Skip to comments.Surrender By Any Other Name... [COULTER]
Posted on 12/13/2006 3:32:21 PM PST by Forgiven_Sinner
How did we go from winning the war in Iraq to losing overnight? Was this decided by the same committee that changed "Peking" to "Beijing"?
These word changes are a fortiori evidence that liberals are part of a conspiracy. On what date did "horrible" and "actress" vanish from the English language to be replaced with "horrific" and "actor"? Who decided that? (Meanwhile, I'm still writing "Puff Daddy" in my nightly dream journal when everybody else has started calling him "Diddy.")
When did "B.C." (before Christ) and "A.D." (anno Domini, "in the year of the Lord") get replaced with "BCE" (before the common era) and "CE" (common era)? "Withdrawal" is "redeployment," "liberal" is "progressive," and "traitorous" is "patriotic."
These new linguistic conventions -- like going from "winning" to "losing" in Iraq -- simply spread like an invisible bacterial invasion.
To be sure, last month the Democrats did win a narrow majority in Congress for the first time in more than a decade. And it cannot be denied that for the past 50 years, Democrats have orchestrated humiliating foreign policy defeats for America. So it is understandable that some might interpret their midterm gains as a mandate for another humiliating defeat.
But that's not what the Democrats told Americans when they were running for office. To the contrary, they claimed to be gun-totin' hawks. A shockingly high number of Democratic candidates this year actually fought in wars. And not just the war on poverty, either -- real wars, against men with guns.
It was a specific plan of Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Rep. Rahm Emanuel to fake out the voters by recruiting anti-war veterans to run against Republicans. (And when did "chairman" become "chair"?)
To the credit of the voters -- especially the American Legion and VFW -- the Democrats didn't fool enough Americans to even match the average midterm gains for the party out of power.
But the point is: You can't run as a phony patriot and then claim your victory is a mandate for surrender. That would be like awarding yourself undeserved Purple Hearts and then pretending to throw them over the White House wall in protest. No, that's not fair -- nothing could be as contemptible as throwing someone else's medals on the ground in protest.
Is it the report of the "Iraq Surrender Group" that suddenly caused everyone to say we're losing?
The ISG report was about what you'd expect if the ladies from "The View" were asked to come up with a victory plan for Iraq. We need to ask Syria to tell Hamas to stop calling for the destruction of Israel. Duh! "Dear Hamas, Do you like killing Jews, or do you LIKE killing Jews? Check yes or no."
Most of the esteemed members of the ISG were last seen on the "Dead or Alive?" Web site. Vernon Jordan's most recent claim to fame was getting Monica Lewinsky a job at Revlon when she was threatening Bill Clinton with the truth. He's going to figure out an honorable way to get out of Iraq?
We're still trying to figure out a six-part test from some decision Sandra Day O'Connor wrote back in 1984, but now she's going to tell us what to do in Iraq.
Have things changed on the ground in Iraq? Are our troops being routed? Hardly. The number of U.S. fatalities has gone from a high of 860 deaths in 2004 to 845 in 2005, to 695 through November of this year. If the Islamic fascists double their rate of killing Americans in the next month, there will still be fewer American fatalities in Iraq this year than in the previous two years.
Admittedly, it would be a little easier to track our progress in Iraq if the Pentagon would tell us how many of them we're killing, but apparently our Pentagon is too spooked by the insurgents posing as civilians to mention the deaths of our enemies.
Moreover, it might seem churlish to mention the number of Islamic lunatics we've killed during the holy month of Ramadan. Half the time we do anything to them, it's "the holy month of Ramadan." It's always Ramadan. When on Earth is Ramadan over?
It's true that no one anticipated that al-Qaida sympathizers would stream into Iraq to fight the Great Satan after Saddam fled to a spider hole, but that's because everyone expected al-Qaida to be fighting us here.
Like "Peking," that's something else we can't say anymore: the amazing absence of another 9/11-style terrorist attack in the past five years. The heart of the insurgency in Iraq is, by definition, composed of Islamic terrorists who hate the Great Satan, own an overnight bag and are willing to travel to kill Americans. But don't worry: The Iraq Surrender Group feels sure they won't come here if we pull out of Iraq.
If absolutely nothing changed in Iraq over the next few years -- if it didn't continue to get better and if the savages never lost heart (I'm assuming they subscribe to "TimesSelect") -- by 2010, 6,000 brave American troops will have died to prevent another 9/11 terrorist attack on American soil for a decade.
If that's a war Americans think we're "losing," Osama bin Laden was right: We are a paper tiger.
the msm and dems are traitors. I remember seeing Ellen Ratner on Hanitty and the skeleton she stated "I hope George Bush FAILS in Iraq". That was 3 years ago, and they are still hoping we fail.
Hooray Ann! Definitions are the guardians of reason and logic.
You go, girl! (Coulter, that is)
"Have things changed on the ground in Iraq? Are our troops being routed?ping
The number of U.S. fatalities has gone from a high of 860 deaths in 2004 to 845 in 2005, to 695 through November of this year." - Ann Coulter
Ann's been pretty good lately. More than I can say for the majority of GOPers. Where the hell are the Prez's backups? He is the ONLY one, outside of the military, calling for victory. Frist? Hastert?
Happy Birthday Ann Coulter, December 8 - 2006 edition
Posted by theDentist
On General/Chat 12/08/2006 8:37:41 AM PST · 106 replies · 1,290+ views
I love Anne Coulter - she's great.
Love ya Ann!
Good column by Ms. Coulter!
I'm amazed that many are giving such weight to the recommendations of the "has-beens" on the ISG.
LOL at her remark about Vernon Jordan!
"...Admittedly, it would be a little easier to track our progress in Iraq if the Pentagon would tell us how many of them we're killing, but apparently our Pentagon is too spooked by the insurgents posing as civilians to mention the deaths of our enemies..." - Ann's column TODAY (12/13)See also, from President Bush's News Conference [12/13/06]:
So, does President Bush get an ADVANCE COPY of Ann's columns?To: NormsRevenge
Bush: In the last month (?), we have captured or killed 5,000 of the enemy.
(FR is so slow I'm having a difficult time posting)
52 posted on 12/13/2006 11:48:46 AM PST by Peach (The Clintons pardoned more terrorists than they captured or killed.)
-- snip --
I think it was for October, November and so far in December that 5,900 enemy have been killed or captured.
also Kim Basinger
I'm amazed that many are giving such weight to the recommendations of the "has-beens" on the ISG.See also, from Today's Toons 12/12/06:
If there ever was a picture that called out for Freepers to caption it...it is THAT one!
I love Anne Coulter - she's great.See also THIS thread:
The Right Brothers release new CD ("No Apologies") - includes "I'm in Love with ANN COULTER"
http://www.therightbrothers.com/index2.php ^ | December 5, 2006 | www.therightbrothers.com
Posted on 12/06/2006 6:54:59 AM PST by RonDog
You can listen to it HERE:
Freshmen journalism students are invited to a kegger. When they pass out, an RS-232 Port is installed at the base of the skull with a hammer.
The wetware is reformatted.
Thereafter, downloading the latest spewings of whatever acid-burned tenured radical is teaching the class insures that only the Correct Thoughts Of The Day will be published.
"Moreover, it might seem churlish to mention the number of Islamic lunatics we've killed during the holy month of Ramadan. Half the time we do anything to them, it's 'the holy month of Ramadan.' It's always Ramadan. When on Earth is Ramadan over?"
HAHAHAHA!! I've noticed this as well. I think Ramadan is only a month out of the year, but it seems like every time the Islamic fanatics are under attack, it's always... "But... but... it's the holy month of RAMADAN!!! Don't you see?!?!"
I just knew she had to be a Sagittarian. ;)
BCE is Before Christian Era.
CE is Christian Era.
"When on Earth is Ramadan over?"
When they start making their flight plans for the Hajj.
Why haven't we heard how many of the enemy we've been killing? To tell me we've killed OR CAPTURED 5000 enemy doesn't tell me.
Is it 150 killed and 4850 captured?
And if they're captured, where in the hell are the photos of them in shackles or behind barbed effin wire?
If they can show me shots of Paris, Lindsey and Brittany without underwear, then surely they can show me Achmed in orange pajamas and plastic handcuffs.
All is not lost, isn't today the anniversary of our great military finding Saddam buried in a pit?
CE is Christian Era.
Not to many people. A quick Dogpile search finds:
Discussion of the abbreviations BCE (before common era) and CE (common era); what they mean and why they exist. www.radix.net/~dglenn/defs/ce.html
Give em what they paid for Ann!!!! And then some!!!!
Why the sad face. Her suggestion is much kinder than I would recommend. I don't think conversion would work so I suggest we reduce their numbers instead. A LOT!
I know. It was a "joke." One I like.
This is her best column in several weeks.
How 'bout: "Whatever you're thinking, don't even think about it..."
Sorry, I missed that. I do like the joke though. :=)
This is her best column in several weeks.Perhaps.
But the column that got her the most "thread views" recently (over THREE TIMES as many as her weekly average here) is THIS one:
FWIW, the THREAD TITLE often has a significant impact on the total number of "thread views."
Ann Coulter: What can I do to make your flight more uncomfortable?
Posted by Vinny
On News/Activism 11/22/2006 2:59:00 PM PST · 204 replies · 7,678+ views
Human Events Online (Contributors) ^ | 11-22-2006 | Ann Coulter
They already gave their farewell speeches and...they are out of here!
Funny, but I can hardly recall whose side they were on or what they accomplished!
When did discrimination based on race or gender get replaced with "affirmative action"?
She should not have included BCE and CE in the list as Jewish publications have been using these designations for a hundred years or more.
Who's the fat bald guy?
EricBlair11 Since Nov 27, 2006
Ah I see. You seem to have taken a wrong turn. Here we actually know facts about Iraq. You want Deluded United or Daily Krap if you want to simply regurgitate the screaming hysteric ignorance that passes for "News" coverage on Iraq.
If on the other hand, you actually have the guts to LEARN some things rather then simply chant nonsense slogans, try reading these.
One of the really infuriating things in modern politics is the level of disinformation, misinformation, demagoguery and out right lying going on about the mission in Iraq. Democrats have spent the last 3+ years lying about Iraq out of a political calculation. The assumption is that the natural isolationist mindset of the average American voter, linked to the inherent Anti Americanism (what is misnamed the "Anti War movement") of the more feverish Democrat activists (especially those running the US's National "News" media) would restore them to national political dominance. The truth is the Democrat Party Leadership has simply lacked the courage to speak truth to whiners. The truth is that even if Al Gore won the 2000 election and 09-11 still happened we would be doing the EXACT same things in Iraq we are doing now.
Based on the political situation in the region left over from the 1991 Gulf War plus the domestic political consensus built up in BOTH parties since 1991 as well as fundamental military strategic laws, there was NO viable strategic choice for the US but to take out Iraq after finishing the initial operations in Afghanistan.
To start with Saddam's Iraq was our most immediate threat. We could NOT commit significant military forces to another battle with Saddam hovering undefeated on our flank nor could we leave significant forces watching Saddam. The political containment of Iraq was breaking down. That what Oil for Food was all about. Oil for Food was an attempt by Iraq to break out of it's diplomatic isolation and slip the shackles the UN Sanctions put on it's military. There there was the US Strategic position to consider.
The War on Islamic Fascism is different sort of war. in facing this Asymmetrical threat, we have a hidden foe, spread out across a geographically diverse area, with covert sources of supply. Since we cannot go everywhere they hide out, in fact often cannot even locate them until the engage us, we need to draw them out of hiding into a kill zone.
Iraq is that kill zone. That is the true brilliance of the Iraq strategy. We draw the terrorists out of their world wide hiding places onto a battlefield they have to fight on for political reasons (The "Holy" soil of the Arabian peninsula) where they have to pit their weakest ability (Conventional Military combat power) against our greatest strength (ability to call down unbelievable amounts of firepower) where they will primarily have to fight other forces (the Iraqi Security forces) in a battlefield that is mostly neutral in terms of guerrilla warfare. (Iraqi-mostly open terrain as opposed to guerrilla friendly areas like the mountains of Afghanistan or the jungles of SE Asia).
Did any of the critics of liberating Iraq ever look at a map? Iraq, for which we had the political, legal and moral justifications to attack, is the strategic high ground of the Middle East. A Geographic barrier that severs ground communication between Iran and Syria apart as well as providing another front of attack in either state or into Saudi Arabia if needed.
There were other reasons to do Iraq but here is the strategic military reason we are in Iraq. We have taken, an maintain the initiative from the Terrorists. They are playing OUR game on ground of OUR choosing.
Problem is Counter Insurgency is SLOW and painful. Often a case of 3 steps forward, two steps back. One has to wonder if the American people have either the emotional maturity, nor the intellect" to understand. It's so much easier to spew made for TV slogans like "No Blood for Oil" or "We support the Troops, bring them home" or dumbest of all "We are creating terrorists" then to actually THINK.
Westerners in general, and the US citizens in particular seem to have trouble grasping the fundamental fact of this foe. These Islamic Fascists have NO desire to co-exist with them. The extremists see all this PC posturing by the Hysteric Left as a sign that we are weak. Since they want us dead, weakness encourages them. There is simply no way to coexist with people who completely believe their "god" will reward them for killing us.
So we can covert to Islam, die or kill them. Iraq is about killing enough of them to make the rest of the Jihadists realize we are serious. They same way killing enough Germans, Italians and Japanese eliminated the ideologies of Nazism, Fascism and Bushido.
Americans need to understand how Bin Laden and his ilk view us. In the Arab world the USA is considered a big wimp. We have run away so many times. Lebanon, the Kurds, the Iraqis in 1991, the Iranians, Somalia, Clinton all thru the 1990s etc etc etc. The Jihadists think we will run again. In fact they are counting on it. That way they can run around screaming "We beat the American just like the Russians, come join us in Jihad" and recruit the next round of "holy warriors". Iraq is also a show place where we show the Muslim world that there are a lines they cannot cross. On 9-11-01 they crossed that line and we can, and will, destroy them for it
About the same time "infanticide" became "choice."