General Macarthur, April 19, 1951
Military alliances, balances of power, leagues of nations, all in turn failed, leaving the only path to be by way of the crucible of war. The utter destructiveness of war now blocks out this alternative. We have had our last chance. If we will not devise some greater and more equitable system, our Armageddon will be at our door. The problem basically is theological and involves a spiritual recrudescence, an improvement of human character that will synchronize with our almost matchless advances in science, art, literature, and all material and cultural developments of the past two thousand years. It must be of the spirit if we are to save the flesh. But once war is forced upon us, there is no other alternative than to apply every available means to bring it to a swift end. War's very object is victory, not prolonged indecision. In war there is no substitute for victory.
1 posted on
07/27/2006 9:01:29 PM PDT by
humint
To: humint
Translation: wait 'till they get the bomb.
2 posted on
07/27/2006 9:03:16 PM PDT by
nikola
To: humint
Thanks, "Mohammed", for that unbiased and totally unsolicited remark. The Palestinian question: Hmm, is that a reverse-euphemism for they used to call "The Jewish Question"? And, Mohammed, what would your "final solution" to this question be?
3 posted on
07/27/2006 9:04:09 PM PDT by
SlowBoat407
(What is our exit strategy in the war on poverty?)
To: humint
Everyone should sleep well at night knowing the guy in charge of stopping nuclear proliferation is named mohammed.
To: humint
One cannot constantly treat only the symptoms.
Could not agree more, that is why we can't treat the symptom (violence) and must treat the disease (islamofacism). and if the UN keeps enabling the disease with ceasefires that they claim as victory, the cancer will grow until it has consumed the UN (which may have already happened). guess what's next Mohammed?
To: humint
European pipe dreams of diplomacy with Iran are dead.
Ahmadinejad has already given his answer to the EU in the form of an attack on Israel.
To: humint
"The bloodbath [in Lebanon] must be stopped quickly and a cease-fire must be brought about without delay," he told Der Spiegel. "But what's even more important is a comprehensive solution to the underlying problem. The Palestinian question is the elephant in the room. One cannot constantly treat only the symptoms."...
Everyone agrees with this. Hezbollah must be destroyed down to the last man, the Lebanese must be held accountable for any actions that come from their sovereign territory and the constant terrorist strikes must stop immediately...
Why do I have the feeling that he's disagreeing with every one of those statements?
8 posted on
07/27/2006 9:37:26 PM PDT by
kingu
(Yeah, I'll vote in 2006, just as soon as a party comes along who listens.)
To: humint
The Palestinian question is the elephant in the room. No, ElKabong, the Nuclear Weapons issue is the Tyrannosaurus Rex in the room.
9 posted on
07/27/2006 9:37:36 PM PDT by
NonValueAdded
(Occupation does not cause terrorism; terrorism causes occupation. (A. Dershowitz))
To: humint
Why would we want to trust "Mohammed"?
11 posted on
07/27/2006 10:48:38 PM PDT by
sheik yerbouty
( Make America and the world a jihad free zone!)
To: humint
The best defense is a great offense. Should hit Irans nuke facilities and hit them all hard.
13 posted on
07/28/2006 3:09:13 AM PDT by
Joe Boucher
(an enemy of islam)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson