Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Sat 08/05/2006 View Fri 08/04/2006 View Thu 08/03/2006 View Wed 08/02/2006 View Tue 08/01/2006 View Mon 07/31/2006 View Sun 07/30/2006
1
2006-08-05 Home Front: Culture Wars
Pat Buchanan: Respect Popular Terrorist States
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Snease Shaiting3550 2006-08-05 02:41|| || Front Page|| [2 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 Signs of senility setting in.
Posted by JohnQC 2006-08-05 10:09||   2006-08-05 10:09|| Front Page Top

#2 Pat and Robert Novak are Arab-lovers (and Joooooo haters)
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-08-05 10:25||   2006-08-05 10:25|| Front Page Top

#3 This asshole and his fellow-travellers can FOAD.

They obviously don't think we're going to lose, in spite of their blathering - since they'd be some of the first to die at the hands of the islamoterro-nutcases if we did.

Keep yapping, Pat - your buddies Adolf, Josef, Yassin, et al., are keeping a seat warm for you with them in HELL.
Posted by Barbara Skolaut">Barbara Skolaut  2006-08-05 11:05|| http://ariellestjohndesigns.com]">[http://ariellestjohndesigns.com]  2006-08-05 11:05|| Front Page Top

#4 Buchanan wants to pretend that the elections in the West Bank, Lebanon, and Egypt are about as free and fair as elections can get.

I tend to disagree with this very strongly.
Posted by Phil 2006-08-05 11:48||   2006-08-05 11:48|| Front Page Top

#5 Whether these elections are legit or not, the question still is: do these regimes pose a threat to us? After all, let's say that Japan 1941 was a representative democracy and not some strange imperial militaristic hybrid. Would we have then said, "Oh, that massacre in Nanking? It represents the will of the Japanese people through their democratically elected leaders. No biggie."

We are going to have to accept that the notion that democracies do not fight each other is untrue and has only appeared true in the past because the sample population was so small.
Posted by Dreadnought 2006-08-05 14:30||   2006-08-05 14:30|| Front Page Top

#6 Weirdly I lost respect for Pat Buchanan about a decade ago.
Posted by eLarson 2006-08-05 17:14|| http://larsonian.blogspot.com]">[http://larsonian.blogspot.com]  2006-08-05 17:14|| Front Page Top

#7 This asshole and his fellow-travellers can FOAD

I disagree. They can FOESAD. :-)
Posted by gorb 2006-08-05 17:54||   2006-08-05 17:54|| Front Page Top

#8 The "democracies are peaceful" stuff always annoyed me because when you mentioned a counterexample, it was always eliminated as 'not a democracy' (US-England in 1812). Democracies and Republics can be as expansionist and warlike as anyone else, if the bulk of the population is. Witness Rome, or the USA in the westward expansion era.

So if a country, Democracy or not, crosses the line they deserve to get hammered for it. The difference is that in a Democracy, the decision makers are paying the full price of the retribution and have a better chance of learning a lesson. In a dictatorship, its not difficult for the rulers to be isolated from any negative consequences of a failed adventure.
Posted by Oldcat 2006-08-05 21:49||   2006-08-05 21:49|| Front Page Top

23:44 Redneck Jim
23:13 Bobby
23:11 ed
23:06 Bobby
23:05 Legolas
23:04 JohnQC
22:58 ed
22:55 gb506
22:54 JohnQC
22:50 JosephMendiola
22:50 Snease Shaiting3550
22:47 JosephMendiola
22:40 ed
22:39 JosephMendiola
22:28 JohnQC
22:25 gorb
22:08 CrazyFool
22:04 twobyfour
22:02 Brett
21:58 Brett
21:49 49 Pan
21:49 Oldcat
21:47 49 Pan
21:43 Lone Ranger









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com