What do the Dems really think?

The Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan knows how to play the Liberals and the American Media.

Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah's leader, said in a TV interview aired today that he would not have ordered the capture of two Israeli soldiers if he had known it would lead to such a war.

Quickly, the press has taken the bait and are calling Israel the aggressor.

This wasn't only about the two kidnapped soldiers - - that was just the straw that broke the camel's back.

Mississippi, under Republican management, has healed from Katrina nicely, rebuilding to what she was before Katrina hit. Southern Louisiana, under Democratic leadership, is still blaming the Federal Government for this and for that, and are still sitting in the rubble waiting for a hand-out.

The Dems stated that Bush lied because we found no WMD's. Then, when it was released that over 500 chemical weapons had been found in Iraq, the Dem's response was that those weapons are not techinically WMD's, and if they are, they aren't the WMD's we went into Iraq over, so Bush still lied.

The Liberals, however, say that we should've sent more troops into Iraq, and that they support the war on terror, but they don't support the war in Iraq, nor support the aggression of Israel against Lebanon (they're too stupid to realize that it's not against Lebanon, but against Hezbollah).

It seems the moment we entered Iraq they were looking for an exit strategy. You don't enter a war and then immediately look for a way out, or undermine the effort. The only acceptable exit strategy is Victory! Any other exit strategy is for losers.

Besides, cutting and running would be the wrong message to send to Iraq, and the world, for that matter, but the Libs have no interest in the war other than to lose it. They are defeatists, intent to undermine the effort. Anywhere else in the world, in any other nation, the Liberal's and Media's actions would be labeled as treasonous behavior.

And they complain that the right thinking Americans of this nation question their patriotism.

The definition of patriotism is love and pride of country. Love and pride does not search for surrender and defeat.

Damn right we question their patriotism!

And I think that they truly believe that the war in Iraq is something cooked up by the GOP to increase numbers. Terrorism is not a little problem, and we are not sticking our nose in some personal problem between Israel and Islam, as some on the left tend to think. Terrorism is a worldwide struggle.

The left truly believes that if we cut and run terrorists will just leave us alone and they will be content to fight it out with Israel. First of all, Israel is our ally and we need to support them. Second of all, 9/11 was an act of war, and if we lose the war the left really believes that is will just be a loss for Bush and the Republicans -- But if the United States were to cut and run as the left suggests with our tails between our legs it would be a defeat for the U.S. on a scale that the left just doesn't understand.

The global community doesn't follow America's inner politics -- they don't see Republicans and Democrats -- the world only sees America. If the United States were to cut and run in the face of terrorism we'd have a lot more to worry about than the political devisiveness that the left is so eager to proclaim the GOP is guilty of.

Yes, the war on terrorism (including the war in Iraq) is hard, and what's going on with Israel and Hezbollah (or Iran and Syria's behind the door activities, for that matter) doesn't help matters a whole lot. But this war is a lot harder than it should be not only because we are up against an ideology that doesn't negotiate and only wants to kill you, but also because of the leftwing media and politicians intent on sabotaging the effort. And it would make it far worse if we were to walk away. Simply put, we must finish what we started. Wars are won by the side that wants it the most. Any show of weakness will open us up to attack, with the hope that the outrage by the defeatists will push us out of that region. Then, after that, after we're gone, do the libs really think the Jihad will simply end? Not in the least. First Israel would be annihilated, then the conversion of Europe and America would resume, showered by terror attacks and assassinations against anybody that Islam feels would be a threat to them.

What do the Dems really think? They think that you can reason with the unreasonable. They think that the Islamic Radicals will just shrug and settle down once we cut and run. They truly believe that the best way to deal with terrorism is to open our borders, and welcome them with open arms.

Final thought. One argument given to me by a liberal I work with was, "Spain pulled out, and they haven't been hit ever since."

Really?


Before 2004: April 12, 1985, Madrid, Spain: Bombing at restaurant frequented by U.S. soldiers, killed 18 Spaniards and injured 82.

On Thursday, March 11 2004, during the morning traffic of people going to work in Madrid, several bombs were exploded in commuter trains as they pulled into stations. Shortly after that, when a liberal took office, Spain pulled out of Iraq.

In October of 2004, Spain's National Police learned of a plot to attack the National Court, where Spain's top judges investigate terrorism, with a truck laden with a half-ton of dynamite. An informer said the leader was an Algerian born in the United Arab Emirates named Mohamed Achraf. According to a police intelligence report cited by the Associated Press, Achraf recruited members of his "Martyrs for Morocco" cell inside a jail in western Spain sometime after the March 11 attacks.

Acting on foreign intelligence, approximately 100 Spanish police officers descended on a suspected Islamic cell in northeastern Spain near Barcelona on Dec. 22, 2004 and arrested three Moroccans on suspicion of planning to buy explosives.

Okay, too many since then (and that isn't all of them in 2004), so let's fast forward to 2006:

26 incidents detailed here (the list has 28, but two of them were prior to 2006)

26 -- and that's just this year so far!

The problem with the left is, as many posters have stated on my comments before, is that their decisions are based on emotions, not reality.

Unfortunately, it seems that "sense" is not a common commodity.

Makes you wonder about the symbols of the parties, doesn't it?

GOP: Elephant -- strong, intelligent, works as a group . . .
Dems: Donkey -- stubborn, hard to deal with, last one I saw was pulling a cart full of manure, Jackasses.

You know, I don't think the Dems really know what they think, other than that their only chance into the White House in 2008 is to hate Bush so much that people may buy their backward propaganda.

I hope the voters don't fall for it.