Moktada al-Sadr, Emperor of Iraq

[Harlan Huckleby]

Why are you so blind to the fact that Iran is an ENEMY COUNTRY--by Iran's choice

This is not completely true. The United States has had a very belligerent policy towards Iran that has played a destructive role.

pro-American regimes in Pakistan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, which while not perfect models of democracy and freedom, are certainly less hostile to the vast majority of their people than the tyranny which is Iran.

We've already dealt with this false statement. Independent agencies rate Iran no worse than the countries you name in terms of freedom and human rights.

But this is typical. Facts mean nothing to you, you believe want you want to believe.

[texaspackerbacker]

Opinions put forth by LIBERAL independent agencies are FACTS to you?

Why do you HATE the pro-American nations, and spew nothing but respect and apologies for the regime that has BEEN A VILE AND HATEFUL ENEMY OF AMERICA SINCE ITS INCEPTION, the highlight of which was taking over our embassy and holding a bunch of innocent Americans hostage? Are you going to deny that this is the same Iranian regime with the same policies and methods, both foreign and domestic going back to Ayatollah Khomeini? Or are you somehow going to try and excuse their vile and hateful deeds?

You claim Iran is only belligerent because America has been hostile to Iran? Do you still cling to such a horrendously wrong and anti-American statement in light of the indisputable history of Iran's regime?

[Harlan Huckleby]

Opinions put forth by LIBERAL independent agencies are FACTS to you?

well, this is a new turn. So you believe your own hunch about freedom within foreign countries is more reliable than the judgement of Freedom House. And what exactly is your evidence that they have a "liberal" bias?

Why do you HATE the pro-American nations?

I have never expressed hatred for pro-American nations. You are lying.

and spew nothing but respect and apologies for the regime that has BEEN A VILE AND HATEFUL ENEMY OF AMERICA

I have never expressed respect for Iran. I detest the Iranian regime. You are lying again.

SINCE ITS INCEPTION, the highlight of which was taking over our embassy and holding a bunch of innocent Americans hostage?

The US could and should have rebuilt relations with Iran 25 years ago. To hold a grudge does not serve our interests, and has in fact cost us dearly. There is no reason why we could not have relations with Iran like we do with Pakistan, or Vietnam, or China, or Saudi Arabia.

[texaspackerbacker]

Harlan, this whole back and forth over Iran is getting boring. What is gonna happen is gonna happen regardless of any of this, and unlike Iraq and other venues, it's all future speculation, rather than actual events.

Anyway, how does one recognize a "liberal" independent agency? Maybe because they say "liberal" things? Regardless of that, however, even your pet independent agency doesn't seem to regard Iran as better than Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, domestically speaking, only equally bad. That being the case, I continue to ask, how can you place Iran--blatantly ANTI-American on such a pedestal above the other three--all of which have been loyal allies in the War on Terror and legitimate members of the civilized portion of nations of the world?

You say I'm "lying" about your being hateful of these three American allies and respectful and apologetic for Iran? Well, how would YOU characterize all the nice things you've said about Iran and all the bad things you've said about the three American allies?

I haven't called you a liar--as you've called me. I haven't called you an America-hater or even anti-American. I'm just asking you to explain what seem like inexplicable and indefensible positions you've taken regarding what would seem to be an undeniably evil regime in Iran. How could you possibly think otherwise?

[Harlan Huckleby]

Anyway, how does one recognize a "liberal" independent agency? Maybe because they say "liberal" things? Regardless of that, however, even your pet independent agency doesn't seem to regard Iran as better than Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, domestically speaking, only equally bad.

You reject Freedom House as a liberal mouthpiece, but you base this on zero evidence. If you look at the list of countries I posted a while back, it's obvious they have no ideological bias. They rate Cuba and North Korea worst of all.

Freedom House rated Iran more tyranical overall than Saudi Arabia based on a reasonable and thorough analysis. You dismiss their judgement simply because it doesn't happen to fit your ideology, as you dismiss any and all evidence that doesn't fit your views.

Coincidentally, I saw an AP article today where Freedom House looked specifically at freedom of the press, and they rated Iran as the worst in the world in this respect. Do you theorize that Freedom House temporarily shed their liberal bias in making this particular judgement? Let me find that article, then I will grouse at you some more.....

[Harlan Huckleby]

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i17syAITvC41t92IJKTVvtmiH3ZAD90BM71G8

I was wrong about Iran being very worst, but Freedom Press singled them out for condemnation.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Well, how would YOU characterize all the nice things you've said about Iran and all the bad things you've said about the three American allies?

I haven't said bad things about those American allies, other than to note that objective analysis rates them similar to Iran in terms of human rights.

And as far as my supposed praise of Iran, again, I'm just trying to be objective. They have pluses and minuses. Overall, I think of them like the regime in China, I detest their government. But they also hover over a generally pro-American population, they have checks and balances within their government, and we can cooperate with them on a number of issues.

You are incapable of dealing with a complex world. You paint everything in black/white.

[texaspackerbacker]

Harlan, there's nothing all that complex about it in one sense, and it's you that doesn't understand the complexity in the other sense.

First and foremost, we have the SIMPLICITY of a GOOD versus EVIL world--those who promote freedom and compassion and enlightenment versus those who promote tyranny and barbarism and ignorance. Iran undeniably is the latter. They support terrorism; They threaten genocide; They strive for the means to carry out that genocide; And that pro-American population you mentioned (talk about over-simplification and exaggeration), the tyrannical regime in Iran oppresses, represses, and suppresses it.

There's no complexity at all in recognizing evil. The COMPLEXITY is in how to deal with that evil, given the context of America NOT exerting anywhere near the full weight of our military force because the American left has a sizeable portion of our population conditioned to oppose that.

Just to throw you a bone, I would include in that complexity dealing with domestically evil, but internationally pro-American regimes like the Saudis, Egypt, etc.

Your biggest failing, Harlan, is that you overvalue the domestic evil and undervalue the factor of loyalty to America in the overall Good versus Evil picture.

[Freak Out]

Isn't today "Mission Accomplished" day?

I remember when the comb sucker told congress that by the end of 2003 we would only have a division left in Iraq.

[Freak Out]

Bush makes historic speech aboard warship

ABOARD THE USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN (CNN) --The following is an unedited transcript of President Bush's historic speech from the flight deck of the USS Lincoln, during which he declared an end to major combat in Iraq:

Thank you. Thank you all very much.

Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans, major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.

And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country.

In this battle, we have fought for the cause of liberty and for the peace of the world. Our nation and our coalition are proud of this accomplishment, yet it is you, the members of the United States military, who achieved it. Your courage, your willingness to face danger for your country and for each other made this day possible.

Because of you our nation is more secure. Because of you the tyrant has fallen and Iraq is free.

Operation Iraqi Freedom was carried out with a combination of precision and speed and boldness the enemy did not expect and the world had not seen before.

From distant bases or ships at sea, we sent planes and missiles that could destroy an enemy division or strike a single bunker. Marines and soldiers charged to Baghdad across 350 miles of hostile ground in one of the swiftest advances of heavy arms in history.

You have shown the world the skill and the might of the American armed forces.

This nation thanks all of the members of our coalition who joined in a noble cause. We thank the armed forces of the United Kingdom, Australia and Poland who shared in the hardships of war. We thank all of the citizens of Iraq who welcomed our troops and joined in the liberation of their own country.

And tonight, I have a special word for Secretary Rumsfeld, for General Franks and for all the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States: America is grateful for a job well done.

The character of our military through history, the daring of Normandy, the fierce courage of Iwo Jima, the decency and idealism that turned enemies into allies is fully present in this generation.

When Iraqi civilians looked into the faces of our service men and women, they saw strength and kindness and good will. When I look at the members of the United States military, I see the best of our country and I am honored to be your commander in chief.

In the images of fallen statues we have witnessed the arrival of a new era. For a hundred of years of war, culminating in the nuclear age, military technology was designed and deployed to inflict casualties on an ever-growing scale.

In defeating Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, Allied forces destroyed entire cities, while enemy leaders who started the conflict were safe until the final days. Military power was used to end a regime by breaking a nation.

Today we have the greater power to free a nation by breaking a dangerous and aggressive regime.

With new tactics and precision weapons, we can achieve military objectives without directing violence against civilians.

No device of man can remove the tragedy from war, yet it is a great advance when the guilty have far more to fear from war than the innocent.

In the images of celebrating Iraqis we have also seen the ageless appeal of human freedom. Decades of lies and intimidation could not make the Iraqi people love their oppressors or desire their own enslavement.

Men and women in every culture need liberty like they need food and water and air. Everywhere that freedom arrives, humanity rejoices and everywhere that freedom stirs, let tyrants fear.

We have difficult work to do in Iraq. We're bringing order to parts of that country that remain dangerous. We're pursuing and finding leaders of the old regime who will be held to account for their crimes. We've begun the search for hidden chemical and biological weapons, and already know of hundreds of sites that will be investigated.

We are helping to rebuild Iraq where the dictator built palaces for himself instead of hospitals and schools.

And we will stand with the new leaders of Iraq as they establish a government of, by and for the Iraqi people.

The transition from dictatorship to democracy will take time, but it is worth every effort. Our coalition will stay until our work is done and then we will leave and we will leave behind a free Iraq.

The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001 and still goes on.

That terrible morning, 19 evil men, the shock troops of a hateful ideology, gave America and the civilized world a glimpse of their ambitions. They imagined, in the words of one terrorist, that September the 11th would be the beginning of the end of America.

By seeking to turn our cities into killing fields, terrorists and their allies believed that they could destroy this nation's resolve and force our retreat from the world.

They have failed.

In the battle of Afghanistan, we destroyed the Taliban, many terrorists and the camps where they trained. We continue to help the Afghan people lay roads, restore hospitals and educate all of their children.

Yet we also have dangerous work to complete. As I speak, a special operations task force lead by the 82nd Airborne is on the trail of the terrorists and those who seek to undermine the free government of Afghanistan.

America and our coalition will finish what we have begun.

From Pakistan to the Philippines to the Horn of Africa, we are hunting down Al Qaida killers.

Nineteen months ago I pledged that the terrorists would not escape the patient justice of the United States. And as of tonight nearly one half of Al Qaida's senior operatives have been captured or killed.

The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We have removed an ally of Al Qaida and cut off a source of terrorist funding.

And this much is certain: No terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi regime, because the regime is no more.

In these 19 months that changed the world, our actions have been focused and deliberate and proportionate to the offense. We have not forgotten the victims of September the 11th, the last phone calls, the cold murder of children, the searches in the rubble. With those attacks, the terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States, and war is what they got.

Our war against terror is proceeding according to the principles that I have made clear to all.

Any person involved in committing or planning terrorist attacks against the American people becomes an enemy of this country and a target of American justice.

Any person, organization or government that supports, protects or harbors terrorists is complicit in the murder of the innocent and equally guilty of terrorist crimes. Any outlaw regime that has ties to terrorist groups and seeks or possesses weapons of mass destruction is a grave danger to the civilized world and will be confronted.

And anyone in the world, including the Arab world, who works and sacrifices for freedom has a loyal friend in the United States of America.

Our commitment to liberty is America's tradition, declared at our founding, affirmed in Franklin Roosevelt's Four Freedoms, asserted in the Truman Doctrine and in Ronald Reagan's challenge to an evil empire.

We are committed to freedom in Afghanistan, Iraq and in a peaceful Palestine.

The advance of freedom is the surest strategy to undermine the appeal of terror in the world. Where freedom takes hold, hatred gives way to hope.

When freedom takes hold, men and women turn to the peaceful pursuit of a better life.

American values and American interests lead in the same direction. We stand for human liberty.

The United States upholds these principles of security and freedom in many ways: with all of the tools of diplomacy, law enforcement, intelligence and finance.

We are working with a broad coalition of nations that understand the threat and our shared responsibility to meet it.

The use of force has been and remains our last resort. Yet all can know, friend and foe alike, that our nation has a mission: We will answer threats to our security, and we will defend the peace.

Our mission continues. Al Qaida is wounded, not destroyed. The scattered cells of the terrorist network still operate in many nations and we know from daily intelligence that they continue to plot against free people. The proliferation of deadly weapons remains a serious danger.

The enemies of freedom are not idle, and neither are we. Our government has taken unprecedented measures to defend the homeland and we will continue to hunt down the enemy before he can strike.

The war on terror is not over, yet it is not endless. We do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide.

No act of the terrorists will change our purpose, or weaken our resolve, or alter their fate. Their cause is lost; free nations will press on to victory.

Other nations in history have fought in foreign lands and remained to occupy and exploit. Americans, following a battle, want nothing more than to return home. And that is your direction tonight.

After service in the Afghan and Iraqi theaters of war, after 100,000 miles on the longest carrier deployment in recent history, you are homeward bound.

Some of you will see new family members for the first time; 150 babies were born while their fathers were on the Lincoln. Your families are proud of you, and your nation will welcome you.

We are mindful as well that some good men and women are not making the journey home. One of those who fell, Corporal Jason Mileo, spoke to his parents five days before his death. Jason's father said, "He called us from the center of Baghdad, not to brag but to tell us he loved us. Our son was a soldier."

Every name, every life is a loss to our military, to our nation and to the loved ones who grieve. There is no homecoming for these families. Yet we pray in God's time their reunion will come.

Those we lost were last seen on duty.

Their final act on this Earth was to fight a great evil and bring liberty to others.

All of you, all in this generation of our military, have taken up the highest calling of history: You were defending your country and protecting the innocent from harm.

And wherever you go, you carry a message of hope, a message that is ancient and ever new. In the words of the prophet Isaiah, "To the captives, come out; and to those in darkness, be free."

Thank you for serving our country and our cause.

May God bless you all. And may God continue to bless America.

[texaspackerbacker]

And that's exactly the way it would have happened ......... except for the fact that al Qaeda intervened--blew up the mosque at Samarra, killed a bunch of innocent Iraqis of all three major ethnic groups, successfully blaming the killing on the other groups, and damn near gave the sick Bush-hating American leftists exactly what they hungered for: a civil war.

Fortunately, the Iraqi leadership of all three groups held firm. There were insurgents in the streets, but NO CIVIL WAR because the leadership of the three groups resisted the temptation to sink to that. Slowly but surely, American troops have eradicated much of al Qaeda in Iraq and co-opted or neutralized most of the other insurgents. That success is undeniable and increasingly difficult for the leftist saturated American media to stonewall.

Before that commitment to destroy the America-installed Iraqi regime, all of the landmarks were being met. Iraq was progressing successfully and in a timely manner toward stability. THAT was the news of the first half year or so after the military victory.

And what has been the cost versus benefit summary of the years since the military victory was achieved? We have lost 4,000 + troops--a major tragedy, yet a tiny fraction of Vietnam, Korea, and other wars, barely more than were killed in an hour or so on 9/11. We also have had dollar costs in the hundreds of billions--still totalling less than the estimated economic hit of 9/11.

Have there been benefits of the war? Only if you value the lives of Americans who have NOT been killed by repeats of 9/11 that have been prevented. Amercan leftists like to deny this link--between the war and Bush's preventing repeats of 9/11. Some of the]m correctly point out the OTHER FACTORS--enhanced security, harsh treatment and interrorgation of terrorist prisoners, monitoring of terrorist communication between America and overseas. What they conveniently ignore is the fact that the leftists who hate the American effort in the war also STRONGLY OPPOSED ALL OF THOSE OTHER FACTORS WHICH HAVE SAVED AMERICAN LIVES--I'm talking about Obama and Hillary, Reid and Pelosi, Durban, Murtha, and all the rest of those degenerate scumbags of the left who whine and rant against ALL the factors which have saved huge numbers of American lives--INCLUDING the war in Iraq--which according to al Qaeda itself, was prioritized by al Qaeda ahead of hitting America at home.

I call that a benefit which far outweighs the cost. That conclusion is obvious and not even considered controversial to the huge majority of our troops who are the ones actually making the sacrifices. Only assholes of the leftist media and political persuasion question it. Hopefully, that doesn't include any of you upstanding anti-war types in the forum. I guess we'll see about that by what you guys post in response to this.

[MJZiggy]

Why would ANYBODY want a civil war in Iraq? Remember all the leftists you're criticizing have humanitarian efforts going on there and would lose all their Peace Corps folks.

[texaspackerbacker]

Ya see, there's this little thing called "politics"--which is the road that leads to another little thing called "power".

One way to have success in that area is to REFLECT the views and values of the huge majority of good normal Americans--love of and pride in country, desire for low taxes and lack of government intrusion in their lives, traditional Judeo-Christian moral values and heritage, and MOST OF ALL, having America safe and secure from mass murder by terrorists. That would be the Republicans.

Then you have the other way to success in politics and power. You get the complicity of the media and the educational establishment to hoodwink people and inflict on them a horrible elitist agenda of alternative values, althernative morality, de-emphasis of Christianity in favor of basically any two-bit crap religion or no religion at all, subordination of American power and prestige to international organizations run by crap little countries, many of which are dictatorships, some of which are terrorist-supporting, and most of which are anti-American--while these elitist assholes concentrate on what WE did wrong to make them anti-American, etc. etc. etc. That would be the Democrats.

Which brings us back to the question, why would anybody want to see civil war in Iraq--or why would anybody want to see American failure in Iraq and elsewhere?--or why would anybody want to see economic problems--and indeed, conjure up economic problems where there really aren't any? The answer, of course, is to make the party in office--the one that got there by REFLECTING the views and core values of the people--look bad so they lose in the next elections.

It worked wonderfully for the Dem/libs in 2006, hopefully not so well this time.

[MJZiggy]

First off, I don't believe anyone (well, maybe besides George) is stupid enough to want something like a civil war just to have their party win an election. George looks plenty bad enough to cost his party the election all by himself with no help from any civil war. Then again, we're supposed to be electing the most qualified CANDIDATE, no?

Also realize that these are not Judeo Christian countries we're talking about so maybe they're anti-American because they're pissed that we keep trying to stuff our American Judeo Christian values down their throats...

[texaspackerbacker]

Why would you call a Yale graduate with a higher GPA than that leftist icon, John Kerry, stupid? I'll tell you why: Because the God damned elistist biased leftist media and scummy entertainment establishment portrays him that way. And why do they do that? Because they can't find any REAL degenerate or scandalous aspect to his life, as with Bill Clinton. And why did they apologize for and do their best to cover up the behavior of Clinton? Because he had the same sick leftist and anti-American philosophies as they do. Only recently when Clinton has dared to attack somebody even more rottenly left wing have the damned media and entertainment community turned on him.

Bush actually was liked by the leftist media when he got the Republican nomination as one of the least conservative of those running in 2000. When did they start really attacking him? Right after the military victory in Iraq and the stunning economic recovery from probably the worst calamity in American history, Bush appeared unbeatable. That is when they started to irrationally savage him as has been done to no president in history, not even Reagan.

And as for our "stuffing our Judeo Christian values down their throat"--I assume you mean the Muslims, do you honestly have the gall to suggest that our American Way and all that goes with it is not superior in every way to the barbarism, tyranny, ignorance, sexism, etc. that characterize the Muslim way?