Hi all,
I just wanted to link you to a MUST READ article written by Caroline Glick. It details exactly how the US/UK/Germany/Israel must act if it hopes to win the war against the Islamofanatics.
Here's the start of the brilliance:
The footage of the British hostages thanking Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for his hospitality and forgiveness, like the footage of Speaker of the US House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi covering her head in a scarf while on a visit to Damascus, was enough to make you sick.
Must we lose this war?
Read the whole thing!
My analysis is exactly the same as Glick's though I didn't have the wisdom to phrase things as perfectly as she did. It is disgusting to see the world gloating over the "benevolence" of Iran, compared to the "evil" of Abu Ghraib and the US. That is the end result of what happened. And meanwhile, what of the British hostages? They said after they got back to safe harbor that they were blindfolded and isolated, and forced to make the remarks they made on TV.
But none of this matters, and the world doesn't care.
Iran had its PR coup, and they exposed the West as weak, useless, feckless, and inept.
Please read Caroline Glick, and her analysis on what must be done. I would love your feedback!
6 comments:
Hi Egypeter:
I actually responded to much of what Sphinx said, except he censored it for his blog. (too hot to handle?)
Thanks for posting here! I agree with 100% of what you said, and he did not fool me for even one second!
Ultimately, Sphinx is a perfect example of a livning hypocrite. He keeps saying Islam is so peaceful, yet he openly admitted that the mosque he attends is run by the Muslim Brotherhood. He says he is peaceful, and he openly supports Hamas and Hezbollah. I thought he was saveable, but alas, he is a lost cause.
I am amazed you actually read that exchange, but glad you did, as it is a perfect example of the mentality that we face in this world, sadly.
I also have discovered a shocking fact...many of Sandmonkey's friends are people who are active members of the Muslim Brotherhood. I wonder how he is able to maintain friendships with people like Alaa (of manalaa.net), who I have documented already is a very vocal supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood.
What's the point of defending someone's "freedom of speech," when those people thank you by wishing you dead? This is why I honestly was rooting for the amendments to pass in Egypt - anything that bans the Muslim Brotherhood is a good thing. If the choice is a mullahtocracy or a thugocracy, I choose a thugocracy any day.
Sad world we live in, no?
Egypeter:
In the end, it's a waste of time to even discuss Sphinx, who is but one person of limited influence. Interesting that you read the comments, though!
It's a shame you don't have a blog, as your experience as a Coptic Christian is frankly of vital importance for the world to know about!
There is no way, on god's green earth, that 15 US servicemen would have behaved with such craven cowardice. In the end, their spineless officers made excuses for them, and they went away clutching gift bags like teenage girls clutching "American Idol" consolation gifts. If those cowardly, disgraceful limeys don't kill themselves out of shame, they have none.
I think the biggest balls in Britain are 6 feet under, between the deceased Maggie Thatcher's legs. Only 7% of their population thought they should have geared up for war when the hostages were bing held.
And their Admiral said those sissies behaved with "dignity and courage". The woman rolled in 24 hours, several men not long after. Maybe the limeys need to read Admiral Denton's book.
The French need to move over, the British are joining them in the cowards club.
Egypeter:
Your comment never showed up on Sphinx's site. Shocka, huh?
I would love for you to read Ayaan Hirsi Ali's autobiography. I am very curious as to what you think. In fact, I think I will post it as reading for a C4A book club!
P.S.: Please email me! (you can see how on the main page) I would love to hear more from you!
Smarty:
I would like to think the Americans would have acted differently, but I honestly doubt it.
It is amazing to see the arrogance and hypocrisy of the people from the once great and noble USA.
Firstly in terms of the British sailors, they could not fire on the Iranians as they were in international waters, and the rules of engagement prohibited firing unless they were fired upon. Swiftly after the Iranians had the British surrounded, and to try to fight their way out would have ended up with 15 dead servicemen, and an international incident, which I don't think would have solved anything.
You talk about the British having balls - however the USA does not seem to have balls either - it did not support the UK in any way in the UN or elsewhere. This is especially distressing as the USA caused the problem in the first place by kidnapping a number of Iranian diplomats.
As for the USA, I seem to remember numerous occaisions during the war in the 90s when captured USA airmen said pretty similar things. There is absolutely no point in captured people not cooperating with their captors, especially when they think their lives might be in danger.
Finally I think that the comment about dropping a 'nuke' on them just about sums up the attitude of the USA, and the reason why we are in this mess in the first place.
Caleb:
I don't see where I said that Iran should have been nuked in response to the hostage crisis.
That said, these words of your's are particularly disgusting...
This is especially distressing as the USA caused the problem in the first place by kidnapping a number of Iranian diplomats.
This is saying it's somehow all America's fault. When in doubt, blame America. That's your motto, and I see it clearly.
Never mind these 'diplomats' were in Iraq, and actually consisted of people such as the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Quds director, who was directing the Revoutionary Guard to attack soldiers in Iraq!
Never mind that there is no indication, regardless, that Iran did what it did to Britain as a response to American action.
No, none of this matters. Blame America first. When in doubt, it's our fault!
As far as the British soldiers - they were not in "international waters," rather, they were in Iraqi waters, and it was within their legal rights to fire back if the rules of engagement were not so f*cked up. I already tackled that and said the rules of engagement are nonsense. But moreover, there is no justification for their shameful display on camera (which occurred quite soon after they were captured). And nowhere in any of what I wrote did I say Americans would have behaved differently. I see no real evidence of this.
Let me quote myself...
I would like to think the Americans would have acted differently, but I honestly doubt it.
Post a Comment