please review www.replacelindsey.com
Good Deal!
Rod-I read it, you're off to a good start. One minor quibble. You need to change the word "eccept" to "accept". I know it's a minor typo, but people jump on things like that and use it as a point of derision. It's right under the YouTube video.
I've only read the first page so far, but I've bookmarked it.
Lem, The amount of destruction involved is mind boggling BUT it really seems that militant muslims only behave when they're on the receiving end of a severe ass-kicking. Ask the Shah, or Saddam.
I think instead of "salting the earth" we should use bac-o-bits.
I think you left out the most important step.
In exchange for taking away our secular buildings on 9/11/01 Islam should lose one holy building.
That one is sitting on the Temple Mount and that which is Muslim there should be wiped off the face of the earth. The bits and pieces can be scattered to the world's universities for anthropological study, photographed in detail and then pulverized and the dust scattered.
You want your holy site? I want my 3,000 people back. There are husbands, wives, fathers, mothers, sons, daughters and friends among those killed by Islam. Islam must pay.
check out http://www.pardonlibby.net
Not withstanding any differences of opinion among us posters with regard to Jews, Muslims, U.S. Middle East foreign/military policy, or petro politics; I can't for the life of me understand why this country has allowed itself (via immigration policy) to be populated by enclaves of Middle Eastern Muslims.
Flaxen-It's due mainly to the influence of CAIR,the ACLU, Democrats as well as Republican Neo-Cons, and some universities that want the money that comes from Arab/Muslim students.'
Lemuel,
Thank you for your answer. It still seems ill-conceived to me.
If we're an empire, as you assert, we sure are a broke one. You seem to be a history buff. Can you think of any lasting empire in the history of the world that was financed by other countries (Saudi Arabia, China, Japan)? What if our financiers decide to stop funding us? We'll have to pay for the war somehow - probably thru tax increases.
1. The Saudis/Sunnis - What sort of pressure are you suggesting we apply? The type of pressure that Dick Cheney and George Bush have been applying? It doesn't seem to work very well and what if they turned off the oil?
2. Iran - how would you pacify Iran when we can't even pacify Iraq? How would you "suppress" Shiite Islam?
3. Gaza - kill everyone. Again, logistically speaking, how would you accomplish this? Don't you think our support of an outright slaughter would diminish our standing and moral authority in the world?
You think your proposals would change the equation, but I think they'd actually change it for the worse. Do you think other Muslim countries (Indonesia, Turkey, Egypt, etc.) would sit by passively as we slaughtered and suppressed these people solely on the basis of their religion?
And, just out of curiosity, what will your role be in this conquest of Islam. Will you be leading the charge from the rear (your home office) or should I expect to see you join a great line of foreign conquerers?
Hyunchback,
I think you need to read history. When WWII ended, the Germans and Japanese stopped fighting us. After the Commander-in-Chief declared major combat operations over in Iraq, the violence not only didn't stop, it escalated.
If you want to compare Iraq to a previous war, the unfortunate fact is that Viet Nam is the closest equivalent we have. Both Iraq and Viet Nam had governments that wouldn't survive without us propping them up and we're fighting many people who aren't even part of an organized military.
arguably, Iraq is worse because even though we just spent $1/2 trillion dollars to beat Saddam, we've now started arming Saddam loyalists who will almost certainly turn their guns on US troops at some point in a perfectly predictable example of blowback (remember Afganistan & bin Laden?).
One quick comment... You said:
"It is the next war, the one not against Iraq, but against the foreign terrorists who have infiltrated the country and attempted to start a Sunni vs Shiite civil war that we have handled badly. "
So I guess you're acknowledging that there weren't any foreign terrorists in Iraq when we invaded, right? I think it's safe to say that we've actually made matters worse in that regard.
How anyone can cite Iraq as a "success" in the war on terror is a mystery to me and it's simply not supported by the data. If it was a success, by definition, the # of attacks would be going down instead of up every single year.
FWIW, by the your own definition, US troops are attacked by "terrorists" every single day. the Iraq Study Group report said we're attacked in Iraq more than 100 times/day, also. Simple math tells us that the US is now attacked by terrorists more than under every other President in American history combined. Again, this is not success, it's failure.
Billy Joe,
"If we're an empire, as you assert, we sure are a broke one."
I do not assert that we are an empire. I point out what we would do if we were an empire.
"The Saudis/Sunnis - What sort of pressure are you suggesting we apply?"
Turning Mecca into a sea of glass then shooting the members of the royal family one by one until they agree to be our puppets.
They will not "turn off the oil" because our troops will occupy the oil fields.
"Iran - how would you pacify Iran when we can't even pacify Iraq? How would you "suppress" Shiite Islam?"
The insurgency in Iraq is not a home grown movement. It is something which is being fed into Iraq by Saudi backed Sunni terrorists and Iran backed Shiite terrorists. Once Saudi Arabia and Iran were dealt with the Iraq would fall into line quickly because the insurgency would dry up like a plant which has been pulled up by the roots. As to how I would deal with Iran I would destroy every city, every power plant, every sign of advanced technology. I would reduce them to a preindustrial state so that they would have more important things to worry about than exporting their fraked up religion.
"Gaza - kill everyone. Again, logistically speaking, how would you accomplish this?"
The Mongols did similar things with nothing more than swords, bows and horses. Do you really think that with all our technology we could not sterilize a patch of ground smaller than a lot of Texas cattle ranches?
"Do you think other Muslim countries (Indonesia, Turkey, Egypt, etc.) would sit by passively as we slaughtered and suppressed these people solely on the basis of their religion?"
Not their religion, their actions. And I would not care what they did because they do not have the power to challenge us.
As for my role. . . Well if the people of the United States want to appoint me God-Emperor and ruler of the Earth I would humbly accept the mantle of responsibility.
"So I guess you're acknowledging that there weren't any foreign terrorists in Iraq when we invaded, right? I think it's safe to say that we've actually made matters worse in that regard."
It has been proven that there were high level contacts between al Qaeda and Saddam and Saddam was supporting terrorism by paying the families of suicide bombers.
" How anyone can cite Iraq as a "success" in the war on terror is a mystery to me and it's simply not supported by the data. If it was a success, by definition, the # of attacks would be going down instead of up every single year."
How many attacks like 9/11 have there been on US soil?
ZERO.
Instead of attacking American citizens in parks and malls and restaurants and movie theaters and office buildings IN AMERICA the terrorists are fighting our military on Middle Eastern soil.
Why can't you understand that this is a good thing?
The choice is not between fighting them in Iraq or not fighting them at all. It is between fighting them in Iraq and fighting them in New York, Atlanta, Miami, Dallas, Los Angeles, Chicago, Kansas City. . .
9/11 shows the war being fought on their terms. Iraq is the war being fought on our terms. Pick one or the other because there is no third choice.
As much as I love the idea of turning Mecca into a beautiful montage of multi-colored glass, it's not really necessary. They would be easily dealt with.
Just tell them, we expect you to continue to sell us your oil at a steady price of fifty dollars a barrel, not ever one penny more.
In return, we give you the means to defend yourself against your religious nuts, and at the same time stop importing Wahabi Islam overseas, not just to the United States, but anywhere else.
That is what you get from us, the ability to protect yourselves from them, and kill them all if you want in whatever way you want to, and therefore you can continue to live your lives of luxurry.
That however is all you get from us. And if you stop selling us the oil at the price we dictate, you will not even get that much. Any more problems out of you or your subjects, and you are on your own against them, then once they are finished with you, we will take care of them ourselves.
Then we lay the same conditions on all the other Muslim countries that we do business with. That would be the end of it, I believe.
I still like the idea of turning Mecca into a sea of multi-colored glass though. I think it would be quite pretty.
Hi Lem,
Thanks for your answers. I'll reply to your second comment later, maybe on my blog. For now...
So you're not saying we're an empire? You're saying we should act like one and borrow the money from foreigners to do it. Sorry, that's not a serious proposal. By virtue of the fact that we can't finance our empire ourselves, we would be begging for financing from foreigners from the get-go. And they could just stop paying if they decided we were a danger to them, which is a very real possiblity if we're invading various countries, overthrowing their governments and slaughtering people indiscriminately.
Turning Mecca into a sea of glass. I assume you're referring to nuclear weapons. If so, do you think the Israelis and our troops will like having radioactive fallout rain down on them? Why would US troops, a number of whom are stuck in Iraq because of manpower issues, want to go protect oil in a country that is contaminated with radiation? Again, this is a childish fantasy and is completely unrealistic.
The Iraqi insurgency is not homegrown? Polls suggest that a majority of Iraqis support attacks on US troops. Do you have any evidence to support your assertion that the insurgency is not homegrown? I will concede that there are foreign fighters in Iraq, but my understanding is that they are actually a very small fraction of the total fighters against the US (between 5~10%). We can debate it later, but I think it's a complete oversimplification to say that among the many different groups we're fighting in Iraq, none of them are homegrown. The Saddamists who have killed American troops but whom Americans are now aligning themselves would almost certainly fall into the "homegrown" category.
Gaza: how do we "sterilize" it? I'm asking for details, not bumper sticker slogans. how would you sterilize it? Obviously not on horseback with swords. Do we send more troops that we don't have to march thru and shoot everyone in a human phalanx? How many troops would that require?
Regarding your role in this war... so you aren't doing anything and you don't plan to do anything, unless asked to be God-Emporer, which will never happen because there is no such position. So in other words, your role is to blog. That's the definition of a paper tiger. You aren't even going to enlist so you could meet this threat to American and western, christian civilization head on? I'm sure the troops in Iraq appreciate your cyber contribution but I'm also sure the terrorists are laughing at your cowardice. It's one thing to talk tough, but another thing entirely to actually follow thru.
Drop by my blog sometime. I appreciate your willingness to engage me. You're one of the few right-wingers who's even willing to talk about the war anymore but your proposal for winning the war sounds like it was thought up by a 5 year old. I could shoot holes in it all day long.
At least you tried.
If you know of any right wing sites where people actually talk about detailed, realistic strategies for winning the war, by all means, point me in their direction.
I do read history, Billy Joe.
'Hyunchback,
I think you need to read history. When WWII ended, the Germans and Japanese stopped fighting us. After the Commander-in-Chief declared major combat operations over in Iraq, the violence not only didn't stop, it escalated.'
Problem is that we didn't war on the people, we warred on the government. We whipped the government without whipping the people. There was no Sherman marching through Falujah. There was no firebombing of Bahgdad. When secondary power figures like Sadr rose up in the power vacuum created by the toppling of Saddam we tried to negotiate with him rather than deal with him. The only negotiation should have gone like this 'You totally support us, and everyone who works for you totally supports us and we let you live. Otherwise...'
"If you want to compare Iraq to a previous war, the unfortunate fact is that Viet Nam is the closest equivalent we have. Both Iraq and Viet Nam had governments that wouldn't survive without us propping them up and we're fighting many people who aren't even part of an organized military."
Not a parallel, Billy Joe. In Vietnam we faced an indigenous enemy. In Iraq we face non-indigenous enemies shipped in specifically to war on both us and the population. Those from Iran want to kill Sunnis as much or more than they want to kill us. Those from Saudi want to kill Shiites as much or more than they want to kill us.
Not even England faced this kind of war in Northern Ireland where the Protestant side was allied with the English.
"arguably, Iraq is worse because even though we just spent $1/2 trillion dollars to beat Saddam, we've now started arming Saddam loyalists who will almost certainly turn their guns on US troops at some point in a perfectly predictable example of blowback (remember Afganistan & bin Laden?)."
You keep throwing money numbers at us like it's supposed to impress someone. What is the cost of losing, Billy Joe? What is the cost of having Iraq firmly in the hands of terrorists? What dollar figure is that?
Nothing in what I have posted could be taken by a serious reader to suggest that I support the higher level strategies used by political figures but I support victory in this war with every fiber of my being. I WANT victory and don't believe that we will achieve it with the strategies used thus far. Lem has posted a broader strategy that has worked in the past on insurgencies. That has NOT been tried in Iraq or Afghanistan.
"So you're not saying we're an empire? You're saying we should act like one and borrow the money from foreigners to do it."
Borrow? Do you realize how much wealth we would obtain by annexing the oil fields of the Middle East.
The only way to win a religious war is for one side to put the fear of their God into the other side and that includes civilians and non combatants. Our compassionate moves to win the hearts and minds have only made us look weak in the eyes of our enemies.
Good post, I agree with most of it.
The Roman Empire was financed by forgeiners except they just went in, broke things, and took the wealth. Ask the Greeks. You talk about what the Romans did to the Jews, look at what they did to Carthage. Caesar depopulated Gaul. Afterward, the Romans had very little trouble from these regions because the locals realized that it was better not to incur the wrath of the Roman state and its legions.
Other nations invest in the US because they see us as a stable market that is going to continue its growth. We are not borrowing, others are investing in us. If the US cut off the sale of bonds the world would be in dire financial straits. Where would the old and neuvo rich of the world put their money? Where else will they invest? The opaque Chinese? In wilting Europe? Authoritarian Russia? The Middle East? Backward and Leftist South America? In the AIDS ridden basketcases of Africa?
The Saudis will never turn off the tap because they need the revenue too badly to keep their own restive and lazy population quiet.
They could hold down production, but they have no other source of revenue.
All of this is academic. We could never act properly to stop the Jihadists because of Western Leftists and the media. Hell the media goes crazy if American soldiers walking by a house in Baghdad wake a baby from its nap.
Hyunchback,
You said:
"I support victory in this war with every fiber of my being. I WANT victory and don't believe that we will achieve it with the strategies used thus far."
Are you actually fighting the war or are you leading the charge from the rear like most right wingers? It sounds big to say you want to win with every fiber of your being, but waging it online is not exactly heroic.
Commenting by HaloScan
