Posted on 01/28/2011 1:55:41 PM PST by Sub-Driver
“This implies that Bush started it.”
I wouldn’t take that to be bank. It’s exactly the kind of lie a Democrat would tell to provide cover.
Jimmy helped topple a secular country and leave an Islamic state in place of it, why would you expect Barry to do any differently?
Islam and arabs are two friends in a rapist society of the world. Mubarak has his kids overrunning him and is scared to death, while we recklessly call for reforms like a bunch of morons who should look with edification the fear and death on the dictator’s face.
WE are such a bunch of fools, again, fooled by our idiot comfy corrupt ambassadors and diplomats.
My question is why no riots against the Syrian or Iranian government or Chinese government ever receive such support?
**This is far to spontaneous to be planned.
This administration has been caught flatfooted**
Now that’s the truth!
Egads, that shot of Jimmah Carter looks just like an engineer I worked around. And he was a typical Minnnestoopid Dem, with his hate America, hate the rich, cheering an economic collapse.
This story sounds like complete nonsense. How do you equate sending an Egyptian dissident to a “summit for activists” into US goal to undermine a stable regime that was friendly to us. Even the umbrella name “summit for activists” sounds silly.
followed your link,
how is it Ayers and Dorhn have passports with their criminal records?
that and no other country in the world will trust the boy OR the US anymore on a scale here to fore unknown... and with good reason
The list, ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
It looks like it started spontaneously, but it sounds as if all of the troublemakers (imams, Muslim Brotherhood, Iranians) are rushing in to try and take control of the chaos. As to this administration being flatfooted, I think that's the best interpretation. I think Obama secretly likes the idea of religious revolutionaries. He's a Muslim-sympathizing community organizer, after all. And, he hates Israel, to boot. He won't support Mubarak.
So did the Shah of Iran, so did Saddam Hussein in Iraq, so did Milosevic in Yugoslavia. You don't get it, the globalist bankers thrive on instability -- it's just another word for "opportunity" to them. You are under the assumption that "America's interests" is what guides these decision makers when it is the furthest thing from their minds.
It’s in NOBODY’s interest to have a more volatile Middle-East. Except the Muslims’.
Again, you assume that the bankers and Muslims are on opposite sides. Where have you been? The Muslims are due to be about 1/4 of the planet in the next 20 years. What a "market-share"!
if you ever watch Amy Goodman on linkTV, ‘progressives’ call this American intervention evil.
Dana Perino was on Fox earlier, saying essentially this. My reaction was almost the same as yours, "Yeah, right". Now I wonder if she wasn't subtly confirming the idea...
The real problem is the fact that our government has a long history of promoting true freedom in the mideast without acknowledging that the dominating religion in the region is all about oppression.
What else is new? Our dear leaders (and I'm not only referring to Bambie here...) think the region will respond to reason with reason. We've completely ignored the fact that the prominent religion his no history of reason, or any intent to get along with the West. They're bent on expansion, and to expand they have to control governments as well as the religious fervor. The last thing we ever should have done is try to reason with fanatics.
Germany and Japan were countries. Islam isn’t. It’s spread across a wide portion of the globe. The problem with that is, even should we have complete victory somewhere, it’s tentacles will still be active elsewhere. That’s a different scenario than going head to head with an expansionist country.
You’re right in that we’ve lost the will for total victory. But even worse, we’ve lost the knowledge that the West and Islam are incompatible. And that only a total commitment to destruction of its host regions of power (Mecca, etc) should they attack would suffice. We don’t think that way and the will isn’t there in those who we’ve put in power.
You are asking me? Best direct you question to the WH.
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.