Article

2003-02-03 Axis of Evil

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 Fred Pruitt 2003-02-03 10:21 am|| || Front Page|| [2 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 The anonymous poster is bloodthirsty. Also, he/she is correct. Even if we dont use nuclear weapons, bagdad should have to choose between unconditional surrender or a dresden-updated-60-years style fire bombing.

As for the executions in egypt - dead terrorists are sufficiently neutralized.

Posted by flash91 2/3/2003 11:52:13 AM|| 2/3/2003 11:52:13 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Iran's top naval officer warned Sunday that Washington would pay a heavy price if it ever attacked the Islamic Republic. "If the United States attacks Iran, it will suffer heavy losses ... because we know its weak points," Rear Admiral Abbas Mohtaj was quoted as saying by Kayhan newspaper. "Iranian naval forces have enormous capabilities and we are able to build missiles with a range of 1,500 kilometers," Mohtaj said.
Gee, Abbas, I thought those were banned? Do you guys really believe this stuff, or do you get promoted by how tough you can talk?

Posted by Steve 2003-02-03 10:36:47|| 2003-02-03 10:36:47|| Front Page Top

#3 I believe that the inspectors should take a look at Rear Admiral Abbas fleet. Not that I care about his missles, I'd just like to know more about their boats power plant. Do they use Johnsons of Evinrudes, and do they also come with a Trolling Motor.

Posted by Bobbing4Kittens 2003-02-03 11:01:33|| 2003-02-03 11:01:33|| Front Page Top

#4 The notion that the U.S. is morally incapable of sustaining war after taking large losses, is central to Islamist jihad doctrine. And they view their own willingness to sacrifice their own lives as a strength. In the Iraqi war plans, which were leaked to al-Ahram, and published last Aug. 22, it was disclosed that the Iraqis planned mass attacks on American troop landings in order to prevent troop concentrations. Also, the plan involves use of weapons of mass destruction against these landings. It appears that the intent would be to launch WMD from civil centers, to dare quid pro quo attacks which would kill civilians. The handful of realists within the Bush administration are well aware that Islamania is primed to deny the reality of any use of WMD by co-religists, on any evidentiary basis, and to agitate against proportionate retaliation. It is my opinion that the adoption of limited-war means in response to the 911 atrocities, is folly. The costly use of smart bombs in Afghanistan, as a means to limit civilian casualties, completely backfired, as did the forcing of armistice arrangements on the Northern Alliance victors. The inevitable global instability inherent to the self-defeating practice of limited-war options, within Bush's declared "ten year" counter-terror plan, have already produced huge and unnecessary economic losses equivalent to trillions of dollars. The nuclear blackmail option should have been exercised immediately after 911, in order to force liquidation of the entire global jihadi movement. For example: the government of Egypt should have been pressured to conduct mass executions of its jihadi (Muslim Brotherhood) prison population (20,000). The indulgence of jihadism, has placed the Ikhwanis in a such a position of strength, that al-Azhar clerics have just fatwahed an Islamic obligation to develop WMD. In Saudi Arabia, the Bush family patrons have incorporated al-Qaeda clerics - al-Awdah and al-Hawali for example - within the official Wahabi culture.

It is axiomatic: the counter-terror campaign will only be won when every jihadi is dead, including numerous members of America's own Muslim Students Association. I predict that within two weeks of the Iraq war, Americans will become disposed to annihilate this mortal enemy, in spite of the President's propensity for subsidizing the enemy in Pakistan, and elsewhere, and fraternizing with them - CAIR, ISNA, ICNA, AMC, etc - in America.

Posted by Anonymous 2003-02-03 11:39:06|| 2003-02-03 11:39:06|| Front Page Top

#5 The anonymous poster is bloodthirsty. Also, he/she is correct. Even if we dont use nuclear weapons, bagdad should have to choose between unconditional surrender or a dresden-updated-60-years style fire bombing.

As for the executions in egypt - dead terrorists are sufficiently neutralized.

Posted by flash91 2003-02-03 11:52:13|| 2003-02-03 11:52:13|| Front Page Top

#6 I agree with Anonymous. Eventually we will break out of the reluctance to actually see the blood of our enemies. If we don't, we won't win the war against them. Time enough to feel really, really sorry and wish things could have been different when they're all dead.

Posted by Fred 2003-02-03 12:22:01|| 2003-02-03 12:22:01|| Front Page Top

#7 This thing can end 2 ways:
1. We win a few battles, and new leaders emerge to reform Islam from within to the point where we can have peace.
2. We win by anhilating them.
"We lose and accept Sharia" is not going to happen.

As a Christian, I am hoping against hope to avoid scenario 2. I get especially frustrated with the "peace" crowd -- many of whom are christian clergy members -- because their actions make scenario 2 increasingly likely.

Getting the WMD away from Sammy, et al is the only hope we have to avoid having to commit what amounts to genocide to ensure our safety.

Posted by JAB 2003-02-03 13:25:51|| 2003-02-03 13:25:51|| Front Page Top

#8 Like I said before, peace, but not peace at all costs. If Saddam, or any other whacko who wants WMD isn't dealt with right now, the problems in the future will be exponentially higher. To the peace crowd: how much do you think it will cost, in terms of money and other resources, to protect your ass from a nuclear bomb carried in the trunk of a car. And the technology and means to do this, are only going to get better.

And to those who say "..double standard! why not N.Korea???": not all whackos are created equal. N.Korea is China's little child. It's only allowed to misbehave to a certain point.

Posted by Rw 2003-02-03 14:35:45|| 2003-02-03 14:35:45|| Front Page Top

#9 Flash91:
I am not "bloodthirsty." Over 50,000 jihadis were trained in the production and use of WMD in the Afghan genocide camps. Prior to 911, I accessed the "Islamway" website (an ISNA/Jamaat-i-Islami front which is run by American Pakistanis), and downloaded numerous comments from American Muslims who had attended the genocide camps and were recruiting fellow Muslims to do the same on their vacations. Muslim Students Association members still agitate on behalf of jihad-genocide, and do so at public expense at colleges across America, every Friday (jumuah) afternoon. I have monitored some of these, surreptitiously. It is essential that jihad-life be cheapened. It is not immoral to kill a mortal enemy.

Posted by Anonymous 2003-02-03 14:57:15|| 2003-02-03 14:57:15|| Front Page Top

#10 These type of comments are exactly why I have maintained since 9/11 that this nation needs a forceful response to terror.

I don't want this country to devolve into a Northern Irish situation where citizens arm themselves to kill each other because a fretful/apathetic central government refuses to address the problem squarely.

Hold your fire, guys, until you give the US gov't a chance! It's their constitutional obligation and our only opportunity to preserve the society we love.

Posted by JDB 2003-02-03 22:42:36|| 2003-02-03 22:42:36|| Front Page Top

00:20 Anonymous
22:49 JDB
22:42 JDB
22:28 JDB
22:27 Flora
22:15 JDB
22:07 JDB
21:12 Fred
20:53 Alaska Paul
20:24 Anonymous
19:08 Ptah
18:54 Ptah
16:46 mojo
15:46 Frank G
15:35 Scott
15:21 Steve
15:00 Alaska Paul
14:57 Anonymous
14:39 Alaska Paul
14:35 Rw
14:25 tu3031
14:11 Scooter McGruder
14:10 Chuck
14:02 Scooter McGruder