Jihad terrorist leads in early Palestinian vote count

God forbid the Israelis ever let this piece of excrement out of jail,

We are at war.

Israel is at war.

Wartime penalties must follow sedition( include Congresmen the drunk(Kennedy) and the liar (Kerry)).

If Barghouthi did anything to have his name put on the ballot, he should receive the ultimate sanction.

DGene, hows about you take your drunk, lying, seditious self back to freerepublic.com and let us discuss Islam?

DGene, is the "palestinian" election of an imprisoned terrorist one of those "positive effects" of the current administration's nation-building bungling in the Mid East?

I'll take the word of a war hero over a draftdodger any day. The same goes for Dick "Five Deferments" Cheney and Colonel Murtha.

DGene, what is Prince Dub going to do when they start electing wifebeaters and nukemongers in Iraq?

Good morning, KJ,

Help me understand something here. If this guy is locked away for five life sentences, how's he going to run the place if he wins the election? I guess it's not like in America where a convicted felon is not allowed to vote, let alone run for office.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Israel giving up Gaza was a bad thing, because now it's going to become a breeding ground for terrorists. They will have no real governemnt, social structure, economy, etc, it will just be a haunt for islamic terrorists of every kind.

"I'll take the word of a war hero over a draftdodger any day...."
-- from a posting above

Much the same sentiment has been expressed by others, of the opposite viewpont of the poster quoted above, who think that criticism of the stated reasons for remaining in Iraq, and the observation that some, by no means all, of the soldiers in Iraq have been trained to repeat the phrases about "making a difference by helping the Iraqi people" and "fighting the war on terror here so we don't have to fight the terrorists at home" though their real loyalty seems to be to the corps, or battalion, or even smaller group of fellow soldiers, rather than to a set of prefabricated statements that soldiers in Iraq can see for themselves make little sense.

It was suggested at one thread that noting this fact -- that some have been trained to repeat the party line and do so (and many others do not, and are appalled by the misuse of soldiers as props for this or that civilian leader) -- somehow constitued mockey of the troops. It did not.

But that poster, and kj above, both seem to accept the idea that military service, by itself, is enough to constitute mastery of a subject -- say, of Islam, of what its texts contains, and of the psychology of Islam, or of Muslims. Why? Would a Medal of Honor winner magically be transformed into an expert on strategy? Was Audie Murphy, because of his feats in World War II, invited to the Pentagon to conduct the strategy for the Korean War? Were the heroes on the battlefield the best people to conduct world-wide propaganda against Soviet Communism, or were others, perhaps schooled because some of them had been Communists once themselves, and had defected, and knew languages and the great world,were best able to conduct that relentless campaign of anti-Soviet propaganda?

John Murtha is not entitled to be listened to because he is a former Marine and served two tours of duty in Vietnam. He is entitled to be listened to because he makes sense. Bush and Cheney and Rice have lost the ability to command belief in this "total victory" in Iraq, in this "democracy-is-on-the-march-in-the-Midddle-East" and in this "LIght-Unto-the-Muslim-Nations Project" because this project, this democracy-on-the-march, this "total victory" (what in god's name, at a time when Infidels in America and elsewhere should be steeling themselves for a long, possibly endless effort at self-defense against the Jihad, is anyone doing talking idiotically about "total victory"?). It is not that Cheney had five deferments, or Bush managed to join the National Guard in lieu of being sent to Vietnam, or that Rice, perfectably understandably, never served, that entitles us to see through what they continue, obstinately, to cling to.

A knowledge of, and appeal to history, both of Islam and of Iraq, some intelligent appraisal of what is most important and what is less important (is what happens in Iraq more important than the islamization of Europe?), husbanding one's resources, including the morale of both soldiers and civilians, and not squandering them, carefully and cleverly artidulating the real problem so that something like the truth may begin to be approximated in discussing the tenets of Islam, some undersanding of how a particular situation, incompletely understood at first, may in fact offer precisely the kind of opportuntities to divide and thus demoralize the world of Islam,or at least push in that direction, so that Infidels everywhere, and non-Arab Muslims, and then even Arab Muslims,will begin to understand that the backwardness and failure and violence of the world of Islam derives from the nature of Islam itself, and the effects it has, not in some wierd and strange fashion, but perfectly naturally, on the minds of its truest adherents. And the truer they are, the better and more fully believing they are, the more willing they are to carry out in practice what is taught to them, the greater the menace for Infidels, and even for the not-quite-true believers.

Thank you, Hugh.

There are usually two sides to every story.Here is what one soldier says about Iraq. From what this Marine says it appears that soldiers words are being manipulated by the press.

One Marine's words

By Mona Charen

Nov 25, 2005

I don't know if the war in Iraq is ultimately unwinnable, but what I do know makes me skeptical of those who say so.

I do know that since Vietnam, liberals have viewed every exercise of American military power (with the exception of those undertaken by Bill Clinton) as preludes to disaster. The very first question Ronald Reagan was asked at his first presidential press conference concerned El Salvador. The question: Did he think it was going to turn into another Vietnam? Democrats invoked Vietnam with every other sentence during the long and nasty controversy about aiding the resistance in Nicaragua. More recently, just days into the Afghanistan war, The New York Times ran a front-page lament calling that conflict a new "quagmire."

Liberals seem always to believe that America will lose its wars, and when it doesn't, that it should.

It is obviously deeply painful to contemplate the more than 2,000 American dead, and many others gravely injured in Iraq. And charities like Fisher House (www.fisherhouse.org) welcome concrete demonstrations of Americans' concern for military families. But one does not sense that members of the military share the belief so widespread in the press and Congress that the Iraq war is going very badly and that the original decision to fight was a mistake.

One Marine, Sgt. Todd Bowers, who did two tours in Iraq, described the attitude of many press types. "They didn't want to talk to us." Why? I asked. "Because we were gung-ho for the mission." Bowers, who was saved from grievous injury when a bullet lodged in the sight of his rifle (a sight his father had purchased for him), is chary about the press.

In his first tour, he noticed that members of the press were reluctant to photograph Iraqis laughing, giving the thumbs up sign, or cheering. Yet Bowers saw plenty that would have made fine snapshots. In Baghdad, Al Kut and Al-Nasiriyah, Bowers reported no signs of anti-American feeling at all among Iraqis.

Fallujah, of course, was different, as the city was a hotbed of terrorism, and the battle of Fallujah was one of the fiercest engagements of the war. During the battle, Bowers found himself sharing a ride with an embedded reporter for the AP. He was asked what he thought of the destruction. Bowers responded that it was "Incredible, overwhelming. But it definitely had to be done." He also stressed that because the enemy had fought so dirty, tough calls had to be made. Later, he saw himself quoted in newspapers around the country to the effect that the destruction was "overwhelming" as if he could not cope. He had also made some anodyne remarks about rebuilding the damaged areas of the city, and responded "Where to begin?" when asked about the plans. He was speaking of the water treatment plants, medical facilities, and schools American forces were about to help build, but his comments were offered as evidence of the futility of the situation -- the very opposite of this eager Marine's intent.

There was plenty of progress to report, if the press had been interested. When the battle of Fallujah was over, the Marines set up a humanitarian relief station in an abandoned amusement park. Together with Iraqis locally hired and trained for the purpose and with an assist from the Iraqi ministry of the interior, they distributed rice, flour, medical supplies, baby formula, and other necessities to thousands of Iraqis. For six weeks, Bowers reports, the distribution went beautifully, "like a well-oiled machine." Not worth a story, apparently. Only when something went wrong did the press see something worth reporting. A small group of Iraqis were turned away from the food distribution point, though they had been waiting in line for hours. They were given vouchers and told they could come to the front of the line the next morning when supplies would be replenished. These few unhappy souls were then besieged by press types eager to tell their story.

At the same site, the Marines had repaired an old Ferris wheel. The motor was dead, but when two Marines pushed and pulled by hand they could get the thing turning to give rides to the children of the Iraqi employees. They did so for hours on end. A photographer from a large American media company watched impassively. "Why don't you take a picture of this?" demanded one Marine. The photographer snorted, "That's not my job."

dgene writes:
"Wartime penalties must follow sedition( include Congresmen the drunk(Kennedy) and the liar (Kerry))."

and kj writes:
"I'll take the word of a war hero over a draftdodger any day. The same goes for Dick "Five Deferments" Cheney and Colonel Murtha."

I don't possess Hugh's gift for words, my training is in mathematics, physics, and engineering. In that field known as logic, which
had it's roots in rhetoric, there is a (very) common fallacy called "argumentum ad hominem".

In political discourse, I don't take anyone's
word for anything, but rather, use my own
limited intelligence to determine whether that
word is sensible or not.

I have the greatest respect for the fighting men and women of our armed forces, but the mission
of transforming "Iraq" into a modern nation is
mistaken, and we will suffer if it is successful.

Roxane,

I would like to see the original report. This is what we all know but did not have proof about.

I suggest that someone also start a blog exposing the reporters who would not file one unless it is motivated...

Seculartalk,

Here is the link to the article by Mona Charen

http://townhall.com/opinion/contributors/monacharen.html

What this soldier says matches another report in which a US soldier said the embedded reporters are
"detested" because they are slanting the coverage from Iraq.While there are exceptions most soldiers quoted in the press say the believe in their mission in Iraq.

Seculartalk,

Oops that's the wrong link. Here's the link to Mona Charen's article "One Soldier's Story".

http://townhall.com/opinion/column/monacharen/2005/11/25/176731.html

Roxane:

Thanks for sharing the link.

There are a few "reporters" out there that the troops trust but not many.

Michael Yon comes to mind.

http://michaelyon.blogspot.com/

Now now kj, get back into your playpen and ease up(your mind is too good to waste it).

Now that I realize that (according to you) I'm "drunk lying and seditious" (strangely the very words I would use for your heroes Not His Brother Kennedy and My Fellow Soldiers Were Torturors Kerrey) let's deal with the real tenor of the war we are in:

Winning is not necessarily a democratic Iraq.

Winning is being present and having a say in the country and conversely in the countries around Iraq. G.W.Bush may not be one's first choice for president, but given what the left has put forward, he is the best choice.Winning is also turning that area from an Islam which is a major virus to Islam which is a more minor virus.Hugh's point is central: we all wish to eradicate the virus,but facts on the ground might not allow us more - but then, we will see - the best opportunities for us are still ahead.

There is no alternative to a win, because the obverse is a cut and run which would be disasterous.

God bless America.

"Cut and run," achieving "total victory," "completing the mission" are all phrases that mean nothing. No one is "cutting and running" if, after a full 2 1/2 years after the country was conquered and the regime destroyed, and a first election held, and then a Constitution arrived at, and then a referendum on that Constitution held, and then a second election held. To leave at that point is not "cutting and running."

If the aim is correctly defined as containing Islam, then there is no such thing as "total victory."

If the "mission" is correctly defined as containing Islam, by trying to use the Iraqi situation to divide and demoralize Muslims themselves, then that "mission" is not being accomplished or even attempted -- rather, the reverse of that intelligent goal, to be achieved not by remaining in Iraq but by leaving, appears to be, in the Bush-Rice definition, to be the "mission."

All of it silly. And perhaps silliest of all is the way in which those who detest Bush in the Democratic Party cannot bring themselves even to hint at what is weakest in his whole policy, which is not whether or not he had enough information on which to rationally conclude that Iraq was a menace (answer: he did), but rather the kind of criticism that has been offered here for more than two years.

Is there no one in the entire political class, no one among the returning soldiers who will be entering politics next year, who will begin to offer the unanswerable criticisms that they can find here, in several hundred places.

Start, if you are so inclinced, by googling "Posted by Hugh" and "Light-Unto-the-Muslim-Nations" Project, and see what comes up.