posterchild #racist

posterchild #racist rr-bb.com

The "war" on terror is winnable, but the following minimum concepts must be known and believed:

1. "Terror" is a tactic not an enemy. We must win the war against those
who use terror as a Tactic (Muslim Men).
2. You must be willing to use unrelenting, massively excessive power to win. Anything less will not do. We would not have won world war II with anything less than a FULL commitment to survive as a country.
3. We must silence and restrain the liberals in this country and remove their ability to interfer and influence the outcome of the war. Get rid of the embedded reporters yesterday.
4. Forget about nation building in Iraq. It's a no win situation.
5. Get the UN out of the US and get us out of the UN.
6. Pick one Islamic "Holy City" and nuke it. This becomes an object lesson, then for the Jihadis to learn from. It would show, for once that we say what we mean, and mean what we say.

49 comments

old comment by Fed Up

1. "Communism" is a tactic not an enemy. We must win the war against those
who use terror as a Tactic (Soviet Men). 2. You must be willing to use unrelenting, massively excessive power to win. Anything less will not do. We would not have won world war II with anything less than a FULL commitment to survive as a country. 3. We must silence and restrain the liberals in this country and remove their ability to interfer and influence the outcome of the war. Get rid of the embedded reporters yesterday. 4. Forget about nation building in Korea. It's a no win situation. 5. Get the UN out of the US and get us out of the UN. 6. Pick one Soviet "Workers' City" and nuke it. This becomes an object lesson, then for the Commies to learn from. It would show, for once that we say what we mean, and mean what we say." Different conflict, same old bigots

old comment by FishyFred

"We must win the war against those
who use terror as a Tactic (Muslim Men)." Let me introduce you to these Russian separatists over here. They're white, so it's probably harder for your small brain to get around the fact that they are terrorists, but I'm sure you'll get there eventually. "Get rid of the embedded reporters yesterday." You retard. The embedded reporters HELP the administration. Because they're embedded, they are shown only what the Army lets them out far enough to see. They are the ones getting the fluff pieces. The really REALLY dangerous and crazy stuff comes from reporters who are not embedded and are risking their lives everyday to try to tell you that WE ARE NOT WINNING IN IRAQ. You are insulting every journalist if you blind yourself to the situation in Iraq.

old comment by Ed

1) True. Mostly. You're over-generalizing at the end, there.
2) False. There's this thing called "Diplomacy" that most of the world uses. Sometimes you have to give a little to achieve your goal, but it's usually more efficient and effective than warfare. 3) False. You're a violent idiot, and you attempt to demonize anyone with a more rational point of view than yours. 4) False. It wouldn't have been, if the companies that these huge contracts were handed out to hadn't completely squandered them. 5) False. I'm no huge fan of the UN myself, and withdrawing might not really be a huge deal for us, but it would have a big impact on the rest of the world. 6) False. You're a complete idiot if you think that would do anything but turn the entire world against us. Also, why do you want to blow up Jerusalem?

old comment by Sandman

1. "Terror" is a tactic not an enemy. We must win the war against those who use terror as a Tactic (Muslim Men).

You're half right. Terror is not an enemy, but it isn't just "Muslim Men" who use it. The USA has been using it extensively as well. You do not defeat your enemy by becoming just like them.

2. You must be willing to use unrelenting, massively excessive power to win. Anything less will not do. We would not have won world war II with anything less than a FULL commitment to survive as a country.

Well, this is sound, practical military doctrine. Where it falls apart is that the current situation confounds normal military tactics. Killing a terrorist just makes more terrorists. The only way to "win" a war against a terrorist enemy is to kill every single human being that is in any way connected to or sympathetic to their cause. And I don't think that the USA should be endorsing genocide. The only way to really win against a terrorist enemy is to remove or alter the underlying reason for the terrorist activity. But that would mean admitting we have made some mistakes, and the current administration refuses to do that.

3. We must silence and restrain the liberals in this country and remove their ability to interfer and influence the outcome of the war. Get rid of the embedded reporters yesterday.

Total information blackout does not work. It promotes a political culture of non-accountability, and when a political structure reaches that point, democracy and liberty suffocate. It's happened before. Liberals are not your enemy. Change is not always bad, and static social and political structures are not always good. You can not win a war against tyranny by repressing the freedom and liberty of your own citizens. And to do so simply because they happen to disagree with you actually puts you more in line with a facist philosophy than one of liberty.

4. Forget about nation building in Iraq. It's a no win situation.

Well, you got me on that one. On this sole point you are 100% correct. Too bad Bush didn't figure this out before he decided to do it, eh? And too bad he forgot all about that time when he was running for President back in '99 when he said that he did not believe in "nation building..." By the way, this one is the fault of neo-conservative Republicans. Why haven't you demanded the removal of their rights to free speech?

5. Get the UN out of the US and get us out of the UN.

Why? Why would you want to remove the US from the only global forum for the resolution of conflicts? We are in no danger from the UN. They can't set US policy or law. They can't control US foreign policy; Bush's unilateral Iraq war clearly demonstrated that. The US has veto authority on the Permanat Security Council. I repeat: the United Nations can not dictate, set, or control US policy. What it provides is the only global framework for internation humanitarian cooperation and non-violent conflict resolution. Why you would want to remove our voice in the forum is baffling.

6. Pick one Islamic "Holy City" and nuke it. This becomes an object lesson, then for the Jihadis to learn from. It would show, for once that we say what we mean, and mean what we say."

It would also start WW III, but perhaps that's your point. Jingoistic, knee-jerk violence has never been a successful foreign policy, and you can't defeat the terrorists by going to war agains a specific city or nation: the terrorists don't happen to believe in nationality, and their organizations are not nation-specific, despite what Bush and company would like to believe.

old comment by Pat

"Get rid of the embedded reporters yesterday."
Of course then you'd have to kill all those impressionable young soldiers returning home. The stories they could tell. And of course their families 'cause they,would be curious as to why no-one was coming home alive. The neighbors; same reason. Well the whole damn town(s) and the states and yes the whole friggin' country. Then and only then, will you have won. Well wait a minute. How about the Canadians and Mexicans, I imagine they're starting to wonder about now. Next the Brits, Middle and South America, Europe, Asia, Africa and India...and yes the Aussies and Kiwis. You'd have to kill 'em all or word would just get out. Damn if I don't think you got yourself a workable plan for a Rapture goin' here.

old comment by Will

People on the net are always calling for hundreds of thousands of people they will never meet to die. This is not just a Fundie behavior. It is just lazy, cowardly barking from the other side of glass screen.
I imagine the war on terror could be won by increasing world wide economic opportunities so less people live thier lives poor, miserbable, uneducated, and angry. We could also work with and reninforce our Muslum allies (yes we do have them). We could rehire the Arab translators we fired for being homosexuals (though I beleive it was only two or three). We can call upon the people of America not to shop more but to actually sacrafice and support our troops. From higher taxes (espically on those who earn more than 100k), national service, even nationwide home land security seminars and workshops so that real threarts are located. Pour resources into border security. Expediate the immigration process so that there are more legal immigrants in our country who are in our national database (ie social secruity) which means they can be monitored at the same level citizens are. Cooperate with SCIENCE and make efforts to control ozone depletion. Foster a greater feeling of globalism and coperation with the world while at the same time retaining our unique identity.

old comment by Pedantic Speaker

@Sandman:
Regarding #4, it would not have been a no-win situation if the administration had simply refrained from DESTROYING the nation in the first place (I am reading am interesting book on this subject called Cultural Cleansing in Iraq).
The obviously sensible plan for occupation of a state involves seizing power and using the existing government and social infrastructure to keep the situation under control; you can then reform the system at your leisure (I leave the details to the professionals). This strategy has worked since the time of the Persian Empire and is in fact what the original United States Proconsul, Jay Garner, had planned ("the major
bureaucratic, technocratic and judiciary institutions would be
kept in place to carry out basic government functions", page 34). He was removed and replaced by Paul Bremer, who appears to have believed that his job was to destroy the Iraqi government and remake it in the image of lasseiz-faire capitalism. A description of the other ways the Iraqi society was unmade by the occupiers, actively or by nonfeasance, takes up the entire book.

posterchild #racist rr-bb.com

49 comments

Confused?