A False Ally

This blurb from FoxNews.com got me going a bit.

 NEW YORK —  Pakistan’s top diplomat says there are no U.S. or other foreign military personnel on the hunt for Osama bin Laden in his nation, and none will be allowed in to search for the al-Qaida leader.

Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi told The Associated Press Saturday that his nation’s new government has ruled out permitting any such military operations, covert or otherwise, to catch militants.

In the interview, he said that “any foreign intrusion would be counterproductive,” and that it will create “an anti-U.S. feeling.”

The United States, increasingly frustrated as al-Qaida, the Taliban and other militants thrive in Pakistan’s remote areas and in neighboring Afghanistan, has offered U.S. troops to strike at terror networks.

Let me replay one sentence of that for you.

In the interview, he said that “any foreign intrusion would be counterproductive,” and that it will create “an anti-U.S. feeling.”

Anti-US feeling?  Roam the streets of Karachi or Islamabad and figure out what the “feeling” is concerning the US.  THEY HATE US ANYWAY.  I fail to understand how we need the permission of these foreign aid leeches in order to kill our public enemy number one. Why do we care that our approval rating amongst the Pakistani populace might fall from 8% to 3% if we attack killers on their soil?

I had a lot of hope for the new government of Pakistan.  But they have shown themselves to be spineless pacifists who are NOT dedicated to the eradication of terrorist elements in their nation.  Even after these elements assassinated their beloved leader (Bhutto) and have continued to kill innocent citizens within their nation, the Pakistani government has shown little resolve or intestinal fortitude.  Instead, they hope that “negotiation” will solve their problems.

What a joke. Ronald Reagan was right.  You don’t negotiate with terrorists.  It gets you nowhere.

 

Advertisements

19 thoughts on “A False Ally

  1. Man I love you when you get fired up.

    While the rest of the civlized world remains respective of the United States and their efforts – especially judging how other nations are voting – liberals will continue to remind us how we are “hated” everywhere.

    Of course most of this mantra is a lie – but if they did (stipulating for purposes of argument), who the hell cares?

    If he wants an “anti-American” feeling among terrorist apologists, tell him to try Hollywood or Manhattan.

  2. This is so easy to solve. Just tell the Pakistanis we are also hunting down guerilla insurgents from India. They’ll roll out the red carpet for that one and give us two nukes on the side.

  3. Two nukes on the side, now thats funny… the real truth is we have lost traction in Afghanistan do to the bumbling fool we have for a President.

    I don’t know about the rest of you but my daddy always taught me to finish one job before we start the next. If we had spent the amount of time and effort in Afghanistan that we have spent in Iraq, there would be no boarder situation and Pakistan would sit in fear of us.

    However, this is not the case. Since we are now over extended and over spending our military operations world wide while at the same time tying the hands of all the Generals as in how they can and cannot fight a war…

    The truth is Bush is a liberal or a RINO (Republican In Name Only). This is yet just one more example of what happens when we let Liberals fight Wars, we all were had… including this conservative here twice.

  4. Ferg – it is NOT liberal position to grab a situation by the yankers and take it out before it’s out of control. Which is what Bush did with Saddam.

    It is NOT a liberal position to plan ahead by allowing a sick country like Iraq to become a stable democracy and giving us a strong footprint there to continue the overall fight against terrorism.

    It is NOT a liberal position to understand that this is not a war with just Iraq, with just Afghanistan, with just Pakistan, with just Iran….thus not being at war with any one country.

    It IS; HOWEVER, a liberal position to assume that cathing one man “Osama” is going to end terrorism and everyone can then go to bed and sleep peacefully.

    North Korea is a prime example of what happens when a country is appeased with money, technology, and fuel.

    Iran and Iraq could not be one of those examples – yet again.

    I am sick of hearing liberals complain of the infamous Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam photo. Why was he shaking Saddam’s hand? I do believe it was that same Democratic art of “diplomacy” we keep being harangued about by Democrats and Ron Paul-types.

    I guarantee, in 20 years if we were attacked by Iran – and a subsequent photo taken of Condoleezza Rice shaking hands with a member of Iran’s government exists, liberals and Ron Paul types will put the same cloud of “corruption” on Rice as they have no with Rumsfeld.

    The truth is – with regard to national security, Bush is an AMERICAN – much like FDR was who held loyal Japanese Americans in internments camps for WW2, much like Abraham Lincoln was when he suspended Habeus Corpus during the Civil War. I don’t give a damn what letter follows your name of what party you represent, if you take the position that sticking our necks in the sand and not developing a long term plan for relations in the Middle East, there is only one letter that should follow your name…”I” (not “independent” but “insane”).

    It certainly was not liberal of Bush to be called a “failure” by Pelosi today after not being able to pass through one spending bill in Congress. Obviously, Ms. Pelosi is frustrated at that tiny little fact – along with the fact that her Congress’s approval rating is at about 16% right now.

    It wasn’t being “liberal” that earned Bush the blatant hate of the left.

    What Ron Paulers need to do is learn to observe Hollywood, learn to observe the members of Code Pink, Barbra Steisand, Cindy Sheehan, and the Jersey Girls’ responses to any Bush policy – if they are screaming about it, then everything is on schedule for the better of the country.

  5. “Obviously, Ms. Pelosi is frustrated at that tiny little fact – along with the fact that her Congress’s approval rating is at about 16% right now.”

    It’s not Ms. Pelosi. Where I live the proper term for her is Pelosipig.

    She’s part of the Congressional Axis of Evil along with Sen. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein.

  6. “Ferg – it is NOT liberal position to grab a situation by the yankers and take it out before it’s out of control. Which is what Bush did with Saddam.”
    Saddam, had a zero military threat and was boxed in well, no weapons of mass destruction other than intelligence that was well over 10-15 years old indicating the potential “threat”. Zero Al Qaeda presence or Terrorist factor and lived in incredible fear of the US… If you want to go with that logic, perhaps Saudi Arabia would have been the better target… After all, most of the 9-11 terrorists came from that country and correct me if I am wrong, but none came from Iraq. In fact, nothing about 9-11 can be traced to Iraq!
    “It is NOT a liberal position to plan ahead by allowing a sick country like Iraq to become a stable democracy and giving us a strong footprint there to continue the overall fight against terrorism.”
    First off, is not a democracy we are trying to setup, but a Republic and there is a big difference. Once again I’ll counter Iraq had no Terrorists presence. However, it is not Americas place to nation build either and that is a historical conservative principle. In fact, if this was to be fought right assuming one agrees with the war, then it should have been a quick in and out, turned the nation back over to the Bathe party and said if ya “mess” up, we’ll be back. Then Iran and all the other would have trembled at the thought of American bombs. But, we got sucked into the exact kind of war our enemies wished us to fight. So Yes, I will call Bush a RINO.
    “It is NOT a liberal position to understand that this is not a war with just Iraq, with just Afghanistan, with just Pakistan, with just Iran….thus not being at war with any one country.”
    So fighting a war with an undefined Monster to slay, like the war on drugs, will bring complete success… seems to me we should tackle them with our culture, flood them with free computers and cheap internet connections… Lets be honest here, you’re fighting a war for the minds and souls of the people there. You don’t win those wars with bullets and bombs. In fact bullets and bombs make that objective that much harder to achieve. The fact is Nation building doesn’t work. The people have to want to take Liberty for themselves for Liberty only belongs to the belligerent willing to take it for themselves. Therefore, Republics only belong to thosewilling to fight for them. Ben Franklin perhaps said it best as he was existing the signing of the bill of rights one lady on the street stood up and asked him, “Sir what did you give us?” Ben answered, “A Republic Ma’am, if you can keep it.”
    “It IS; HOWEVER, a liberal position to assume that cathing one man “Osama” is going to end terrorism and everyone can then go to bed and sleep peacefully.”
    Point agreed, I never said catching him would be the end all and be all either. All I said was finish the job before you start another.
    “North Korea is a prime example of what happens when a country is appeased with money, technology, and fuel.”
    North Korea is a product of China and an entire different ball of wax. Shame on you for even attempting to make the comparison.
    “Iran and Iraq could not be one of those examples – yet again.”
    Iran halted its nuclear production back in 2003, why? Because they were scared ____________(please fill in the blank).
    “I am sick of hearing liberals complain of the infamous Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam photo. Why was he shaking Saddam’s hand? I do believe it was that same Democratic art of “diplomacy” we keep being harangued about by Democrats and Ron Paul-types.”
    Ohhh-no, he goes personal, shame on ya Steve lol, No that is always referred to by us “Ron Paul types” to show America’s best friend one day, worst enemy next day foreign policy hypocritical strategy. The fact that we rarely have kept our promise in that region of the world, to show how we prop up dictatorships when it suits us and tear them down when it doesn’t. It just adds credence to the fact that our foreign policy is failing and has been failing for 50+ years.
    “I guarantee, in 20 years if we were attacked by Iran – and a subsequent photo taken of Condoleezza Rice shaking hands with a member of Iran’s government exists, liberals and Ron Paul types will put the same cloud of “corruption” on Rice as they have no with Rumsfeld.”
    No, but I will remind you of the Shah of Iran and the government that preceded that dictatorship. It was an anti-communistic (Republic) government that fought the communistic elements in the North part of the State yet we help topple it and put in place the Shah.
    “The truth is – with regard to national security, Bush is an AMERICAN – much like FDR was who held loyal Japanese Americans in internments camps for WW2, much like Abraham Lincoln was when he suspended Habeus Corpus during the Civil War. I don’t give a damn what letter follows your name of what party you represent, if you take the position that sticking our necks in the sand and not developing a long term plan for relations in the Middle East, there is only one letter that should follow your name…”I” (not “independent” but “insane”).”
    Well, lets be honest, there was no Hero with regards to Habeas Corpus in the Civil War for Lincoln’s counterpart in the South did just the same. The writ of Habeas Corpus is inherent in our Humanity, just like our liberty, it is what separates us from the beasts of the land. So imprisonment without Habeas Corpus is a great relationship builder with middle eastern culture? So people like Andrew Napolitano, Walter E Williams and many more are just flat out insane? Sorry mate, you’re gonna have to work harder than that to convince me we are doing the right thing here or better put in the right manner. If we forget what made this country so great or what makes us the envy of the modern world, if we fail those principles of Liberty, then we fail America as well. It has often been said if the founders were alive today, they would be considered insane, so go right ahead and call me insane, I’m as crazy as they come.
    “It certainly was not liberal of Bush to be called a “failure” by Pelosi today after not being able to pass through one spending bill in Congress. Obviously, Ms. Pelosi is frustrated at that tiny little fact – along with the fact that her Congress’s approval rating is at about 16% right now.”
    Ohhh spending, Don’t go there! Bush has out spent every President of the 20th century, minus military spending and adjusted for inflation. He has doubled the department of Education, something that During Reagan was considered a department that was expendable. The only difference between Bush and Pelosi is what they choose to spend things on. Give me a break, don’t even go there.
    “It wasn’t being “liberal” that earned Bush the blatant hate of the left.”
    No, what has earned his left hatred is the things that make him “conservative,” His Pro-life, Pro-marriage and non-traditional stance of Pro-preemptive action or Pro-war and that’s why I call him a RINO for one stance for sure is a non-traditional conservative view and the Pro-marriage is actually a non-traditional conservative view. Which in all reality, only leaves one which makes him a RINO.
    “What Ron Paulers need to do is learn to observe Hollywood, learn to observe the members of Code Pink, Barbra Steisand, Cindy Sheehan, and the Jersey Girls’ responses to any Bush policy – if they are screaming about it, then everything is on schedule for the better of the country.”
    What Neo-cons need to do is to wake up, begin to read what conservatism used to mean and not the media distorted version of late. Understand that during Reagan the Christian Right was considered the laughable portion of the conservative movement, much like the Pauler’s today, and now they make up the Neo-Cons that the new media has come to have a love and hate relationship with. They have distorted the conservative view point and it would do us all good to begin to read books written by Taft, Harding, Goldwater, Reagan and the like to understand where we originally came from. I never will leave the Republican Party, but over the last decade the Republican Party has begun to leave me. Yet I stay to remind them all of their roots.

  7. Wow, that was long, Ferg.

    Let me just address two things.

    (1) My husband was a member of the Iraq Survey Group – the people tasked with finding the WMD. There WERE WMD, just not as much as we thought. There were NOT operational nukes, but as the recent secret shipment of Iraq yellow cake shows – they were trying to get started on that.

    Saying no WMD is a false argument. Tell it to the EOD troops that got hit with IEDs that had sarin in them. And the Polish troops that found lots of chem weapons. Sure, they were old. But they were THERE.

    (2) It is also false that there were no terrorists in Iraq prior to the start of the war. Abu Nidal was a terrorist. And he didn’t shoot himself three times in the face, either, even if they did find a suicide note.

    Salmon Pak was a terrorist training camp IN IRAQ. It included mock ups of airplanes to train on.

    I’ll agree with you that Al Qaeda wasn’t Saddam’s best friend, but that’s not the same as there being no terrorists in Iraq.

    Bumper sticker anti-war slogans are ridiculous.

  8. okay, but at the level the WMDs were found, they were not a threat to the US but rather a threat to its own citizens. The WMD threat was sold as a threat to Americans, which was false. After all the last thing Saddam wanted was an American Witch Hunt for his rear-end for we would have known if any of his WMDs were used in America for we held the receipt to them. Therefore, we would never use them in America, we have the blueprint, we would know for sure it was him.

    Saddam was all about protecting his own power, don’t think he really wanted us pissed off at him. And as for bringing “democracy” to those people, well, not every country is ready for the privilege of a Republic. The citizens have to want it for themselves.

    However, this also explains your 3 shots in the face, again, the last thing Saddam wanted was the Witch Hunt for him.

    Well I have Family members from both Gulf engagements and multiple friends from this one. In fact one was in the first Tank battalion over the line, actually as he claims the third tank. So yes, my opinion is formulated on more than just what the media tells me. In fact, if it hadn’t been for friends and family who caused me to open my eyes, I would still be a Social Conservative, like Bush, McCain and the Huckster.

    So….
    If it is not okay for the rest of the world to use WMD, how come it became okay for both Bushes to okay it for US Troops to use?

    Depleted Uranium Ammunition – No need for its use. The Iraqi tanks were out dated. A WWII Bazooka would have taken care of them. WE have turned that desert into one big radioactive mess…

    Think the Muslim culture is going to soon forget that? Especially with all the birth defects it has and will cause.

    Well, anyways, ya’ll are just fulfilling prophecy. Guess I can’t blame ya. I’ll keep attempting to save ya from yourselves lol… and I guess you’ll be doing the same with me… in some ways, we are both talking to walls.

  9. Thank you for admitting my point. I didn’t go into all the things you felt necessary to refute. I don’t necessarily agree with them, but I do feel it necessary to point out that you are arguing things that weren’t a part of the original discussion (at least in regards to my part of it). That is called moving the goal posts. I never attacked your sources, I merely confirmed my own.

    A good thing to remember, which is conveniently left out of most discussions by those against the War in Iraq – no one disputed the intel we had because it was the same intel THEY had. “They” being the US, Europe, the UN, and other Muslim countries. Not all of them agreed with our actions, but they did not argue the facts as we had them.

    But going into Iraq is rather a moot issue to argue at this point. We are already there. The discussion should be how to move forward NOW rather than continual staring at our own asses and complaining about the cellulite. That’s how you crash into trees.

    As for fulfilling prophecy… prophecy is a slippery thing – and that is what the prophets say. I am not a prophet myself, nor do I have any particular psychic powers; so I am not going to bother interpreting anything for anyone.

  10. Ferg –

    Your first massive untruth in your response to me deals primarily with North Korea. We tried appeasement, it did not work! We gave them – in 1994, oil, reactors, and technology – in exchange for a single extraction to not “build nukes.” And part of the legal framework of that great act of diplomacy stated that we could not allow weapons inspectors in for five years. Now what? I do believe they have tested nukes, I do believe we have our sorry asses in a pickle…and for what? So Clinton can be hailed as Jimmy Carter’s right hand man for “peace”?

    The leaders of Iran were testing bombs a week ago! These people are willing to die in their pursuit of killing their enemies. I don’t know about you, but Ron Paul’s reluctance to answer that one simple point kind of frightens me.

    I know its PC to “give peace a chance.”

    Ron Paulers can’t have it both ways. First, they expect us to grant “constitutional rights” to foreign enemies held at Guantanamo prison – somehow associating the enemies who want to slaughter us in masses with what makes this country great. One the same token, they tell us to stay out of infested areas of the world churning out terrorists faster than George Clooney churns out bad movies.

    Regarding Saddam – it has been a known fact that throughout the history of the world, alliances switch and sometimes allies become enemies. What Ron Paulers and liberals fail to do is to remind others that Rumsfeld was not part of some evil regime that set up intention of watching a psychopath use WMD against his neighbors and hide 300,000+ dead bodies in mass graves consisting of his own people.

    Because of the troops, Iraqi citizens are gaining more power and peace more and more everyday. They will decide, they will vote, women will not be forced to wear burkas (though I wouldn’t mind seeing one on Rosie O’Donnell).

    Ron Paul got his clock cleaned by Condi the day he insinuated that America was ginning up a phony stage to go to war with Iran.

    First, she reminded Paul that the UN got a 15-0 chapter 7 resolution against Iran, and that the entire international community, with information gathered by the IAEA, were concerned.

    Second, she reminded Paul that she herself tried to do undo 27 years of US policy and meet with her counterpart from Tehran anywhere in the world if they would simply adhere to the commands of the international community, and our allies, and cease enriching uranium.

    Iran said no.

    As Dr. Rice said: “so the question isn’t; Congressman Paul, why won’t we talk to Iran, the question is why won’t they talk to us!”

    So in response to the bomb tests last week, Ron Paulers and liberals are hopping mad at the President for stating: “we are prepared to go to war!’

    For the love of God, folks. What should he say to a group of psychotics? Should he say “The United States is not prepared to take military action, so please be kind, and aim your nukes at a small city?”

    He’s the commander-in-chief and he’s responsible for 300,000 Americans.

    I ask that you take that same cut-and-run attitude Ron Paul is promoting to a poker game and let me know how much money you come back with.

  11. When President George W. Bush announced on June 26 that he was removing North Korea from a U.S. list of terrorism-sponsoring nations, it seemed that Pyongyang had deftly played its nuclear card. After years of escalating threats, North Korea seemed to be ready to compromise, publicly acknowledging its nuclear plants and materials, and agreeing to resume stalled six-nation talks with the U.S., China, Japan, South Korea, and Russia, in a process that would lead to the dismantling of its Yongbyon nuclear facility. The reward: coveted access to Western capital and technology, which Pyongyang needs to shore up its shaky economy. South Korea’s former Unification Minister Lim Dong Won hailed the deal as the biggest step forward in U.S.-North Korean relations since the Korean War ended in 1953.

    Hmmm, Guess diplomacy did work after all…

    However, if i remember correctly we didn’t exactly live up to our end of the bargain anyway with the technology too… I forget which kind of nuclear energy it is called that you can supply nuclear power without making weapons grade fizzle, but we didn’t supply the necessary equipment parts, something (can’t remember exactly) that they required to make the project work.

    2nd, China is a huge factor when dealing with N. Korea, appeasement has very little to do with it. China has everything to do with the appeasement.

    Why wouldn’t Iran test bombs after all we are getting ready to blockade them? An act of war, or am I mistaken (H.C.R. 362 & SR 580)? So the Neo-Cons reluctance to answer that one simple question, how did we get to the point that they hate us soooo much? And its not because we are so free and prosperous.

    I already addressed your next point in a previous comment on here but again for a refresher:

    Nazis were determined to be POWs who had Geneva Convention protections from the 1929 Geneva Convention. Here we have created a whole new class of prisoner. Personally, I think they should be deemed POWs and held until an official end of the “war” can be determined, which would indicate a life sentence to me. But the idea of putting them in limbo doesn’t sit well with me. This situation can be made black and white, instead, we created a situation where you forced the Supreme court to make a ruling. Simplified, I’m not surprised when we could have made it real simple and just called them POWs instead of a new classification of enemy combatants. Even if they are “evil” they still are human beings that deserve either Geneva Convention protection or due process. If not, then are we really any better than those who wish to do harm? America has high standards and civil liberty protections because we are or should be the envy of the modern world. If we fail those principles, then we fail America as well and become no better than those who wish to do us harm.

    So personally, I think the Neo-Cons are truly forgetting what makes this country great and the envy of the rest of the world. We ought to be role models, not villains.

    Regarding Saddam – Heres a simple fact, it the problem for the countries of the middle east or should have been. We could have solved much of our problem back in 1991 if we had just armed our ally, Saudi Arabia, like the populace wanted, and let them go after Saddam just giving air support. Or how bout when Bush 1 promised air support to the Iraqi citizens after Gulf 1 if they attempted to over through Saddam? We of course broke our promise and never delivered, again!

    “Rumsfeld was not part of some evil regime that set up intention of watching a psychopath use WMD against his neighbors and hide 300,000+ dead bodies in mass graves consisting of his own people” — Correction m8, we hold the receipt on the WMD’s.

    So they are gaining more and more peace (Iraqi citizens), but at some point they have to stand up and walk for themselves, we cannot afford to continue much longer. Thats the real problem Neo-Cons forget. The financial factor. The bank is broke buddy, we have no more money and the citizens of the US are taxed more than a surf during midevil times… can’t afford it much longer. Ron Paul is right, close the bases everywhere around the world, bring the troops home, protect the boarders, protect the ports and let the countries of the middle east defend themselves… Isreal is quite capable of taking care of any of those countries on their own. For God sakes Drill Drill Drill here, there is enough oil in Alaska to take care of this nation for at least a century if not more… And i say great cuz eventually the free markets would work and we would find a renewable source of energy. Simplified, the less time the market focuses on the middle east and the more time it focuses on a renewable source of energy… I say great! Can’t wait till we can tell the middle east to keep their oil, we don’t need. But something else has to trigger it and all the money being made over there, all the investment made over there ties us down, weakens our sovereignty and independence by us being tied and dependent upon the a stable middle east. We lose everyday we don’t drill big in Alaska, and focus our resources in a stable middle east.

    “Ron Paul got his clock cleaned by Condi the day he insinuated that America was ginning up a phony stage to go to war with Iran.” ~ Excuse me, he said it was possible and has been done before, not that it was being done now… just that it is possible as far as I know according to other comments he has made, I’m not aware of the comment you are referring too. please link me.

    Its a regional matter, not a US concern… the only reason it is a US concern is that we have been consistently sticking our collective noses where it don’t belong, for 50 years and now its finally coming back to bite us hard. Thats the hard truth no one in Washington wants to talk about…. They always want to fix the broken wheel when in all reality it is just needed to go back to the round one that worked just fine in the first place.

    For the love of God, folks. What should he say to a group of psychotics? ~ he should unleash the Dogs of Israel and wash our hands. Its their region their problem. In fact, Israel would have already of done something about it if our collective noses weren’t in the way to begin with, a decade ago or when ever they began the process of enrichment.

    BTW, I don’t play poker. I play chess.

  12. BTW folks, I love the spirited debate and take no offense from any comment so I hope the rest of you don’t too. If its not welcome anymore then say so, I’d be sad, but I’d leave.

  13. Oh – Hell no, Ferg. We love debate. Keep it coming. I think you’re wrong on this one, but Steve and I love it. Hell, we debate each other for fun when we have nothing else to do.

  14. Paul’s question to Rice which she side stepped with the usual rhetoric and didn’t answer:

    “Can you ensure me, this committee and the American people that the United States will not initiate a preemptive attack on Iran?”

    … and it would seem to me he had some good facts and points too backing up his question. Honest facts and an honest question since we all know the facts that led up to Iraq was on intelligence that was 10-15 years old.

    Link:

  15. Ferg –

    Of course we cannot take military action now, because it is too late with N. Korea. As I have said, I do believe we are in a pickle. Bush, Obama, Rice, have no choice now because THEY ALREADY HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO KILL US.

    And how did they get this capability? Why, I do believe it was the art of “diplomacy.” Of course we have to tip-toe around them now! We don’t disagree there.

    But that doesn’t mean the diplomacy worked with a nut like Kim Jong Il. All it means is that we do have to take these long, drawn out steps with ensuring N. Korea be removed as a threat.

    Our country gave them the biggest chance in 1994 – now suddenly, you’re saying that “removing them froma list” worked after literlly handing them 10 billion dollars, 2 reactors, and a basketball signed by Michael Jordan. Don’t y’all just miss Madeline Albright?

    It reminds us why Saddam and Iran must be dealt with now. Our ability to create these changes throughout the world is indeed what makes this country great and Ferg, I STILL love it and am more proud of it than I ever could be.

    Finally, that link with Condi and Paul is indeed what I was referring to before. She did not side-step. Paul indicated that we were ginning up to strike, and Rice – with the facts from the IAEA and the UN that got a 15-0 Chapter 7 Resolution, did anything but side-step. Paul didn’t use fact in his questioning, he used ideology.

    Did you watch the whole thing?

  16. First off, your missing the point.

    If we had attempted any military action with N. Korea we wouldn’t be fighting N. Korea…

    I can think of a billion people that can walk off a bridge for eternity… hmmm wonder what nation that might be?

  17. ohhh and…

    Thanks to the Shanghai Cooperative Organization, we won’t just be fighting Iran either.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s