The Left Does Not Want The Fight

Tom DeLay Continues Making Sense

By Erick Posted in Comments (16) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

From DeLay's interview with Neil Cavuto:

DELAY: They don’t want to fight this war on terrorism. If they did, Bill Clinton would have led us into the war on terrorism and against Islamic fanatics. Their world view is, “Can’t we all get along? Surely we can talk our way out of this.” And so when we are attacked, their first reaction is to recoil, and say, “This is really horrible. It’s too harsh and you can’t go after these wonderful people that just killed a bunch of Americans. You’ve got to just find a leader here or there, put him in jail,” instead of understanding, as the President understands, that we are at war. We are at war all over the world and you have to go get these terrorists and either put them in a cell or a cemetery. That’s all they know. And we have to do it with overwhelming force. That’s something that I criticize the administration for right now.

CAVUTO: Yeah.

DELAY: You want to get rid of the insurgents in Iraq? Overwhelming force. Israel shouldn’t just let a few troops into Lebanon every now and then. They ought to call up the entire army and have overwhelming force in Lebanon.

Well said Congressman.

« BREAKING: Bank Collapses. Feds cite Sen. Chuck Schumer as "immediate cause" of collapseComments (14) | LA-02: Rep. Jefferson draws much oppositionComments (8) »
The Left Does Not Want The Fight 16 Comments (0 topical, 16 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

The Left is about FEELINGS--not logic. And, I’m sure it FEELS awful to kill ANY human being, even "by proxy" as the Left would say, even if that human being is a viscous bloodthirsty murderer who’s well-armed and determined to kill you first. A terrorist is a human being that somehow got their mind twisted, so at some level, you can almost pity them.

But, sane people (not the Left) that are able to use logic (not the Left,) and with an instinct for self-preservation (not the Left) realize that killing is needed sometimes. Sometimes talking doesn't work. Sometimes talking can't create peace. Sometimes peace only follows a military victory. Now is one of those times.

With said Overwhelming Force, and then refocus your main attention to the next province. All reports suggest that its working pretty well in Iraq. Going a little slower than some people may like, but much faster than we have any right to expect...

"Always be honest with yourself even if you are honest with no one else...
...It helps you keep track of your lies..."
--Myself

to understand why the Islamic terrorists want to kill us. They are under the delusion that if we are just "nice" to them they will be happy and go away.

I don't know how many times I have asked people opposed to the Israeli conflict how Israel is supposed to negotiate peace with a group of people whose first and primary goal is to see them destroyed.

The is essentially the same issue the US and the West have with the Islamic terrorists and those that support them. These people don't want to live by "to each his own" they want to see the West, or at least its culture destroyed, and they want to install their own Islamic caliphate.

How do you make peace with that?

I am getting more and more to the point where I think the key to victory is to utterly defeat and subjugate the enemy. Sure it isn't politically correct, but I think political correctness gets you nowhere.

The core problem with Bush's "War on Terror" is that terrorism is an ideology and bullets are only good for killing people. We didn't defeat communism on the battlefield, we beat them by proving that capitalism was a better economic system. Iraq is a failure in the war on terror because with every civilian death, two more terrorists are born. I am not arguing that we should put down our arms and "just be nice to them". When we are attacked like we were on 9/11, terrorist should know that we will respond, as we did in Afghanistan. But when we begin promoting democracy at the point of a gun, we loose all credibility. This has become painfully apparent with the current Israel/Lebanon conflict. Had we used the international support following 9-11 to push for a real solution to tensions in the Middle East, we would all be much safer today.

--
"In this day and age, you're not going to get a fair shake in the media" -- Lance Armstrong

-----------
Even those who learn from history are surrounded by those doomed to repeat it.

from the preceding comments, there is little point in trying to engage partisans when they're throwing their cliches around. Look! There's Barbara Streisand! Let's pretend people cares what she thinks so we can make fun of them for that!

What joy it is to gaze from the shore at the heavy stress some other man is enduring! Lucretius.

You appear to have one of the shortest-term outlooks in our galaxy. Yes, we won last time by "proving that capitalism was a better economic system." In order to prove anything here, we first have to sweep one of the despots out of the way, then get rid of all the guys who want to be the next despot, and then begin constructing The Better Way.

Please look up the date of ratification of the U.S. Constitution. Then look up the date of the Declaration of Independence. Do the math. And then, please, stop expecting tectonic events to complete during the commercial.

Drink Good Coffee. You can sleep when you're dead.

We can't kill ideas with bullets. Sixty million people died as a result of WWII. A major part of the world was in ruins. Yet there are still Nazis. There are still practitioners of Bushido. Oh my!

We can't kill ideas. On the other hand, we can make it clear that the cost of promoting those ideas in an agressive way will be SO great that the idiots who need to buy into those ideas will not take agressive action.

And by the way, just what would a ...real solution to tensions in the Middle East... look like?

-----
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?

Real Bright and Shiny and Mirror-like and you could see it from the moon...

"Always be honest with yourself even if you are honest with no one else...
...It helps you keep track of your lies..."
--Myself

It is wrong to assume that only the left wants a change in the way we are fighting the war on terrorism. MANY of us on the right are saying the same thing.

Our soldiers move into a province and "take it", by then the insurgents have moved to another province, so we follow and "that it". They move somewhere else.

This cat and mouse fighting has been going on for three and a half years - and we are even worse off now than when we started. 2,600 soldiers dead. 20,000 wounded. Billions spent.

All the while we are waiting for them to "stand up" so we can "stand down". It is time to realize that the Iraqis can not "stand up" as long as they are hunkered down shooting each other!

This conservative says let's stop babysitting the Iraqis. These soldiers should be fighting the REAL war on terror in Afghanistan and strengthening our defenses here at home.

Clearwater Conservative

Maybe we should have enough forces to take both provinces? Could that be where we're going wrong?

"Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful people with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb." -- Calvin Coolidge

--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.

I know it's not an overnight process to train an army, however, it's been 3 1/2 years. It seems like the Iraqis are more concerned about killing each other, then starting a democracy.

Should we have stayed in Germany or Japan or South Korea?
2 years? 3 years? 5 years?

History tells us almost exactly how this is going to go. Sit back and let history take its course.

Elsewise get out there and Help move history along and speed things up...

"Always be honest with yourself even if you are honest with no one else...
...It helps you keep track of your lies..."
--Myself

about nine months to train an infantry soldier or Marine in the basics of combat.

An enlisted platoon leader in a combat unit is more like 18 months.

An NCO, about three years. A Staff NCO, five to seven years.

An officer corps, seven plus years.

And keep in mind that the Iraqi army - like every other army in the ME (except the Israelis), did not have a professional officer corps or anything resembling competent NCOs. The force structure of the US military is generally unknown in the region.

Note that the above is for an infantry corps and they are the easiest to train and get to a reasonable level of readiness. Add in the complexities of Intel and Combined Operations with coordinated Air/Sea/Ground and you just begin to scratch the surface.

-----
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?

 
Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)


©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service