Posted on 12/10/2006 5:12:10 AM PST by Alas Babylon!
People here at work were talikng about a Hillary-Hussein, er Obama ticket just now. When I pointed out that Hussein only has two years experience in the Senate, and that was it, most of them didnt even know that. The MSM has done well..
Thank you rodguy911.
I'm glad you appreciate it.
We have it from both Woodward and Harman so it must now be the conventional wisdom on the DC cocktail circuit.
I suspect Richardson put his name in earlier than expected of him. The media is playing Barack Hussein Obama up a little much! Your description of the DBM fits, by the way!!!!
I said on another thread ..... give us women like Prime Minister Thatcher and Ambassador Kirkpatrick, ... Rest in Peace, Dear Lady ,... and I'm ready for a woman. But hillary rodam clinton's only interest is for hillary only not to mention all her baggage.
I also believe the color of a person will not matter if they are qualified. I used to think Colin Powell was that person.
So, to answer your question..."Do you think this country would vote for them separately, but especially as a team??"
No!!! But after 2 elections of bill clinton and what happened this last election ..........
Looks like a lot of work,some great links there.
That is the result of my poor phrasing and is NOT my intent (though now that you mention it..... <evil grin>)
Factually incorrect on Afghanistan and the Russians tactics. Russians pretty much practiced indiscriminate mine warfare and a free fire doctrine outside urban areas in Afghanistan. Country is still covered with thousands of mines thanks to them.
Only incorrect by omission, not commission. I did not mean to dismiss the mining of Afghanistan by the Russians, nor things like scattering bombs disguised as toys in "rebel" areas. But the land mines were surrounding "pacified areas" where the "hearts and minds" campaign supposedly had taken hold and true Marxist/Leninist orthodoxy was being protected from the ignorant peasants with their "opiate of the masses." The strategists in Moscow actually thought that they had a cadre of "loyal" communists in Afghanistan so they tailored their tactics to protect those people, little realizing that those were the folks who had chosen to pretend to convert in order to get close enough to kill them. In defense of my poorly laid out post I will point out that I said it was a miserable failure.
Will you agree with my assessment that the tactics the Russians have employed in Chechnya are both qualititavely and quantitively more extreme than those employed by their Soviet predecessors in Afghinistan? That is my only point of comparison in this regard, however the two brutal campaigns are described.
In defense of my position, but something I can never provide evidence of nor prove, is the fact that my wife's late uncle was Agency, a "cryppie" supervisor (he retired when they switched to NOTES - he wasn't going to learn yet another system!), and I got my impression of what was going on in Afghanistan from one of his friends we met on a visit to them in DC. His friend had worked Afghanistan for the Agency during the Reagan years and I formed my opinions of what was going from discussions with him. Nothing extensive or detailed, just things he said when he agreed to discuss the then current topic. I know that's unfair, in this context, as it's straight out of the "journal of irreproducible results." Don't accept it as evidence of my being right, only as info as to where I got the info (correct or not) from which I draw my opinions on this issue. Then remember my tag line...
Quick aside... he had another friend we didn't get to meet, but whom he told us about. She worked undercover in Beirut back in the "bad old days." Her apartment got shot up in the days leading up to her departure. She knew she was leaving so she set up her big expensive stereo system in the window of her flat and played "Hava Nagilah" really loud out into the street... then she ducked... She didn't have to ship anything home and it all got replaced by the Agency as a cost of doing business <g>.
Also factually incorrect on the situation on the ground in Iraq.
I don't doubt your conclusion, per se, but you'll need to tell me to what you refer in order for me to reply.
Perhaps you can explain this. IF we are being "shot to hell" as the drama queen parts of the US media keeps screaming, why are Coalition casualties for 2006 lower then in 2005 and for 2005 lower then 2004?
Now, to be perfectly accurate, I didn't say we were being "shot to hell." I said, precisely that we were being "shot at right the hell now." There's a big difference between the two. I'm not talking about volume, in this regard, but the actions our troops who are being shot at are confronted with. They are thrust into situations where it is kill or be killed. They don't have the luxury of calling on the nonexistent trained and reliable Iraqi forces you and I both want to take over for them. So long as they are in that situation I will make no apologies for arguing to remove the handcuffs that keep them from adequately defending themselves. It's not what I want to be happening, but it is what is happening and any ROE that limits their abilities to protect themselves and to protect the innocents who they are there working to free I will continue to bitch about, even if it doesn't meet the standards of the Marquis of Queensbury.
The first thing that should happen, for example, is that the folks accusing our marines in Haditha should be in an intense regimen for sweating them to find out what really happened. If we get indicator one that Haditha was a terrorist set up I say carpet bomb the place, after putting John Murtha at Ground Zero, tied to a stake.
Now, having said that, in response to your comments about relative casualties, I've been touting a post by syriacus (#49) last week that points out that we lost 3483 troops in Korea during the week of November 26 to December 2, 1950, yet we were willing to at least see that conflict to a standstill and we've been their for 50 years, protecting the free people of South Korea (despite themselves). I revisited this theme in my post to snugs of a Churchill quote last week:
If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.
In that portion of your post, in fact in all that you've said on this topic, I don't disagree with any of the points you make. You're preaching to the choir. I just am coming at the question from a different place. I'm looking (cynically) at what we have and what we can do. From my point of view you're arguing for what we should do, under ideal circumstances. I agree with you completely on that. Our only disagreement, to me, is that I don't see your solution as being a viable option at this point in time, no matter how much we wish that were otherwise. You may very well be right that is not only possible but the right tactic to pursue. I'm very afraid that it's not a viable alternative right now, therefore we have to work with the tools we have, not the tools we wish we had or that we should have.
Yep, it's amazing how much research at times can go into 1 little link or post.
It also amazing (in a very gruesome and disturbing sense) how much information/propaganda that will never be posted due to its graphic
nature.
Huh? That is in fact what I said.
I was replying to your incorrect statement in #249 in which you said "By the way only two non-Moslem powers ever took Baghdad--the US and the Mongols." Note you said nothing about either Turks or Arabs.
So niener, niener, niener!!!
Thank YOU...
That has been my contention for a LONG time..that people in America, other than Washington and New York..and other than freepers or the equivalent on other sites...
have NO CLUE how distorted the news is...and on that distorted basis, they answer polls saying we have to leave Iraq....or Obama is a moderate who will bring the country together after Pres. Bush tore it apart..blah, blah.
Thanks for the news..
It makes ya want to hit your head against the wall, doesn't it??
LOL..and you know that there has been a LOT of intermingling done this last few weeks with various and sundry Christmas parties..
I bet the politicians go to all of the network parties, the lobbyists parties, the White House parties...
My goodness they dems especially are probably drunk most of December...LOL
Christopher Hitchens was on Fox yesterday and was so obviously hung over it was painful to watch. He was barely able to speak.
LOL..can you imagine a party with Hitchens and other opinions writers, drunk, discussing world events???
oh my goodness!
Based on the articles I picked up for the preview thread yesterday I was extremely skepitical of Brownback. After what I've seen and read about his appearance today I have totally written him off.
In fact, I'm beginning to start the process of researching a primary opponent I can support in his next Senatorial campaign...
Or, a Rodham-Hussein ticket, which is how I prefer to charaterize it, as it is accurate as hell. Both of them are red-leg phonies with big plans for us and the MSN are firmly in their pockets.
re: Brownback ...."--After what I've seen and read about his appearance today I have totally written him off."
Me too!!! If he has changed his philosophy because of the times - he is shallow. If he has changed his philosophy because he truly believes, I still write him off!!!
Just listening to FoxSunday rerun - want to tape Brit's response to Juan. It was priceless!!!
While listening, earlier, to Wallace asking about Barak Hussein Obama -- wish I had the tape in - but went something like .... Is this the flavor of the times?
There are hotels which used to be classified as "five star" in Baghdad. They are all inside what is now known as the Green Zone. Guess where they stayed?
So Gorbachabama is the young clean Black VP to counter all of her bags??
Pray for W and Our Troops
Smiling at you.
FR is great and so are the people here.
Yep.
I think we got "the old Brit" back today!!
I watched the repeat of FNS...and it was a total smackdown of Juan...what an ignorant man he is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.