Whose War? Patrick J. Buchanan - The American Conservative

"torresD" wrote in news:vvxkc.625$Hs1.308
@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net:

A neoconservative clique seeks to
snip
by Patrick J. Buchanan

There is nothing more ludicrous than Pat trying to distance
himself from neocons. Pat is the prototypical neocon, and
always has been. Big government, intrusive government Pat.

Then again, the Indianapolis LP ran Greg Dixon. Go figure.


--
"It's obvious to me that this country is rapidly dividing itself into
two camps - the wimps and the warriors. The ones who want to argue
and assess and appease, and the ones who want to carry this fight to
our enemies and kill them before they kill us."
--The Hon. Zell Miller

"Asmodeus" wrote in message
6.16...
....
--
"It's obvious to me that this country is rapidly dividing itself into
two camps - the wimps and the warriors. The ones who want to argue
and assess and appease, and the ones who want to carry this fight to
our enemies and kill them before they kill us."
--The Hon. Zell Miller

If Zell had been running things in 1962 he would have rolled over for the
joint chiefs and we would have had a nice little nuclear war. Kennedy
argued.

SG

If Zell had been running things in 1962 he would have rolled over for the
joint chiefs and we would have had a nice little nuclear war. Kennedy
argued.

Kennedy is often --usually-- seen as this playboy cheater, but he faced down
old Iron Pants himself -- Curtis Lemay -- and the other generals who had
convinced themselves that a nuclear exchange with the USSR was a good thing.

Walt

Asmodeus wrote:
"torresD" wrote in news:vvxkc.625$Hs1.308
@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net:

A neoconservative clique seeks to

snip

by Patrick J. Buchanan

There is nothing more ludicrous than Pat trying to distance
himself from neocons. Pat is the prototypical neocon, and
always has been. Big government, intrusive government Pat.

Which planet have you been on for the past few years? Uranus?

Buchanan is absolutely right -- Israel hijacked our foreign policy
the old-fashioned way: they bought it fair and square. Bribery works.
And now, we are fighting a war for the benefit of Israel.

It's time to try Richard Perle for treason.

"Ken Smith" wrote in message ...
Asmodeus wrote:
"torresD" wrote in news:vvxkc.625$Hs1.308
@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net:

A neoconservative clique seeks to

snip

by Patrick J. Buchanan

There is nothing more ludicrous than Pat trying to distance
himself from neocons. Pat is the prototypical neocon, and
always has been. Big government, intrusive government Pat.

Which planet have you been on for the past few years? Uranus?

Buchanan is absolutely right -- Israel hijacked our foreign policy
the old-fashioned way: they bought it fair and square. Bribery works.
And now, we are fighting a war for the benefit of Israel.


Yeah, sure.

-*MORT*-

Morton Davis wrote:
"Ken Smith" wrote in message ...
Asmodeus wrote:
"torresD" wrote in news:vvxkc.625$Hs1.308
:

A neoconservative clique seeks to

snip

by Patrick J. Buchanan

There is nothing more ludicrous than Pat trying to distance
himself from neocons. Pat is the prototypical neocon, and
always has been. Big government, intrusive government Pat.

Which planet have you been on for the past few years? Uranus?

Buchanan is absolutely right -- Israel hijacked our foreign policy
the old-fashioned way: they bought it fair and square. Bribery works.
And now, we are fighting a war for the benefit of Israel.

Yeah, sure.

So tell me, why *ARE* we fighting this war? Because Dubya is a sick
religious nutter who hears voices (like our Teddi)? It *sure* as hell
ain't the WMD (none left, as Ritter predicted) or the links to al-Qaeda
(couldn't find those, either). Powell was right.

"Ken Smith" wrote
So tell me, why *ARE* we fighting this war?

Because Islam has come for us and we've got it to do with them.
Saddam got to ride the pipe because he was a secular muslim and nobody would
get ****ed from a religious standpoint. Iraq and Afghanistan provide good
platforms for confronting Islam on their own ground- better to fight there
than here.

Chas

"Chas" wrote in news:hqWdnS7AjcXgYwndRVn-
:

Because Islam has come for us and we've got it to do with them

And this:

http://www.islam-online.net/English/...rticle05.shtml


--
"It's obvious to me that this country is rapidly dividing itself into
two camps - the wimps and the warriors. The ones who want to argue
and assess and appease, and the ones who want to carry this fight to
our enemies and kill them before they kill us."
--The Hon. Zell Miller

"Chas" wrote in message ...
"Ken Smith" wrote
So tell me, why *ARE* we fighting this war?

Because Islam has come for us and we've got it to do with them.

Iraq was not an Islamic state. It HAD a secular government. However
when we leave, the fundamentalist Islamists might take over.

Saddam got to ride the pipe because he was a secular muslim and nobody would
get ****ed from a religious standpoint. Iraq and Afghanistan provide good
platforms for confronting Islam on their own ground- better to fight there
than here.


You contradict yourself. None of the reasons for taking the war on
AL Queda to Afghanistan were appicable to escalating the war in Iraq.

--

FF

"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote
Because Islam has come for us and we've got it to do with them.
Iraq was not an Islamic state. It HAD a secular government. However
when we leave, the fundamentalist Islamists might take over.

It's entirely because Iraq was titularly a secular state that made it a good
demonstration project for the rest of them.

Saddam got to ride the pipe because he was a secular muslim and nobody
would
get ****ed from a religious standpoint. Iraq and Afghanistan provide
good
platforms for confronting Islam on their own ground- better to fight
there
than here.
You contradict yourself. None of the reasons for taking the war on
AL Queda to Afghanistan were appicable to escalating the war in Iraq.

Not in the least. Saddam was a secular leader out of an Islamic base. You'll
notice he had his ass in the air, calling for help from the jihadi, when it
suited him.
Other Islamic states are run by religious leaders, any attack would be seen
as an attack on the religion- other states have holy sites- again, the
Muslims claim a proprietary authority over their holy sites and desecrate
those of other religions.
Nah; Saddam was a good choice, and it also gives us a base of operations to
deal with other threats as they arise- and they will.

Chas