Humpty W. Dumpty

Study Doesn’t Share Bush’s Optimism on Terror Fight

More crazy liberals who hate America, right micadelic?

I heard some excerpts of Bush talking about this and he reiterated his same old mantra “We have to be on the offensive.”

Why? In the hands of inept people that turns into a policy of unprovoked violence. Except for Iraq, we have very, very few terror attacks. Yes, let’s use intelligence and the military when necessary to stop attacks against us. But as Daniel Shore said recently, if Iraq is the center on the war on terror it is only because Bush made it so. It certainly wasn’t when this whole war in Iraq began.

Bush is blind to the fact that insurgency in Iraq and the global war on terror are not the same thing.

Just like I have said all along, we should not be in the business of nation building in Iraq. We aren’t qualified. Now its confusing our dim-witted President into thinking that is where the war is. It’s not. The war in Iraq is over. What’s left is a lot of resentment that America, while successful in getting rid of a dictator, destroyed the lives of millions of people and can’t figure out how to put it back together again.

Humpty W. Dumpty

5 thoughts on “Humpty W. Dumpty

  1. micadelic says:

    PS. One more thing… I sincerely believe that the NY Times has an agenda and that agenda is anti-Bush. If there is any opportunity to slant stories against the administration, they do it. This NIE story is a perfect example, there are clearly a few ways to slant or spin those findings but guess what, they spun them anti-Bush. I do not think that it is because “reality is biased to the left.” It seems to me that there should, every once in a while, be a story in the Times that is positive or maybe at least be neutral towards this administration but there never is. I think their bias is obvious and to me they are not an objective source. Neither is Fox objective for the most part but I think they are more fair to the left than the MSM is to the right. I know, call me crazy! I find that people who are overly critical of Fox have never actually watched it. I on the other hand, watch CNN, my main source of news on the net is, I read the Star Trib, the NY Times and I do watch Fox news too.


  2. micadelic says:

    Look, I’m going to inject a little reasonableness and sanity into this debate. I have way too much respect for Mr. lolife to just continuously trade barbs and play dueling sources and let him spin one way so I can spin the other. I would like to illuminate my position on the war and try and explain why I see things as I do. I hear too much rhetoric on the left which seems to indicate that they think we (the right) are in denial and if they had their way, they would do everything “smarter.” I heard a quote from Dick Schumer today where he said exactly that. Can’t you see how deeply offensive that is to me? You can’t win an argument just by indicating that you think I’m stupid, or not as smart as you are. All you do is alienate me and make me firmer in my convictions. This tactic does not help you to convince me of the merits of your arguments.

    My take on the war…
    The left seems to think we’re fighting the “wrong war in the wrong place.” Bush lied, kids died, there were no WMD, we should be trying to kill Bin Laden, the war in Iraq is not the same as the war on terror, there is no connection between Saddam and Al Q’aeda, we’re just fighting for oil or to avenge daddy, or chum up with our Saudi homeys etc., etc., etc.
    My take is that Bush honestly believed there were WMDs and that Saddam Hussein was an immediate threat to the US. Please kids, if he believed this, he was not lying, there is a very important difference. Let’s not rehash this, a bunch of Dems including, Kerry, Clinton, the list goes on, also believed it. Don’t make me find the quotes. Bush is not the embodiment of the intelligence agencies, the intelligence agencies as they were at that time were wholly, or largely put in place by Bill Clinton over the previous 8 years. Also there were years and years of UN resolutions, sanctions, etc. that were not working and were not being taken seriously by Saddam. I understand why Saddam was acting this way; a UN resolution is the equivalent of double secret probation. They are never enforced and there are never any consequences to defying them. Look at the current situation in Lebanon with Hezbollah. That is why I was behind Mr. Bush; finally somebody was going to actually do something. Please remember that Hussein had killed Kurds (including women and kids), was brutally killing and maiming any internal opposition, routinely shooting at our fighter jets (who were only there to insure that he did not invade another country), paying $25,000 each to the families of suicide bombers, and if not outright denying unfettered access to all areas to UN inspectors, being very evasive and making their jobs very difficult. It’s my stance that you just can’t let assholes like that continuously spit in your face and violate human rights forever. Somebody has to stand up to him and finally someone did and now he is going to get what he deserves.

    Now I’ve admitted that I think this war has been poorly prosecuted. Hindsight being 20/20 there are lots of things we should have done differently. I think there are things we should be doing different now but that does not mean I am going to condemn the president for this and bail on him. I grew up in the military. My Dad was a Senior Master Sergeant in the US Air Force and served for 23 years. I had friends whose dads were colonels, generals; fighter pilots most of whom served in Korea and Vietnam. Fine, brave men who fought for this country, some of them died doing it. I know as they did that war is hell, war is unpredictable, and fucked up shit ALWAYS happens. This is the prism through which I see this conflict. If my employees started criticizing every mistake I ever made and never gave me credit for any of the success, I’d have a problem too. I think the left can and should be critical but the way they are going about it is not constructive. IMHO they smell blood and they are in a feeding frenzy to try and bring this president down. It’s my fear that in this type of atmosphere, this president, and no president in the future, Democrat or Republican, can ever succeed. To me this represents a corrosion of the system and I think both sides are guilty of it. I almost hope that a Democrat is elected president next so I can prove how I feel about this country and the office of the president. I will support that president if we are still in this war, or any war, or if this country faces other types of challenges. To put it succinctly, the concept of a “loyal and respectful opposition” has disappeared and I think that is not only sad but extremely damaging to this democracy. Maybe even its death knell. Perhaps that is why I am somewhat over-the-top sometimes in defense of the administration. Now please don’t throw the “good German” argument at me, obviously if I felt that the administration was evil, or unlawful, etc., I would not support it. Please don’t tell me that they are unlawful as far as the NSA, “torture,” FISA, etc. All these things are at the very least debatable and yet to be decided by the courts. It’s my opinion on these things that the president has done all he can, within the law, to protect this country. I believe he sincerely believes this and so do I. That does not make me stupid or naive.

    Bottom line, these extremists need to be confronted and killed and we’re doing it. Maybe we’re not doing it the right way and maybe we can do it better. But we’re doing it and I support it. If I were the president, I would bring in more troops, give it the “Powell Doctrine” on 11 and clean that place up and get the hell out. Then again, I’m not a general, you don’t want me running the military! I still have faith that our leaders will figure it out and get the job done. We have to succeed. As I’ve stated before, I believe that the only thing these assholes (jihadists) understand is force. I do not believe that terrorism is caused by poverty; I believe it is caused by religious fanaticism. Most of these assholes that have attacked us were not poor, or were not from poor backgrounds, quite the opposite actually. If poverty caused terrorism, why aren’t the extremely impoverished people in Appalachia (in Kentucky, West Virginia) blowing up marketplaces and beheading people? There are lots and lots of poor people that are not attacking us! This is a clash of cultures, NOT economies. The main cause of poverty in the Middle East is religious extremism, not the US or US policies. These Islamic theocracies are the Muslim people’s own worst enemies, not us! I believe if we win in Iraq, which has been a magnet for Al Q’aeda and other jihadists, it will be a great thing for this country and the world. I may be wrong on all these accounts, but right now, this is what I think and why I think it. I believe my stance is reasonable, well considered, and most importantly, not stupid. There are many very, very intelligent people that agree with me.


  3. Yeah, right, the NY Times is a fly-by-night hack shop, right? Fuck…

    You guys just can’t handle that reality has a well-known liberal bias. The NY Times is one of the most read and highly respected newspapers in the world. News Max? Fly-by-night hacks. You could have said Fox to have something like equity but that probably even turns your stomach. 😉


  4. micadelic says:

    More crazy liberals who hate America, right micadelic?

    Um, NY Times. Exactly.

    From now on I’m just going to cite Front Page Mag and News Max.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s