Posting Towards Gomorrah

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Is Kevin trying to say that the pre 9/11 2000 election wasn't a vicious, partisan squabble? Is he trying to tell me that the left wasn't calling for Bush's head the day after Election Day? Rubbish.



Why wouldn't it be great issue? Look at what happened - whether their fault or not - during 8 years under the Democrats' watch:

• January 25, 1993: Mir Aimal Kansi, a Pakistani, fired an AK-47 into cars waiting at a stoplight in front of the Central Intelligence Agency headquarters in Virginia, killing two CIA employees.
  
  February 26, 1993: Islamic terrorists try to bring down the World Trade Center with car bombs. They failed to destroy the buildings, but killed 6 and injured over 1000 people.
  
  March 12, 1993: Car bombings in Mumbai, India leave 257 dead and 1,400 others injured.
  
  July 18, 1994: Bombing of Jewish Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina, kills 86 and wounds 300. The bombing is generally attributed to Hezbollah acting on behalf of Iran.
  
  July 19, 1994: Alas Chiricanas Flight 00901 is bombed, killing 21. Generally attributed to Hezbollah.
  
  July 26, 1994: The Israeli Embassy is attacked in London, and a Jewish charity is also car-bombed, wounding 20. The attacks are attributed to Hezbollah.
  
  December 11, 1994: A bomb explodes on board Philippine Airlines Flight 434, killing a Japanese businessman. It develops that Ramzi Yousef planted the bomb to test it for the larger terrorist attack he is planning.
  
  December 24, 1994: In a preview of September 11, Air France Flight 8969 is hijacked by Islamic terrorists who planned to crash the plane in Paris.
  
  January 6, 1995: Operation Bojinka, an Islamist plot to bomb 11 U.S. airliners over the Pacific Ocean, is discovered on a laptop computer in a Manila, Philippines apartment by authorities after a fire occurred in the apartment. Noted terrorists including Ramzi Yousef and Khalid Shaikh Mohammed are involved in the plot.
  
  June 14—June 19, 1995: The Budyonnovsk hospital hostage crisis, in which 105 civilians and 25 Russian troops were killed following an attack by Chechan Islamists.
  
  July—October, 1995: Bombings in France by Islamic terrorists led by Khaled Kelkal kill eight and injure more than 100.
  
  November 13, 1995: Bombing of OPM-SANG building in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia kills 7
  
  November 19, 1995: Bombing of Egyptian Embassy in Islamabad, Pakistan kills 19.
  
  January 1996: In Kizlyar, 350 Chechen Islamists took 3,000 hostages in a hospital. The attempt to free them killed 65 civilians and soldiers.
  
  February 25 - March 4, 1996: A series of four suicide bombings in Israel leave 60 dead and 284 wounded within 10 days.
  
  June 11, 1996: A bomb explodes on a train traveling on the Serpukhovsko-Timiryazevskaya Line of the Moscow Metro, killing four and unjuring at least 12.
  
  June 25, 1996: The Khobar Towers bombing, carried out by Hezbollah with Iranian support. Nineteen U.S. servicemen were killed and 372 wounded.
  
  February 24, 1997: An armed man opens fire on tourists at an observation deck atop the Empire State Building in New York City, United States, killing a Danish national and wounding visitors from several countries. A handwritten note carried by the gunman claims this was a punishment attack against the "enemies of Palestine".
  
  November 17, 1997: Massacre in Luxor, Egypt, in which Islamist gunmen attack tourists, killing 62 people.
  
  January 1998: Wandhama Massacre - 24 Kashmiri Pandits are massacred by Pakistan-backed Islamists in the city of Wandhama in Indian-controlled Kashmir.
  
  February 14, 1998: Bombings by Islamic Jihadi groups at an election rally in the Indian city of Coimbatore kill about 60 people.
  
  August 7, 1998: Al Qaeda bombs U.S. embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya, killing 225 people and injuring more than 4,000.
  
  August 31 – September 22, 1998: Russian apartment bombings kill about 300 people, leading Russia into Second Chechen War.
  
  December 14, 1998: Ahmed Ressam is arrested on the United States–Canada border in Port Angeles, Washington; he confessed to planning to bomb the Los Angeles International Airport as part of the 2000 millennium attack plots.
  
  December 24, 1998: Indian Airlines Flight 814 from Kathmandu, Nepal to Delhi, India is hijacked by Islamic terrorists. One passenger is killed and some hostages are released. After negotiations between the Taliban and the Indian government, the last of the remaining hostages on board Flight 814 are released in exchange for release of 4 terrorists.
  
  August 8, 2000: A bomb exploded at an underpass in Pushkin Square in Moscow, killing 11 people and wounding more than 90.
  
  August 17, 2000: Two bombs exploded in a shopping center in Riga, Latvia, injuring 35 people.
  
  October 12, 2000: AL Qaeda bombs USS Cole with explosive-laden speedboat, killing 17 US sailors and wounding 40, off the port coast of Aden, Yemen.

The Dems talking points memo is how the Bush Administration made the world "less safe". Tell me how the world was safe from 1993-2001?

Over 3000 dead in Iraq. 3000 plus dead in NYC on 9/11.

I think the count under Bush is still higher.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Coming from someone who has been labeled as one of the two most "militantly partisan left wing ideologues" here (and not by me, but certainly a charge that went without third party rebuttal or defence), and who never misses an opportunity to either personally disparage me or Hank with hateful vitriol, your response rings hollow.

I'm looking to reach across the divide, why you slap my hand away?

Reach across the divide, friend. Go a day without calling anyone on the left an Islamofacist. Go four hours without asking someone here why they hate America.

Earn it.

ETA I didn't really think anyone needed to come riding to my rescue when Spanky called me that. I don't particularly care whether or not you or anyone else thinks I am partisan, let wing, or an ideologue. It doesn't offend me. After all, it's not like he called me a conservative Republican.

[SlaveNoMore]

taxwonk
Over 3000 dead in Iraq. 3000 plus dead in NYC on 9/11.

I think the count under Bush is still higher.

So you concede the Democrats god awful record on terrorism from 1993-2001.

Secondly, cite please

Antiwar.com, probably the most sympathetic source you'll find on the internet (and criticized, if not often savaged by the right, for its poor accounting) has the numbers at

American Deaths Since war began (3/19/03):

Total - 2669 In Combat - 2168

http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/

Unfortunately, that site won't tell me how many bad guys we took out, but I bet it's a lot.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Over 3000 dead in Iraq. 3000 plus dead in NYC on 9/11.

I think the count under Bush is still higher.

Yeah, but all terrorist attacks have ceased since the Iraq war started.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Via Greg Djejerian, this excerpt from a speech by British Tory David Cameron is pretty excellent:

• In that context, what should be the outline of British and American foreign policy in the post-neo-conservative world? Let me start by making clear where I agree with the neo-conservative approach. I fully appreciate the scale of the threat we face. I believe that the leadership of the United States, supported by Britain, is central to the struggle in which we are engaged. I believe that the neo-conservatives are right to argue that extending freedom is an essential objective of western foreign policy. And I agree that western powers should be prepared, in the last resort, to use military force. We know from history that a country must be ready to defend itself and its allies. More than that, we and others are justified in using pre-emptive force when an attack on us is being prepared, and when all means of peaceful dissuasion and deterrence have failed. Furthermore, I believe that we should be prepared to intervene for humanitarian purposes to rescue people from genocide.
  
  But I believe that in the last five years we have suffered from the absence of two crucial qualities which should always condition foreign policy-making. Humility, and patience. These are not warlike words. They are not so glamorous and exciting as the easy sound-bites we have grown used to in recent years. But these sound-bites had the failing of all foreign policy designed to fit into a headline. They were unrealistic and simplistic. They represented a view which sees only light and darkness in the world - and which believes that one can be turned to the other as quickly as flicking a switch. I do not see things that way. I am a liberal conservative, rather than a neo-conservative. Liberal - because I support the aim of spreading freedom and democracy, and support humanitarian intervention. Conservative - because I recognise the complexities of human nature, and am sceptical of grand schemes to remake the world. A liberal conservative approach to foreign policy today is based on five propositions. First, that we should understand fully the threat we face. Second, that democracy cannot quickly be imposed from outside. Third, that our strategy needs to go far beyond military action. Fourth, that we need a new multilateralism to tackle the new global challenges we face. And fifth, that we must strive to act with moral authority.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Over 3000 dead in Iraq. 3000 plus dead in NYC on 9/11.

I think the count under Bush is still higher.

Clinton let 20000 people get trained in the Afghan camps. The fact that some of them killed people after Clinton left office doesn't mean they're not his responsibility. Hell the 9/11 guys were already firmly rooted here when he left.

Don't you know the Earned run rule for guys on base when a pitcher leaves the game?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Reach across the divide, friend. Go a day without calling anyone on the left an Islamofacist. Go four hours without asking someone here why they hate America.

Earn it.

1. I don't call people on the left "Islamofacists". Do you have a reading comprehension problem?

2. I would only ask someone why they hate something if they are evidencing hatred towards something. I am seeking to understand other points of view, because I don't want to be a militantly partisan ideologue-I want to be open minded. A browser, iyw, in the marketplace of ideas. As yoda told me, learn, there is much to.

3. Even if I were guilty of your charges, I went all of yesterday without calling anyone anywhere an Islamofacist and/or asking them about their hatred, real, perceived or misperceived. So by your standards, I have earned it.

Originally posted by taxwonk
ETA I didn't really think anyone needed to come riding to my rescue when Spanky called me that. I don't particularly care whether or not you or anyone else thinks I am partisan, let wing, or an ideologue. It doesn't offend me. After all, it's not like he called me a conservative Republican.

Militantly partisan ideologue suggests to me someone not open to entertaining other PoVs contrary to theirs, i.e. closed minded.

Spanky, can we get a ruling on that?

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
Via Greg Djejerian, this excerpt from a speech by British Tory David Cameron is pretty excellent:
[list]In that context, what should be the outline of British and American foreign policy in the post-neo-conservative world? Let me start by making clear where I agree with the neo-conservative approach. I fully appreciate the scale of the threat we face. I believe that the leadership of the United States, supported by Britain, is central to the struggle in which we are engaged. I believe that the neo-conservatives are right to argue that extending freedom is an essential objective of western foreign policy. And I agree that western powers should be prepared, in the last resort, to use military force. We know from history that a country must be ready to defend itself and its allies. More than that, we and others are justified in using pre-emptive force when an attack on us is being prepared, and when all means of peaceful dissuasion and deterrence have failed. Furthermore, I believe that we should be prepared to intervene for humanitarian purposes to rescue people from genocide....

This was a lovely speech until he gets to these parts:

But I believe that in the last five years we have suffered from the absence of two crucial qualities which should always condition foreign policy-making. Humility, and patience....

Was 13 years and the blatant violation of 16 UNSCRs not patient and humble enough?

First, that we should understand fully the threat we face...

Someone should hand him a copy of Qutb's books. Or the Koran. but please wear gloves, lest we offend anyone we are trying to understand.

...Second, that democracy cannot quickly be imposed from outside....

Can someone call Ned Lamont and Harry Reid that "cut 'n run" isn't the answer. Democracy takes time.

...Third, that our strategy needs to go far beyond military action....

Halliburton or Bechtel would love to help build some infrastructure, but the Democrats don't like that very much

Fourth, that we need a new multilateralism to tackle the new global challenges we face...

And fifth, that we must strive to act with moral authority

The prisoners at Abu Ghraib were recently said to be begging for the Americans to return. Meanwhile, multinational UN peacekeepers in the Congo are selling children as prostitutes.

When discussing moral authority, I'd rather go it alone, thank you.

[SlaveNoMore]

Penske_Account
1. I don't call people on the left "Islamofacists". Do you have a reading comprehension problem?

Given the Left's growing support of terrorists organizations like Hezzbollah and Hamas and their open support in this country of organizations like CAIR, its only a matter of degree.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
This was a lovely speech until he gets to these parts:

Was 13 years and the blatant violation of 16 UNSCRs not patient and humble enough?

I haven't checked the Tories' position on Iraq lately -- do they really go to Blair's left?

Someone should hand him a copy of Qutb's books. Or the Koran. but please wear gloves, lest we offend anyone we are trying to understand.

"Tory." As in Thatcher.

Can someone call Ned Lamont and Harry Reid that "cut 'n run" isn't the answer. Democracy takes time.

"Tory." As in United Kingdom.

Halliburton or Bechtel would love to help build some infrastructure, but the Democrats don't like that very much.

Do they get the big contracts from England?

The prisoners at Abu Ghraib were recently said to be begging for the Americans to return. Meanwhile, multinational UN peacekeepers in the Congo are selling children as prostitutes.

Any English in either of those places?

When discussing moral authority, I'd rather go it alone, thank you.

So noted.

[SlaveNoMore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I haven't checked the Tories' position on Iraq lately -- do they really go to Blair's left?

The answer is a clear and resounding "yes". Did you honestly not know this?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
The answer is a clear and resounding "yes". Did you honestly not know this?

Can Quiggan confirm, yes?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
The answer is a clear and resounding "yes". Did you honestly not know this?

Um, yes. I read the FT, but their US edition is not long on the UK domestic politics. Or maybe my eyes glaze over.

[Penske_Account]

Forty-four percent (44%) of American adults approve of the way that President Bush is performing his job.....Those are the best numbers for the President in months

I predict he goes over 50% by November and we hold both the House and Senate. this reminds me of 04, didn't the Dupocrats have Kerry inaugarated by this point in the electoral campaign?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

I find myself pulling for Chafee tonight, because he seems like a decent fellow, even though the seat is sure to turn blue if Laffey wins the primary. Huh.