The noted blogger Fjordman who's on a roll is filing this report via Gates of Vienna.
In my essay about the retreat of the Western world order, I mentioned the possibility of civil strife in the West caused by runaway immigration. This is no longer just a theoretical possibility. It is pretty clear to anybody following the developments in Europe that the situation in France is starting to become rather serious. President Jacques Chirac threw out part of a youth labor law that triggered massive protests and strikes, bowing to intense pressure from students and unions. The unemployment rate for youths under 26 is a staggering 22 percent nationwide it's over 23% IIRC, but soars to nearly 50 percent in some of those troubled areas with many Muslim immigrants. French Jews are leaving the country in ever-growing numbers, fleeing a wave of anti-Semitism. Nidra Poller, American ex-pat writer and translator in Paris, has written some appalling stories about aggressive anti-Semitism, such as the murder and brutal torture of French Jew Ilan Halimi early in 2006.
Muslim blogs are calling for violence against the Jews, the whites and the well-to-do. They say, We must burn France, as Hamas will burn Israel. The growth of the Islamic population is explosive. According to some, one out of three babies born in France is now a Muslim yup, or at least about 30-35% of births come from migrants. Around 70% of French prisoners are Muslims yup. Hundreds of Muslim ghettos are already de facto following sharia RG police intelligence sez there are over 1000 "no go areas", not French law.
Some have pointed out that the French military are not always squeamish, but there are estimates that 15% of the armed forces are already made up of Muslims sorry to repeat myself, but the figures I've read/heard on radio are 20-28%, with supposedly up to 40% in particular units like paratroopers, and rising. How effective can the army then be in upholding the French republic? At the same time, opinion polls show that the French are now officially the most anti-capitalist nation on earth. France has chosen Socialism and Islam. It will get both, and sink into a quagmire of its own making. Some believe France will quietly become a Muslim country, others believe in civil war in the near future:
The French Disease
Within 20 years, one person out of four in France will be Muslim, and almost certainly poor and angry. So the French disease progresses. It is chronic becoming terminal. On the way toward collapse, there will be no civil war, just moments of harsh violence. The population will change. People with a high level of productivity will choose exile. People with a low level of productivity will immigrate. Jews and Christians will leave. Muslims will arrive.
The unreported race riot in France
Frédéric Encel, Professor of international relations at the prestigious École Nationale dAdministration in Paris and a man not known for crying wolf but not an idiotarian, especially about the israeli-arab war, recently stated that France is becoming a new Lebanon. The implication, far-fetched though it may seem, was that civil upheaval might be no more than a few years off, sparked by growing ethnic and religious polarization.
Im not sure which of these scenarios is scarier. People keep talking about the nukes that the Iranians may get, but what about the hundreds of nuclear warheads the French have? Will they be used to intimidate the rest of the West? How do we handle an Islamic France, still the heartland of the European continent, with Muslim control of hundreds of nukes? And how do we handle a Bosnia or Lebanon with a population much larger than either of these countries, and with hundreds of nuclear warheads at stake?
If Muslim immigration continues, the impending fall of France could mark the starting point of the Balkanization of much of Europe, perhaps later even North America. I fear this is a world war. Maybe future historians will dub it the Multicultural World War. Just as WW1 was caused by Imperialism, WW2 by Fascism and the Cold War by Communism, this one will be caused by Multiculturalism. The term the Multicultural World War has been coined by Fjordman. I find this to be more accurate than The Islamic World War because what will cause this world war is Western cultural weakness, through Multiculturalism and Muslim immigration, rather than Islamic strength. As poster DP111 says, this world war may very well be in the form of a global civil war, where you get a succession of civil wars instead of countries invading other countries. Multiculturalism and uncontrolled mass-immigration destroy the internal cohesion of the decadent West, which will slowly fall apart as it has lost the will to defend itself and the belief in its own culture. The wars in the Balkans in the 1990s will in hindsight be seen as a prelude to the Multicultural World War. Rather than a Westernization of the Balkans, we get a Balkanization of the West.
I guess there is some poetic justice in the fact that the country that initiated and has led the creation of Eurabia now gets consumed by its own Frankenstein monster, but we should not gloat over this. The downfall of France is very bad news for the rest of the West. Again, what happens to their nukes and military resources? As stated in the book Eurabia by Bat Yeor, the merger of Europe and the Arab-Islamic world has been encouraged by the French political elite in particular at least since the early 1970s, with a vision of creating a united Europe and Mediterranean basin under French leadership, in what has basically been a French dream since the age of Napoleon, the great hero of current French PM de Villepin. Several prominent French leaders stated quite openly in 2005 that the proposed EU Constitution was basically an enlarged France. Justice Minister Dominique Perben said: We have finally obtained this Europe à la française that we have awaited for so long. This constitutional treaty is an enlarged France. It is a Europe written in French. Education Minister François Fillon stated: This Constitution allows the French ambition to assert itself in the big Europe that General de Gaulle hoped and prayed for. The French dream of an enlarged France. What they may get is a France carved into tiny pieces.
My personal belief is not that we are witnessing the final triumph of Eurabia, but rather the last spasms of the Eurabian Union. There will be at least as big changes in Western Europe over the coming generation as there were in Eastern Europe following the fall of the Berlin Wall. There will be the downfall and disintegration of an anti-democratic, bureaucratic superstate, the European Union instead of the Soviet Union, and there will be the downfall of soft Socialism in the shape of the Multicultural welfare state in the West just as you had the downfall of the hard Socialism in the East. The difference is that the downfall of Communism in the East happened through a relatively bloodless Velvet Revolution, whereas the downfall of Multiculturalism in the West may turn out to be anything but bloodless. And it will come, sooner than many people think. Multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and the idea of forced cultural equality, will collapse just as Communism, the idea of economic Marxism and forced economic equality fell.
The difference is that when Communism was discredited in Eastern Europe, it was still Poles who lived in Polish cities, Bulgarians who lived in Bulgarian cities etc. When the veil of Multiculturalism disappears, it will be Pakistanis who live in London, Turks who live in Berlin, Algerians who live in Paris and Moroccans who live in Amsterdam. And then the show begins.
Europe may not be finished yet, but she will go through a painful period of transition even if we do get a rebirth here. It should be noted that a revolution doesnt usually come when the oppression is at its worst, but when the grip of the authorities and their totalitarian ideology, in this case Multiculturalism and Political Correctness, seems to be slipping. This was the case with the Soviet Union in the 1980s, and it will be the case with the European Union now. I see increasing signs that the idea of Multiculturalism is on the retreat. Even Germanys and Europes largest newspaper ran a series about the collapse of Multiculturalism recently.
I am not alone in predicting such a turbulent scenario. Prominent critic of Islam in Denmark, Lars Hedegaard, is quoted in Bruce Bawers book While Europe Slept, How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within in support of this dark view:
If theres any hope, Hedegaard suggested dryly, borrowing a line he knew Id recognize from 1984, it lies in the proles. Yet we both knew that the proles if they did take over the reins from the elite might well lead Europe back down the road to fascism. He did admit that he was glad to be living in Denmark and not elsewhere in Western Europe: If theres any place where theres hope, its got to be this country. But Hedegaard didnt hold out much hope even for Denmark. Unless they build up a cadre of intellectuals in Europe who can think, he said, America can kiss Europe good-bye. The Continents future, he predicted, is going to be vastly different than we imagine.. Its going to be war. Like Lebanon, with some enclaves dominated by Christians and others by Muslims. There will be permanent strife, and no one will have the power to mollify or mediate It will be more gruesome than we can imagine. When the horror comes, he warned, the journalists who helped to bring it about will wag their heads and flee and leave it to those who cant flee to fight it out.
The population movements we are witnessing now are the largest and fastest in human history. In Europe, they can only be compared to the period often referred to as the Migration Period, following the disintegration of the Roman Empire. However, during the 4th and 5th centuries, the total human population of the world was in the order of 200 million. Today, it is 30 times larger than that, and still growing fast. We also have communications that can transport people anywhere on earth within hours, and media that show ordinary people how much better life is in other countries. On top of that, the Romans didnt have human rights lawyers advocating that millions of barbarians be let into their lands. Is it a coincidence that the last time we had migrations like this was when large parts of the European continent suffered a complete civilizational breakdown? Is that what we are witnessing now? The second fall of Rome?
Both Thailand and the Philippines, countries where the Muslim population is not much larger than it is in some Western European countries, are facing war. Countries such as France, Holland and Sweden could soon reach a point where the Muslim population will create something akin to civil war, as it already has in the above-mentioned nations. The Islamic world is now at war with most of the major powers on the planet at the same time, from the USA to India and from Russia to Western Europe. It is a real possibility that we will get a full-blown world war because of these events. If so, I dont think this will happen 50 years from now, but within the coming generation.
There are several possible scenarios:
1. Eurabia
The EU continues its transformation into a continent-wide organization with clear totalitarian leanings, and a very pro-Islamic stance. Europes fate is sealed when Turkey is allowed into the Union, and becomes its largest member. Historian Bat Yeor, who first coined the term Eurabia, thinks that Europes ties with the Arab-Islamic world are now so firmly entrenched and established that Eurabia is an irreversible fact. Europe will cease to be a Western, democratic continent, and will become an appendix to the Arab world. Eurabia will become a global center for Jihad activities, as the dhimmi taxpayers and infidel Western technology give a boost to the Ummah. Muslims will be heavily concentrated in the major cities, and the dhimmi native population will retreat into the countryside. The old nation states will thus slowly die, as their major cities, which constitute the brain and head of its culture, are cut off from the rest of the body. Europes decline into Eurabia will be speeded up by the fact that millions of educated natives with the means to it will move to the USA or other nations. There will be no major war in Western Europe, as its civilization is already dead and very few will bother fighting for it.
The only violence will be sporadic Islamic terror attacks to induce fear, and occasional Muslim mob assaults in European streets to remind the dhimmis who is boss. It is conceivable that the center of European civilization will move from Western Europe to Eastern Europe, but even Eastern Europe will be put under severe pressure from Muslims, both in the Middle East and in the West. The basic rule is that the areas Muslims have taken into possession remain in Islamic hands, while the native population and culture is slowly eradicated. If this holds true for us today, then parts of Western Europe are already lost, and will indeed become Eurabia as Bat Yeor predicts. There are not too many instances I know of where areas once under the sway of Islam have been reclaimed by infidels. The most obvious is of course Spain and the Iberian Peninsula, where the Reconquista took quite a few centuries. I know the Sikhs have kicked Muslims out of Punjab, India. Parts of present-day Israel could be counted, although Arabs and Muslims are trying very hard to wipe Israel off the map. And maybe some of Chinas Western provinces could be included. Islam has not been eradicated there, but it is visibly retreating as Chinese authorities are suppressing any signs of rebellion.
What these examples have in common is that both the Christians in Spain, the Sikhs in India and the Jews in Israel were fighting Islam with powerful religious convictions of their own. The Chinese are not usually very religious, but they have an equally strong, even ruthless nationalism and belief in their own civilization. If history is any guide, todays decadent, bored, post-religious and post-nationalist Europe will be no match for Islam, unless it rediscovers a belief in its own culture and a will to defend it. This will have to happen soon, or the Islamic demographic conquest of much of the continent will be an irreversible fact, anyway. The result of this will then either be Eurabia or a Pakistanization of Europe, the way we have already seen for generations in the Balkans.
Unfortunately, that's my scenario of choice. Oh, well, I won't miss today's France and european civilization, actually I'll enjoy seeing it destroyed for I hate what it has become, I'll just miss their History and past achievements, all in vain. Islam is one giant civilization erasing engine for arab identity. We'll just meet the berbers in the garbage heap of mankind. Farewell.
2. War
Personally, I think this alternative is at least as likely as the above Eurabia scenario. It also contains several sub-scenarios, partly depending upon when the eventual war starts, and partly on whether there is still some Western pride and resistance left in Europe underneath the self-loathing and Multiculturalism:
The Pakistanization of Europe
Muslims arent numerous enough to control the entire continent. In the event of war, there will be mutual ethnic cleansing and Muslims will seize parts of Western Europe. For instance, a belt stretching from parts of Germany via Belgium and Holland to France, but maybe even regions within certain nation states. All of Europe will not be lost, but some parts will, and many others will be deeply damaged by the fighting. Many of our cultural treasures will burn. How things will go from there is difficult to predict. Perhaps this new Pakistan in the heart of Europe will be the source of constant instability and the staging ground for Jihad incursions into infidel areas, just as Pakistan is to India now. Perhaps we will see a slow reconquest of this area, possibly taking generations or even centuries. Muslim de facto control of hundreds of French nuclear warheads will make the situation a lot more dangerous.
Of course, it could be more than one Muslim region. Kosovo and in part Bosnia are functioning as Islamic bridgeheads in Europe at this moment. There could be several mini-Pakistans created all over the place. In fact present day Kosovo walks, talks and looks like a mini-Pakistan. The zones in France sound suspiciously like Muslim mohallas in India although the situation is not as bad as in France.
Very likely at least as an initial stage; in fact, according to René Marchand's book, it was the "leopard spots" project of the jihadists overtly planning the conquest of Europe as explained to him by one of them in the late 90's.
Reconquista - The Second Expulsion of the Moors
Muslims strike too early, before they are ready to seize control over major chunks of Europe. They overestimate their own power, and underestimate the strength that is still left in Europe. It will start, as these things always do, before anyone is ready. Everyone, the Islamists, the proto-dhimmis, the neo-nationalists, the sleepwalking middle class, thinks they have more time than they do. It may start more or less by accident, like WWI, through the act of a fringe player unaware of the forces involved or the stakes of the game. Once a full-blown civil war starts in one country, it can, and probably will, spread to other countries. Given the European Unions borderless nature, it is unlikely that war will be limited to one nation only. This will create a domino effect, and Muslims will be expelled from Europe yet again, after major bloodshed and millions of dead across the continent. This will result in the collapse of the EU. The Arab world will support the Muslims and will prolong the war, but they wont win it.
That's Guillaume Faye's favored romantic theory/wish; for thoses who understand french, check his famous book "The colonization of Europe" (.pdf download) here or here
Cultures collide: Muslim immigrants will be expelled from Europe unless they reverse the growing perception of them as a social threat
The Muslims refused to assimilate. They were expelled. This was the story in Europe 400 years ago. We are watching the sequel today. In the clash of cultures between secular Europeans and extremist Muslims, there can ultimately be no compatibility or compromise, only loss by one side or the other of the absolute values it holds dear. European capitulation on European soil, where they remain the dominant majority, is unlikely.
Global Civil War
Europe has been the primary staging ground for one cold and two hot world wars. It could become a major battlefield in an Islamic or Multicultural world war, too. A world war is already simmering, with Muslims clashes against Russia, Europe, Israel, China, India, the USA and Southeast Asia. Once the fighting starts in Europe, it could spread outside the continent and ignite a world war. This is the scenario of global civil war.
3. Western Rebirth in Europe
We should discuss the possibility of whether the Islamic threat will force the West to rethink its values and regain its strength. Can this be done, and how would this take place? Is it possible to avoid both major war and Eurabia or is this wishful thinking by now? The growth of Eurabia is closely tied to the growth of the EU. Perhaps we could derail Eurabia by dismantling the EU? This would require that Europe regain her old, cultural and religious dynamic and repel Islam. Just as Islam isnt the cause of Europes current weakness, but rather a secondary infection, it could have the unforeseen and ironic effect of saving Europe from herself. By quite literally putting a dagger at Europes throat, the Islamic world will force Europeans to renew themselves or die. Europe will go through a turbulent period of painful, but necessary revival, and will arrive chastened on the other side.
Sadly, as it will be bloody, perhaps like on other, I think this scenario will be the one to play out:
A world war is already simmering, with Muslims clashes against Russia, Europe, Israel, China, India, the USA and Southeast Asia. Once the fighting starts in Europe, it could spread outside the continent and ignite a world war. This is the scenario of global civil war.
It seems insane that the Islamists believe that they can take on all of these countries at one time, but clear they do think that and they are attempting it. That's why I feel certain we will see this scenario play out. The final outcome is uncertain.
#3
What evidence do they have to suggest the West won't roll over for them? Why shouldn't they try, when they are winning in so many places, by default?
#4
I still hope and believe the derogatorily refered to 'proles' in the article will rise to fill the moral, intellectual and good sense vacuum left by the elites.
We shall see.
BTW, I am/was a big fan of Fjiordman. He was a must read for me. I regret his leaving the blogosphere almost as much as Steven Den Beste's.
#7
What evidence do they have to suggest the West won't roll over for them?
I have said previously that the reason I believe will have a global civil war is because the same mindset that infects those "over there" are the same who are our own "liberal elites" and dispossessed. It's all about blame, victimization and a baseless sense of superiority and an inability to step outside the herd zone for the fear of being alienated. Basically they are cowards who will always side with the closest bully willing to make them feel big.
It's not so much that they will be unable to admit they were wrong, despite the fact that Islam is the antithesis of everything that they claimed to be so superior for championing - but they are terrified to stray from the herd.
I think Islamists and anti-Americans overestimate their support and ability to make it happen here in the US to any degree that really matters - but they will make it happen to a degree.
Conspiracy theory page from Al Jizz, feel free to explore to get a view from the other side...
Note that they don't even pretend to blame an US "neo-con" (wink, wink) inner-job for 9/11, nope, it's the mossad, with its dancing-in-the-street agents, plain and simple.
Remember, that is supposedly the outlet for middle class, educated Moderate Muslims(tm), not Al Manar...
What kills me is the fact that al jizz made its reputation by being the favored outlet of the testimonies of the hijackers, of OBL's Pr (including the "I dood it and I glad about it"),...
That the arabo-muslim psyche can simultaneously blame the jooos for 9/11, and laud the Lions Of Islam(tm) for having struck the infidels is just mind boogling.
But, then again, while there was *recorded* dancing in the street/car horns concerto/ululating... all over the muslim world, including here in France, to rejoice for the WTC racist massacre, that they can project this by reusing the "dancing mossad agents" card seems to indicate some kind of problem with reality here.
Perhaps the people who say that islam truly is a schizophrenic civilization are right.
IMHO, this kind of conspiracy theory is a weapon, a psy-op campaign, aimed as much as shielding them and presenting them as the "true victims" (cf. the "upcoming genocide of muslims") than weakening the resolve of the ennemy by fomenting dissent. In that regard, conspiracy theorists are hostile agents, cf. Thierry Meyssan's Grand Theory being propped up by Gulf money (and possibly by the french secret services in their influence war against the despised anglo-saxons, as implied by disgruntled former associates in his Réseau Voltaire).
The Mexican government has condemned a tough new immigration law passed in the US state of Georgia on Monday. Presidential spokesman Ruben Aguilar said the legislation discriminated against Mexicans and that diplomats would monitor how it was applied. The law, which will take effect next year, prevents illegal immigrants from receiving many social services. It will also require police and employers to report undocumented workers to the Immigration Service.
The signing of the legislation comes amid deadlock in the US Congress about how to deal with illegal immigration, as well as nationwide protests by worried Latino groups. "The referred legislation incurs discriminatory acts against the Mexican population and those of Mexican origin," Mr Aguilar said. "It is a partial measure that fails to resolve the complex phenomenon of immigration between Mexico and the United States in an integral manner."
Since becoming Mexico's president in 2000, Vicente Fox has been pressing for reforms that would allow more Mexicans to work legally in the US.
Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue, who signed the bill, said it was intended to ensure that everyone who lives in Georgia abides by the laws there. "It is our responsibility to ensure that our famous Georgia hospitality is not abused, that our taxpayers are not taken advantage of and that our citizens are protected," Mr Perdue. "I want to make this clear: we are not, Georgia's government is not, and this bill is not anti-immigrant," Gov Perdue said.
The law, which will take effect in July 2007, will also impose prison terms for human trafficking and limit the services commercial companies can provide to illegal immigrants. BBC correspondents say the move has come at a difficult time in the US, BUT NOT IN GEORGIA as there have been country-wide protests over a federal immigration law currently being debated in the Senate.
"It is a punitive bill," said the president of the Georgia Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, Sara Gonzalez. "This is a very complicated issue, and I don't see any good coming out of this." .... for lawbreakers that is.
There are an estimated 11 million undocumented illegal allien workers in the US.
Worse than Watergate? High crimes and misdemeanors justifying the impeachment of George W. Bush, as increasing numbers of Democrats in Washington hope, and, sotto voce, increasing numbers of Republicansincluding some of the president's top lieutenantsnow fear? Leaders of both parties are acutely aware of the vehemence of anti-Bush sentiment in the country, expressed especially in the increasing number of Americansnearing fifty percent in some pollswho say they would favor impeachment if the president were proved to have deliberately lied to justify going to war in Iraq.
#4
Yes, let's impeach the President. He is, after all, the Anti-Christ. The fly the Left Wing seems to be overlooking in this particular ointment is that when this happens, you don't get a do-over on the election - the Vice President moves up a notch.
I can see it now: the Evil Chainey(tm) motoring around the White House lawn on a spanking new Cat D9, brandishing a small gauge shotgun, hunting for his enemies. Plus, being a hard-headed businessman with experience in big international projects, he's just the guy to bomb the crap out of a certain wacky mullocracy. Yee Haw! Bring it on.
The New York Times reports that Bolton will offer a Security Council resolution tomorrow that will publicly identify four Sudanese individuals responsible for atrocities in Darfur and possibly force a vote on whether the panel would impose sanctions on them. In a telephone interview, Bolton said "We've been pushing sanctions for years, and the effort was always to make it clear to the government in Khartoum that there would be individual consequences."
The Times adds that the Ambassador decided on the move after learning that China and Russia had objected to action against the four individuals. Bolton said he was surprised by the response of China and Russia, despite the two countries' traditional reluctance to endorse sanctions, because these were aimed at individuals rather than countries.
Bolton continues to expose the UN Security Council for what it is. A bad joke.
#1
Nice work Bolton but your times is up. The UN is beyond help, we at the Rant are re-assigning you as the Director of CIA. BTW, we've change the wiring diagram, Ponte now reports to you. Congratulations, you report 0730 on Monday.
#1
The country's transport minister resigned earlier this month to accept responsibility for a scandal involving funds earmarked for road construction and infrastructure development but embezzled and reportedly used for gambling.
So will Vietnam be changing it's name to, I dunno,...Illinois?
Posted by: ed ||
04/18/2006 16:51 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Does Danny Glover know about this yet. He'll be purty pissed off. Maybe Hollywood can do hands around Vietnam as a symbolic gesture in support of Communism.
#4
China is working hard to exert its influence over all of SE Asia - will say again that America needs to make peace, rapport, and to get together wid still anti-Everybody unified Vietnam, and before the Chicoms succeed in making anti-China Vietnam/Hanot Govt. into another un-annexed Chinese province-peon state like starving North Korea, and Tibet. Pro-Chicom armed Maoists are striking all along the East and South Asia periphery, from Bangladesh to Thailand to India to Malaysia [Red Star White Turban]. China is using as much capitalist $$$ as it can to succeed in replacing Commie Vietnam's anti-China old guard and pol-establishment wid pro-China elements. *Iranian Empire in ME-EURABIA? = Chicom Empire in Asia-Pacific + 1/2 of CONUS.
Will the Democrats SAVE Iran!!!!! Will Democrats stop war on Iran? When I saw this title first thought was pitiful their last hope is the Dems then second thought was of anger and shame in the fact that this is not just a fringe freeko party they one of the two major parties. And people wonder why our enemy thinks we are weak and ripe for the plucking.
I don't have much good to say about the Dems, but I think the Medes and the Persians are putting too many eggs in the antiwar basket, just like Sammy did. Events in Iran are coming to a head quicker than I thought they would, and the Dems may very well see the train rushing down on them when it's too late to get on board. There will always be an antiwar wing within the party, opposed to military action of all kinds to include repelling invasions, but it's becoming increasingly hard to pass off Iran as anything other than a bloodthirsty regime headed by nutcases. I believe the Dems who count will come around, and they may do so abruptly...
I'm afraid I don't have that much faith in the Dhimmicrats. I don't see the moderate, sensible Dhimmis as people willing to take a stand this election year, especially as long as Howlin' Howie holds out the slimmest possibility that the Dems could re-take the House and commence impeachment proceedings. I think the Mad Mullahs see that too -- in fact, they're counting on it.
"Recently, it has been reported that U.S. troops are conducting military operations in Iran," wrote Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Admitted Communist and this guy actually ran for Democratic President WTF is wrong with that picture
Al Sharpton ran for president, too. In fact, I think he outpolled Kucinich. That hardly makes either of them an epicenter of political thought...
... close to the epicenter of political shame, however, if only they could nudge Cynthia McKinney out of the way ...
Ranking Democrat on the House Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations, last Friday. "If true, it appears that you have already made the decision to commit U.S. military forces to a unilateral conflict with Iran, even before direct or indirect negotiations with the government of Iran had been attempted, without UN support and without authorization from the U.S. Congress".
Given Iranian involvement in the internal politix in Iraq and the shrieking hysteria and venomous threats of their president, I'd call most things we do to Iran short of nuking Teheran reasonable and prudent. There's nothing in our constitution that says anything about UN support, and responding to Iranian bad boyz in defense of U.S. forces falls well within the CinC's responsibilities...
Facing pressure at home and abroad over the possibility of initiating another devastating war in the region, President Bush claimed yesterday that recent reports, all revealing plans by Washington involving a military strike against the Islamic Republic are just "wild speculation". Bushs weakness is he can't talk worth anything. He couldnt sell a gold bar if it was priced FREE.
Regardless of Bush's shortcomings, the "possibility of initiating another devastating war in the region" says nothing about who's going to get devastated, does it?
It's all going to be 'wild speculation' until the day it happens.
Last week, a report by Seymour Hersh Another well known traitor Seditionist can someone tell me why these guys are not in prison somewhere?
They don't have to be jailed. This is the U.S.A. where anyone has the right to be as stoopid as he/she/it pleases, with very few exceptions even fewer of which involve politix. Nobody but writers for al Jizz and Iranian politicians takes Seymour seriously. He's as consistently out in left field as anyone writing today, which is probably why the warning shot was leaked through him.
in the New Yorker, stated that, "one of the militarys initial option plans, as presented to the White House by the Pentagon this winter, calls for the use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, I can't imagine a scenario were a US pres would OK nukes short a WMD strike on the States. Bush damm sure dont have the sack to do it. Now if he was talking about Israel thats another story.
I don't idealize Israel any more than I do any other country. They've got their own internal constraints and they're not cowboys or heroes or even he-men, any more than Bush is. I doubt that when the balloon does go up with Iran we'll use tactical nukes but I don't know for sure anymore and I thought I did a month or two ago. More importantly, neither do the Medes and the Persians know for sure, which is the whole object of the exercise, isn't it?
such as the B61-11, against underground nuclear sites. One target is Irans main centrifuge plant, at Natanz, nearly two hundred miles south of Tehran. Natanz, which is no longer under IAEA safeguards, reportedly has underground floor space to hold fifty thousand centrifuges, and laboratories and workspaces buried approximately seventy-five feet beneath the surface. That number of centrifuges could provide enough enriched uranium for about twenty nuclear warheads a year."
Such things are of small concern to the Dems. What's important is that there's an election coming up. They've been lining up on the side of winning elections rather than on the side of national interest since Kerry got trounced, usually without even bothering to hide the fact. They're being stoopid as a party, but that still leaves the real world problem of Iran, which isn't a matter of local or even national politix.
They're jonesing for impeachment proceedings, as if they're going to get rid of Bush, Cheney, Rice et al before 2008.
Also Congressman Peter DeFazio Havent heard of this traitor yet new name to me wonder what party he is in anyone wanna bet Democrat of course
I don't think DeFazio's a traitor, just another middle-of-the-herd politician about to do something stoopid...
(D-OR) plans to submit a resolution "expressing the sense of the Congress that the President cannot initiate military action against Iran without congressional authorization" soon. He also plans to send his letter to other House members to get their signatures.
Good idea. Then everyone will be on record, won't they?
GWB should offer to sign it, even though it's a non-binding resolution. That way he'll acknowledge not only that Congress has the power to initiate hostilities, but also the responsibility.
Citing Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution ("The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into actual Service of the United States..."), DeFazio wrote, "We are writing to remind you that you are constitutionally bound to seek congressional authorization before launching any preventive military strikes against Iran." That way we can debate until hell freezes over and at the same time tell the Iranians in detail what we are planning so they can get well prepared like the Iraqis in 03. Thats right the insurgency wasnt planned ahead of time or weapons hid all over or anything and ohh yeah those WMD were not moved RIGHT
There were similar moves in the run-up to GWI, as well as to GWII. They pretty much forgotten now. One reason for that is that the people who were pushing them want them forgotten.
DeFazio condemned the repetitive intentional misinterpretation of the clause with the aim of using it to justify unilateral military actions by U.S. presidents without authorization of Congress. "Contrary to your Administration's broad reading, nothing in the history of the "Commander-in-Chief" clause suggests that the authors of the provision intended it to grant the Executive Branch the authority to engage U.S. forces in military action whenever and wherever it sees fit without any prior authorization from Congress," writes DeFazio. "The founders of our country intended this power to allow the President to repel sudden attacks and immediate threats, not to unilaterally launch, without congressional approval, large-scale preventive military actions against foreign threats that are likely years away from materializing," DeFazio adds.
Of course, he could also use the authority to respond to the extant Iranian incursions into Iran, both through proxies like Tater and the presence of Hezbollah and the Basij within Iraq.
Liberal Democrats strongly opposed the Bush administrations decision to go to war in Iraq, and now theyre trying to stop the government from committing the same offense, but, according to analysts, theres a fat chance President Bush would listen. for our childrens sake I pray he dont listen.
I think military action will come, and I think it'll come in response to an overt Iranian military action against us or against Israel, possibly against the Brits despite the fact that Tony's determined to stay out of it. The ayatollahs are working themselves up to something big, and they think they have the resources to carry it off.
Political experts suggest that a war on Iran is imminent, given the U.S. deteriorating situation in Iraq, which would allow Iran intervene to support the country Shias ... What they arent doing that NOW. More like it would divert those supplies to homeland defense. Kind of like the whole fight em over their so we dont have to fight em over here strategy but localized to the theater.
We wouldn't put up with Iranian troops in Iraq. That'd be the trigger to throw them out, and then to destroy their home bases but not necessarily with ground forces. They're either forgetting about the air war, or they've got a lot of misplaced faith in Russian antiaircraft systems that didn't work for Sammy.
And I take exception to the remark, 'deteriorating situation'. It's deteriorating for the jihadis and the Sunni hard boyz, and it's going to deteriorate in the near future for Tatar, but for us?
... also with the near launch of Iran's Bourse that threatens the U.S. hegemony and the once strong American economy. Back to the old its all about OIL conspiracies
That's not an "all about oil" cliche. That's a delusion of adequacy, thinking that Iran's stock market is going to topple "U.S. hegemony."
Wonder if the Iranian Bourse is priced in Euros?
The war in Iraq is viewed by most of the U.S. Democrats as the governments biggest mistake. The U.S. launched Iraq war on the incorrect false pretext that the toppled leader of the country possessed weapons of Mass Destruction and had ties to Al Qaeda network, which they U.S. blames for September 11 attacks. Maybe those Dems should spend some time reading the translated documents that is showing just how tied Saddam was to AQ down to financing AQ allies (Abu Sayaf) and meeting with ranking AQ months before 9-11
The antiwar wing of the Dems regards the Iraq war as their big opportunity. But they've consistently been fighting Vietnam over and over again, as though there's never been another war, anywhere or at any time.
Now the U.S. government is using the same scenario, to launch a military strike against Iran, claiming that the Islamic Republic is developing a nuclear weapons program. I guess they thought we were kidding when we said the that Afghanistan and Iraq were but some of many phases in the WOT.
I don't think they thought we were kidding. We're fighting against an enemy, and there are strategists and tacticians on each side. We're witnessing move and countermove. If Iran falls, it will take out the center of Shiite terrorism. Syria falls, Hezbollah's left naked, Paleo Islamic Jihad falls, and all the regional Hezbollahs evaporate. There's no more funding for them because there's not a comparable Shiite state until the southern part of Iraq is back on its feet. That's why they're fighting the proxy war in Iraq so hard, because they're caught between Iraq and Afghanistan. If both states were to become stable democracies Iran would be physically as well as ideologically isolated.
#1
We all know Iran, North Korea, and Cuba, etc. are "lines in the sand", Neutral Zones which for the Left were not to be crossed by the USA during the Cold War unless war per se was desired to be fought against Russia-China and the Commie Bloc nations. Left-based Socialism and Communism = Islam/Radical Islam > both ascribe themselves as "WAR PARTY" or "WAR IDEOLOGY", with unilateral and unconditional right to take by force iff need be, thus FOR ONE TO BELIEVE THAT THE US DEMS-LEFT IS INDEED CONTROLLED BY THE FAR/RADICAL/ULTRA-LEFT, BUT SOMEHOW IS ERGO NOT FOR WAR, ESPEC WAR AGAINST THEIR OWN NATION, IS LUDICROUS. It is the Left itself which has argued that iff democratic America does NOT accept Socialism and subornment to OWG vv Year 2015-2020, the Left reserves its unilateral right to use any and all means necessary, including global nuke war and armed violence, to force America to accept the same. However, we are dealing wid Lefties, and Lefties do give a rat's arse whom gets the blame for anything, esepc when its their fault or their doing - IOW, the Left will not admit to anything, iff to anything at all, unless its power is already absolute, deeply entrenched, and no longer challengable or capable of being removed except by the very same armed force, violence, anarchies, and wilful sectarianism it rode to power on. Until then, the Left uses THIRD PARTIES AND PC, TERTIARY EXCUSES AND ALIBIS. THE RINO CINO AGENDA-LESS POST-2000/CLINTON CLINTON-LED DEMOCRATS ARE NOT HERE TO STOP ANY WAR AGAINT IRAN, NORTH KOREA, TAIWAN, OR ANYWHERE - THEIR JOB IS TO SURVIVE ANY NEW 9-11'S, BLAME THE GOP, AMERICA, WESTERNISM, AND DEMOCAPITALISM FOR EVERYTHING, AND PC LEAD AMERICA UNTO ANTI-SOVEREIGN NWO, SWO/CWO, AND OWG WHERE AMERICA IS JUST ONE WEAK NATION AMONG MANY OTHERS. AMERICA > JUST ANOTHER CUBA AND NORTH KOREA. Once free America is gone, the WEst is held to fall next - the glitch for the Lefties and Commies is once America-West are gone, ANY RAESON D'ENTRE FOR PC "NORMAL/PEACEFUL RELATIONS" BETWEEN SECULARISTS AND ISLAMISTS WILL BE GONE. ALL BETS WILL BE OFF - THE LEFTIES AND MUSLIMS WILL SLAUGHTER EACH OTHER FOR WHATS LEFT OF THE WORLD.
Welcome PLANET OF THE APES, Welcome giant man-eating bugs and MOTHRA, welcome MORLOCS, etal. Fascist Arrogant Penis-centric Male Brutes in Iran and NK beat the war drums, invoke God and make obscene warmongering rants, Motherly Lefties-Commies are quiet as crickets, as quiet and reserved as, well, women, and plan the PEACE-TIME holocausts, revolutions, gulags and bloody purges.
As any Madonna fan or CIA-INTEL Psychic knows, or should know, "POLITICS AS USUAL" IN AMERICA = AMERIKKA ENDED THE FASCIST = HALF-A-COMMIE DAY BILL CLINTON STOLE HIS FIRST POTUS ELEX.
#3
DeFazio wrote, "We are writing to remind you that you are constitutionally bound to seek congressional authorization before launching any preventive military strikes against Iran."
Geez, I must have a bad copy of the Constitution, I can't find that line anywhere.
#4
Moderators: I probably should have not used the Traitor verb age more appropriate would be Seditionist.
I agree Sheenan and all her type have full right to be as radical as they want but when you are a Congressman, Senator, Political Leader or even American Media representative there is a certain responsibility that comes with such position. Some of the wild statements and conspiracy put forth by people in positions of responsibility are extremely damaging and outright Sedition. Aljazeera often has these people on so much so that today they even think such people will save them.
The point I am saying is giving aid and comfort to the enemy is Sedition so by that giving our enemy the impression that if they can just hold on a little longer or just till the next election is giving comfort and prolonging a war that is costing the US people in Blood and Treasure. We are a nation and whether you agree or not with a war effort in the run up to such ones we are engaged their should be solidarity portrayed at least publicly if for no other reason than the soldiers fighting a war of wills with a enemy who is being invigorated by such as*hat partisan politics.
I have no grudge with the Democrats and no particular love for the Republicans (both are thieves and neither really represent the majority of Americans) but I have no time for those who dont love this nation. One of the only required jobs of the Federal Government is protection of our little box here from foreigners and keeping them from meddling in our box.
3,000 dead in one day is definite deserving of WAR personally I was pissed in 93 when Clinton did nothing in response to what would have been worse than 9-11 if the bombers had just parked at the right pillar (pure luck saved thousands that day and no retribution meant the threat returned to finish the job and well 9-11). The Democrats seem to me unwilling to make the hard decisions involving war. War is not PC it is ugly it is brutal it is horrible and how you win is irrelevant the one does win rights the history so that is all that matters WHO WINS.
Bush I believe would have insane high approval polls and the war would be rolling full steam if Bush could just quite letting the Media (biased) be in charge of rallying the people. Bush should be giving speeches regularly demanding prime time airtime leveling with the people. Hell if it was me I would take the worst reporters on the Media and take that channels #1 show and do my speech in that slot leaving a good 15minutes at the end so the audience would see the beginning of one and end of other. Hit those pocket books and they will learn to do their freaking job that American news networks did in WW2 support their home nation in a time of WAR.
On Iran I do believe we are going to do what must be done after all what does Bush got to lose what he wont win the next election? And the Republican Party right now will get slaughtered if they try to run the midterms on domestic issues Budget PORK and of course the dems are no better but their base expects such from them were as Repubs are supposed to be fiscally responsible. So what would they lose if the debate turned into WOT Iran phase good or bad.
I dont idealize Israel and understand they have constraints like US if not worse but they just dont have the legs if you will to conduct a sustained long-range air campaign into Iran. And the dreams of a 6day Desert Fox operation is just that Dreams. The Iranians are well dug in and dispersed not to mention intelligence will take time to track down all needed targets with follow-ups. The Israelis are stuck in a situation were their option is either wait until Iran gets enough nukes to decimate them or preempt them with a nuclear strike decimating Iran. Personally if I was a Israeli pres (Sharon I think would have done it or Netanyahu) I would pull the trigger holding just enough reserve nukes to burn every Arab capitol as deterrent then resign and put myself forward for war crimes. This would lessen the backlash to some point although it still would be horrific from the UN sanctions. But they w
#3
This is obviously true. I can't buy a gallon of whale oil to light my house at any price! Why, oh why didn't we sign Kyoto?!?!?! Damn you, G. Bush!
Posted by: Mark E. ||
04/19/2006 12:40 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Don't you love the fact that all of the brilliant writers who push global warming and all of this other flat earth crap will one day look equally foolish.
#8
Actually I knew a guy who bought several hundred gallons of WHALE OIL TRANSMISSION FLUID before it became illegal. He's dead of old age for awhile so I don't know if anybody still has it.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
The New York Times reports that Bolton will offer a Security Council resolution tomorrow that will publicly identify four Sudanese individuals responsible for atrocities in Darfur and possibly force a vote on whether the panel would impose sanctions on them. In a telephone interview, Bolton said "We've been pushing sanctions for years, and the effort was always to make it clear to the government in Khartoum that there would be individual consequences."
