Alarming News

February 25, 2007

Looks like I’m not the only one who loves Dick Cheney

Via Drudge:

*Rush Limbaugh says Dick Cheney is his hero

*Australians hold pro-Cheney rally

My own Cheney love is here.

Posted by Karol at 04:28 PM |
Technorati Tags:
Comments

Dick Cheney is not bad, but I ‘ve got even BETTER good news for you and millions more like you.
A new political party is being offered to the tens of millions of Americans who feel that the Republican party and the DemocRAT party have NOT lead them to achieve what they really want our government to do for them.
They want their borders secured and their immigration laws ENFORCED. They want tax reform-and they want it ASAP! They want much more effient, innovative and effective SMALLER government that gives them more bang for their hard-earned buck. They want Senate rules that do not allow and up or down vote for executive appointment to the federal judiciary changed to allow a constitutional up or down vote. They want their second amendment right to keep and BEAR arms VIGILANTLY protected! They believe America’s best and brightest days are YET to come! They yearn for REAL change that PRODUCES real results that truly satify them. And, they want it all RIGHT NOW!
The new party is called the ‘New Republican Party’ and can be further studied at my website. This party is what we, and millions of others like us, have all been searching for…but it has never existed before…until NOW!

Posted by: Denny at February 26, 2007 at 4:00 am

The 3000 dead Americans are not the reason you have failed in Iraq.
You have failed utterly in Iraq because you took away a system that was certainly brutal (although not that much worse than the norm for dictators and certainly no Hitler Stalin or Pol Pot) but was stable. Iraq is not that different from the former Yugoslavia; an artificial creation taking in groups with no real loyalty to or affinity with the state. They have centuries worth of squabbles that have lasted longer than America’s state existence. Saddam although a bastard (were his parents married btw?) was similar to Tito in that he was able to hold together a European cock up of a country. Don’t disagree he was a git about it, fact remains he did it. When you toppled Saddam you didn’t replace him with anything. You cannot take a country like Iraq and leave a power vaccuum and expect a rosy hollywoodesque ending. History is FULL of examples of this. Dictators don’t have a replacement lying around and when you remove them chaos invariably follows.
2. You have NO credibility in the Arab world whatsoever and its not just because of Israel. Egypt isn’t exactly popular and you have a well deserved reputation of waltzing in, causing chaos, taking what you want and then buggering off leaving the problem to somebody else.
3. 600000 dead Iraqis. Speaks for itself.
4. You have done next to nothing to persuade the average Iraqi that you really want him to have a nice comfortable existence a la beaver trip back to the fifties. His house is demolished, electricity and water problems. An insurgency that the local authourities and you are powerless to stop and your wonderful constitution is worth bugger all in a country like Iraq.
PS. Rush Limbaugh is a moron.

Posted by: Nick at February 26, 2007 at 8:55 am

Nick,
We have not failed in Iraq. The ending isn’t written yet. In fact, all indications are the “surge” is going well. You won’t read that in the NYT, but if you read what soldiers are writing, you will see.
Back away from the kool-aid. There’s no way on God’s green earth that 600,000 number is correct. It’s wrong just on the face of it, like the Lancet’s 200,000 number. That’s more than 300 people, day in, day out. No way.

Posted by: Eric at February 26, 2007 at 7:05 pm

I don’t read the New York Times or any other US Paper.
OK you disagree with 600,000 and even 200,000. what would say is a more realistic figure?
The ending may not have been fully written but the writing is on the wall and the ink is drying, and god thats an awful phrase. Iraq will descend into civil war if it hasnt already. If your troops are there it will happen more slowly but occur all the same.

Posted by: Nick at February 27, 2007 at 2:06 pm

Somebody doesn’t like Dick Cheney.

Posted by: Charles at February 27, 2007 at 7:26 pm

Nick, your writing is full of “awful phrases.”
“You cannot take a country like Iraq and leave a power vaccuum and expect a rosy hollywoodesque ending.”
Of course we can, we are, all of us, Hollywood after all.
You write in absurdities. The only way to speak to you is in absurdities.

Posted by: rcb at February 28, 2007 at 2:49 am

Please feel free to point out why I write in absurdities.
Or are you unable to actually do that?

Posted by: Nick at February 28, 2007 at 6:46 pm

Nick,
I would certainly put the number of civilian deaths due to voilence at under 50,000. Deaths from American violence probably far less than that. It’s pretty hard to know with any certitude, since the bad guys always report their losses as innocent women and children. The Lancet study, which was actually done by a university in Chicago, was a purely political document.
As for the people who take up arms against the US, as far as I’m concerned they don’t count. Five or five billion, I don’t care.
Actually, things have been going pretty well in the last couple weeks. The Kurds agreed to the partition of oil revenue. Al-Sadr ran to his masters in Iran and the Shiites don’t seem to be all that bothered that we’re taking out his thugs. With every arrest of a Shia militia leader the Sunnis know the government is serious about shutting down militias and the reprisal attacks make less sense.
If Iraq is having a civil war, then so is Detroit. It’s only a civil war by the most tortured stretching of the term.
By the way, we don’t have to stop every bombing and reprisal attack to win. We just have to leave a government that’s in control. I think we’re very close to that now, although it will be a few more years before we actually leave.

Posted by: Eric at February 28, 2007 at 9:27 pm
Post a comment