What a perfect recipe for anarchy: Only Allah can legislate, therefore there can never be a government of any kind. But what's that you say? Only we true Muslims can rule, so you've got to die so we can take over!
It's the Theology of Megalomania.

Posted by: jewdog at April 14, 2007 8:03 AM

"Allah used his hand to destroy the group of infidels"

Uhm, wouldn't that be his finger? You know, on the button...

Cheers,

http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com

Posted by: Doctor Bulldog at April 14, 2007 10:08 AM

There is something else running under the surface here. Sunnis cannot tolerate being out of control and living in a country run by Shiites. If Sunnis were running the show, this would not have happened.

American, British, and a token of others are in the middle of an unending domestic squabble; 'tis time to overhaul this lame strategy.

Posted by: Pelayo at April 14, 2007 11:08 AM

A new strategy addresses this kind of thinking, how?

Moose

Posted by: Moose at April 14, 2007 11:12 AM

The first thing is to start removing troops and assets (equipment) from the southern provinces of Iraq. Announce our commitment for an Independent Kurdish area. Let the Sunnis and Shiites concentrate on on one another.

Hugh F. and Robert have spelled this out much better than I can. This attempt at democratization of Iraq has not worked and will not work. We have already been in Iraq longer than our participation in WW2, Korea, and the Civil War. In WW2 the US military got stronger as the war progressed; the accounts I have read are telling me that the Army is getting weaker.

Afghanistan seems to be reverting to "Old Afghanistan."

Posted by: Pelayo at April 14, 2007 11:22 AM

Pelayo - if we pull out, the Jihadies will claim victory in a heart-beat. This 'PullOut' scenario will backfire on us in a way that we may have to fight the lunatics for one or two generations to come on our own shores. The other related problem that may cause a nightmare is Saudi-Arabia will become venerable to Jihadies and their current regime, no matter how much we dislike’em, will become unsustainable. We can all guess the impact of that on the World economy- it will be devastating.

I think we ought to reduce the risk to our service-people by all means possible, and find a way to reduce our casualties to a level that it will not hurt us as badly as it is now. We should let the SOB fight each other out and keep’em busy till they turn onto their Jihadies. I like to see Muslims fighting their Jihadies. It is their creation. Nobody has anything to do with it. It will take years or decades before this fire will stop burning. We should be committed to keep them busy a long way away from our shores.

Posted by: MusHuntCowboy at April 14, 2007 11:42 AM

Assalamau Laikum MusHuntCowboy,

I can hear your grandchildren in Texas say
"Allah Akbur Yee-hah"...

Posted by: Naseem at April 14, 2007 11:57 AM

Until recent weeks I've been a staunch supporter of the Bush administration and the doctrine of "fight them there so we don't have to fight them here."

It's no use. They are utterly hopeless.

Posted by: turn at April 14, 2007 12:05 PM

MusHuntCowboy, Do we want two or three US divisions in the middle of all this? I say no. How do we reduce casualties with our troops in Iraq. Build bases and keep them cloistered and away from the "jihadies?" If these jihadists have to divert their resources and focus toward one another, that means fewer bullets and bombs headed our way.

Speaking of the world's economy. We can preserve the oil resources, and if Saudi Arabia were forced to pay for their own defense, that would be less money funding things like madrassas and CAIR.

How long should we stay in Iraq with the present level of effort? What is this vague notion of victory that I keep hearing about?

Someone pleeeeze describe victory in Iraq.

What better way to keep them away from our shores than having them fight each other in Islamdom. By the way, the Fifth Colomn of world wide jihad is already on our shores probing our defenses and testing our resolve. The "flying Imams" is a damn good example.

Posted by: Pelayo at April 14, 2007 12:10 PM

"studying the area" Translation: An Islamocommunist utilizing blueprints and other intercepts from said "diplomatic corps" of Russia etc... used fake identity badges manufactured with state of the are printers which only governments have access to and carried out the best attack they could muster in blowing up a cafeteria.

For reality: Reuters "just happened" to have all it's cameras running feed at the EXACT TIME and just near enough the location to get a wonderful effect for the MSM to broadcast.

Lara Logan of CBS getting al Qaeda feeds for her news posts is not an accident. These leftists are alerted and are doing nothing to warn of attacks.

Someone in Reuters knew this was coming and staged the cameras. This is a top end Russian op linked right into the Islamocommunists.
This was a detailed as Litvenko being poisoned by Polonium 210.

Posted by: Lame Cherry at April 14, 2007 12:11 PM

Naseem,

I predict that shortly the wicked salutation won't be heard in the US at all.

Posted by: turn at April 14, 2007 12:11 PM

Naseem, I hear something else. I hear MHCowboy's great grandchildren asking their father, "Daddy what's a Moslem?"

Posted by: Pelayo at April 14, 2007 12:13 PM

Litvinyenko wasn't murdered. He accidentally poisoned himself.

Posted by: turn at April 14, 2007 12:21 PM

Everybody, read this:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/016023.php
and this:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/015703.php

Posted by: Pelayo at April 14, 2007 12:23 PM

From the article

The right to legislate belongs to God alone, and whoever disputes that is an apostate. The members of parliament deserve only death

If the painfully obvious needs to be said again, and apparently it does, Islam is incompatible with democracy. Islam is incompatible with the exercise of free will. Islam is incompatible with the search for knowledge.

Posted by: special_guest at April 14, 2007 12:39 PM

Assalamau Laikum MusHuntCowboy,

Posted by: Naseem [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 14, 2007 11:57 AM

F..U Naseem.. don't bother me with your Islamic greetings. Over my dead body you'll see Texas turn Islamic. Enough said.

----------------
How do we reduce casualties with our troops in Iraq.-Posted by: Pelayo [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 14, 2007 12:10 PM

I am not going to spell it out too loud, but there is tremendous work going on in that direction. We aint gonne avoid some occasional Jihadi hits, but they will be minimal and a great deal less than lets say a number severities caused by road accident in Wash. The Victory can be defined by us in the coming years. Different nations define victory differently, for instance Sadam Husain thought he was victorious in 1991 though we know he was defeated.

If we are able to reduce our casualties to an acceptable level, that is a clear victory for us and we pull out at our own will. I just think it is wrong to pull out now because we are perceived by them to be ‘on-the-run’.

Posted by: MusHuntCowboy at April 14, 2007 12:39 PM

Nasseem says:

"I can hear your grandchildren in Texas say "Allah Akbur Yee-hah"...

Hearing voices is a classic symptom of a mental illness. You, definitely, should see a psychiatrist.

Had your "prophet" Mohammed sought professional help after hearing a strange voice reciting the Koran into his ear the world would have been a much nicer place today.

Posted by: thomas. h at April 14, 2007 12:40 PM

MusHuntCowboy said

If we are able to reduce our casualties to an acceptable level, that is a clear victory for us and we pull out at our own will. I just think it is wrong to pull out now because we are perceived by them to be ‘on-the-run’.

What is "acceptable"? To me, one casualty is unacceptable, if that casualty is spent for the benefit of the Iraqi people, to bring them "democracy" and to improve their lives. I'm sure you think that helping the Iraqis is helping ourselves. I wholeheartedly disagree.

What is "acceptable"? Why can't we say that todays' level of casualties are "acceptable", and, of our own free will, choose to pull out now? What needs to happen before we can choose to pull out? What are we waiting for? If they think we're "on-the-run" if we pull out now, what are the conditions that will change that will not allow them to think we're "on-the-run" then?

Remember in Lebanon, Israel kicked Hezb'Allahs @ss every which way but loose, and Hezb'Allah still claimed victory. Who cares what their perceptions are, why should we base our decisions on their perceptions and beliefs? Aren't we smart enough to have our own perceptions and beliefs, and base our actions on our own? Let them think they're "winning", as we bomb their parades, kill their leaders, destroy their weapons, isolate their economies. Let them play the Monty Pythonian Knight of Nee, saying "it's only a flesh wound!" as the torso writhes helplessly.

As in the case of Dinesh D'Souza, please, please, get out of the head of these people, worrying about what they want or what they think. We're adults, we can make our own decisions, completely independent of their goals and desires, based on our own goals and desires.

Posted by: special_guest at April 14, 2007 12:57 PM

“The right to legislate belongs to God alone, and whoever disputes that is an apostate. The members of parliament deserve only death,” the Internet statement [from Al Qaeda in Iraq] said."
--from the article above

Perhaps one could just claim that Allah is responsible for all the legislation in order not to offend the True Believers With the Bombs, and one could treat legislators in Muslim states dismissively, hardly even acknowledge them. In other words make them the unacknowledged legislators of the world. That has a ring to it, doesn't it?

Posted by: Hugh at April 14, 2007 1:32 PM

“The right to legislate belongs to God alone, and whoever disputes that is an apostate. The members of parliament deserve only death,” the Internet statement [from Al Qaeda in Iraq] said."
--from the article above

Perhaps one could just claim that Allah is responsible for all the legislation in order not to offend the True Believers With the Bombs, and one could treat legislators in Muslim states dismissively, hardly even acknowledge them. In other words make them the unacknowledged legislators of the world. That has a ring to it, doesn't it?

Posted by: Hugh at April 14, 2007 1:32 PM

Some people say that if we pull out now the Islamists will claim a victory. So what? The claimed objective of the second Iraq war was WMD. None were found so the job is done. And rightly or wrongly the evil ruler in Baghdad was ousted.

So with that in mind there is absolutely nothing to be gained by fighting both the Sunni and the Shia in Iraq, especially considering that Iran is playing an active role in the ‘jihad’ violence at least on the Shia side, but probably on both sides.

We gave them the chance to build a country of their choosing in which they could live in peace. Maybe the ideal we hoped for was impossible but at least they had a chance, a clean slate. That chance was given to them by the West, just as it was given to Ahmed karzai and his government in Afghanistan.

In both instances that chance is being trashed, not by the West but by their own brothers and sisters across the Islamic world.

We are not responsible for the deaths caused by Islamic meddling, the Muslims are. We are not responsible for any death caused through sectarian violence of any kind, which covers practically every civilian killed in Iraq.

Let em burn until they get sick of there own fratricide.

Posted by: Mert at April 14, 2007 1:38 PM

"The right to legislate belongs to God alone, and whoever disputes that is an apostate. The members of Parliament deserve only death."

If anything ever proved that Islam is diametrically (and murderously) opposed to to anything else on earth except Islam the quote from the from "Islamic nation" is all-too-typical of the governments that are and have been running the Islamosphere over the past 13 centuries. And, yes, this-- THIS --is what the folks at the CAIR have in mind for America's (read: YOUR!!!) future. Scary, is it not????

All who think Islam is reformable need to read the above article and examine what "true" Muslims believe. The people who express such viewpoints as the one I quoted here from the "Islamic nation" are the ones who know the Kuran and Muhammad's vile philosophies best. In short, welcome to the genuine Islam.

Notice how few moderates challenge such views of Islam in Islamia and notice how even fewer 'moderates' have gotten anywhere with their attempts to defang Islam. Why? Because (of course) the Kuran's text supports violence and brutal repression--exactly the type of rule Islamia has seen turning its terrain into 'rivers of blood' for the past 13 centuries. And exactly the sort of mentality advocated by "Islamic Nation."

The Kuran's texts for the most part do NOT support a peaceful, sane religion, government, and way of life in any way, shape or form.

Islamic 'moderates' and would-be reformers of Islam are "SOL." The proof is in the pudding (if you want to call it that).

Clearly, Islam can NOT ever be reformed. It can NOT co-exist with anything other than itself. And it is a terrible, immediate danger to every human being living on this planet (including Muslims).

Posted by: pythagoras at April 14, 2007 1:58 PM

tis time to overhaul this lame strategy.

yeah place some well aimed bombs on iranian and paki nuke sites, and stop all money going to ME pimping politicians. let arabs feed arabs/muslims.

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at April 14, 2007 1:59 PM

Pelayo - if we pull out, the Jihadies will claim victory in a heart-beat. This 'PullOut' scenario will backfire on us in a way that we may have to fight the lunatics for one or two generations to come on our own shores. The other related problem that may cause a nightmare is Saudi-Arabia will become venerable to Jihadies and their current regime, no matter how much we dislike’em, will become unsustainable. We can all guess the impact of that on the World economy- it will be devastating.
[...]
Posted by: MusHuntCowboy

Wrong Wrong Wrong.

1 Who cares WHAT they claim? They're always claiming victory no matter what. Part of their M.O.

2 They are ALREADY HERE! Jesus! How many times have we discussed this?! 16000 "student visas" for SOWdis alone.. 7K more "refugees" from iraq.

2 Still on 2 yes.. what do you think CAIR is..? That's their political arm. We ARE fighting them over here. We need our military where it can do real good.. at the borders. And guarding our ports. rounding up jihhadists and shipping them off.

Case in point: jihad while driving, flying imams, Utah Mall shooter, Beltway sniper.. sue me for lack of having a complete list.. there's so much jihad going on in this country it's hard to keep track.

3. Who CARES about SOWdi arabia and the economy? I'd rather be cold and broke than live around a bunch of moslems.

A bit less prosperity will spur our collective inventiveness and dry up the guvmint;s ability to spend crazy.. maybe if we are unable to give aid these people won't have food to eat.

And that would be good for us.

Either they grow their own and waste less time on jihad activities or they simply perish.

Posted by: Allahfanculo at April 14, 2007 2:02 PM

Assalamau Laikum MusHuntCowboy,

I can hear your grandchildren in Texas say
"Allah Akbur Yee-hah"...

Posted by: Naseem

And like a bad hangnail.. Nazim pops back in.
Nazim, seriously.. do you really think that not a single one of us will have the wherewithal to deliver a destructive blow to the idolatric shrines you and your kind worship?

And once that is done, the moslems will perish in the ensuing mayhem. The Left will simply have no choice but to fight on our side. As they will be made targets by the jihadists who as of now are simply using these useful idiots.

Your triumphalism sounds like Hitler's last days in the bunker.. oh yes, my heroic German armies will fix things and bring victory. these armies were comprised of 12 and 14 year-olds.

Sound familiar?

Only the Russians didn't show the compassion that the IDF are showing in Israel.

We have so much to learn from the Russians. :-)

And learn we will.

Posted by: Allahfanculo at April 14, 2007 2:07 PM

Muhammad is Allah-Allah is Muhammad- when you read about it, it sounds like Muhammad is speaking directly to you but using Allah as his second persona. So people think Allah is speaking when in fact it's the creator Muhammad is doing the talking. So the person reading it thinks Allah is speaking to them when its in fact Muhammad who convinced him self in some mental disorder of a psychopathic nature (just go by the actions alone) that now makes the mentally unstable today even more like Muhammad that inspire the action of death by honour. The process in the Koran is just reprinting it self on people, every conflict has to be a war when it does not. The loop holes make people loopy afraid, oh look it says this here’ oh look no it does not’ now it says it does, like Muhammad its not consistent, level or clear and the system it self has produced further ignorance in people and nations. The ones that stayed inherited the desert the ones that left or had nothing to do with it prospered and saw greater land towards freedoms.

Posted by: jesusisthelamb at April 14, 2007 2:16 PM

Yes, this does pose a rather ominous problem. Basing a government entirely on a theocracy is a risky business. At the very least, one had better hope that theocracy is true and accurate.

I would prefer a more secular type of government. One that is tolerant of certain religions. I say certain religions and not all religions because some religions have proved to be dangerous. And while it is true that most governments do have elements of religion in them, which can be a good thing, there are certain dangers in this. But then there are also certain dangers in a totally secular government.

I view the U.S. government as one having been informed by religion. Not dominated by it. This worked well for the past couple of centuries but it seems to be faltering now.

Posted by: Pere des lumieres at April 14, 2007 2:33 PM

"We have already been in Iraq longer than our participation in WW2, Korea, and the Civil War."

posted by Pelayo

So many people make that argument but how did those wars end?

WW2: Germany was reduced to rubble and Japan had two nuclear bombs dropped on it. Most of Western Europe was decimated. (Also, we were late to the party. The British had to fight this war for more than two years on their own.)

Korea: After three years of fighting both sides were right back where they started from. No victory there.

Civil War: The South was crushed and didn't recover for decades.

Let's decide what we're after. Do we want Iraq and all of its people reduced to the level of Germany and the Germans in 1945? Then let's say so, because that's what it will take for this war to "end" the way two of the other three did.

The fact is we have already achieved victory:

Saddam is dead. His sons are dead. The Baath regime has been dismantled. The people of Iraq have a chance for a better future. The end.

As Mert says, we gave them a chance. What they do with it is up to them. The idea that they need our hands on the bicycle while they learn how to ride is preposterous. Turkey may not have supported the invasion but why isn't that Muslim government willing to do all it can to aid Iraq in the creation of a new civilian infrastructure? We all know the American system won't work in other places - most prefer parliamentary systems, so why isn't Turkey willing to lend a hand?

We are being blackmailed for our failure to support the resistance that we encouraged in 1991. The fact is that debt has been paid. Saddam is dead, etc. They say we can't leave yet, but the members of their own government call for an end to "occupation". Somewhere along the way the presence of Americans on foreign soil became an occupation by definition. That means we are still "occupying" Germany.
Iraqis want an end to occupation, let's give it to them. We should not be held responsible for their failure (not inability - FAILURE) to govern themselves. The people who struggled under Saddam should understand what it means and yet they are deciding to oppress those who once oppressed them. The Shia are being given an opportunity to show the world what they can do and they are blowing it. That's their fault, not ours.
The bombers said the members of Parliament deserve only death. Do the people of Iraq feel that way? Then let them show it. As so many people like to tell us: it's their country. My response: SO DO SOMETHING!

Posted by: PMK at April 14, 2007 2:43 PM

I found this news story interesting and it has a lot to do with the posted story today. I hope you all find it interesting:

"http://www.almasry-alyoum.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=54865&r=t
معلم أيمن الظواهري يقود مراجعات «الجهاد»الفقهية"

He is seriously questioning the scholarly positions of Thawahiri (his student) and others. I wonder why this story isn't published on this site? (rhetorical)

Posted by: An American at April 14, 2007 3:40 PM

It is obvious that someone inside did this bombing. Someone who had security clearance. It probably was some body guard.

Posted by: callmeinfidel at April 14, 2007 4:22 PM

I've asked many of my Republican (I'm one, but not a BushBot) friends to define victory in Iraq. NONE of them could give a sensible, defensible answer. Most got mad at me for even bringing up the question, thinking I was being sarcastic. But I was not. The ones with an answer were mostly versions of "victory is winning" or "victory is not defeat-the Democrats own defeat, you know" or "victory is not cutting-and running". These are, for the most part, college-educated folks.

Posted by: Charles Bogle at April 14, 2007 5:03 PM

I take exception to PMK's statement that Korea was no victory. Sure North and South K. were not re-united, but the North Koreans were repulsed. In that South Korea was preserved, it was a victory. If we had chased the NVA out of Vietnam, crushed the Viet Cong, and reached a real truce, we would call that victory. The Viet Cong were actually crushed after Tet, 1968.

Roosevelt told us what victory would be. Unconditional surrender; the Japanese surrendered. Bush told us what victory would be. Well, we have democracy in Iraq, and Saddam is worm food; they have had two elections.

Victory.

Bush never said that US Forces would become a surrogate Iraqi National Guard.

Posted by: Pelayo at April 14, 2007 5:32 PM

Secretary of Defense Gates responds to a question about the status of the mending of the Sunni-Shia divide (13APR07 televised news conference):

“I’d like to see it be faster.”

Respectfully suggesting official consideration.

Posted by: pez at April 14, 2007 5:38 PM

It seems that for Islam, government cannot be divine in the root and popular in mode (after Samuel Rutherford's _Lex Rex_of 1644)--i.e., no divine use of human means unless it's to kill someone or blow something up.

Posted by: Kepha at April 14, 2007 6:05 PM

special_guest said

Let them play the Monty Pythonian Knight of Nee, saying "it's only a flesh wound!" as the torso writhes helplessly.

By writing in a rush, I have confused the Knights of Ni, who say the word "Ni", and the Black Knight, who claims victory even after all his limbs have all been cut off by his opponent.

Posted by: special_guest at April 14, 2007 6:33 PM

“The right to legislate belongs to God alone, and whoever disputes that is an apostate.

To bad he cant make up his mind who God is. He uses the name 'Allah' with the deadly hand claim. (Allah used his hand to destroy the group of infidels,”) Yes, Allah, the god with the deadly hand. Now thats cool. How many gods do you know of that have deadly hands? Not only that, but the god with deadly hands, legislates. Now you got to admit that no ordinary god can do that. Dont let him touch you, or its all over. We knew Allahs touch was deadly, and now we have confirmation...
How many times has Allah touched you Naseem? How do you live through it?

Posted by: duh_swami at April 14, 2007 9:18 PM

Bernard Lewis tells the story of the first Turkish ambassador to England in the reign of George III being taken to see the Houses of Parliament. he wrote back to the Sultan that the King of England, having rejected divine law, was reduced to having to make up his own laws.
It looks as though the Mohammedans still don't really get the concept of democracy.

Posted by: wallyUK at April 15, 2007 12:12 AM

Thats what they think about our legislature also.

The "hero" from the Is-lame-ick state is now the "zero"!

Posted by: guide inside at April 15, 2007 1:09 AM

I wonder why this story isn't published on this site? (rhetorical)

....

Because, fool, it's not about debate or rational argument at this point. But you know that. What an ass.

nabi ZK

Posted by: zonie kafir at April 15, 2007 5:47 PM

Let me make this prefectly clear. The idiot Phoney American believes that we can end this with a nice debate with Zawahiri. Maybe we should ask him to come on Larry king Live!

Here Phoney American. This is for you

http://illustratedpig.blogspot.com/2007/04/this-is-not-bbc-cnn.html

I'm sure we can just sit down and work this out.

Do you clearly understand how I feel about you Phoney American?

nabk ZK

Posted by: zonie kafir at April 15, 2007 5:54 PM

"It is obvious that someone inside did this bombing. Someone who had security clearance. It probably was some body guard.

Posted by: callmeinfidel"

....The same thing happened in A US military mess tent in Mosul in 2004...killed many soldiers, an insided job..one of the "trusted" Iraqi employees simply exploded a suicide belt in the middle of the crowd...."The militant group Ansar al-Sunna later claimed it had made a suicide attack."

....a breakdown in the security screening process allows things like this to happen....I suspect the Muslims were doing some of the screening....just like the Muslim baggage handlers and screeners at the airports in the US....

.....report any suspicious behavior, even if the suspicious person is wearing a company badge, expecially if the suspicious person has a beard and Islamic style clothing or a woman wearing Islamic clothing....the life you save may just be your own

Posted by: exsgtbrown at April 16, 2007 3:42 PM