Flame — HabitableZone

Flame » in reply to re: from the heart

Okay then...
Tom Brosz — (archived)

I have often been asked how many U.S. casualties I would accept in Iraq before surrendering, as though any other war in our history had been fought on such a basis.

So, how many terrorist attack casualties would you be willing to accept in the U.S. before the stiff upper lip and indignant letters to the U.N. were no longer considered a sufficient response?

Osama bin Laden planned the 9/11 attack during the Clinton administration based on the conviction that we would not come back with any serious response. He said this in so many words, and based it on our actions in Africa, Lebanon, and elsewhere.

Your side has nothing in its philosophical arsenal any more to deal with this, Robert. Maybe the Democrats of the 1950s and 1960s did, but for the last thirty years, and the last two decades of the Cold War, those Democrats have been long gone, and you can see for yourself what's left of your party.

I've noticed that the current meme is to pretend that the terrorism problem doesn't really exist, as witness recent posts on the British incident, or common phrased like "so-called war on terror."

This is part of the liberal fantasy conviction that this is all being run by the evil lords in Washington, along with its very comforting corollary, the conviction that removal of the Republicans and the abandonment of military action will make all the bad go away.

The "dhimmitude" infecting Europe already is the next step, I suppose.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (59 posts)