LGF posted this speech by Evan Sayet, a former writer for Bill Maher. It is rather long, about 45 minutes. But it is very good and fun to listen to: the guy is a comedian, after all. So, I desided to post it here. Listen whenever you have time.
Powered by Qumana
I posted several times about my Protest Warrior activities in San Diego. This particular article is an great reminder of why I consider it my duty to participate in the San Diego Chapter of Protest Warrior and why the only excuse for not being involved at all should be an actual combat deployment (yes, I really think that).
...Carl von Clausewitz is the father of modern strategic thought. His experience was in the Napoleonic Wars, at the dawn of the industrial revolution, but he did not discuss technology. He assumed that armies would acquire whatever weapons were available in pursuit of the traditional objective of war, "to compel our enemy to do our will." When determining the power of an adversary, he notes two "inseparable factors, viz, the total means at his disposal and the strength of his will." With 300 million people and a $14 trillion economy, U.S. means are unrivaled by any combination of enemies in the Middle East. The weakness is in America's will to mobilize adequate resources to sustain the kind of campaign needed to grind down a fanatical opponent. This is the weakness that the enemy has targeted with success. The high civilization of post-modern America seems unable to stand up to the ruthless exponents of Dark Age doctrines.
The eminent British military historian Jeremy Black reconfirms Clausewitz in his study War in the 21st Century, arguing that war "involves a constant– the willingness of organized groups to kill and, in particular, risk death." Material factors are "less important than its social, cultural and political context." In other words, the home front is the decisive theater of war (emphasis mine - Eric-Odessit). American forces that are superior in the overseas theaters of combat may be defeated, not by any failure of those who are there risking death, but by the betrayal of those who are consumed by domestic luxuries and cannot bring themselves to think about the brutal realities of a dangerous world.
…………………………………………………………………………….
Today, the U.S. Congress is a quarrelsome place. Proposals to micro-manage the Iraq War show no consistent thought or grasp of strategy. Fight al-Qaeda, but no other foes. Support the troops, but don't let them win before they are pulled out at some arbitrary date. The only unifying themes are partisanship and political ambition. This is the behavior that doomed democratic Athens, and which will render all the marvelous new military technology useless.
Please read it all. And please participate in our counter-protests in the future.
Powered by Qumana
Whenever I participate in countering the leftist demonstrations, I like to question the leftists about their beleifs. I always try to show them that if they are truly liberal and consistent in their beliefs, then they should not be supporting what they support. So, during last Saturday demonstration I gave one leftist lady a flier with this photograph on it:
I told her that I call this "Hezbo-Jugend", to which she replied: "Let's not call people names". Of course, the obvious response to her admonition is another question: "What else would you call a bunch of kids in a Hezbollah summer camp, raising their right hands in Nazi salute?". On the other hand, the leftists are never shy about calling people names. Last Saturday I was called "a criminal", and one of our marines was called "a baby killer". Dennis Prager, who I respect immensly, often says that, while the Right often considers those on the Left silly, uneducated and misguided, the Left often thinks of those on the Right as evil. Perhaps this could be explained by the common misconception that Fascism and Nazism are on the Right. But I am about to break with tradition of considering the Left stupid or misguided. Burning US soldier in effigy is evil. Supporting the people who train kids in the picture above is supporting the Nazis. Advocating abandonment of the people of Iraq to monsters who use kids in suicide bombings is depraved indifference and evil. Finally, attempting to force defeat on the United States is treasonous.
There. I've said it. The Left is evil, Nazi-sympathizing, indifferent and treasonous. Try proving me wrong.
A couple of days ago Little Green Footballs linked to this:
Insurgents in Iraq detonated an explosives-rigged vehicle with two children in the back seat after US soldiers let it through a Baghdad checkpoint over the weekend, a senior US military official said Tuesday.
The vehicle was stopped at the checkpoint but was allowed through when soldiers saw the children in the back, said Major General Michael Barbero of the Pentagon's Joint Staff.
"Children in the back seat lowered suspicion. We let it move through. They parked the vehicle, and the adults ran out and detonated it with the children in the back," Barbero said.
The general said it was the first time he had seen a report of insurgents using children in suicide bombings. But he said Al-Qaeda in Iraq is changing tactics in response to the tighter controls around the city.
A US defense official said the incident occurred on Sunday in Baghdad's Adhamiyah district, a mixed neighborhood adjacent to Sadr City, which is predominantly Shiite.
After going through the checkpoint, the vehicle parked next to a market across the street from a school, said the official, who asked not to be identified.
"And the two adults were seen to get out of the vehicle, and run from the vehicle, and then followed by the detonation of the vehicle," the official said.
"It killed the two children inside as well as three other civilians in the vicinity. So, a total of five killed, seven injured," the official said.
Calling the people creatures who did this "monsters" is insulting to monsters. But the news itself is a couple of days old, so it is not the point of this post. The Left might be skeptical about this story: they never trust US Government or US Military. But we know that this story is true because it is part of a pattern. There was this, and this, and this. There was this Hezbo-Jugend summer camp. And then there was the story of a British Muslim couple who took their 6-months old baby on a suicide mission and intended to use their baby's bottle to bring the liquid explosives to the airplane. Here is another link to that story. So, I think we can conclude that the story of the terrorists using children in a suicide bombing is not an invention of American propaganda.
And now we come to the question that I wanted to ask the opponents of the war effort, which is the point of this post:
Are you prepared to abandon the people of Iraq to the perverted monsters who use children in suicide bombings?
You say we should not have gone there in the first place. Fine. But does it mean that we should leave? You say that if we have not gone there, thing like this one would not be happening over there. It is arguable, but for the sake of this question I'll give you that. Again, does it mean that we should leave? I was always taught as a kid that if I break something, I have to fix it. So, why doesn't it applies to Iraq? Are you prepared to say that it is not our business? You call yourselves "liberals" and claim to be compassionate. So, please explain to me:
How is abandoning the people of Iraq to those monsters consistent with any sort of liberal ideology and compassion?
I'll wait patiently for answers.
My fellow Protest Warrior John posted his report on last Saturday action here and here. Meanwhile, my friend Smash is running 4-part series on the events in Washington, DC:
Part 4: The Tsunami of Stupid.
The stupid MSM managed to under-report the Gathering of Eagles, but they could not ignore it completely. We need large numbers. Large numbers are impossible to ignore. When will people on my side, presumably normal people, wake up and get off their collective butt? It seems that in San Diego so-called supporters of the troops and their mission for the most part limit their activity to bitching about "liberals" to their friends who agree with them anyway. Yes, I am pretty pissed that there were only about a dozen of us countering the moonbats. Between Free Republic and Protest Warrior it should have been more.
Yesterday was a Saturday and a day of big leftist demonstrations all over the country. Ever since the start of combat in Iraqi theater of the war against Islamo-Fascism the leftists mark the anniversary of the start of the hostilities on the Saturday closest to March 19, the date on which the current hostilities started. In Washington, DC, the Left was countered by the Gathering of Eagles, a counter-demonstration organized by a group of Vietnam War veterans in order to protect the Vietnam War Memorial from the violent and destructive representatives of the Left. Needless to say, Vietnam veterans were not the only ones there. Protest Warriors and Move America Forward also showed up in force. They apparently had a great success in DC: preliminary estimates are that there were about 30 thousands people on the side of Freedom and that they out-numbered the Left by a ratio of 3 to 1.
The leftists here in San Diego have also come out to play, and the San Diego Chapter of Protest Warrior was ready to oblige them with a counter-rally. Unfortunately, here in San Diego attendance by our side still leaves a lot to be desired, so we were out-numbered, as usual. There was maybe about a dozen of us total, including some marines who served multiple tours in Iraq. Nevertheless we got some news coverage by Channel 8. Channel 10 also covered us, but they were horribly biased: when our marines were attacked by the leftists, they made it look like it was marines' fault and they were being arrested by police. In fact, as Channel 8 correctly reported, police had to drive the marines to the destination of the demonstration in order to protect them. The guy who attacked the marines was on a bicycle, wearing a Palestinian scarf over his face. As a side note, when he rode by me, I called him "Nazi". He heard it and, I am sure, was shocked: he did not expect that. But he rode on. Channel 10 still has a video on their site.
We had a visitor from Hell:
He was passing out yummy yellow cake cupcakes. Here is a close-up of the left-overs:
There are some people who still think that there were no links between Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda. This picture proves otherwise:
Looks like Osama supports Obama for 08. In al seriousness, even the 9/11 Commission Report admitted that there were links between the two. It was one of our marines dressed up as Osama bin Laden.
John interviewed Saddam:
Hopefully he will post the audio on the San Diego Chapter of Protest Warrior web site. Our marines engaged in a spirited debate with the leftists:
While the marines were presenting arguments based on facts and experience, the leftists resorted to calling them brainwashed idiots, demonstrating their "support for the troops". I actually got to talk to a guy who was reasonable. He acknowledged that he did not have a solution for the situation in Iraq and that just pulling out would not be a good idea. When I suggested that more troops might be needed, he agreed that it would be a solution, but insisted that there were no more troops available.
Finally, here are some more pictures of our marines, who, while on a break from combat, enter the battle of public opinion:
I can't even begin to express my gratitude to these guys.
In conclusion, I have to say that we were successful, despite pretty low turnout. We got the news coverage, and the leftists got pretty pissed off because of that. We had some fun and we got into the leftists' faces and rattled their cages. I have to say that comparing them to Nazis and calling them "Nazi sympathizers" is effective at this point because they don't expect that, and it bothers them. Over all, it was a good operation. I just wish there were more of us.
It's been almost 2 weeks since my post about Christina Aguilera. The reason is because I ended up in charge of organizing a Protest Warrior action by San Diego Chapter on March 17.
In case you did not know, the leftists are organizing big demonstrations all over the country on March 17. San Diego is no exception. For details on their plans go to http://www.sdcpj.org/. Here is their flier.
Are you ready to be counted? We need to counter the defeatist message with our own demonstration in support of Victory. We have to make it obvious to the media, to our friends and foes alike, that there are Americans who do not support defeat and surrender. This Global War has a mission for everybody. Those of us, who do not carry guns as members of American or Allied Armed Forces, have to participate in the battle of public opinion.
The details of the operation will follow. For now just mark your calendars and prepare to be there roughly from 1pm to 4pm.
If you are in San Diego and planning to participate, sign up to San Diego Chapter of Protest Warrior message board at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SDPW/, as well as San Diego Chapter of Protest Warrior at www.protestwarrior.com.
You can also e-mail us at sandiegopw@gmail.com or leave comments on the San Diego Chapter of Protest Warrior blog. You can also just show up in front of the NBC building on Broadway at 12:30pm next Saturday, March 17, 2007.
If you are in San Diego, I hope to see you there.
My Canadian cousin left a comment on my post about my lonely Protest Warrior action. While she agrees with the notion that our forces have to stay in Iraq because Iraq cannot be surrendered to Iranian Islamo-Fascists, she still asks: "What is Victory?" Indeed, there will be no surrender documents signed in Rheims, Karlshorst or on a battleship. By now it is very widely accepted by friends and foes alike that a Western-style democracy in Iraq is very unlikely in the near future, if ever. What we have in Iraq is insurgency. Thus, our forces are conducting a counter-insurgency campaign. A victory in a counter-insurgency campaign is achieved when the insurgency stops. Unsuccessful counter-insurgency campaigns in recent history are most often associated with American war in Vietnam and the Soviet war in Afghanistan. But there was number of successful counter-insurgency operations. Examples are:
Russian Caucasian War of 1817-1864;
The Philippine-American War (note some anti-American slant of Wikipedia);
Soviet suppression of the Baltic countries;
Soviet suppression of Ukrainian nationalists.
There were more, but this is enough for now. These campaigns were conducted by democracies, an empire and a dictatorship. So, there are quite a few differences between these campaigns. But here is what they have in common:
1. Lack of outside support for the insurgency;
2. Willingness of the government forces to take and inflict casualties;
3. Patience of the government to conduct counter-insurgency operations for many years.
I doubt that the Soviet successes are good examples for us: I don't think we would ever follow in Stalin's footsteps. Thus, perhaps the best example for us is the Philippines, now the loyal ally of the United States. A lady who is a dental assistant in my dentist's office told me stories her grandmother told her (she is a Filipino). Her grandma told her that during World War 2, whenever there was a battle between American and Japanese Navies nearby, the local Filipino fishermen would always rescue the Americans from damaged ships, but finish off the Japanese. Filipinos fought shoulder-to-shoulder with Americans against the Japanese. Manuel Quezon, the first President of the Philippines, did participate in the anti-American insurgency in the early 20th century. Apparently, he used to say: "Damn the Americans! Why don't they tyrannize us more?". At the time he apparently was complaining about the difficulty of getting people to fight against the Americans (despite anti-American slant of Wikipedia). So, I think that a counter-insurgency campaign that turned insurgents into loyal allies could be considered successful. For reference I would recommend The Savage Wars of Peace: Small Wars and the Rise of American Power by Max Boot and Small Wars Manual by United States Marine Corps.
So, what could be defined as victory in Iraq? Simple: when the insurgency is over, there will be victory. We will have to establish presence in Iraq in order to contain and, if necessary, fight against the Iranian Nazis. It will probably take many years to pacify Iraq. We just have to have the patience and political will to wait the insurgency out. We also have to ensure that there is no outside support for the insurgency. It might take some diplomatic or military action to do so. But the most important thing is patience. Without it we will lose simply because we will quit.
I was never a fan of Christina Aguilera. Not because I had anything against her, but because I was not into modern American pop music. Maybe I am simply too old for this. But today I became a fan.
Apparently this song is based on "Boogie Woogie Bugle Boy" by the Andrews Sisters. Click here to listen.
If I weren't told that Aguilera's "Candyman" is based on the "Boogie Woogie Bugle Boy", I would have never recognized the melody, even though it is one of my (and my 6-years old daughter's) favorite Andrews Sisters songs. But then, as the Russian saying goes, a bear must have stepped on my ear when I was little, so no wonder I can't recognize a tune. Nevertheless, Aguilera's song is clearly a tribute to the Andrews Sisters, to American Armed Forces and to American resolve against ruthless enemies. Note the big American Flag in the video with "V for Victory" on it. Note also Rosie the Riveter in the video.
And while we are on the subject of the Andrews Sisters, listen to my favorite of their songs. I'd like to think that they recorded this translated into English originally Yiddish song, made popular by the Barry Sisters, in order to piss off the Nazis. But it was recorded before World War 2, so maybe it is just wishful thinking.
