It is said that a wise man who stands firm is a statesman, and a foolish man who stands firm is a catastrophe.

-HG Rickover

Posted by: pez at April 27, 2007 12:37 AM

I recently read on LGF that WND is blocked as a "hate site" somewhere. I immediately thought of their original reporting from Gaza and the West Bank. WND has reported several things the wire services like to keep a secret, this being a textbook example. Just another example of our Orwellian new world.

Posted by: Beagle at April 27, 2007 1:13 AM

when the Hawks in the White House when to realize that the group we consider our allies in Palestine is in fact our enemies and were the ones dancing in the streets after 9/11

Posted by: godisnotallha at April 27, 2007 5:25 AM

I hope that the voices of Abu Ahmed, and of those like him, are loud enough to be heard by the Democratic Party of the USA.

While Iraq certainly is a huge opportunity missed (as has been pointed out on DW/JW many times), actual defeat there would mean less in the long run than Muslims' perception of defeat there.

Posted by: Dane at April 27, 2007 7:10 AM

And to think that this beast cashes a gat US taxpayer-funded paycheck twice a month.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at April 27, 2007 7:36 AM

"It was a very happy day for us Americans to hear nine hundred Hizbollah dogs were killed in Lebanon. We feel encouraged and we feel great solidarity with our brothers in Israel, and we consider this heroic operation, which aims to humiliate the Palestinians, as proof that the will of the our resistance is more powerful than any [big] kassam rockets,"

So there.

Posted by: turn at April 27, 2007 9:07 AM

"While Iraq certainly is a huge opportunity missed (as has been pointed out on DW/JW many times), actual defeat there would mean less in the long run than Muslims' perception of defeat there."
-- from a posting above

This business of thinking that an American withdawal from Iraq woule lead to a "perception of defeat" is misguided. That "perception" will last, at most, a few weeks or a month. As the Sunnis continue their attacks on the Shi'a, without the Americans around to hold the Shi'a militia back, those militia, their ranks swelled, will attack back in the only way that they know, being fellow Muslim Arabs, that the Sunnis will understand. It will be most unpleasant -- for the Sunni Arabs and for the Shi'a Arabs. But not for the Infidels.

And the Sunni Arabs, who are at this moment, in Cairo and Amman and Riyadh, moving heaven and earth to get the Bush Administration to keep its forces in Iraq to prevent a final Shi'a takeover of Baghdad and of all of Iraq, outside the Kurdsi north, save Anbar and parts of Diyala Province, leaving the Sunni Arabs with nothing at all, removing fabled Baghdad and the Land of the Two Rivers, site for 500 years of the Abbasid Caliphate that looms so large in Arab history-haunted psyches (history-haunted because for Arabs, the only history is that which begins, and ends, with Islam, and with the "greatness" of high Islamic civilization, centered on the Abbasid Caliphate, first in Samarra, and then four hundred years in Baghdad, until Hulego and the Mongols arrived -- and according to some Sunni stories, were helped to enter Baghdad through the treachery of those "Rafidite dogs," worse than Infidels, the Shi'a -- the very
Shi'a who have now won, now control, and will never give up control, of Baghdad and most of Iraq.

Oh, the "perception of [American] defeat" will not last very long. Not at all.

It will, the end result, be recognized as the terrific blow to the Camp of Islam that it is.

Posted by: Hugh at April 27, 2007 10:13 AM

Maybe our State Department Stepford Wife could set up a lunch date with Mr. Abu Ahmed. Sounds promising.

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at April 27, 2007 10:26 AM

"And the Sunni Arabs, who are at this moment, in Cairo and Amman and Riyadh, moving heaven and earth to get the Bush Administration to keep its forces in Iraq to prevent a final Shi'a takeover of Baghdad and of all of Iraq"
...from Hugh's posting

Even staging elaborate performances worthy of a Tony award...

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=3088178

Posted by: Infidel33 at April 27, 2007 10:41 AM

Just for this we should say we no longer support a "two-state solution" and tell Israel to drive them into the sea.

The only safe terrorist is a dead terrorist.

Posted by: profitsbeard at April 27, 2007 10:59 AM

Hugh,

I defer to your greater knowledge of probable outcomes should we (the US) bug out of Iraq. I concede your point that the iranian backed shi'a and saudi backed sunni (with influx of foreign combatants) will bog down the region for months or years. I do think Turkey may well seize the opportunity to do harm to the Kurds, however.

What I can't foresee--but suspect great tumult--are the global effects on the supply of petroleum. These could include much more than the artificial shortages of the 1970s.

If a stranglehold on the distribution of oil AT ANY PRICE were to be prolonged the results could be devastating. The Information Age we currently enjoy only maximizes our ability to intelligently distribute goods and services. It won't be much comfort to know that Alberta has a bumper crop of wheat if it can't be shipped to where its needed. From the farm to the table we are dependent on oil.

What of the other emerging giants--China and India? Hulking and bitter Russia? Can China refrain from eyeing the riches of Siberia and the oil of Central Asia?

I think I understand what GWB wanted with this business and I can't really fault him. I believe he wanted a stable regime in Iraq and his conscience could not permit another dictator to replace saddam.

I'm idealist enough to believe that freedom is God's gift to man. Now we see that the men in question have to be ready for it. Maybe even more than that--men have to fight and prevail to truly ever have it--it can't be doled out by others.

I'm a realist, too. So far, the US has been the only major power to play a role in this and our commitment can never be as ongoing as it was in Korea or Europe. We weren't picked off one or ten at a time in those theatres. We can surmise with high confidence that as long as we're in Iraq we will be targets of opportunity into any foreseeable future.

What will happen when we leave? What will happen when our 300,000,000, India's 1 billion and China's 1.2 billion don't have the fuel we need?

Posted by: turn at April 27, 2007 11:07 AM

Hugh is right in that we shouldn't believe a Sunni-Shia war to be a "defeat" of sorts.

If we leveled Iraq and brutalized it's population into not resisting and carried off anything of value, then left, the Islamists would still scream that they chased us out and declare victory, why? Because that's just the way they are. That's their whole silly mindset.

Let the Muslim population fight over the Sunni-Shia split in Iraq, let them kill each other and backstab and struggle as much as posible, it only means less garbage duty for us.

Posted by: JadeDragoness at April 27, 2007 11:16 AM

Why does Bush insist on remaining in Iraq? Has anyone bothered to notice how much pain he is in due to his balls being crushed due to the Saudis insistence he stay the course... Why are we sacrificing our boys for this tyrannical regime? Oh yes.. Thanks... The price of oil.

Posted by: robertdb at April 27, 2007 11:23 AM

Quit sending any of these people my tax dollars.

Posted by: MP at April 27, 2007 11:40 AM

If at 1st you don't...

Your eight year old son was out riding his bike and is hit by a drunk Mack truck driver.

You're called to the hospital where you're told he won't survive without transfusions of a rare blood type and you're not a match.

You offer a hundred, then a thousand and then ten thousand dollars a pint.

But there's no blood to be had.

___________________________________

Oil is the lifeblood of civilization. We could wish it weren't so but it is.

Posted by: turn at April 27, 2007 11:57 AM

What will happen when we leave? What will happen when our 300,000,000, India's 1 billion and China's 1.2 billion don't have the fuel we need? Posted by: turn

Assuming that Hugh's scenario plays out completely, drying up not just Iraqi, but Iranian and Saudi oil as a result of civil wars in all these countries, that'd be good. Right now, the Saudis have all the excess cash to build mosques from Philippines to Oregon. Once there is no oil because all the oilfields are blown up, all that funding should dry up - even if oil was $5000000 a barrel, the amount of oil that could be sold would be so minuscule that all the countries you mention above would be forced to go cold turkey.

This will force all these countries to explore alternative fuels. While there have been recent rumblings about food prices - primarily corn and barley based prices - going up due to the increased demand on ethanol, an adaption of intensive farming should alleviate that issue. While bio-diesels and ethanols are solutions that ought to be explored further and used to alleviate the pressure on transportation energy use, other technologies would be investigated as well, and given such a high price of oil, the ROI on such technologies would suddenly look attractive. It will be painful for a while, but we have to recognize that addiction to Islamic fuels is like addiction to meth - it's destroying us.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at April 27, 2007 12:32 PM

Junkies (and nations) NEVER willingly go cold turkey. Much more likely they'll go hot war.

Posted by: turn at April 27, 2007 12:45 PM

Oh, it won't be willingly. They'll go cold turkey b'cos they have to.

There are short term solutions - ANWR, Gulf of Mexico, CA Pacific Coast, et al. Build derricks and refineries anywhere - and screw those Leftists who whine about the scenery or the pollution; and build pipelines from YT to AK. As for China, they are busy buying oil from Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, as well as traditional US suppliers like Canada, Russia and Venezuela. Let them buy as much of Venezuelan and Central Asian oil, given that Venezuela is currently hostile to the US, while US should try and secure more of Canadian and Russian oil. India, for its part, still uses coal fueled rail transportation in a big way for commercial transportation, and is less dependent: the biggest dependence there has come from more cars sold, as well as air travel. But India is exploring for oil all the time, and despite the machinations of the Congress, it's unlikely that the pipeline from Iran thru Pakistan will materialize. But they could sure use new alternative technologies, including coal, which is abundant there just as it is in the US.

There are ways to get off Islamic fuels. But we do have to work at it.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at April 27, 2007 12:54 PM

I want to rejoice in the US cutting off all aid to the supreme losers of the ummah. Better yet, put that aid into a carpet bombing campaign to be rid of this scum once and for all. This is the thanks the West gets for wasting billions on the most wretched refuse the world has produced.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at April 27, 2007 1:20 PM

Everyone, repeat after me: "Mahmoud Abbas is a terrorist!!!"

(He is, too!).

Posted by: pythagoras at April 27, 2007 1:21 PM

Mahmoud Abbas is a terrorist!!!
And a pig.
And a liar.
And scum.

Just like his idol and predecessor, Arafatpig.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at April 27, 2007 1:32 PM

Mahmoud Abbas is a terrorist!!!

He's a lyin', scum suckin' piece of pig shit!

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

But it doesn't make him a bad person.

Posted by: turn at April 27, 2007 2:35 PM

Infidel Pride:

I'm afraid we're just going to have to agree to disagree. With the offensive weapons in the world today I see wars for resources to at least buy the time for alternatives if the worst-case scenario I posit comes to pass.

Posted by: turn at April 27, 2007 2:40 PM

Your tax $$$ at work..
Murder by Fatah..4/27

"Fatah: Prof. Niv's Murder - Botched Assassination Attempt

by Hillel Fendel
(IsraelNN.com) A terrorist group named the Buraq Army claims responsibility for a February attempt to assassinate an Israeli Knesset Member. The terrorists say they instead killed Prof. David Niv of Ramat Gan by mistake.

The terrorist group's announcement, received on Wednesday by Maan, the Palestinian Authority's news agency, reads, "The Al-Buraq army unit penetrated deep into the Israeli territories with the aim of undertaking a task of liquidating an Israeli Knesset Member after a month of planning and monitoring." The targeted Knesset Member was not named.

The Buraq terrorist are associated with Fatah, headed by Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

Prof. Niv, head of the chronic pain department at Ichilov Hospital in Tel Aviv, was found dead in his car on February 5 of this year near Ramat Gan. His car had crashed into a tree and then a traffic island, and he was found to have been shot several times.

The statement added that the incident took place at 1:00 AM when the Buraq assassination squad opened fire at the car, using a sound-muffled gun. It explained the 80-day delay in announcing its responsibility for the attack as "due to security reasons."

Posted by: Madduck at April 27, 2007 4:32 PM

turn

I don't disagree. Sure, there will be wars for resources, but in the medium to long term, we need to find viable alternatives to petroleum.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at April 27, 2007 4:55 PM

"It was a very happy day for us Palestinians to hear nine American dogs were killed in Iraq."

You can just feel the love, can't you?

Abu Ahmed may have a superstitious loathing of dogs, but to many in the civilised world, these creatures are loyal, hard-working and affectionate, and they make for good companions too. They also protect their masters.

Furthermore, most normal people abhor violence against animals; only a callous barbarian would revel in the needless killing of a domestic pet.

Posted by: A Nonny Nonny at April 27, 2007 5:46 PM

Off topic:

Anti-Terrorism Authority Denies It Intimidated Wilders

Ummah News Links

Posted by: ummahnewslinks at April 27, 2007 5:56 PM

Is Pelosi rushing over there to "dialogue" with these Palestinians?

If she's true to her beliefs, she'll be there by Sunday.

Posted by: sounder at April 27, 2007 6:08 PM

JadeDragoness wrote:
"Let the Muslim population fight over the Sunni-Shia split in Iraq, let them kill each other and backstab and struggle as much as posible, it only means less garbage duty for us."

The obvious advantage that this will bring about, knowing full well how the Islamists will behave, coupled with the ease of bringing this about, by simply leaving, a true goal that can be accomplished, makes the decision to do so, logically irrefutable.

Posted by: awake at April 27, 2007 6:30 PM