Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Radical Islam - The Cult of Death - Benjamin Netanyahu
This is a four part series on YouTube. It's fascinating and I was glad I found it so that I could post it here. I watched it in it's entirety on Friday evening! Benjamin Netanyahu is very insightful. The world didn't think Hitler was a threat til it was too late. I'm not a fear monger, but when the birth rate of Islam is increasing exponentially doesn't it make you wonder?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Well I think there is a clear consensus that we cannot allow Iran to develop or acquire nuclear weapons. Either Israel and or the United States will have to take out Iran's nuclear sites. The Iranian people are not all extremists. In fact many of them are very pro American and very much dislike the current Iranian regime. So, it is very much in our interest to find a way to bring about regime change in Iran. I think the American people will unite in taking whatever action is necessary if it is done under the next President.
OK, so let's see if I understand this. Jim, you're actually advocating a military strike? I'm all for it, but I am surprised.
Considering the US and our Euro "allies" have all wanted Iranian regime change since 1979, why to you believe it might be successful under the next president? Why do you believe the "American people" would be supportive if done by the next president? That would be somehow different that if done by W?
Let's suppose the we have a President B. Hussein Obama next January and the Iranians are that much closer to a viable weapon. What should BO do? Military strike? Think the EU will be on board? Would a President Obama be supportive of an Israeli strike?
A little joke courtesy of Mark Steyn: A leprechaun, the tooth fairy, a moderate Muslim, and a radical Muslim approach an intersection from different directions. In the middle, on the ground, is a gold coin. Who will reach for it first? Answer: the radical Muslim. The others are mythical creatures. The point is that we all like to believe the Iranians are more benign than others, but they're not.
(coughing and shaking my head)
Jim, this sounds like a very familiar theme that was espoused by the country when we were contemplating invading Iraq! (I still believe there to be weapons of mass destruction by the way.) I believed that we could not allow a tyrant like Saddam Hussein continue to bully a part of the middle east and support terrorism. You know it's like I always say, one bully in the neighborhood just can't be ignored, he ruins the entire neighborhood. You know it's like sticking your head in the sand or ignoring the elephant in living room. What I find interesting is that you say, "find a way to bring about regime change in Iran." That is somewhat frightening to me, because surely you aren't inferring negotiations of some sort with this bully Ahmadinejad? It's a proven fact that you can't negotiate with terrorists, just ask Jimmy Carter. And you mention the "next" President, almost suggesting that this President is finishing out his term as window dressing?? I sure as hell hope he isn't asleep at the wheel. I would love to think Netanyahu is not correct, but I believe that he is a visionary and we better be paying attention or it might not be the Jews that are annihilated this time! Really if you have a chance to watch all four videos in that series, it's very interesting if you like that sort of thing!
Lee, just call me a ditto head!!
I tried to agree with you but I see that you have spun that into another Jimmy Carter rant. If this issue is as important as we all think it is, we need to have the country united behind the action necessary. George Bush has lost the credibility and trust of the country (fact) so that's why I say it should be carried out by the next President.
Jim, presidents don't, or shouldn't, take an opinion poll prior to taking decisive action in the interests of national security. Why do you believe it's necessary to have the country united? What does that mean? Who gauges it? Will it matter if the kooks posting at DU and KOS are not on board? Dennis Kucinich? Nacy Pelosi and Harry Reid? Geez, they're so deadset against what we're doing now, and Iran will be much tougher nut to crack. How about Cindy Sheehan? Is she still out there? Why, if you think action is required, would you disapprove because of the person inhabiting the White House?
Lee I wasn't thinking about getting DU and KOS on board, rather I was thinking about getting the people on Main Street USA on board. You know, those people, some Republican, that just voted Democrats into three of the most Republican Congressional districts in the country. Like it or not and right or wrong, George Bush has lost the trust of the country.
Jim, we travel in different circles. "Trust of the American People" is a nebulous notion. It means nothing. All of the mainstream media folk infected with BDS purvey this notion that he lacks credibility, has lost the trust, etc, etc. Translated, it means that he isn't following their conventional wisdom. I recall a day in the 80s when Reagan was receiving such treatment and, like W, refused to respond which drove them nuts. Reagan was a dolt, too stupid to breath, an amiable dunce (in the immortal words of Clark Clifford), would lead us into nuclear confrontation, and, well you get the picture. It comes with the turf when you're a political conservative.
Post a Comment