Dear Cindy,

Clifford May, the head of the Foundation to Defend Democracies — a private charity that got Department of State funding — writes an open letter to Cindy Sheehan.

So let me suggest an alternative: Come visit with me. Our meeting probably won’t get much publicity but I can promise you an interesting discussion. I’ll invite to join us some of the many Iraqi freedom fighters with whom I’ve been working for the past several years – many of them women — as well as democracy and human rights activists from Syria, Iran, Libya, Egypt, Lebanon and other countries.

You say you want to know, “What is the noble cause that my son died for?” They would answer: Your son died fighting a war against an extremist movement intent on destroying free societies and replacing them with racist dictatorships.

The Iraqis will want to tell you what life was like under Saddam Hussein – the mass murders of hundreds of thousands, the women and girls who were gang-raped by Saddam’s cronies, the creative forms of torture that were ignored by the “international community.”

I know several Baghdadi businessmen whom Saddam suspected of disloyalty. He had their right hands amputated. Want to meet them? The doctors who were forced to perform these amputations are worth chatting with as well.

The letter will run as a full-page ad in Waco’s paper.

The FDD also has a blog (full disclosure; a friend and former colleague helped them put it together); it includes ongoing commentary on the Iraqi constitution.

  • Gunther

    Not surprising that you’re shilling for the likes of Clifford May. Pullling “freedom and democracy’ out of your ass when all the other excuses for the invasion and permanent occupation of Iraq have fallen apart isn’t going to cut it. Particularly when some of those same people (e.g., Safia Taleb al-Suhail; remember her?) have basically accused the Americans of selling them out regarding the new constitution. If May had any integrity or courage he’d go to Crawford himself to speak to Sheehan. But since he’s a coward and blowhard, he runs an ad in the local paper instead. And gets people like you to praise him for doing so.

  • Truth Hurts

    the mass murders of hundreds of thousands, the women and girls who were gang-raped by Saddam’s cronies, the creative forms of torture that were ignored by the “international community.”
    …………………………………………………………………………………………….

    Shouldn’t that read:

    “were ignored by the Reagan and Poppa Bush administrations” until Saddam threatned the Saudi’s.

  • kat

    What exactly did Clinton do?? Enlighten me, please, I seem to have forgotten. Or was it nothing like in all cases?
    * The first World Trade Center bombing on February 26, 1993, Clinton did nothing
    * 10 months later in Mogadishu, Somalia… an attack on American military forces who were in country to bring food to starving Somalis, eighteen American soldiers were killed and the body of one was dragged through the streets in a gesture designed to formally humiliate the world’s greatest super power. Clinton turned tail and ran.

    * In 1995, Ramzi Youssef was captured in the Philippines with plans to use commercial airliners to blow up CIA headquarters among other targets.Plans to tighten airport security were rejected by the White House on the grounds that they might be construed as “racial profiling.” Did not want to piss off CAIR and ACLU. So he did NOTHING.

    * In 1996 in the Khobar Towers, 19 U.S. servicemen were killed but the Saudis refused to cooperate in tracking down the killers. The Clinton Administration did nothing.

    * In 1998, they blew up the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania– 245 people were killed and 6,000 injured. Clinton’s bombed an aspirinfactory in the Sudan and an empty terrorist camp in Khost.

    * In October 2000, al-Qaeda attacked the U.S.S Cole, an American warship, killing 17 servicemen. Clinton did nothing.

    *Able Danger pinponted that Atta piece of garbage–but Clinton did squat, so years later Sandy Berger had to hide incriminating evidence in his underwear and socks.

    Doing nothing gets you more terror–they feel brave and strive for bigger and better. The terrorists love that Sheehan psycho who speaks to the dead. They have a wonderful writeup about her in an Arab paper. She’s the terrorists’ female version of Michael Moore.
    Thanks for the link, Jeff.

  • rick gregory

    C’mon Jeff… there’s no doubt that Saddam was as evil as they come, but that’s not why we went in there. Even if you accept the Bush administrations stated reason for starting this war, it was because they believed there were WMDs which would pose a danger to our interests, not to liberate Iraq from a dictator.

    This rationale (topple evil regimes) would have us very, very busy for the next several decades as there are a LOT of evil regimes out there. Would I like to see each of them toppled? Hell yes. Am I willing to have us invade each of them? No.

  • Mike G

    “Pullling “freedom and democracy’ out of your ass when all the other excuses for the invasion and permanent occupation of Iraq have fallen apart”

    That pretty much sums it up. Freedom and democracy are literally shit to people like Gunther. The Left stands for order, for the sovereignty of dictators. Freedom is shit. Democracy is slavery. Ignorance is strength.

  • james

    Mike G., nice try at totally misreading that post.

    oct. 2002
    May: We know from satellite photography, we know from defectors, we know from all sorts of sources that he does have chemical and biological weapons and he’s working on nuclear.

    May: Yes. A defector recently said that Saddam Hussein called together his nuclear scientists and he congratulated them and thanked them for the important work that they were doing in terms of his competition against the West. Now, maybe what he wants to do is have these guys figure out a way to have nuclear power plants that will obviate the need for oil and that’s what he means, but somehow, I very much doubt it. I don’t think that’s what Saddam Hussein is doing. I think it’s pretty clear what he’s doing. I think you have to be so gullible, just entirely gullible not to understand he has some weapons, he is developing more, he is amassing these, he is lying that he doesn’t have them and he thinks any weapons inspection regime put into place, he can beat. —-{{me-CURVEBALL}}
    May: As Condi [Condoleezza] Rice, the National Security Advisor put it, by the time we have a smoking gun, we’ll also have a mushroom cloud.

    May was all bout the WMD, the rationale changed after the fact.

  • http://oodja.blogspot.com Jersey Exile

    Nice attempt at misdirection, Kat, but Clinton was highly successful in containing Saddam Hussein, almost seamlessly continuing the postwar siege tactics of the Bush I administration which reduced the regime to virtually nothing.

    As for whatever missteps he made in the War on Terror, how exactly does that exculpate Bush II for ignoring the terrorist threat until 20 hijackers forced the issue? Then Attorney General Ashcroft was more interested in porn than terrorism, and even said so when the outgoing Clinton people told the Bushies to take the threat more seriously.

    Keep your hate and your empty cut-and-paste talking points out of this conversation.

  • http://oodja.blogspot.com Jersey Exile

    I wonder if Clifford May has met with the Iraqi intellectuals of Al Mutanabbi Street, who have seen their bustling marketplace of books and ideas go from the hope and promise of liberation to a new random fear no less oppressive than that of Saddam.

    In our eagerness to declare Iraq a success and get the Sam Hill out of there so the Repubs don’t get massacred in the 2006 Elections we are selling every genuine freedom-loving soul in that country short. Women’s rights? Expendable. Freedom of worship? Negotiable.

    Some democracy we’ve built there in Mesopotamia. Can’t blame the multi-culti liberals for this one…

  • owl 1

    I look at Iraq and can not believe that people see such different things.

    Jersey Exile seems to think containment worked. I agree the US did a good job for years. How much longer Jersey?
    He did the following while in containment: a)son-in-laws exposed his chemicals b)Hussein tried to have an American president killed c)Hussein spent millions on HOMICIDE terrorists d)he tried to buy radar so he could shoot down American planes that were keeping him in containment e)he managed to get his government onto key UN committees (weapons no less).

    The main thing we could not stop was his deliberate funding of civilian murder that kept the pot boiling with the Palestinians. Then every Arab country could point……”see that problem”.

    Our good Allies at the UN were about to turn him loose. Our choices were to do a Clinton and “do nothing” or take him out. Containment was no longer an option. The anti-war critics never address this point. We were definitely going to be in a war in the Middle East. That pot Hussein was stirring. Do we choose the time or let him?

    How do so many people hear different things? I must have tuned out the WMD campaign (even though I thought he had them) because I was watching our good Allies and what you could SEE Hussein doing.

    Mother Sheehan does not respect her son. He was a grown man that chose his own course, every step of the way. Hero Casey would have understood this open letter. Mother Sheehan said she did not believe this country was worth dying for…….Casey re-enlisted. Mother Sheehan is about Cindy. I suspect this letter could only be understood by the Hero Sheehan.

  • http://oodja.blogspot.com Jersey Exile

    Jersey Exile seems to think containment worked. I agree the US did a good job for years. How much longer Jersey?

    We’ve laid siege to Castro for over forty years now. I suppose in your opinion it’s high time we invaded Cuba as well, rather than sit around and “do nothing”.

    Saddam Hussein was a flea on the ass of the world, and we could have kept him that way indefinitely. Whether he admits it in public now or not, I’m sure Dubya wishes he’d listened to his Pappy on this one in retrospect. A former director of the CIA probably knew a lot better about the feasible of forcible regime change than a former owner of the Texas Rangers — who’d have thunk it?

  • http://oodja.blogspot.com Jersey Exile

    That pretty much sums it up. Freedom and democracy are literally shit to people like Gunther. The Left stands for order, for the sovereignty of dictators. Freedom is shit. Democracy is slavery. Ignorance is strength.

    Let me know when you and your freedom-loving buddies are going to liberate Aung San Suu Kyi in Myanmar and maybe I’ll buy into the Right’s newfound fascination with human rights and the international rule of law. Until then color me slightly suspicious that all of your areas of current bleeding-heart concern happen to be sitting on top of sizable reserves of light sweet crude.

  • tonynoboloney

    Clifford Mays letter is right on the mark.

    “outgoing Clinton people told the Bushies to take the threat more seriously”

    You mean Bill had to say, “be careful there George I kinda left the back door open.”

    I grow weary of the Anti-America, Anti war left and all of their empty rhetoric. Checking daily with the likes of Kos & co. for the latest talking points. I also grow weary of the “no WMD’s” argument which everyone on both sides realize is just an excuse used to make the present administration look bad. No one and I mean no one on either side of this issue has any doubts that Saddam was intent on causing great harm to his enemies, or that the U.N inspectors were prevented from doing their jobs in Iraq. What really bugs me about the Cindy Sheehans of this country is their insistance on ignoring the political realities of the situation not only in Iraq, but the entire region and what Americas role is. The situation in Iraq is REAL and the war on terror is REAL, the threats to Iraqis from with-in and the outside their country by Islamic extremists is REAL, as the threat to this country by the same thugs is REAL. That the United States (George Bush) has decided to make a stand against these people at this time and in this place is a credit to all free peoples everywhere. Not only is the war in Iraq having the desired effect here (no more 9/11′s), but it is having a positive effect in the region by bringing a sorely needed regime change and democracy to millions of deserving people.

    If the the Democrats can do nothing but complain putting nothing on the political table to ease the tensions here or in the M.E. they should at least shut-up and stand down. The constant negative beat by the left is doing far more harm than good.

  • http://oodja.blogspot.com Jersey Exile

    I also grow weary of the “no WMD’s” argument which everyone on both sides realize is just an excuse used to make the present administration look bad.

    Your President made himself look bad, friend. Don’t blame critics for simply pointing out the lies.

    Not only is the war in Iraq having the desired effect here (no more 9/11’s), but it is having a positive effect in the region by bringing a sorely needed regime change and democracy to millions of deserving people.

    That’s right, no more 9/11′s — just 3/11′s (Spain) and 7/7′s (London). And let’s not forget the bombing in Bali, either. Or doesn’t it count if it isn’t American blood that’s spilt? Yeah, we sure have those al-Qaeda goons on the run.

    As for democracy, let’s wait and see what the Iraqis end up with before we prematurely call it a “democracy”. Last time I checked democratic governments allowed their females to go outside of the house unaccompanied by male relatives without being labelled a slut and beaten or killed. Last time I checked democratic governments did not allow their citizens to get shot for selling ice on the street because frozen water was “un-Islamic”. Last time I checked democratic governments didn’t allow shadowy religious bodies unelected by the people to have the final say on whether a law agreed with a 1500-year old religious document or not.

  • http://flamingflivvers.blogspot.com/ Carson Fire

    Looks like I’m too early for Oliver Willis’ appearance. I’ll come back later.

  • http://cellar.org/iotd.php Undertoad

    I’m absolutely certain that Clinton would have listened to his own appointed CIA Director George Tenet, would have gone into Iraq at the great unmitigated joy of the left and the great dismay of the right, and would have faced the same slow burn of criticism from the right over accumulating casualties.

    The only difference, perhaps is that Clinton’s emotional appeal style of communication would be more effective than W’s “yer a retard so I’ll speak slowly and enunciate” style.

    Partisanship, it sucks.

  • Mike G

    Let me know when you and your freedom-loving buddies are going to liberate Aung San Suu Kyi in Myanmar and maybe I’ll buy into the Right’s newfound fascination with human rights and the international rule of law.

    How self-righteously presumptuous, Jersey Ex, to presume that I am a rightist with a newfound interest in human rights.

    In fact, I am a longtime supporter of human rights with a newfound identification with the internationalist faction of the right who have finally come to recognize that spreading liberty is the only viable solution for reducing the threat from areas of the world that, thanks to oil and so on, are constantly volatile. (God works in mysterious ways and if She chose crackers from Texas as Her instrument for freeing the middle east, well, it’s a start.)

    Along with that newfound identification, I have a newfound revulsion for my former allies on the left-liberal side who were perfectly happy to leave a monster like Saddam in power, benefiting from a corrupt and cruel sanctions regime. When the isolationist left adopted “out of sight out of mind” as an operating principle toward the people of regimes like Saddam’s, it ceased having anything to do with the cause of human rights.

  • Jimmy

    There is no denying what this man says is true; however, we did not go to war to free Iraqis. We went to war because our President tolds us Saddam Hussein and Iraq were a direct threat to the national security of the United States. That they had weapons of mass destruction. We did not go to war because Saddam was a mass murder and gang-raped woman and girls — he did that with out tacit approval for decades. If you want to disagree with a grieving mother, fine, but don’t use less that truthful reasons to back up that disagreement. It soils the memory of the son she lost.

    Moreover, don’t lay this “out of sight, out of mind” crap at the door of the liberal-left. There have been exactly two Democrats in office in that last 30 years. Many Republican administrations saw no problem with Hussein, with his mass murders and gang rapes, as long as it was in our interests to look the other way. The last time we engaged in a conflict for REAL humanitarian reasons it was under a Democrat and the Republicans were playing the “out of sight, out of mind” game. There is a REAL humanitarian disaster in Darfur, but where are the Republicans on this issue? Once again, “out of sight, out of mind.”

  • Dr. Mathews

    Nothing anyone anywhere has said has yet convinced me that oil was not the main objective behind the invasion of Iraq. Democracy? Freedom? What was the United States doing to effectively advance democracy in South Africa during the apartheid years?

  • Mike G

    I remain flabbergasted by the implications of these oft-advanced arguments:

    There is a REAL humanitarian disaster in Darfur

    Therefore: we shouldn’t have done anything about Iraq.

    What was the United States doing to effectively advance democracy in South Africa during the apartheid years?

    Therefore: it is just and proper that dictatorship continue in Iraq.

    Let me know when you and your freedom-loving buddies are going to liberate Aung San Suu Kyi in Myanmar

    Therefore: the gassing of the Kurds was a positive good, as it maintained order in a sovereign nation.

    This is what drove me, in dismay, out of the ranks of the post-humanitarian liberal side. Or enabled it to leave me.

    But of course Hitchens says it so much better than I:

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/995phqjw.asp

  • http://cellar.org/iotd.php Undertoad

    Wait Mike G, let me try:

    What was the United States doing to effectively advance democracy in South Africa during the apartheid years?

    Therefore: it is never in the strategic interests of the US to effectively advance democracy at any time, now or in the future.

  • Dr. Mathews

    Allow me to expand a bit on my previous curt observation so people do not put words into my mouth. I am not advocating a return of Saddam Hussein to power in Iraq nor am I against democracy. However, the United States apparently saw no problem with the lack of democracy in Nicaragua under the bloody Somoza dictatorship or in the Dominican Republic under the equally repressive Trujillo dictatorship as long as it advanced its strategic interests. Similarly, it overthrew the democratically elected government of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala during the 1950′s when it perceived a “threat” to its strategic interests. I can go on and on but I think that if you are honest with yourselves, you can see why a person might be skeptical about calls for democracy in the justification for a military invasion, especially when the track record of the US over the years speaks for itself.

  • Mike G

    I am not advocating a return of Saddam Hussein to power in Iraq nor am I against democracy. However, the United States apparently saw no problem with the lack of democracy in Nicaragua under the bloody Somoza dictatorship or in the Dominican Republic under the equally repressive Trujillo dictatorship as long as it advanced its strategic interests

    And since absolutely nothing has changed in the world since the 1980s…

  • http://cellar.org/iotd.php Undertoad

    That’s right Dr. Matt, but this is — and wait a minute, imagine me saying it in W’s “yer a retard so I’ll speak slowly and enunciate” style:

    “It’s a War on TERROR, y’see – a DIFFERENT kinda war –”

    I know, you don’t think you can take him on his word at that. But, beyond just oiiiillll, biiiiiiig oiiiillllll, can you — (and I’m really being patronizing here, and I’m sorry about that I swear) can you think of any OTHER reason why it might be a good idea to create a Arabic, US-friendly, democratic, terror-hating nation that borders Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Syria?

    Think real hard about that, and while you do, imagine we’re the good guys, eh?

  • Dr. Mathews

    To the chaps who insist on replying to my comments: While I wish I could share in your optimism and your unmitigated faith in your commander-in-chief, experience has taught some of us that a healthy dose of skepticism is often the first step towards perspicacity. In cases such as the US invasion of Iraq, history obliges us to dig underneath the rhetoric-strewn surface to learn the true motivations behind such actions. The ulterior motive or motives, if you will. I can’t help wondering if your opinions will remain the same one or two years from now.

  • tonynoboloney

    Dr. Mat, my dear chap, I can’t help wondering if YOUR opinions will remain the same one or two years from now.

  • Eileen

    If perspicacity is your goal, Dr., I suggest you read up on Islamofascism. If after doing so you still throw your hat into the nefarious oil-is-the-only reason (ever) for (any and all) U.S. foreign policy decisions, so be it.

    One can only imagine what Might be accomplished if the lefties actually got dialed into the present day threats we face and stopped “not being against democracy”. Now there’s a rousing testament to something or other. Why is it that pursuing our nation’s *strategic interests* is so god-awful to you America haters? I guess you’d prefer to see us all dead or dhimmified.

    It isn’t 30 years ago and this isn’t Viet Nam.

    I suggest we send 7 nice Black Burkas for Cindy to wear under the hot Texas sun as she makes the front page of Al Jazeera today, and continues in her efforts to ‘make her son proud’. Cindy and her supporters, moveon et al., are clearly a match made in anti-American heaven.

    And JE, could you please stop being so rude? This isn’t Your conversation to dictate like a prime MCP. Maybe it would be good for you to back up your own bellicose bellowing with a few citations for a change?

  • Eileen

    And to all you America hating, Camp Buzz commenters: I am sick to death of gagging on the bile of your hatred. Get the FO if you hate us, your country and our political system so much! Go share a cave with your terrorist buds and spew, sputter, splurt and self destruct. You’ll be in good company. Move On outta here! Ride donkeys into the hills/save gas.

    It really IS so simple. Either you are with us or against us. Our ‘stupid’ Harvard grad Prez said it all. What don’t you ‘get’ about these simple words, hmm?

    If you insist on hating freedom and democracy, and wish to assist our enemies, please just LEAVE us. Trust me, we don’t need you and we won’t miss you one bit.

  • http://thealguy.blogspot.com/ Al Hill

    Mr. Jarvis … how do you feel about that last post? Are we to become a society without dissent? Is it really going to be “with us or against us”? Is dissent not one of the key rights and obligations at the core of our democracy? And would dissent be worth anything if it was not taken up during these kinds of operations? Wouldn’t it be kind of like fighting for free speech that only includes your speech? I lived through one cycle of “My Country Right or Wrong and Love it or Leave it” and let me tell you how I feel about that … it is my country and if I feel it is wrong then it is my duty, right and obligation to speak up and do something about it … I can believe that the leadership is doing the wrong thing for the wrong reasons and still support the troops .. as I do three times a week at the local VA … I can believe the president is wrong and still honor the bravery and sacrifice that our men and women bring to their jobs …. disagreement with the government is not un-american … it is ,in the best since of the word, American to the core…

  • Dr. Mathews

    I have one final suggestion to those of you that embrace the current US administration’s propaganda on Iraq with such alacrity. You might read Dr. Robert Higgs’ excellent analysis of current events there: http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1553

  • http://cellar.org/iotd.php Undertoad

    So, Doc, you couldn’t think of any other reason why it might be a good idea to create a Arabic, US-friendly, democratic, terror-hating nation that borders Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Syria?

    You sound pretty smart, but I thought that was an easy question.

  • http://thealguy.blogspot.com/ Al Hill

    Undertoad . do you think that the new Iraqi ties to Iran prove that statement? What would you say if they end up with closer ties to Iran? Do we bomb them also? Iraq is well on the way to ending up as a Muslim Theocracy … do you think that will be good for the US? Or the women in Iraq? I would love to see it as a free and democratic country … with equal rights for everbody … but does it really seem to be moving that way to you? And by the way did you read the post he linked to?

  • http://thealguy.blogspot.com/ Al Hill

    One more thing … over at James Wolcott I find this text of a conversation ..

    http://jameswolcott.com/archives/2005/08/once_more_into.php

    Let us recall the colloquy following a television debate between Nation editor David Corn and Richard Perle. The night was dark and the streets of Washington thronged with ghosts. Corn:

    “On the way home, I recalled the other dollop of insider wisdom he attempted to impart to me that night. When we first walked out of the studio, Perle sharply said, ‘Why do you think we need anyone else?’ He was replying to my on-air skepticism regarding Bush’s effort to win Arab backing for a military move against Iraq.

    “I noted there were widespread media reports saying an attack would require up to 250,000 troops. These soldiers could not all be air-dropped into Iraq. They would have to come from somewhere, such as Saudi Arabia. And a military action of this size would need extensive logistical support nearby.

    “Forget the 250,000 figure, Perle said: ‘The Army guys don’t know anything. They said we needed 500,000 troops in 1991 [for the Gulf War]. Did we need that many to win? No.’

    “What’s the Perle Plan? I asked.

    “‘Forty thousand troops.’ he said.

    “To take Baghdad? Nah, he replied. To take control of the north and the south, particularly the north, where the oil fields are. Cut off Saddam’s oil, make him a pauper, that should do the trick.

    “‘We don’t need anyone else,’ he said, in a distinctly imperial fashion.”

    ………………………………………………………………………………………

    And then there is this….

    John Podhoretz–now there’s a chickenhawk. Back in 2002, he urged Bush to adopt a Wag the Dog policy and spring an “October Surprise” on the Democrats by–well, let’s hear it in his own words (via Unqualified Offerings):

    “There’s a luscious double trap in starting the war as soon as possible, Mr. President. Your enemies are delirious with excitement about the corporate-greed scandals and the effect they might have on your popularity and the GOP’s standing in November.

    “If you get troops on the ground quickly, they will go berserk. Incautious Democrats and liberal pundits will shriek that you’ve gone to war solely to protect yourself from the corporate-greed scandal. They will forget the lesson they so quickly learned after Sept. 11, which is that at a time of war the American people want their political leaders to stand together.

    “Your enemies will hurl ugly accusations at you, Mr. President. And at least one of them will be true – the accusation that you began the war when you did for political reasons.

    “But that won’t matter. It won’t matter to the American people, and it won’t matter as far as history is concerned. History will record that you and the U.S. military brought an end to a barbaric regime on its way to threatening the world.”

    Any grownup who could describe the scenario of getting a jump on your political enemies by going to war as “luscious”–who could treat the carnage and misery caused by massive bombing and overwhelming American firepower as a neato trick to pull on those crybaby Democrats–is a wanton clown. Suppose Bush had taken Podhoretz’s tip and launched the Iraq war even earlier than he did, and the war went even worse than the one we’re waging now because of haste and cynical expedience, what would history have said then? Podhoretz doesn’t know, and he doesn’t care. Like Richard Perle, he thinks he’s got it all figured.
    …………………………………………………………………………………
    In this day and age the words you post, as Mr. Jarvis knows, stay on forever …

  • http://cellar.org/iotd.php Undertoad

    Al, in the end, the results will be all that matter. I’m prepared to judge the whole thing by the results; screw what the administration says, screw stupid commentators who try vainly to make hay out of little suggestions in the WaPo, screw people who consider the events of decades ago to be damning evidence today.

    I’m also a swing voter, and I voted for Kerry in 2004 and Gore in 2000.

    A truly Democratic Iraq will never consort with Iran and will not be a Muslim Theocracy. Surveys of Iraqis show that 75% of them do not want that type of government, therefore if the government is truly representational it will not BE that type of government.

  • http://cellar.org/iotd.php Undertoad

    Al, it would appear that your posts are damning evidence of things that didn’t happen and bad guesses about what might happen in the future.

    It’s not very convincing for careful readers.

  • http://thealguy.blogspot.com/ Al Hill

    Results are not all that matter .. how you get results also matters a lot … that is the meaning of “Morals” and just because a poll says that 75% of Iraqis do not want a Muslim Theocracy does not mean that the people with the power and the guns will not enforce one … I bet the same 75% did not want a crazy dictator running the country … but he did for decades .. You seem to think that wishing will make it so … but you last post makes my point … it is based on ether being “A truly Democratic Iraq” and they do not seem to be moving that way now … Though I want that to be the case with all me soul.

  • Eileen

    Al, it isn’t about us ‘becoming a society without dissent’. My expression of frustration last night was with the moveon types that spew venom to such a degree that they essentially become a mouthpiece for our enemy. They are otherwise known as the ‘useful fools’.

    My observation is that the naysayers, those who constantly denigrate the administration and attempt to ascribe every ill on the planet to the U.S. (ala JE’s suggestion that Spain, London and Bali are ‘somehow’ *also* our fault) never provide any suggestions for solving problems. [And notice he doesn't bother to point out these incidents are fully in keeping with the Islamofascists' stated aims for global jihad which predate Iraq by centuries.] They only prognosticate gloom and doom – like you are also doing – without waiting to see what in reality the Iraqis will forge for their constitution and for their fledgling democracy.

    The class half empty crowd isn’t offering even one suggestion for how we are to fight Islamofascism. If cutting and running in Iraq is *it*, then God help us all.

    Democratic representatives do appear to finally be ‘getting it’ (somewhat), as you don’t see them lining up to support Cindy – well, unless you consider the Reverend Sharpton one of their leaders. But the biggest mistake some of them Are making is to press for a ridiculous timetable for withdrawal. Who the hell will that help except our enemy? They may be well meaning, but how do you spell stupid? Democrats need to offer solutions that make sense. So far, I’m not hearing any.

    Criticizing without offering solutions doesn’t solve any problems. And the constant whining of the doom and gloom crowd is not only annoying, but also counterproductive. If all you can focus on is your hatred of the administration and worst case scenarios, maybe it Is time to change your channel.

    And when the station that shows beheadings has Cindy on its cover, you know the rhetoric of the useful fools has *in fact* become a useful tool for our enemy. If THAT doesn’t disturb you, what would?

  • http://thealguy.blogspot.com/ Al Hill

    Fear of what the other side will do with our words is not a reason to shut up … the other side will always be able to use our words against us .. even if we all speak with the same voice … as to no other plan … here are some …

    Read all of this …
    http://www.juancole.com/2005/08/ten-things-congress-could-demand-from.html

    And another…
    http://securingamerica.com/issues/iraqplan

    There are more … your statement that no one that opposes the war has offered any other plan is wrong …

    As to the cover with Cindy on it .. I believe that are own Sec. of Defense and VP made that cover based on stories about torture .. and documents that they had OKed

    As to the time table .. I think the first time table me to make is one that applies to the people of Iraq … it is one of the reasons I like one of the above plans …

    130.000 well armed tough troops even though they are the best that has ever been sent into battle can not change the culture of millions of people … they will have to do that on there own … because if we force they will tear it apart when we leave …

  • http://www.amir-meshkin.com Amir Meshkin

    Great post. Many have died to protect freedom and democracy, in Iran and elsewhere. I want to remind Cindy that it is an all volunteer army. Don’t think I don’t appreicate your son giving his life to protect freedom in Iraq.

    As far as Iran, I don’t think invasion would be the answer. Freedom in Iran requires a revolution from within, with a little push from the west.

    Read my latest. What if There Was Oil in Uganda?

    Thank You for the support.

  • http://thealguy.blogspot.com/ Al Hill

    Here is some reading for you … this guy is not a left wing nut by any stretch of the imagination …

    Where Do We Go From Here?
    http://cunningrealist.blogspot.com/2005/08/where-do-we-go-from-here.html

    By The Cunning Realist

    I’ve written a lot about Iraq in this space, but I want to fill in a few gaps that pre-date this blog’s inception. First, I supported the invasion and removal of Saddam. I felt a twinge of disgust when I saw the first bombs fall on Baghdad and the computer screens in front of me at work showed that the reflexive reaction of many Americans to the carnage was to buy stocks. But that’s another issue, and based on my professional experience it was both understandable and predictable. I had little doubt military action was necessary in light of 9/11 and the intelligence that was presented in the months leading up to the war. But there’s the rub. Of course, we now know a fair amount about how the prewar intelligence—as well as the public debate via the Plame outing—was subverted, hand-picked, shaded, crafted, manipulated, or flat-out fabricated to support an objective that had been conceived well in advance. At this point, this simply cannot be denied by any reasonable, clear-thinking person.

  • http://cellar.org/iotd.php Undertoad

    That guy’s a blowhard, and to say otherwise simply cannot be denied by any reasonable, clear-thinking person.

  • http://thealguy.blogspot.com/ Al Hill

    Well I say otherwise .. he has done his homework and basis his beliefs on information …. so I guess I am not a clear thinking person … If you want to see what war is go here read his whole post first …then follow the lick .. but before you look at the picture of war .. look at the comments from the Troops … this is what happens to men and women in this kind of war … and remember this web page is accessible by anybody in the world …

    http://simbaud.blogspot.com/2005/08/porn-for-monsters.html

  • http://flamingflivvers.blogspot.com/ Carson Fire

    so I guess I am not a clear thinking person

    Mm hm. You’re busy looking at all sorts of “licks” which show how ugly and perverted the world can be, but don’t have the intellectual grounding necessary to understand that what’s at stake far eclipses the crimes of errant individuals.

    It would be as if you were in Germany in the 30s arguing that the Jews were too at fault for many of Germany’s problems, and therefore it would be wrong to stand up against the burgeoning anti-semitism. The crimes of individual Jews would not, in fact, excuse subsequent atrocities and exterminations, but that is the argument.

    And that is what many Moorians and Sheehanites have been trying to do desperately ever since 9/11. In their eyes, any misstep on the part of individuals means that the US must step down and allow a violent international movement bent on domination, violence, and oppression to continue its work unfettered. The “Jews” are guilty of crimes, and therefore the greater evil of genocide should not be opposed.

    Thankfully, the majority of the US citizens are not so foolish, despite the results of flimsy push polling.

  • http://thealguy.blogspot.com/ Al Hill

    No I am not talking about the sins of individuals .. I am talking about the actions of the US government … Taking out Afghanistan was the right thing to do .. we should have finished it and rebuilt that country … we are going to have to fix Iraq someway now … but that does not alter the fact that we were lied to, to get us into this war … and if you are against genocide you need to be looking at what is happening in Africa … I will say it again Iraq was not a threat to us … in no way shape or form … the country was contained .. even the right thought it would be a cake walk to take them out … and you are right what is at stake is very important … it is the very basis of our democracy .. I have been through this before .. I did my time in uniform …

  • http://flamingflivvers.blogspot.com/ Carson Fire

    We were not… lied to… in the sense that… everyone believed the intelligence we… had… from Bush to Clinton… to Clinton to Kerry… and back again… and WMD notwithstanding… we understood that Saddam was still… in contravention of the cease fire… because he still was shooting at our planes… and behaving belligerently. Only pedantic leftists… insist… that WMD was the entirety… of our problem with Saddam, but… while we believed… that it was so, it was obviously… one of the most important worries. WMD… does not change… the rest of Saddam’s crimes… and does not make… the war “illegal”… as fringist nitwits… insist.

    It indeed would have been foolish to *not* take advantage of the moment in time to do what we did. Otherwise, Saddam would still be sitting there like a fat spider, shooting at us, plotting assassinations, rewarding terrorists, and instructing other middle eastern tyrants that we are paper tigers. Our failure so far is that we are still allowing ourselves to look like paper tigers nonetheless, even in the midst of rebuilding Iraq. Bush’ failure is to worry too much about the opposition, not in ignoring them; he would find more broad success if he pushed forward harder.

    We still have some distance to go to overcome a morally corrupt press corp that allows leftists to manage the news for them. The whole concept of a coming “tipping point” is nothing but a farcical propaganda push by a so-far failed domestic anti-defense force. Maybe these jackals will eventually win… but we pray for the sake of mankind that they do not.

  • Eileen

    Amen, Carson Fire.

    And what will the naysayers say now that a Constitution in Iraq(!) is actually going for a vote? More gloom and doom prognostications? No doubt. Prophesies of civil war will be the next great focus; the next great Chinese water torture talking point. How ‘predictable’ they have become..

    If the Sunnis/sharia crazed idiots don’t get on board, well then, GREAT! Leave them to rot in a desert of non-Allah-rewarded-hell.

    Not everyone supported the draft of our own Constitution, either. Hat tip, President Bush.

  • Robert

    If the Sunnis/sharia crazed idiots don’t get on board, well then, GREAT! Leave them to rot in a desert of non-Allah-rewarded-hell.

    This is possibly the most despicable thing I’ve ever heard. What a great idea: let’s go help the people that want to be helped, then let the rest die. The winner’s get to write the history after all; what could we possibly want any naysayers around for? And after they’re gone, we can move the cleansing to our shores. Why not poison the cafeteria food at MoveOn? That way you won’t have any dissidents around to question your ridiculous ideas.

    Not everyone supported the draft of our own Constitution, either. Hat tip, President Bush.

    Obviously, Iraq circa 2005 is a mirror image of the United States circa 1787. I’ll leave my hat on, thank you. After all, it’s pretty cold here, what with all this “gloom and doom”.

  • Eileen

    Robert, don’t be so literal; chill, bud.

  • http://thealguy.blogspot.com/ Al Hill

    Maybe I am just not very good at saying this … but if you read the rest of this over at …

    http://daoureport.salon.com/synopsis.aspx?synopsisId=8d187cda-6e7c-46bc-af30-fcb819c848a1

    You may get a better idea of how we feel ….

    The unbridgeable divide between the left and right’s approach to Iraq and the WoT is, among other things, a disagreement over the value of moral and material strength, with the left placing a premium on the former and the right on the latter. The right (broadly speaking) can’t fathom why the left is driven into fits of rage over every Abu Ghraib, every Gitmo, every secret rendition, every breach of civil liberties, every shifting rationale for war, every soldier and civilian killed in that war, every Bush platitude in support of it, every attempt to squelch dissent. They see the left’s protestations as appeasement of a ruthless enemy. For the left (broadly speaking), America’s moral strength is of paramount importance; without it, all the brute force in the world won’t keep us safe, defeat our enemies, and preserve our role as the world’s moral leader…..

  • kat

    Excuse me while I barf–if the Left epitomizes moral strenghth then God help us.

  • tonynoboloney

    Al, I cannot fathom how you can say that Americas moral strength is of “paramount importance” to the left ! What moral strength supports the abortion of 10′s of thousands fetuses each year? what moral strength defends same sex marriages? what moral strength supports stem cell research (say late term abortions). what moral strength on the left who condemn Christians (85% of Americans) as “right wing theocrats” for believing in Jesus? What moral strength is represented by calling our Comander and Cheif Bush-Hitler, and likening his administration to Neo-Nazis ? What moral strength supports the ACLU as they fight to remove prayer from our schools, the 10 comandments from our court houses, and crosses from our fallen soldiers graves? What moral strength has accepted for the party on the left almost 90% of the African American vote, election after election district after district for decades, yet have allowed them to be considered second class citizens, doing almost nothing to advance the plight of their schools, or the conditions of their ghettos. What moral strength was shown by the previous president as he lied and cheated, not only on his wife but to congress and plunged this country into impeachment hell. What moral strength is it that fights the legitimate appointment to the UN, or threatens “nuclear options” for supreme court nominees with out considering time honored “up or down” votes. No Al, I think the “left” has no more moral high ground than the right. Would you prefer that America preach our moral superiority to Al Quiada, thus avoid any bloodshed? Keeping America “safe” and “defeating our enemies” might best be accomplished with “brute force”.

    Al, you are right about one thing though there is an “unbridgeable divide” between right and left.

  • tonynoboloney

    Ha ha ha, how silly of me to go on that tirade when all I had to say is you make me barf.

  • http://thealguy.blogspot.com/ Al Hill

    On last thing and then I am done … I have never called Bush Hitler or the administration Nazis .. no one I know wants to take crosses of of graves .. I did two tours in Vietnam … a lot of my buddies are buried in those graves .. a lot of the rest of what you are saying is religion and the way you are saying is that I can not have any morals unless I believe the way you do … that is not true … as to prayer in schools and the 10 Commandments on government ground … are you going to allow all other religions to say prayers in school and put their religious commandments on the grounds or are we just talking about yours? As to Clinton I found his personal behavior despicable .. but every one involved was an adult .. and so I figured it was between him and his wife … going to war has a little more to do with all of us ..

    Most of all I will have you know I am a very moral person .. never lied, cheated or stolen … I do my best to treat people the way I want to be treated .. I pay all of my taxes .. I share what I have with people in need … both time and money … have you done ward volunteer work at the VA this month or this year? I was not insulting to anyone here .. you were … goodbye

  • http://flamingflivvers.blogspot.com/ Carson Fire

    Sorry, Al, no sale.

    The unbridgeable divide between the left and right’s approach to Iraq and the WoT is, among other things, a disagreement over the value of moral and material strength, with the left placing a premium on the former and the right on the latter.

    While that’s certainly not as vulgar as most insults from the left (and I do commend you for that!) it is still essentially an insult.

    You repeat the myth that the left is intellectually superior and the right just doesn’t get it. We just want to blow up everybody.

    On the contrary, you’ll find that many on the right have gone through leftist spasms, generally younger years when we *thought* we were smarter and more intellectual than everybody else.

    But in reality we were simply more self-righteous and impervious to other points of view. This is what we *do* get about the left, because so many of us were there once ourselves. (That is, incidentally, why the left wants to lower the voting age even more — it’s far easier to sell uninformed and biased mythologies to young people than mature people with brains)

    When I used to think that we (the US) were constantly at fault in all matters, it was because I bought into the mythology that the US is a powerful oppressor that is literally impervious to all actions of the rest of the world. When you inhabit this worldview, you can even convince yourself that the Cold War was a fantasy; the USSR was just another rightwing “boogieman”.

    However, at some point some of us grow up, and we come to realize that America’s place in the world isn’t carved in rock. Although some of us figured that out earlier on our own, some people needed 9/11 to spell it out for them.

    So what there is to understand, fundamentally, about the split between the right and the left at the moment is that the right is currently concerned with the real world, and what we need to do to survive in it, considering the dangerous tasks ahead. Some Democrats and liberals understand this, too (thank goodness!), and if I may be allowed to speak for the “right wing” (even though I’m not nearly the “wingnut” that fringists imagine), let me say that I feel absolutely no split with them. The “right” and the “left” does not have to agree on every single issue: this is why so many “wingnuts” read Jeff Jarvis’ blog. Reasonable people can agree and disagree on many issues and not be subject to a dramatic, hyped-up “divide” barrelling towards a “tipping point”.

    It is the fringist, wacked-out left that is still making “moral” decisions based on the America-carved-in-rock mythology. Other countries do not do things that affect us; we only do things to damage other countries. Therefore, outrages by extremists do not “count”. Hostage taking does not “count”. Decapitating innocents like Danny Pearl does not “count”. Blowing up scores of innocents in restaurants and discos does not “count”. Plotting to overtake other countries with an extremist and fascistic version of Islam does not “count”. But the fact that we even breathe is sufficient justification that we are criminally negligent and morally bankrupt.

    We saw this in Kos’ outrageously dismissive reaction to workers in Fallujah: calling them “mercenaries” because they were drawing paychecks (just as our soldiers do), and characterizing their deaths as somehow fitting: “screw ‘em”. How emminently moral! How intellectually superior!

    The left is not concerned with being moral so much as being self-righteous. It’s a teenager’s game to inflate one’s own ego. And, unfortunately, the safety and wealth of the US allow far too many people to grow up and advance in years and never stop being teenagers. Cindy Sheehan is currently media queen of the overage teenagers; she claims that it’s not about her, but it’s all about her: a self-centered circus spotlighting what she thinks, what she feels, what she wants, and as far the security of the US goes, and the morale and safety of her troops: “Screw ‘em”.

    Although we may sometimes act surprised (because we sometimes forget) the right understands the motivations of the left fringe all too well.

  • Dr. Mathews

    To Mike G in reply to his August 27 posting:
    Apparently someone misses Saddam Hussein: The head of Israel’s domestic security agency, Shin Bet, has said his country may come to regret the overthrow of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.