Say Anything Blog

Mike A,

I wasn’t aware that anyone had labeled David Petraeus an appeaser or suggested that his head was buried in the sand.  Have you any evidence to back up the claims that he has been so accused?  ‘Cause it seems to me if that were the case he probably wouldn’t have been appointed to this job by the President.

In fact, although many on the Left seem to have been afflicted with a selective hearing dysfunction, the President has been saying for quite some time that ultimately the solution for Iraqi must be political and must come from the Iraqis themselves.  Perhaps you missed that part?

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

I must have although I swear someone told me that such an attitude equals Chamberlain...maybe I’m just getting old.

"There are different kinds of truths for different kinds of people. There are truths appropriate for children; truths that are appropriate for students; truths that are appropriate for educated adults; and truths that are appropriate for highly educated adults, and the notion that there should be one set of truths available to everyone is a modern democratic fallacy. It doesn’t work.”

Irving Kristol

Mike, you do understand that he’s saying the military is part of the solution to Iraq, right?  Or are you so myopic in your quest to cherry-pick quotes that seem to support your opinions on Iraq but don’t really that you’re willing to overlook that part?

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Rob,

He just continues to emulate Nelson at Copenhagen.

Out Here
Rodney Graves

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Ceterum censeo Parthia esse delendam
Latin: “Furthermore, Parthia (Persia aka modern day Iran) should be destroyed.”

Mike,

The fact that you are getting old, as are we all, is simply no excuse whatsoever for acting like it.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat,

As Indiana Jones once said: “It’s not the years, it’s the milage.”

Out Here
Rodney Graves

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Ceterum censeo Parthia esse delendam
Latin: “Furthermore, Parthia (Persia aka modern day Iran) should be destroyed.”

Rodney,

I quite agree, sir.

Still, there is a reason that so many old BMW’s Porsches, and Mercedes-Benz are still around… especially in Germany.  Taking the old “beater” out on the autobahn and winding it up to 200 plus kph for an hour or so every once in a while does both the car and the driver a world of good.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Rob

Mike, you do understand that he’s saying the military is part of the solution to Iraq, right?

Yes...that’s why I said this

solutions to geopolitical problems must be addressed politically and, dare I say it, diplomatically as well as militarily when required.

I know that some war supporters have trouble reading to the end of a sentence so i’ve helpfully bolded my recognition that military action has its place...a recognition that I’ve never denied or concealed in my days at SA but one that is sadly ignored too often.

"There are different kinds of truths for different kinds of people. There are truths appropriate for children; truths that are appropriate for students; truths that are appropriate for educated adults; and truths that are appropriate for highly educated adults, and the notion that there should be one set of truths available to everyone is a modern democratic fallacy. It doesn’t work.”

Irving Kristol

Mike, I have no problems reading to the end of a sentence.

What I’m wondering is why you’d suggest that we’d call him an appeaser when he clearly recognizes the need for military intervention in Iraq?

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Rob...because any time I bring up the necessity of nonmilitary action, I am described as a Nelson or a Chamberlain or a dhimmi, etc. so I assumed that anyone who recognises the limits of military intervention would be similarly categorised.

"There are different kinds of truths for different kinds of people. There are truths appropriate for children; truths that are appropriate for students; truths that are appropriate for educated adults; and truths that are appropriate for highly educated adults, and the notion that there should be one set of truths available to everyone is a modern democratic fallacy. It doesn’t work.”

Irving Kristol

You’re comparing apples to sky scrapers, Mike.  You favor no military intervention at all.  Gen. Petraeus recognizes the need for military intervention.  You are trying to imply that the Gen.’s comments had meaning which they didn’t really have.

You are also trying to suggest that those of us who have, and still do, support military action in Iraq don’t also favor diplomatic maneuvers to go along with that military action.  Which is also false.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

You favor no military intervention at all.

I told you war supporters don’t read to the end of sentences.

You are also trying to suggest that those of us who have, and still do, support military action in Iraq don’t also favor diplomatic maneuvers to go along with that military action.

Some do, some don’t. I really am kidding around with you although you don’t have to look far at SA to find statements that political and diplomatic initiatives equal appeasement. It’s not fair to tar everyone though so I’ll knock it off.

"There are different kinds of truths for different kinds of people. There are truths appropriate for children; truths that are appropriate for students; truths that are appropriate for educated adults; and truths that are appropriate for highly educated adults, and the notion that there should be one set of truths available to everyone is a modern democratic fallacy. It doesn’t work.”

Irving Kristol

It’s not fair to tar everyone though so I’ll knock it off.

Mike,

Smart move!

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Mike, when have you ever supported any military action in Iraq?  If you have in the past I apologize, but I’ve never heard you voice it.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

MikeA: As I have said many times in the past: Military victory first, then diplomacy to ensure the peace.  Always negotiate from a position of strength.  Trying to negotiate from a self-caused position of weakness is simply stupid.  Of course, that’s the Dem strategy…

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Gen Petraeus gets it, but do you, Mike?  Chamberlain tried to use diplomacy to avoid military action, and the results will be famous for the rest of history.  I somehow get it that you, along with the rest of the lefties, think that diplomacy is also for avoiding the need for military action, and that just doesn’t work.  It simply screams weakness and cowardice, which is not the best way to make things better when dealing with terrorists.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Prime minister Blair spearheaded the peace-process in Northern Ireland with similar comments and sentiments, to those that your illustrious leader expressed about Iraq. Parallels can be drawn between the two situations, although the death toll in Iraq dwarfs that of NI. Ultimately, it was popular opinion that eventually persuaded the various groups to stop fighting. Following a series of abortive ceasefires, the general populace, came to appreciate the serenity that came with peace and were able to suspend their hatred and distrust and, quietly put pressure on their family and friends to step back from the tit-for-tat behaviour that had so tainted life for generations. I just hope it doesn’t take as long for the diplomatic solution to come about in Iraq.

Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.

I’m not saying the military aren’t needed in Iraq, because there’d be a helluva shitstorm if they were to leave.

Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.

Folks,

There is a fundamental failure of understanding here.

Once fighting begins in earnest, there are only three outcomes:

Victory

Draw (deferring judgment for another day)

Defeat

Draw’s are relatively rare, and perhaps the worst outcome of all.  The “First World War” (arguably the third globe spanning war) was effectively a draw that directly set the conditions that led to the far more destructive rematch a scant generation later.

The long term costs of Defeat and Draw should be enough to convince any reasonable person that Victory is well worth the cost.  Sadly, the left seems bereft of vision beyond the next election cycle.

Out Here
Rodney Graves

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Ceterum censeo Parthia esse delendam
Latin: “Furthermore, Parthia (Persia aka modern day Iran) should be destroyed.”

Sadly, the left seems bereft of vision beyond the next election cycle.

Rodney,

Game!  Set!  Match!

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Rodney Graves said, Draw’s are relatively rare, and perhaps the worst outcome of all.

Witness the Korean border and the Korean war, which was arguably the first U.N. war. They certainly got their preferred outcome of a forced stalemate.

We need to keep the U.N. out of this one. The U.N. doesn’t prevent war - it prevents war from working.

A pity I said I’d knock it off.

"There are different kinds of truths for different kinds of people. There are truths appropriate for children; truths that are appropriate for students; truths that are appropriate for educated adults; and truths that are appropriate for highly educated adults, and the notion that there should be one set of truths available to everyone is a modern democratic fallacy. It doesn’t work.”

Irving Kristol

At least with a stalemate, both parties come out with a degree of satisfaction. Okay, you have winners, but then the loser feels bitter and angry and often wants revenge - you can’t kill every last one of them. The only war I can think of which stopped all animosity was WWII and that was because of the two a-bombs. Is nuclear the answer?

Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.

And which side do we bomb, the Sunni or the Shia?

Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.

<img border="0" src="http://aycu32.webshots.com/image/10351/2006280479379736401_th.jpg" alt="Free Image Hosting at allyoucanupload.com">

Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.

oopz, sorry chaps!

Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.

ManofFireandLight said, At least with a stalemate, both parties come out with a degree of satisfaction.

So,..you think that it would have been better if America’s Civil War ended with a stalemate?

Of course not, but the end of the civil war did not end the animosity between the union and (former) confederate states. If there must be a winner in Iraq, who should it be?

The “First World War” (arguably the third globe spanning war) was effectively a draw that directly set the conditions that led to the far more destructive rematch a scant generation later.

The defeat and subsequent partition of the Ottoman empire can be directly attributed to the current political climate in Iraq and throughout the middle east. It could be argued that had a more egalitarian policy been established after WW1, we wouldn’t be faced with the current situation.

Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.

At least with a stalemate, both parties come out with a degree of satisfaction.

No, the war is merely postponed.

Okay, you have winners, but then the loser feels bitter and angry and often wants revenge - you can’t kill every last one of them.

I suppose that the former Confererate states are still bitter & want revenge?  A draw would have been a better outcome?

The only war I can think of which stopped all animosity was WWII and that was because of the two a-bombs.

rubbish.  We still would have beaten both Germany & Japan and the state of the world today would be quite similar.  Had Truman not authorized atomic weapons use, Germany would have ended the same, and Japan would have taken longer and cost more American lives.

Is nuclear the answer?

Not typically, but in the case of WWII, yes.

If there must be a winner in Iraq, who should it be?

THE PEOPLE OF IRAQ. You know, those people who keep getting blown up and murdered by terrorists (the bad guys in case you forgot).  The citizens of Iraq, many of whom are volunteering for ISF positions desite the peril that it holds.  Those people are why we are there.  Many of them suffered or were killed under the regime of a brutal dictator while the world stood by and did very little except collect bribes from Husseins oil for food scams.

The defeat and subsequent partition of the Ottoman empire can be directly attributed to the current political climate in Iraq and throughout the middle east.

Actually, you’ve got this exactly backwards!

It could be argued that had a more egalitarian policy been established after WW1, we wouldn’t be faced with the current situation.

It could be argued that Mao’s China was about as egalitarian as you could get.  The death toll is widely estimated to have been between 35 and 60 million.  Find another adjective.  Few people of intelligence are impressed with anything more egalitarian than the Tooth Fairy.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

MOF&L Opined:

<blockquote>At least with a stalemate, both parties come out with a degree of satisfaction.

To which EN replied:

No, the war is merely postponed.

The resolution is postponed.  The war may be suspended, but as the WWI ==> WWII example shows, the blood interest continues to accrue.

<blockquote>Okay, you have winners, but then the loser feels bitter and angry and often wants revenge - you can’t kill every last one of them.

I suppose that the former Confererate states are still bitter & want revenge?  A draw would have been a better outcome?</blockquote>

The ACW comparison remains less apt than the WWI/WWII example.

Two of the greatest factors which enabled the rise of the National Socialist Party were the perception on the part of the returned soldiers that they had NOT been defeated in battle, in combination with the very real Communist threat.  I can make a very strong case that absent either or both of those factors, the National Socialists would have faded after the Beer Hall Putsch.

<blockquote>The only war I can think of which stopped all animosity was WWII and that was because of the two a-bombs.

rubbish.  We still would have beaten both Germany & Japan and the state of the world today would be quite similar.  Had Truman not authorized atomic weapons use, Germany would have ended the same, and Japan would have taken longer and cost more American lives.</blockquote>

Hard to maintain you were not defeated on the battlefield when your country is occupied (viz Germany).

Japan would have probably been a nightmare levy en masse and guerrilla conflict had the Emperor NOT had a face saving excuse for surrender.  The anticpated casualties for Olympic and Coronet were sobering, to say the least, in terms of both Allied and Japanese caslualties.

But there was no doubt in the minds of the Japanese as to who won and who lost.

<blockquote>Is nuclear the answer?

Not typically, but in the case of WWII, yes.</blockquote>

Unambiguous outcomes are the answer.

QED

Rodney Graves

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Ceterum censeo Parthia esse delendam
Latin: “Furthermore, Parthia (Persia aka modern day Iran) should be destroyed.”