Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

The worst part is the buy-in from the American people. Are they now anti-Bush because he insisted on doing stupid things, or have they been convinced that those "things" were good ideas, just poorly executed. If we, as a nation, are still in the mode that we can and should go wherever we wish and do whatever we want, it will be a long and miserable 4T.

I would hope that we don't forgo Jefferson's exceptionalism as the "shining light on the hill." I could even occasionally be talked into the Wilsonian version of defending those with similar aspirations that come under extreme duress (although I recognize there lays a slippery slope). And I would hope that we always keep the ability to go 'all-Jacksonian (akin to "going all medieval") on anyone that significantly strikes at us.

What I like to see forever assign to history's trash bin is the hubris and stupidity of, as you said, "that we can and should go wherever we wish and do whatever we want."

The politicos who will do well are those that can clearly articulate this difference and gain the trust that knowing the difference will be what guides them.

I think most Americans want their exceptionalism, but in the right form. Its okay to continue to work on those pec's and hope folks will admire them; it’s a whole other matter to going around punching any one in the mouth that looks askance at you.

Originally Posted by salsabob

I would hope that we don't forgo Jefferson's exceptionalism as the "shining light on the hill." I could even occasionally be talked into the Wilsonian version of defending those with similar aspirations that come under extreme duress (although I recognize there lays a slippery slope). And I would hope that we always keep the ability to go 'all-Jacksonian (akin to "going all medieval") on anyone that significantly strikes at us.

What I like to see forever assign to history's trash bin is the hubris and stupidity of, as you said, "that we can and should go wherever we wish and do whatever we want."

The politicos who will do well are those that can clearly articulate this difference and gain the trust that knowing the difference will be what guides them.

I think most Americans want their exceptionalism, but in the right form. Its okay to continue to work on those pec's and hope folks will admire them; it’s a whole other matter to going around punching any one in the mouth that looks askance at you.

That's a tall order, but maybe one well suited to a 4T. Personally, I hope it is. In many ways we are unique. We sit astride a continent that is lush and rich, and we are plentiful enough to be unconquerable. All potential adversaries are elsewhere, nearer to each other than they are to us. If necessary, we can be self sustaining.

So if it comes to be again that we are attacked, we should respond ... by attacking the attacker. Please, let the primary lesson from this be to never attack for vanity or hubris those me merely dislike. The only other lesson would be to immediately fire those that failed to learn the primary lesson.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

That's a tall order, but maybe one well suited to a 4T. Personally, I hope it is. In many ways we are unique. We sit astride a continent that is lush and rich, and we are plentiful enough to be unconquerable. All potential adversaries are elsewhere, nearer to each other than they are to us. If necessary, we can be self sustaining.

So if it comes to be again that we are attacked, we should respond ... by attacking the attacker. Please, let the primary lesson from this be to never attack for vanity or hubris those me merely dislike. The only other lesson would be to immediately fire those that failed to learn the primary lesson.

Absolutely!

By the way, with my analogy of working out to improve one's pec's; I got this strange vision of Virgil doing bench presses using cows for free weights!

I think I need some sleep but now I'm afraid of what dreams await me! ;-)

Originally Posted by salsabob

By the way, with my analogy of working out to improve one's pec's;

But have we been working on the pecs the last few years or have we been eating cancer and sterility causing steroids?

Originally Posted by salsabob

Absolutely!

By the way, with my analogy of working out to improve one's pec's; I got this strange vision of Virgil doing bench presses using cows for free weights!

I think I need some sleep but now I'm afraid of what dreams await me! ;-)

While I have done 350+# lift and carry exercises with the quarters of a slaughtered ox. And, when an arsonist's forest fire threatened my barns and the extinction of young Bovine-Americans as they returned again and again to their kindling pens, I (5'9"/ <12 stone) tossed a near dozen into my truck under the influence of adreneline and the culturally designated sisu (a stubborness of Kalevala-like proportion) of Uralic-Americans. I worked up to about 400# of liveweight Simmental on the tenth go or so. I think we were mutually astounded that I had brought them to the tailgate of my Ford and then tossed them into the box that we were left to but wonder at their uplifting. The last 400# calf made it to the tailgate and then I rolled him over to his fellows and drove to a plowed field to safety.

About 45 years ago inspired by the examples set up in the body-building manuals of Bulfinch and E. Hamilton and most heavily poisoned by testosterone, I tried to follow the example of Milo of Croton with the Holstein-Friesian calf available. All went well for a time as the bullock was mostly skin and bones at this early age; but sadly in a few months time Bovine-American endocrines were opened up and his former acquiescence became by turns sullenness and then outright hostility. My Olympic dream was done in by Bovine-American weight gain and a growing individualistic attitude on the part of my free weight.

This exercise leaves one quite a bit more malodorous than even working out in the gymnasium. So lift your domestic livestock (start out with someone on the order of Siren) and work your way up if you will. Lift the calf, lift the steer, even lift the bull. But, leave the cows upon their feet as it might sour the milk or churn the creams.

I think it safe to practice the more Celestial of the martial arts with even cows. They have kicks that are quite original.

But there wouldn't be an 18-way split - there would be a three-way split: Kurdistan in the north, "Sunnistan" in the center, and "Shiastan" in the south.

And did the world end for the people of the former Yugoslavia when it split up six ways?

Originally Posted by Anthony '58 II

But there wouldn't be an 18-way split - there would be a three-way split: Kurdistan in the north, "Sunnistan" in the center, and "Shiastan" in the south.

And did the world end for the people of the former Yugoslavia when it split up six ways?

Quite a number of personal worlds ended... and it isn't over. The Kosovars were out demonstrating against the UN for standing in the way of complete independence (and of course expelling the Serb minority). Apparently they are still 4T; unlike the rest of the area, the bloodlust hasn't left them yet. (At the other end of Yugoslavia, Croatia is busily preparing itself for EU membership -- very 1T of them.)

The real problem is that the troubles would *not* end with partition. Each of the three states would immediately be under siege from foreign influences. Iran would try to take over Shiastan via its pawn, al-Sadr; presumably, Saudi Arabia and the United States would continue trying to counter this. Sunnistan would be fought out between Syria, Saudi Arabia, and al-Qaeda, with us supporting anyone who will kick Qaeda ass. Kurdistan would receive even heavier pressure from Turkey and Iran, as both fear Kurdish expansionism at their expense.

Iraq is being held together, not by internal cohesion, but by surrounding external pressure. Being in one state keeps them all from being sliced, diced, julienne-fried, and served on platters to their neighbors and enemies. When this finally penetrates their collective mind, Iraq may start coming back together. If Iraq still exists by then...

Originally Posted by herbal tee

But have we been working on the pecs the last few years or have we been eating cancer and sterility causing steroids?

From Katrina to Walter Reed, I think you know the answer to your question. But, there are some bright lights in the darkness - see Virgil's post above or below. ;-)

Originally Posted by Virgil K. Saari

While I have done 350+# lift and carry exercises with the quarters of a slaughtered ox. And, when an arsonist's forest fire threatened my barns and the extinction of young Bovine-Americans as they returned again and again to their kindling pens, I (5'9"/ <12 stone) tossed a near dozen into my truck under the influence of adreneline and the culturally designated sisu (a stubborness of Kavela-like proportion) of Uralic-Americans. I worked up to about 400# of liveweight Simmental on the tenth go or so. I think we were mutually astounded that I had brought them to the tailgate of my Ford and then tossed them into the box that we were left to but wonder at their uplifting. The last 400# calf made it to the tailgate and then I rolled him over to his fellows and drove to a plowed field to safety.

This exercise leaves one quite a bit more malodorous than even working out in the gymnasium. So lift your domestic livestock (start out with someone on the order of Siren) and work your way up if you will. Lift the calf, lift the steer, even lift the bull. But, leave the cows upon their feet as it might sour the milk or churn the creams.

I think it safe to practice the more Celestial of the martial arts with even cows. They have kicks that are quite original.

Virgil, you are one of the lights shinning on the hill!

Perhaps the Seven Nations could adopt a sister area in Iraq and send some photos? With their ties to some of the most ancient practitioners of animal husbandry, I think even a hint of the malodorous scent would be appreciated, and likely aspiring. ;-)

Originally Posted by salsabob

Virgil, you are one of the lights shinning on the hill!

Perhaps the Seven Nations could adopt a sister area in Iraq and send some photos? With their ties to some of the most ancient practitioners of animal husbandry, I think even a hint of the malodorous scent would be appreciated, and likely aspiring. ;-)

I don't know. That story sounded like a lot of bull to me....

Originally Posted by catfishncod

Quite a number of personal worlds ended... and it isn't over. The Kosovars were out demonstrating against the UN for standing in the way of complete independence (and of course expelling the Serb minority). Apparently they are still 4T; unlike the rest of the area, the bloodlust hasn't left them yet. (At the other end of Yugoslavia, Croatia is busily preparing itself for EU membership -- very 1T of them.)

The real problem is that the troubles would *not* end with partition. Each of the three states would immediately be under siege from foreign influences. Iran would try to take over Shiastan via its pawn, al-Sadr; presumably, Saudi Arabia and the United States would continue trying to counter this. Sunnistan would be fought out between Syria, Saudi Arabia, and al-Qaeda, with us supporting anyone who will kick Qaeda ass. Kurdistan would receive even heavier pressure from Turkey and Iran, as both fear Kurdish expansionism at their expense.

Iraq is being held together, not by internal cohesion, but by surrounding external pressure. Being in one state keeps them all from being sliced, diced, julienne-fried, and served on platters to their neighbors and enemies. When this finally penetrates their collective mind, Iraq may start coming back together. If Iraq still exists by then...

However, in our case the threat posed by the mideast is not just al-qaeda or even that of islamism. No, as once acquires more evidence it becomes increasingly clear that islam itself is the problem. For far to long our policy has been based on the notion of winning hearts and minds with the implied knowledge that if muslims understood our peaceful intent they would be peaceful toward us.

However this is no longer possible; 9/11 was essentially the muslims declaring that they have nothing but contempt for america, and especially the sight of americans peacefully trading with them. Therefore the provervial carrot not only would not bring peace but would incite greater hostility from (now emboldened) muslims.

The solution is instead of a carrot, wield and use the stick. This strategy is simple: First announce that we regard the islamic state as enemies and cite islamic terroristic activities as provacations we have endured for far too long. Our war strategy should be a three-phase plan. Phase one should begin with mass carpet bombing strikes on muslims targets. This should include nuclear strikes on major muslim cities and military-strategic targets, with "dresden" carpet bombs conventional strikes on smaller and medium sized muslim population centers. The final part of phase one involves a full scale invasion of north africa and the middle east, iran should also be invaded but not entirely occupied. The mideast, north africa, and the western and southwestern parts of iran should be occupied, once the conquest is complete the occupied zone should be divided into generalkommissariats.

The second phase should primarily be the implementation of the administrative mission of the generalcommisariats; the forcible elimination islam and all vestiges of islamic "culture" even if it means the complete destruction of the entire population of certain regions. It may seem odd that the plan includes not yet occupiying all of iran. The reason is simple, when the now weakened iran sends agents and militants into the US controlled zones we can announce a reprisal policy; for each soldier we lose 5000 muslims will be executed for each soldier wounded 2500 muslims will be executed. As you can see the likely iranian actions would give us the legitimate right to complete our war aims.

The final phase of the plan would be the resumption of the conquest of iran and any major islamic regions not yet occupied as per phase one. In such regions the occupation policies mentioned earlier would be implemented and carried out.

I know that this policy in a moral light would be considered reprehenisble. However when confronted with genocidal enemies, I would rather have them suffer such a fate rather than us.

Originally Posted by Cynic Hero '86

Kill them! Kill them all!

If you think al-Qaeda is the legitimate representative of the attitudes of the entirety of the Islamic world, a realm of a billion souls scattered from West Africa to Indonesia, a group utterly without political, social, or economic cohesion...

I can but pity your ignorance and ask you to go find some books that aren't ideological tracts. Try Bernard Lewis and Karen Armstrong for starters.

Our enemies are not all brands of Islam. They are two particularly pernicious ones: theocratic Twelver Shi'ism, the hacked-together joke of a religion that 'justifies' the Ayatollahs of Iran, and -- much, much more dangerous -- the takfiri, Salafi, and Qutbiyya Wahhabists, who advocate a sixth arkan, condemn any and all bid'ah, and agree with the arguments set forth in The Incoherence of the Falysasufi. They are trying, with their tremendous wealth, to convert all other Muslims to their sect -- and to convince Westerners such as yourself that they are the one and only Islam. Clearly, they have so far succeeded in snookering you.

If you can define all the terms above, and explain why they distinguish our enemies from the rest of the ummah of dar al-Islam, I might start listening to you. In the meantime I propose fighting fire with fire.

Originally Posted by Cynic Hero '86

Kill them! Kill them all!

Get some therapy, bro. Get some help soon. Seriously.

Originally Posted by catfishncod

... If you can define all the terms above, and explain why they distinguish our enemies from the rest of the ummah of dar al-Islam, I might start listening to you. In the meantime I propose fighting fire with fire.

Bada-bing, bada-boom!

Hey, My views aren't something I just found, I have read various sites that discuss the nature of the islamist threat and it's likely plans. I fear that terrorists might gain nuclear weapons and use them against american or other western targets. I've found sites such as belmont club, windsofchange and jihadwatch among others which discuss this threat. I've read that the current president in iran is a member of a sect that believes that the world is on the verge of a devastating general world war that would usher a messianic leader called the 12th inam, this sect openly declares that they are willing to take action to ensure that a world war happens. I am concerned that our government behaves as if we're fighting rational opponents rather than lunatics.

Originally Posted by Cynic Hero '86

Hey, My views aren't something I just found, I have read various sites that discuss the nature of the islamist threat and it's likely plans. I fear that terrorists might gain nuclear weapons and use them against american or other western targets. I've found sites such as belmont club, windsofchange and jihadwatch among others which discuss this threat. I've read that the current president in iran is a member of a sect that believes that the world is on the verge of a devastating general world war that would usher a messianic leader called the 12th inam, this sect openly declares that they are willing to take action to ensure that a world war happens. I am concerned that our government behaves as if we're fighting rational opponents rather than lunatics.

Damn those internets....and where's Justin '77 with his usual pithy remarks in these cases anyway?

Originally Posted by Cynic Hero '86

Hey, My views aren't something I just found, I have read various sites that discuss the nature of the islamist threat and it's likely plans. I fear that terrorists might gain nuclear weapons and use them against american or other western targets. I've found sites such as belmont club, windsofchange and jihadwatch among others which discuss this threat. I've read that the current president in iran is a member of a sect that believes that the world is on the verge of a devastating general world war that would usher a messianic leader called the 12th inam, this sect openly declares that they are willing to take action to ensure that a world war happens. I am concerned that our government behaves as if we're fighting rational opponents rather than lunatics.

Unfortunately, there are also Christianists who believe the Temple must be rebuilt in Jerusalem before the devastating general world war predicted in Revelations can take place, heralding the second return of Christ. Some of these Christianists contribute to American politicians, who have allegedly backed away from the Israel - Palestine peace process in the name of enabling Christ's return. In Bush 43's first year, he briefly attempted to push Clinton's roadmap, but was slapped down by angry Christianists who had contributed towards his election.

Yes, there are lunatics out there. They are not all in the Middle East. They are even damnably predictable, no matter what culture they come from. I'd just think a bit more effort might be put into differentiating between the lunatics and the rational folk. Nuking em all and letting God sort them out would be problematic. I'd second catfishncod's suggested reading.

But conquering the world to make America safe would be problematic. The debt to China resulting from borrow and spend economics has discouraged even our current militant administration from expanding our military to fit their ambition. In World War II, the objective was not nation building of every nation freed from Nazi conquest. The declaration in the Atlantic Charter that we'd return all lands to native rule was pragmatic as well as idealistic and good propaganda. We didn't have to dedicate masses of troops to occupying territories and fighting insurgency. In World War II, we also made it a habit to listen to our allies rather than dictate to them too much. Thus, in World War II, we had allies.

Thus, without full mobilization, without allies, and facing a need to occupy and nation build lands taken in the face of insurgency, a purely brute force military solution is highly problematic. We also don't have 1000 plane bomber formations available anymore. It is easy to say we'll do Dresden style carpet bombing. It is far less easy to amass sufficient aircraft and popular support to actually do it.

So your bombast reduces to a willingness to nuke people you don't like while pretending they aren't a minority scattered among a larger sea of rational people. And me, just for purely selfish reasons, I'd as soon not see the precedent set of freely using nukes.

Hopefully, this will do until Justin wanders by?

The problem is that the lunatics have the greatest concentration in those positions that matter the most: the political and religious establishments. These elements openly clamor for world war, if a country such as Iran aquires nuclear weapons, they would likely at some point launch unprovoked nuclear strikes against western nations.

As for our china debt, there is a simple solution to that problem: just announce that the US simply won't pay it. See problem solved.

Originally Posted by Cynic Hero '86

As for our china debt, there is a simple solution to that problem: just announce that the US simply won't pay it. See problem solved.

Either you are completly putting on an act or else you have no undestanding of the consequences of the US losing global currency reserve status.
To simplify the point in the link, the US can currently buy anything by just printing dollars. Other nations accept them because they know that they can trade them for other things. If we default on our debt, it would cause a worldwide depressions because just like the stock certifcates of 1929 that became worthless after the market crash, the supposidly rich on paper countries of the world would suddenly find this paper worthless. The dollars in your wallet could also become worthless. If the US will not honor the dollar, then no one else will.
The downward spiral could last decades and the country that would be damaged most in the end would be the US for while every other country could revalue their currency if needed against commondities like gold until a new global reserve currency emerges, our currency would be worthless. Far from solving a problem, default would create an unsolvable problem.

Originally Posted by herbal tee

Either you are completly putting on an act or else you have no undestanding of the consequences of the US losing global currency reserve status.
To simplify the point in the link, the US can currently buy anything by just printing dollars. Other nations accept them because they know that they can trade them for other things. If we default on our debt, it would cause a worldwide depressions because just like the stock certifcates of 1929 that became worthless after the market crash, the supposidly rich on paper countries of the world would suddenly find this paper worthless. The dollars in your wallet could also become worthless. If the US will not honor the dollar, then no one else will.
The downward spiral could last decades and the country that would be damaged most in the end would be the US for while every other country could revalue their currency if needed against commondities like gold until a new global reserve currency emerges, our currency would be worthless. Far from solving a problem, default would create an unsolvable problem.

But a nation could simply rehash the solution germany in the 1920's did after hyperinflation rendered the mark worthless: Replace the current dollar with an entirely new version, and cunduct transactions with that version.

Originally Posted by Cynic Hero '86

But a nation could simply rehash the solution germany in the 1920's did after hyperinflation rendered the mark worthless: Replace the current dollar with an entirely new version, and cunduct transactions with that version.

First, consider where Germany eventually ended up. Or Hungary in 1946. Or the confederate states durning the civil war. My family had personal experence with that one. Lack of a middle class was one of the problems that handicapped the South after the civil war. Countries that wipe ot the savings of the middle class tend to have unhappy histories.

Second, the US is effectively de-industralilzed. How is the US going to pay for imports, including oil? If the US destroys its international creditability through default, no one will accept the new currency for payments. We don't really export goods anymore. The standard of living in the US wouldn't be third world, it would be fifth world. The war against moslems you're talking about would not happen, the desperate masses here would have a revolution.

So you propose we do nothing! While al-qaeda, iran and their russian backers slowly marshall their forces for new devastating attacks against the US, probably including WMD attacks. Instead we should launch full scale war in order to confront this threat to our existence before it is in a position to strike.

Originally Posted by Cynic Hero '86

So you propose we do nothing! While al-qaeda, iran and their russian backers slowly marshall their forces for new devastating attacks against the US, probably including WMD attacks. Instead we should launch full scale war in order to confront this threat to our existence before it is in a position to strike.

Why would the Russians support islamists? Chetchia is just one example of the moslem troubles that they have within their own borders. The last thing Russia wants is more radical islamists near its borders.
Iran is shiite and has no long term love for the sunnis in al qaeda. They are in conflict with each other right now in Iraq.
There has been several suggestions on other threads about the best long term approach for the US to take. Taking steps to end American dependancy on middle eastern oil is one of them.
Lumping a billion moslems into one catch all category when there is overwhelming evidence that they are not monolithic then engaging in genecide against them while defaulting on our debts and making the dollar worthless is a course so disasterous, I doubt that even the Bushites could end up there.

Originally Posted by Cynic Hero '86

So you propose we do nothing! While al-qaeda, iran and their russian backers slowly marshall their forces for new devastating attacks against the US, probably including WMD attacks. Instead we should launch full scale war in order to confront this threat to our existence before it is in a position to strike.

Buddy, "24" is fiction. Get a clue.

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

Buddy, "24" is fiction. Get a clue.

So was "the siege" however the themes mentioned in that move came to pass on 9/11. Today's fiction could be tomorrow's fact.