August 29, 2006

Could the US actually lose World War III against the islamic fascists, led by Hitler II Ahmadinejad combined with Al Qaeda?

I think Israel's recent defeat to an out-manned and out-gunned enemy, combined with our ongoing defeat in Iraq, combined with China and Russia lining up against us, is starting to make the odds a little less of a sure thing that we "win" the war on terror (aka WWIII) against the islamo-fascists. I'm actually starting to think they might be the favorite (much to my chagrin).

I don't think the US, the big ol' nation-state, is prepared financially, militarily or psychologically to win a war against islamic and other US-hating nation-states aligned with islamo-fascist terrorist organizations, especially suicidal ones. Think about it, we'll spend over $1 Trillion on a "war" against Iraq, and yet we'll eventually come home as losers.

Here's an interesting older article on the idea, the thought, that we could actually "lose". You owe it to yourself Dear Reader to at least consider the idea in your mind, and the consequences, before you say yes or no to what we're about to do with Iran and Syria.

It's the thought of losing that makes me want to go in right now, today, and take out Iran and their mullahs and Hitler II who calls for the destruction of Israel and funds terrorist groups. It's the idea of losing that makes me want to do the same wherever else this cult is creating a strong-hold (Gaza, Lebanon, Pakistan, etc). You fight wars to win, and that is harsh, and you focus on decapitating the leadership and establishing your authority. We would have "won" in Iraq if we had gone and killed Muqtada al-Sadr and his ilk, burned down the mosques used to hide the enemy, and sent in a real force.

Instead, we fought in Iraq not to lose (and so PC), so we lost. Yes, I'm so far to the right here you can't see me, but I believe in fighting to win. And yes, this does have everything to do with the future price of houses.

The West confronts not a throwback to medieval Islam, but a Westernized version of Islam transformed into a totalitarian political ideology. Although it draws upon Islamic sources and overlaps with some strains of Muslim belief, the ideology of Al-Qaeda has greater kinship with Nazism, another synthetic pagan religion, than with traditional Islam.

Like Nazism, it is a deadly threat. Remember that Hitler very nearly won.

Like the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, Al-Qaeda might win. Al-Qaeda wants no territory, no conversions, no loot, no slaves. It wishes to destroy the West and happily will sacrifice millions of Muslim lives in order to do so.

Rather than batter Afghanistan, whence any terrorist worth his Cemtex departed long ago, the West should act unexpectedly and without mercy against states which allow Al-Qaeda. There is no need to go into details here. Doing so now offers at least the chance of gaining the respect of the Islamic world. Failing to do so makes probable a gradual accumulation of failures. It means that the war will be Al-Qaeda's to lose. We were lucky with Hitler. We may not be so lucky again.


Anonymous said...

We lose if our lender decides to stop financing our efforts.

Anonymous said...

radical islam is naziism and it can be defeated but first westerners need to pull their pc heads out of their asses and stop eating ate the piggy trough of 9/11 conspiracy theories and recognize the enemy who is already here, have been saying so to our faces in very clear words and have done what they promised. perhaps when the housing/credit orgy is over people will focus their attention to reality.

Anonymous said...

meant to say - stop eating at the piggy trough

Anonymous said...

war is hell and we're trying to fight the light version

time to go to hell

Anonymous said...

All it takes is for moderate muslims to speak out more forcefully against radical islam. If they cannot then they are not moderate muslims are they? Why are they not chanting death to jihadists in the streets of america, britain and france? Some have but more need to, they need our encouragement and support and protection from the crazies.

Anonymous said...

Not to be provacative moderate muslims but your silence speaks volumes.

Anonymous said...


I think that apart from wasting our resources in a wrong war, here in the U.S., we need to be united. China has a "One China" policy. In the U.S., there is still that culture and racial divide. We have been so preoccupied in the time wasting, no solution (status quo) immigration issues, that truly, is just a drop in the bucket compare to other national and international issues. Remember the Machiavellian principle; "Divide and Conquer." If we're divided, it is easy for our enemies to defeat us economically, militarily and politically. We are gradually falling apart as a nation. You add the housing crash and severe recession to it and the result - chaos.

Anonymous said...

Weird stuff happens in wars. In WWII, Hitler actually had hopes that England would become his ally in an attack against communism and the USSR. That is why he allowed the Brits 48 hours to evacuate from Dunkirk instead of destroying them on the beach.

Islamists alone cannot defeat the west, but with an ally or two, who knows? Russia and China are the wild cards.

Anonymous said...

this week's events with the UN and Iran should be very telling

Anonymous said...

That picture of old Adolph with his arm outstretched has some interesting history behind it:

Anonymous said...

It probably has it's origins in the ancient Roman salute as the nazis also used the eagle like the romans did and a whole bunch of other militaries for that matter. but thats just a lot of boring "facts" so don't bother with it.

Anonymous said...

Neocons are just Troskyites, continuing to spread the global revolution. You're just eating up their tripe. There's nothing right-wing nor conservative about the Iraq war, the GWOT, northe impending one with Iran. Read to get a taste of libertarian and true-conservative thought on the socialist hell of Neocon America and Likud Israel... Start here:

Anonymous said...

you can see the same picture on wiki captioned as the bellamy salute - the guy who wrote the pledge of allegiance to the flag yadda, yadda.

Anonymous said...

anon: I didn't scroll down all the way on the link and now realize that it already says that about the pledge, except the roman part which it won't mention because it has a specific political agenda. my apologies.

panicearly said...

price of an m1abrahms tank $5 million

price of an IED $10

drinking kool aid with neoquacks-worthless

for everything else theres home equity- was , ha:lol

panicearly said...

now for some contrarian reading for all you arm chair geo-political strategist/warmonger/neo-con kool aid drinkers/fox news tit suckers/
and those of you volunteering to go to the frontline(sarcasm),

Ahmadinejad: We are Not a Threat to Any Country, Including Israel

Believe it, don't believe it, that's up to you. But at least we should know what exactly he said, which is not something our US newspapers will tell us about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's speech on Saturday:

blogger said...

moderate (and others) - you're wasting your time posting if you can't make your point without swearing

keep it clean

blogger said...

PE you left out the whole double-talk sentence. Here it is:

"There is no discussion of nuclear weapons. We are not a threat to anybody, even the Zionist regime, which is a definite enemy to the people of the region"

this is another case of saying one thing externally and a whole 'nother thing internally

he's a master at PR though I'll give him that

sieg heil

blogger said...

iran releases text of letter hitler II sent to germany. here it is in its entirety. Never thought this would get out... go read the whole thing and comment:

blogger said...

a few highlights... as sure as I am that the sun will rise tomorrow, hitler II is going to try to destroy israel, and may even succeed. He's told us, over and over, he's recruiting friends in the battle (hezbollah, hamas, syria, russia, venezuela, even going after germany) and we can't say we weren't warned.

Sixty years have passed since the end of the war. But, regrettably the entire world and some nations in particular are still facing its consequences. Even now the conduct of some bullying powers and power-seeking and aggressive groups is the conduct of victors with the vanquished.

The extortion and blackmail continue, and people are not allowed to think about or even question the source of this extortion, otherwise they face imprisonment. When will this situation end? Sixty years, one hundred years or one thousand years, when? I am sorry to remind you that today the perpetual claimants against the great people of Germany are the bullying powers and the Zionists that founded the Al-Qods Occupying Regime with the force of bayonets in the Middle East.

The question is why did the victors of the war, especially England that had apparently such a strong sense of responsibility toward the survivors of the Holocaust not allow them to settle in their territory. Why did they force them to migrate to other people's land by launching a wave of anti-Semitism? Using the excuse for the settlement of the survivors of the Holocaust, they encouraged the Jews worldwide to migrate and today a large part of the inhabitants of the occupied territories are non-European Jews. If tyranny and killing is condemned in one part of the world, can we acquiesce and go along with tyranny, killing, occupation and assassinations in another part of the world simply in order to redress the past wrongs?

Regrettably, the influence of the Zionists in the economy, media and some centers of political power has endangered interests of the European nations and has robbed them of many opportunities. The main alibi for this approach is the extortion they exact from the Holocaust.

But just imagine where Germany would be today in terms of its eminence among the freedom-loving nations, Muslims of the world and peoples of Europe, if such a situation did not exist and the governments in power in Germany had said no to the extortions by the Zionists and had not supported the greatest enemy of mankind.

Where are the roots of these problems? How long can they continue? Do you not think that the main root lies in the fact that some of the rulers and powers of today have distanced themselves from the teachings of the divine prophets, the teachings of Abraham, Moses and Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) and the Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him).

Our nations believe and are committed to these pillars of faith. The history has shown that the people of Iran are not familiar with aggressing and brutalizing other nations. Nevertheless, we do not allow being the subject and victim of aggression and brutality.

panicearly said...

excellent post keith.
i just finished reading it.
at what point does a nation get out from under the victors of the last conflict and make a decision for themselves.
As i recall a vast majority of germans were against the iraq invasion. same in spain italy uk etc.

irans points maybe called propaganda, pr, but they also do resonate with more than a billion people around the world and its not just muslims nor are the arguments without merit. recent history only proves his points about victors continued aggression.

in WW2 there were a lot of supporters in india of Hitler. NOt because of his murderous ways , that was not known at the time, but that he was challenging England, which held india in a choke hold. churchill was considered more evil and rightfully so from the views of the occupied.

blogger said...

again, hitler II is a brillian PR machine.

Venezuela's Chavez going there last week to kiss the ring was another master stroke. Iran and Venezuela, united together with their oil, could drive the US to its knees. Throw in Russia and game over

He's setting the Axis up. He's planned this all his life. And he knows he's going against a mental midget in the white house.

panicearly said...

with americas precarious economic/energy situation, they have basically left themselves with two options. simply put
1. wage war, and take the risk of loss
2. make peace and play ball with a weak hand.

#2 is not an option as the empire will crumble.
#1. cannot be accomplished without taking america back to the 1930s

dangerous times for sure...assymetric warfare on a large scale

Anonymous said...

The US during WWII still had a lot of domestic oil. Germany in the waning days started cracking coal for oil as the US is now faced with.

The US can not win a protracted conventional war. We don't have the energy resources. It will have to start using nukes to try to get the dirty work over with quickly.

panicearly said...

"It will have to start using nukes to try to get the dirty work over with quickly."


Anonymous said...

Off course there is no way in the world that Iran could threaten the US, perhaps only the occupants of Palestine.

Still I think we will fight WWIII if we are not already doing it, just because of the same reasons we fought WWI and WWII: it serves the Zionist cause.

Anonymous said...

Why the hell should we fight a war for Israel? Israelis believe their country is blessed by god, let us see if that is true. If god loves israel, it should be fine, otherwise it will be pushed into the sea. Gods will shall be carried out regardless, lets standby and watch what happens.

Mamboni said...


Stop referring to Ahmadinejad as "Hitler II:" it's low-class yellow journalism at it's worst. You might try using the brain God gave you instead of acting like some automaton Hitler youth: you're dogged devotion to American hegemony abroad is nauseating.

As an ex-republican and real free market conservative, in my humble opinion, the greatest threat to world peace today is the USA. We have invaded and occupied two countries with the flimsiest of pretense or outright fabrications (remember WMDs) which just happen to be oil-rich and flank Iran. We have military bases all over the middle east, have the world's largest naval fleet trolling the waters surrounding that region, account for 50% of the entire world's defense budget, and fund the military outpost known as Israel. Oh, we also have a very severe addiction to oil. But, the world should be afraid of Iran! This country is populated by uninformed boobs or sentimental nationalists who think the USA has been decreed by God almightly to always be number one and always be on the righteous side of a conflict. Which are you Keith, uninformed or hopelessly entitled? Because, if you support a pre-emptive war against Iran, then you support a USA engaged in war without end. The "patriotic" Bush-loving American attitude is thusly summarized: "We're broke by virtue of our own excesses and greed - we need cheap oil - we represent freedom and democracy - we must previal lest the world fall into the darkness of totalitarianism - we must destroy the forme fruste enemy before he can be conceived - we must take control of his oil - we need it and must have it - we are indispensable - we must prevail."
God forbid we live within our means and pay for the oil: how would Cheney et al. make any money?

“Why of course the people don’t want war. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.”

- Hermann Goering

“The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible.”

- George Washington

Anonymous said...

Radical Islam was Nazism back in the middle ages. That's when it snuffed out Buddhism and Zoroastrianism from Persia and Central Asia. That was a genocide on a grand scale. I always wonder why people don't talk about that stuff and only bring up Israel all the time as if Israel was the major landowner in the middle east. Wrong, the major landowners are the Islamic leaders.

Today, it's more like the KKK types. A bunch of idiots who've taken control of Mullah politics from Indonesia to Egypt who're *lightening roding* the whole event via not granting Palestinians proper citizenship in Jordan, Syria, and Egypt and letting them rot in the border regions of Israel.

Anonymous said...

"Hitler II is going to try to destroy israel,"

Pleaz, the real Hitler had armies, luftwaffe, V-1 missles, and the allies had basically... the same stuff sans the French who had nada.

This bozo, on the other hand, is trying to make one nuclear reactor (and subsequent bomb) and everyone here is having a coronary. Remember, the west has a few thousand nukes, a lot of airpower, but few troops, thanks to Iraq, and less money/credit line to spend for a borrow and spend war.

Anonymous said...


Really Dark Humor

Anonymous said...

We're already fighting a war for Israel in Iraq, at least this is phase one of the neocon plan, later to extend to Iran & Syria. It should all go swimmingly, considering the Iraq "cakewalk". The neocons have lots of chutzpah, but their "strategery" and "intel" needs some re-working. What a mess.

Anonymous said...

A will to win and second guessing is what is keeping us from stomping these idiots (in my opinion). Putting your own soldiers in a public trial for trying to keep a lid on what can only be called a police action (again in my opinion) that seems to have no end in sight while the enemy beheads people on camera? I don't equate busting a guy's lip and putting panties on his head with lopping off his head while he's alive, conscous and helpless. I have a friend who is a 20+ year veteran of the Navy who is now retired who told me they should have taken the gloves off a long time ago. Get all the "journalists" out of there and do a proper ass waxing like our military is trained (and paid) to do. Bomb the shit out of it and leave not one friggin mud brick on top of another. Totally demoralize the enemy and take away his means and will to fight. Make him beg you to stop. That is how wars are won. Then and only then, when the shooting stops and he is totally dependent upon your sense of mercy, treat him fairly in the re-building of his country so that you don't experience a repeat of a rise to another Hitler since he was the product of a country that had been treated without any mercy when WWI was over.

Anonymous said...

you now, i hate to even think so, but the west could very well lose. now befoer i get flamed, think back about 230 years.

England. as the old saying goes, "the sun never sets on the british empire." a ragtag group of farmers and brewers and printers defeated the british empire.

why couldnt it happen again?

we are fighting a war with political correctness, we are losing just like the isrealies.

how committed are we? we could nuke a country, but the west is so infested with islamic culture, the destruction of another country (ie iran) would do no good. they are here. visit detroit. remember the paris riots?

until we (the west) decide to round them up, build detention centers and close the border we wil lose.

i hate to say it. look at the pendilton eight.

Anonymous said...

Those in support of this war in Iraq or a possible future Iran war should show their support financially. There should be a seperate tax table for them and seperate gas prices as well. Example: If you support either of these wars, you pay $6/gallon at the pump and are responsible to pay off the debt and all costs created by fighting these wars( on top of your current tax liability). Those smart enough not to support either war pay $1/gallon and pay lower taxes.

Anonymous said...

It's Abhrams M1A2 tank to you liberal.

Anonymous said...

Mamboni can lickonmyboni. That guy would be a good muzzie slave.

The guy who mentioned Germany "cracking coal" is right on. Synthetic fuel derived from coal is our future. South Afrika did it to get through the apartheid oil embargo and now exports fuel. We have enough coal to make this synfuel practical. Synfuel is very clean burning. It is economical. Peak oil is real.

We need to get into alternatives and ethanol isn't the answer.

panicearly said...

It's Abhrams M1A2 tank to you liberal.

IED $10,

Anonymous said...

What's your point panicearly? Are you happy, gleeful when our guys get killed by IEDs? Are you secretly hoping for the rise of a new Persia or an Islamic Caliphate? Come on out and tell us what you really want to see in a future world.

panicearly said...

my point is you are going broke.

there is no glee in your guy with the wife and kids back home getting killed. but then again no sympathy either.

whats your point? why arent you enlisted?

panicearly said...

my point is you are going broke.

there is no glee in your guy with the wife and kids back home getting killed. but then again no sympathy either.

whats your point? why arent you enlisted?

Anonymous said...

The Big Lie About 'Islamic Fascism'

by Eric Margolis

The latest big lie unveiled by Washington’s neoconservatives are the poisonous terms, "Islamo-Fascists" and "Islamic Fascists." They are the new, hot buzzwords among America’s far right and Christian fundamentalists.

President George W. Bush made a point last week of using "Islamofacists" when recently speaking of Hezbullah and Hamas – both, by the way, democratically elected parties. A Canadian government minister from the Conservative Party compared Lebanon’s Hezbullah to Nazi Germany.

The term "Islamofascist" is utterly without meaning, but packed with emotional explosives. It is a propaganda creation worthy Dr. Goebbles, and the latest expression of the big lie technique being used by neocons in Washington’s propaganda war against its enemies in the Muslim World.

This ugly term was probably first coined in Israel – as was the other hugely successful propaganda term, "terrorism" – to dehumanize and demonize opponents and deny them any rational political motivation, hence removing any need to deal with their grievances and demands.

As the brilliant humanist Sir Peter Ustinov so succinctly put it, "Terrorism is the war of the poor, and war is the terrorism of the rich."

Both the terms "terrorism" and "fascist" have been so abused and overused that they have lost any original meaning. The best modern definition I’ve read of fascism comes in former Colombia University Professor Robert Paxton’s superb 2004 book, The Anatomy of Fascism.

Paxton defines fascism’s essence, which he aptly terms its "emotional lava" as: 1. a sense of overwhelming crisis beyond reach of traditional solutions; 2. belief one’s group is the victim, justifying any action without legal or moral limits; 3. need for authority by a natural leader above the law, relying on the superiority of his instincts; 4. right of the chosen people to dominate others without legal or moral restraint; 5. fear of foreign "contamination."

Fascism demands a succession of wars, foreign conquests, and national threats to keep the nation in a state of fear, anxiety and patriotic hypertension. Those who disagree are branded ideological traitors. All successful fascists regimes, Paxton points out, allied themselves to traditional conservative parties, and to the military-industrial complex.

Highly conservative and militaristic regimes are not necessarily fascist, says Paxton. True fascism requires relentless aggression abroad and a semi-religious adoration of the regime at home.

None of the many Muslim groups opposing US-British control of the Mideast fit Paxton’s definitive analysis. The only truly fascist group ever to emerge in the Mideast was Lebanon’s Maronite Christian Phalange Party in the 1930’s which, ironically, became an ally of Israel’s rightwing in the 1980’s.

It is grotesque watching the Bush Administration and Tony Blair maintain the ludicrous pretense they are re-fighting World War II. The only similarity between that era and today is the cultivation of fear, war fever and racist-religious hate by US neoconservatives and America’s religious far right, which is now boiling with hatred for anything Muslim.

Under the guise of fighting a "third world war" against "Islamic fascism," America’s far right is infecting its own nation with the harbingers of WWII totalitarianism.

In the western world, hatred of Muslims has become a key ideological hallmark of rightwing parties. We see this overtly in the United States, France, Italy, Holland, Denmark, Poland, and, most lately, Canada, and more subtly expressed in Britain and Belgium. The huge uproar over blatantly anti-Muslim cartoons published in Denmark laid bare the seething Islamophobia spreading through western society.

There is nothing in any part of the Muslim World that resembles the corporate fascist states of western history. In fact, clan and tribal-based traditional Islamic society, with its fragmented power structures, local loyalties, and consensus decision-making, is about as far as possible from western industrial state fascism.

The Muslim World is replete with brutal dictatorships, feudal monarchies, and corrupt military-run states, but none of these regimes, however deplorable, fits the standard definition of fascism. Most, in fact, are America’s allies.

Nor do underground Islamic militant groups ("terrorists" in western terminology). They are either focused on liberating land from foreign occupation, overthrowing "un-Islamic" regimes, driving western influence from their region, or imposing theocracy based on early Islamic democracy.

Claims by fevered neoconservatives that Muslim radicals plan to somehow impose a worldwide Islamic caliphate are lurid fantasies worthy of Dr. Fu Manchu and yet another example of the big lie technique that worked so well over Iraq.

As Prof. Andrew Bosworth notes in an incisive essay on so-called Islamic fascism, "Islamic fundamentalism is a transnational movement inherently opposed to the pseudo-nationalism necessary for fascism."

However, there are plenty of modern fascists. But to find them, you have to go to North America and Europe. These neo-fascists advocate "preemptive attacks against all potential enemies," grabbing other nation’s resources, overthrowing uncooperative governments, military dominance of the world, hatred of Semites (Muslims in this case), adherence to biblical prophecies, hatred of all who fail to agree, intensified police controls, and curtailment of "liberal" political rights.

They revel in flag-waving, patriotic melodrama, demonstrations of military power, and use the mantle of patriotism to feather the nests of the military-industrial complex, colluding legislators and lobbyists. They urge war to the death, fought, of course, by other people’s children. They have turned important sectors of the media into propaganda organs and brought the Pentagon largely under their control.

panicearly said...

"What bothers me the most is how clever the enemy is.......

"The enemy is so much better at communicating," he added. "I wish we were better at countering that because the constant drumbeat of things they say _ all of which are not true _ is harmful. It's cumulative. And it does weaken people's will and lessen their determination, and raise questions in their minds as to whether the cost is worth it," he said alluding to Americans and other Westerners.

Rumsfailed trying to divert blame from a neo-con manufactured disaster. how many fox news channels do you want rummy?

Anonymous said...


Normally I am 100% in agreement with you, but you are completely off on this one. The course of action you advocate (that we are 100% innocent and we should go in there and pre-emptively kick ass) has been tried for thousands of years, and what you get is Israel - Millions of people with unsolvable generational hatred towards you. Keep in mind that we in the West are not nearly as innocent as we profess - We are the ones keeping the dictators in power over there so that we can have cheap oil. If some other country was paying billions to keep the USA under a dictatorship so that they could 'steal' our resources for well under market value, I'd be pissed too. Not to mention our corporations who as you constantly point out on HP, constantly try to find any way possible to screw consumers (whether domestic or foreign).

It is time to remember that we are all human beings here (on Earth) and deserve to be treated with respect and fairness, whether or not we have the power. The reason that extremism has such fertile ground in the Middle East is that we (in the West) have behaved very badly towards others (let's not forget the Philippines, the takeover of Hawaii, CIA assassinations, etc.) As long as we portray ourselves as white as snow with regards to integrity, there will always be people calling 'bullshit'. We are the most powerful nation on Earth... Too bad we can't also be the most honorable.

Anonymous said...

You hit it. These armchair warriors have obviously never looked at issues from the other perspective. They view the world only in fear and hatred. Thier racism is appalling.

Bill said...

Stop referring to Ahmadinejad as "Hitler II:" it's low-class yellow journalism at it's worst.

Will Douchbag do?

Anonymous said...

You hit it. These armchair warriors have obviously never looked at issues from the other perspective. They view the world only in fear and hatred.

I would also like to add that they are huge cowards. We faced down the Soviet Union and their nuclear arsenal and survived with dignity. But this crop fear mongerers are the most cowardly feeble little bitches on the planet. Shame on them.

Joey said...

The biggest threat the west is facing economically is the threat of being cut out as the 'middle man' in all matters of trade, plus the rise of an economic order that cuts out the west.

More than an "islamo-facist', Ahmedinejad is an economic populist similar to a Huey Long. He is hated by the economic elites and intellectuals in Iran. One of his overriding goals is to build up Iran economically, build "south-south trade" (google that term for more info). Why do you think he has close partnership with countries like Venezuela, which are socially for "liberal" than the USA? Why do you think Russia and China will not vote for any sanctions against him (no matter what Bucktoothleeza Rice says). Why do you think Iran has observer status in the Shanghai Cooperative (google that term to be shocked)? The USA or other "western" countries don't have observer status. Why do you think China is excluding them?

What about the rise of Mercorser, the south american trade alliance? Did you know that the biggest countries in Mercourser Venezuela and Brazil, are applying for membership into the Arab League 22-nation alliance? Did you know Venezuela already has observer status?

All these countries, mostly former colonies of western countries, or self-professed victims of western alliances (like Russia or China during the Opium wars) are all coming together, in various trade alliances, and cutting out the west.

Right now, the west is the central point of trade between most so-called third world countries. I can personally tell you it's cheaper to ship a product via air freight from Jakarta to Houston to Sao Paolo than it is to ship directly from Jakarta to Sao Paolo, although the distance is shorter. Why? Many people are asking that, including leaders of these countries.

Same thing with sending financial wires to pay or settle accounts, which have to get settled in Europe, along with a small fee attached to those wires. Is that efficient?

Radical islam is a strawman argument that doesn't exist. The real problem facing US policy makers are a economic, political, and eventually military rise of so-called third world countries.

These countries tend to be younger, and growing at a faster rate economically.

If, instead of sending raw materials and unfinished products; they instead complete the whole product life cycle, including design there, the west is economically doomed.

A society of older, lazier, borrowers who are addicted to cheap illegal immigrant labor, and an entitlement mentality of thinking they are entitled to things such as old age pensions, etc, will not be able to compete.

Here are some articles to read up on

Anonymous said...

No way could we be defeated. Israel "lost" (don't see it as a loss, perhaps a standoff, maybe ) because they couldn't go all out. In WW3 the gloves will come off and it will be all out. The middle east does not have the resources to sustain all out war. They have oil, which is important, but you need to be able to manufacture your own war hardware and not rely on others for it.

blogger said...

I call him Hitler II (and will continue to do so thank you very much) because I haven't seen a world leader since who

1) denied the Holocaust
2) called for the killing of the Jews
3) believed the Jews are behind all the troubles of the world
4) Used PR and nationalism with such skill
5) Silenced the opposition parties and media in his country

need I go on? This guy isn't just Hitler II, he's apparently channeling his soul while stealing every page from his playbook

Anonymous said...

Our Middle Eastern Policy should be:

Containment when possible

Elimination when necessary.

Anonymous said...

which ME dictators are we responsible for exactly? We had nothing to do with any of them coming to power. It is europeans that buy most of their oil. we do sell them weapons to use on the Israelis though. If we no longer "propped up" the current spate of ME dictators you think democracy would flourish? most of these countries have never experienced democracy only tribal rule and sharia law. It would be decades of revenge killing and radical islamic rule and beheadings by the bucket loads. you are incredibly naive to think that arabs are even capable of western style democracy.

Anonymous said...

Rick Santorum quote:

"These people are after us not because we've oppressed them, not because of the state of Israel," he said. "It's because we stand for everything they hate."

He trails in the recent poll.I guess it's a hard sell.

Anonymous said...

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Tuesday challenged President Bush to a televised debate and voiced defiance as a deadline neared for Iran to halt work the West fears is a step toward building nuclear bombs.

"Peaceful nuclear energy is the right of the Iranian nation. The Iranian nation has chosen that based upon international regulations, it wants to use it and no one can stop it," he told a news conference.

Anonymous said...

Behind the Plan to Bomb Iran

August 28, 2006

It is no longer a secret that the Bush administration has been methodically paving the way toward a bombing strike against Iran. The administration's plans of an aerial military attack against that country have recently been exposed by a number of reliable sources.

There is strong evidence that the administration's recent public statements that it is now willing to negotiate with Iran are highly disingenuous: they are designed not to reach a diplomatic solution to the so-called "Iran crisis," but to remove diplomatic hurdles toward a military "solution." The administration's public gestures of a willingness to negotiate with Iran are rendered utterly meaningless because such alleged negotiations are premised on the condition that Iran suspends its uranium enrichment program. Considering the fact that suspension of uranium enrichment, which is altogether within Iran's legitimate rights under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), is supposed to be the main point of negotiations, Iran is asked, in effect, "to concede the main point of the negotiations before they started."

The administration's case against Iran is eerily reminiscent of its case against Iraq in the run up to the invasion of that country. Accordingly, the case against Iran is based not on any hard evidence provided by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), but on dubious allegations that are based on even more dubious sources of intelligence. Iran is asked, in effect, to prove a negative, which is of course mission impossible-hence grounds for "noncompliance" and rationale for "punishment."

The administration's case against Iran is so weak, its objectives of a military strike against that country are so fuzzy, and the odds against achieving any kind of meaningful victory are so strong, that even professional military experts are speaking up against the plans of a bombing campaign against Iran. Furthermore, predominant expert views of such a bombing campaign maintain that it would more likely hurt than help the geopolitical and economic interests of the United States.

Anonymous said...

The time for what should have been done is lost. Bush should have paid a lot more attention to what Powell was telling him. Rethinking the situation from other points of view and retrenching/regrouping combined with real efforts at home to cut back on oil use NOW, higher mileage standards, honest and clear message to the public, admission of past mistakes and failures and a need to combat this problem on all fronts - no more hummers, no more cheap energy, no more subsidies, no more gigantic highway bills that contain tons of pork for road projects but at the same time no meaningful funding for rail and commuter projects aimed at weaning people off of cars. I think that would take something we don't have at the moment - real leadership.

Anonymous said...

Some things never change. Lessons not learned:

“I think we shall have to choose in the next few weeks between war and shame, and I have very little doubt what the decision will be.” (Winston Churchill to Lloyd George, 13Aug38.

A month later Churchill wrote to Lord Moyne: “We seem to be very near the bleak choice between War and Shame. My feeling is that we shall choose Shame, and then have War thrown in a little later on even more adverse terms than at present.”

Candy-asses, appeasers, and apologists for the Islamists please take note. When your time (or your son or daughter's time) comes, don't try to say you weren't warned.

Anonymous said...

Dude, we aren't even trying(or at war) right now in Iraq. As a police force modern western militaries suck. Give us a real all out war(where collateral and civilian casualties don't matter)and we will win over night.

Anonymous said...

True the U.S. military can break things and kill people, you just have to show us where. We can win a war with just two branches of the military - Air Froce and Navy.

panicearly said...

"Give us a real all out war(where collateral and civilian casualties don't matter)and we will win over night.

quit looking for excuses, your boys are in power, arent they?
go enlist big man.

Roccman said...

Keith - this one is tailored just for you...SHUT UP AND LISTEN!!!

Damn, but they're really stupid out there! Millions of uninformed
Americans form opinions every single day about vital issues that
affect all our lives. Sadly, they base their views on garbage they've
collected from the mainstream news networks.

No wonder everything is as screwed up as it is! Maybe the sheeple of
America could learn something from this article. It's past the time
for good manners... not when we're on the brink of another war in Iran
that, once again, the masses know nothing about.

You'll get the substance from the opening paragraphs...but you have to
read it all to make a point to people you know who desperately need to
time to:


Enough! Just stop. You've had your say over and over and over.
You've repeated yourself ad nauseam for years without making an iota
of sense. You've accomplished nothing constructive, absolutely
nothing. You've repeated the same nonsense over and over without
knowing a single fact. So just cut it out. Now it's time to close
your mouth and open your ears.

Just shut up and listen!

All this time you've ignored people who know things you can't even
imagine. You've shut your eyes and your mind to people who have spent
years gathering information and checking out their sources. You've
dismissed people with skills and credentials you can't even pronounce.
And you've demeaned people with knowledge and experience you can't
even come close to.

All this time you've refused to hear a single thing they've said.
You've strutted around like an arrogant peacock, believing you knew
more than they. You had no basis for what you claimed to know. You
just decided it was true. What unadulterated stupidity. It's time to
stop being a total idiot.

It's time to just shut up and listen.


Read it all. The article covers the main areas of total ignorance and
disinformation. Then get others to think about this.... it might help
us all:

Anonymous said...

Are all 9/11 conspiracy websites designed by the same cheesey webmaster or is there a conspiracy website design software one can buy.

Anonymous said...

Islamic fascist? You heard that phrase from the mouths of the Republicans last week and now use it without censorship? Keith, I didn't know you were that gullible.

Roccman said...


Anonymous said...

richard, do you recall the Dems in the aftermath of 9/11? Many of them openly pined over the fact that 9/11 happened after Clinton left office. These twerps were upset that history passed over their guy's legacy quest and instead dumped the bucket-o-sh!t on Bush's head.

You conspiracy 'tards need to get a grip. Bush cannot be dumber than dirt one minute, and the architect of a vast conspicacy the next.

Roccman said...

All evidence points at 9/11 as a false flag operation. And all evidence appears to point at the controlled demolition of 3 buildings in the WTC complex, for the following reasons:

There are simply too many eyewitness accounts from members of our emergency services – police and firemen – of multiple explosions occurring in rapid succession immediately preceding the collapse – far below the impact/fire zones. The sheer number of witnesses who immediately (and separately) referred to these explosions as being “like a controlled demolition” or “like bombs going off” is inexplicable in its scope – but, even more damning, inexplicable in that these eyewitness accounts were intentionally suppressed by our government, have remained uninvestigated, with the evidence at ground zero (a crime scene) quickly removed and shipped to China.
47 core columns in each of the two towers appeared to simply disintegrate, despite no damage from fire or impact from the planes. When one considers the inherent strength of an array of 47 core steel columns, with multiple redundant weight-baring support beams in place, it is simply inexplicable to explain their total and catastrophic failure – in two buildings – in nearly identical fashion.
Even if we are to believe that these 47 core steel columns were unable to withstand a progressive top-to-bottom collapse, and failed accordingly, certainly (at the very least) these lower floors, with their 47 steel columns and redundant weight baring support beams, would have offered up some resistance, and slowed down the progressive collapse. Yet, both building fell in approximately 10 seconds, at near free-fall speed. This is simply impossible.

Anonymous said...

cause richards an expert!

Roccman said...

Guatemala, Aug 26 (Prensa Latina) Peace Nobel Prizewinner Rigoberta Menchu Saturday described as abusive, abominable and reprehensible the fact that the US take advantage of the current sickness suffered by the Cuban President Fidel Castro to increase its aggressive anti-Cuban plans.

Roccman said...

No expert here...just a simple guy - 2 kids - fix rate - solid job.

I don't buy the official 9-11 story put forth by our government.

And I am really concerned that most people in the US do believe it.

I am even more concerned that if you do speak out about 9-11 - you are instantly labeled a terrorist.

Anonymous said...

"war is hell and we're trying to fight the light version

time to go to hell"

Go to hell!

dan said...

Of course all the war mongers posting here have no intention of putting their own lives on the line. Until you do shut your pie holes.

dan said...

This is interesting.

A GOP candidate for the US House (Mary Maxwell, North Virginia) is claiming that the current administration "had a role ... at the World Trade Center and Pentagon, so it could make Americans hate Arabs and allow the military to bomb Muslim nations such as Iraq." was a.

dan said...

"You conspiracy 'tards need to get a grip. Bush cannot be dumber than dirt one minute, and the architect of a vast conspicacy the next."

Viciousness does not require intelligence
Mr. 'Tard.

Anonymous said...

I can't stand the new meme BushCo has foisted on the Sheeple:


That is empty head talk. One could say THEOCRATS, maybe. But Fascism is and always has been the melding of The Corporation and The State. And you really don't find that in the Modern Worl -- oh. Never mind.

dan said...

"Candy-asses, appeasers, and apologists for the Islamists please take note. When your time (or your son or daughter's time) comes, don't try to say you weren't warned."

What's the big threat here peabrain. Scary terrorists? Oh My! I don't give a rat's butt about terrorism. My family is at a thousand times more risk of death on a US highway than from your bogeyman. Go blow your ass off in Iraq and be done with it. You sure as hell won't take my children with you. And if you try you will find that war you want soo much in your own backyard.

panicearly said...

"You conspiracy 'tards need to get a grip. Bush cannot be dumber than dirt one minute, and the architect of a vast conspicacy the next."

being a puppet does not require intelligence.
just like being sheeple FBs in a million dollar house does not require intelligence.
what it does require is to listen to your handlers.
so bush is the perfect nitwit for the job.
official 911 story has holes you can drive a truck through.
read up people and make your own conclusions.

InfidelSix said...

I've tried to be open minded about the 9/11 conspiracy. There is some plausability to the theory and honestly, it all points to a single person: Al Gore.

#1. Al was upset from losing the election and moreso when his lawyers couldn't steal it for him.

#2. This operation would have taken years to plan and finance. The hijackers had been in the U.S. for many years prior to the attack ... the same years Al Gore was Vice President.

#3. Having Osama bin Laden claim culpability or "credit" for the attack would have taken a long time to negotiate. The price for this deal - letting him go when he was offered to Clinton, and warning him ahead of any strikes. Is it a wonder that he's always been one step ahead. Al Gore still has a lot of very powerful connections.

#4. Al, as we know is much smarter than Bush. He could've pulled it off - even without a single participant blowing the whilstle. Hell Hillary probably had 'em all killed (like all those mysterious deaths of people associated with the Clintons when they were in the White House). So it's a good bet that she's in on it too. Maybe that's why the Dems were lamenting that the attack didn't happen on "their" watch. They probably had it planned as a false flag and then said 'the hell with it, let's just do it anyway.

#5. If Bush is too dumb too even "make sure" (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) that we discovered WMD's after completely lying about them b/c HE KNEW there weren't any, then there's no way he could've pulled this off. Heck, he can't even pull off a speech. Not a chance. Al Gore though ... he made a whole movie ... 'nuff said.

InfidelSix said...

BTW Kieth,

Funny you should ask that question.

Ironically I was sitting in an Army "Safety meeting" a couple weeks ago, holding my head and wincing from the mind-numbing beauracracy and bullshit, thinking "Al Quaeda's going to win."

Anonymous said...

wtc7, controlled demolition on the same day? how is that possible in the middle of all that was going on.
this is a massive building, its no simple t ask to set it up in max 8 hours while the building was aflame.
if someone can give me a plausible explanation, how this can be done
in 8 hours, i will join the neocons and go fight in iraq.

Roccman said...

"this is a massive building, its no simple t ask to set it up in max 8 hours while the building was aflame."

Good grief ...where does one begin??

Nevermind...we are so screwed at all levels.

Hey Anon - please tell me you don't have a gun.

Anonymous said...

LOL. Al Gore engineered collapse of WTC after inventing the "internets". That was funny, thanks.

Bush is a dope, no doubt about it, but Gore is hardly a mensan. Clinton, touted by many as so brilliant, was merely wiley and more verbal, like the typical con man. Consider the lame line: "it depends on what your definition of "is", is." This from an Ivy League lawyer? The average death row autodidact "law scholar" in a do-rag could muster better.

Our stupid and unprincipled leaders are all about on a par, some are just smoother. The voters have no real choice: dumbass with agenda- R, or Dumbass with agenda- D.

Anonymous said...


What goes around, comes around. You will reap what you have so verbosely sown. One day, you will come to regret your irrational Islamophobic rhetoric.

Many happy returns!

Anonymous said...

Clinton is as bad as Bush? Talk about your dumbass. There is and will be no doubt in
the minds of Americans and the world's historians that Bush is the most dangerous and stupidist (goes hand-in-hand) US president and possibly the stupidist leader from any country through all recorded history.

dan said...

This islamofacist talk is ridiculous. Our
rights in the USA are at far greater threat from christainofacists.

Anonymous said...

"Clinton is as bad as Bush?"

Clinton is brighter than Bush, but in the grand scheme, he's not brilliant. Clinton's screw-ups were not as obvious, but very dangerous.

The bombing of Serbians was unjustified, for one, and gave the Kosovar Albanians a foothold in Europe. (KLA was backed by bin Laden before ALbright, McCain, Mitch McConnell and others took up their cause)

American missile technology now in Chinese hands, gave them a 50 year jump, and will come back to haunt us. His administration was every bit as corrupt as the present. bunch.

I agree the Bush legacy will be shite, and history will show Cheney to be the evil player he is. My point is that while some are less bad, none of them are too damn good.

dan said...

"My point is that while some are less bad, none of them are too damn good."

Sorry. Bush is the worse thing to happen
to the USA and the world. No lame ass Clinton bitchin is going to change that one iota.

InfidelSix said...

You can start worrying about Christian Fascism in the U.S. when internet porn is banned, gambling is prohibited, prohibition is reinstated, and MTV is shut down.

Now put on your veil and STFU!

Anonymous said...

I wasn't "bitching" about Clinton, just making the observation that he, and recent Presidents have been sorry leaders.

Bush is a travesty, a disgrace, a dope- I agree! But maybe you'll change your tune about Clinton's lax standards when a Chineses ICBM
lands up your arse-- all politics is local, and all.