Lou Dobbs: ‘US Troops Out Now!’
Eric Garris,
November 20, 2009
I don’t know how I missed it, but Lou Dobbs has called for immediate withdrawal of US troops.
From Afghanistan? YES!
From Iraq? YES!
From Germany, Japan, South Korea, and everywhere else around the world? YES!
He even has a petition on his Website!
Here’s Lou Dobbs, in his own words:
Henry_Clemens
November 21st, 2009 at 1:42 am
Three cheers for Lou Dobbs! Better late than never Lou.
grg
November 21st, 2009 at 2:02 am
Too bad he was canned a few days ago, so most of his audience will not hear him. It also seems he was shot at (previous to being fired). I guess he can do Cindy Sheehan's show now. It seems anti immigrant types in both the US and UK and perhaps elsewhere have become openly anti war. So there you have it anti fascists are protesting anti war BNP.
mark
November 21st, 2009 at 2:58 am
Perhaps Lou Dobbs's hostility toward immigrants gave the foreign policy thought police the perfect liberal cover for getting rid of him. They were able to pretend that it was his xenophobia that resulted in his dismissal, when it was in fact his increasingly radical anti-interventionism that alarmed the elites. "Why, at this rate, he might start suggesting that Americans should put their own interests ahead of Israel's, for example! We can't have that!"
Peaceful_Idiot
November 21st, 2009 at 3:45 am
This makes sense, like Paul and Buchanan most "racists" and "antisemites" are coincidentally noninterventionists.
lacoste
November 21st, 2009 at 5:02 am
Supra Shoes
men's supra Strapped Shoes
Supra Suprano
Johnny in Wi.
November 21st, 2009 at 6:39 am
I believe Dobbs is thinking of running a third party antiwar, anti illegal immigration, populist campaign for president. He is quite a rabble rouser and could even possibly win. Anyway any loudmouth converts to bringing the troops home is welcome.
Walter Cole
November 21st, 2009 at 7:35 am
Yes to everything Lou said. Isn´t it interesting that he said such a thing immediately upon leaving CNN?
Shaun
November 21st, 2009 at 10:17 am
Dobbs is in the wilderness now – how brave of him to come out now that he has nothing to lose by suddenly proclaiming a rational foreign policy view. He has been discredited in the eyes of most of his supporters and everyone else hated him anyways. So what does this accomplish?
Lester_Ness
November 21st, 2009 at 11:08 am
Not in a million years.
bulletsbiden
November 21st, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Dobbs? WTF??
andy
November 21st, 2009 at 4:30 am
Don't invade or invite the world.
andy
November 21st, 2009 at 4:30 am
Don't invade or invite the world.
roger
November 21st, 2009 at 4:41 am
Lou makes perfect sense on this issue.
Hacklheber
November 21st, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Invasion of the Body Snatchers! Mr. Dobbs has been replicated. Who's next?
zouppie
November 21st, 2009 at 1:00 pm
He would have been gone a lot sooner if he had come out against the empire. Most of the expert guests on CNN are odious. neo-con hacks dredged up from the American Enterprise Institute.
Magnes
November 21st, 2009 at 5:57 am
Lou Dobbs knows who he enemy is.
He did a lot to go after CFR policies.
And was attacked by organized Jews.
I always knew he never supported the wars.
Just the troops.
Regards
Jane Doe
November 21st, 2009 at 2:09 pm
I worked with Dobbs back in the day. Pompous, narcissistic assbite IMO.
That being said –"Hurrah" for this. If Dobb's can get the yahoos out in the flyover zone (and I'm one) to become anti-empire, anti-Israel uber alles, and antiwar, heck, I'd vote for him.
Jane Doe
November 21st, 2009 at 2:17 pm
Palin?
Maybe if her son comes back in a body bag, and no I'm NOT wishing that on her or him — no one should have to bury their children even if they only exist to use as political props — but there's nothing like putting your kid in the ground to turn you against the insanely stupid war that got them there. See: Rudyard Kipling.
Lear K
November 21st, 2009 at 8:00 am
This is typical!
Where was he when he had a bigger audience ?
But anyways,I hope he is committed to what he says now and not changes his position when he gets hired by Fox.
citizen1
November 21st, 2009 at 4:34 pm
CNN was taken over from Ted Turner by the usual Jewish Zionist to make certain there was not even one major television outlet for anyone who may espouse views independent or dissenting from our blind allegiance to Israel. Turner believed at the time he would continue to have influence but he was later disnfranchised. The wars in which we are involved are surrogate religious wars on behalf of Israel. Our Constitution prohibits the support of religion. Why then is the largest recipient of our foreign aid, confiscated from US citizens, a "nation" which promote itself as a "Jewish nation"? Israel openly discriminates in favor of Jews and even subsidizes and supports the most radical elements of its religion. This must stop. TheUS must revert to our Costitutional principles. We have no busness or legal justification foinvolvement in these wars.
Jane Doe
November 21st, 2009 at 5:08 pm
Actually, I worked for Turner too. I'm a bit of a Zelig. Ted said that selling CNN was his biggest mistake. This was a few years back — could have been almost a decade ago, and he recently said that he wants to buy CNN back.
Ted also got called out on his opposition to Zionism, probably around eight years ago — it was after I worked for him so I don't remember the exact time — and ended up apologizing. I would say though that both he and his ex-wife, Jane Fonda, know full well how dangerous Zionism is even though she's become a Born Again so I was surprised at her position.
I would have to say that in my experience with him there was no way that Ted Turner was anti-Jew, just anti-Zionism as it is now. There is a difference, you know…I betcha you do.
LES
November 21st, 2009 at 5:31 pm
Zionist Jews and Christians believe that Israel is entitled to all the land that God promised to Abraham.
From the Nile to the Euphrates. Look at a map of that region.
That is why the US fights in the Middle East.
paulBass
November 21st, 2009 at 6:23 pm
i have a simple question for every one if you are both
anti-war and anti-immigration, how is it possible to be pro-American? unless you support a return to original borders of Jamestown? in which case that is an America i can support.
paulBass
November 21st, 2009 at 6:32 pm
hell if turning your own child in to a political prop involves premeditated wanton acts of murder, i say if it keeps her out of power let some of her kids come back in body bags at least they will get the respect of a grave and being counted something most of the people we are killing do not get.
paulBass
November 21st, 2009 at 6:36 pm
i wonder if part of his antiwar/anti immigrant campaign will be the return of stolen lands to Mexico and the banning of western immigration to Mexican territory
andy
November 21st, 2009 at 8:00 pm
Immigration is a privilege not a right.
Ken
November 21st, 2009 at 9:07 pm
I'll vote for Lou. good man.
gracec
November 21st, 2009 at 9:13 pm
travel is a right.
paulBass
November 21st, 2009 at 10:58 pm
and who grants this privilege my dear commissar?
Guest
November 22nd, 2009 at 12:30 am
Dobbs' views on immigration suck, so I am really surprised and happy to hear his views on the military and the wars.
Andy
November 22nd, 2009 at 2:55 am
Commissar? Were the American people ever asked if they wanted the 1965 immigration act that was rammed down their throats? Did they vote for it in a referendum? I hardly see what gave Ted Kennedy the "right" to alter the country's demographics without the consultation or approval of the general public.
paulBass
November 22nd, 2009 at 4:53 am
im not entirely sure of the reference to this particular event's grand effect on a 200 year revolution of demographics from coast to coast, i would go further ,but im not all that sure where you are going and i have no desire to get in to some more unpleasant topics
Dan Clore
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:12 am
I might sign this, but I don't think I want to give this guy my e-mail address.
phoenixtexoma
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:04 am
To paulBass: You’re grossly mistaken about the “theft” of land from Mexico. I’m a western historian with native American DNA (Comanche). For 200 years, Mexico utterly failed to establish control over Texas, New Mexico and Arizona because of the Comanche, Apache and Kiowa tribes, as well as the Comancheros. Anglo settlers were invited in to provide a buffer against the marauding tribes. My recent work, “We Gave You Texas” covers the Comanche conquest of not just Texas but also the northern third of Mexico. Do a little fact checking before spouting off about territorial “theft”.
Watson
November 22nd, 2009 at 11:29 pm
Over the past seven, eight years, Lou Dobbs has spoken out many times against the wars, especially Iraq. This is not a new stance for him. I wish he had stayed on track instead of derailing onto the immigration issue.
paulBass
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:07 pm
so your saying that among the condition given to the American immigrants by Mexico was convert to Catholicism accept Mexican citizenship and then wage a war and smash their society down to the capital?
was the Louisiana purchase not theft?
or was the purging of Chinese workers form the land paid to them for construction the rail road.
i have no problem with any part of any country demanding Independence and going there separate way. but it seems to me when a massive war is fought over a territory that end up in different hand at the end of said conflict that it was not given up willingly.
p.s. a link to your work would be nice
andy
November 23rd, 2009 at 5:49 am
Why does America need any more immigration? Why? What for? How many people do you want America to have? 400 million? 500 million? 600 million? At what point will there be enough people to satisfy the powers that be? I see no obvious economic or political or social advantage to having any more immigration.
mad doctor
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:03 pm
i like it!
http://www.blog2.tshirt-doctor.com/?p=3625
pete
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:18 pm
Very happy to read that there many of my fellow citizens who understand the nefarious role played by those who have managed to conflate Israel's interests with those of the U.S. Sadly, however, the average citizen can't even identify the countries of the middle east, let alone make a judgement on what we are doing there. These folks are afraid to the use the word "jew" for fear of being accused of being anti-semitic (a crime now worse, it seems, than baby-killing). Under those circumstances, even an ptimist is challenged to see any improvements on the horizon.
runescape hack
November 26th, 2009 at 7:08 am
I truely true! i think your site owns thanks
Antiwar Norwegian
December 1st, 2009 at 6:57 pm
Perhaps in the USA, and even in the UK, this might be the case. In the rest of Europe, it's often the other way around. The parties and people that are calling for a reduction in immigration are also those who support American and Israeli wars most eagerly. This is the case with for instance the Progress Party in Norway, the Danish People's Party, the Sweeden Democrats and the anti-immigration parties in the Netherlands.
They all support the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. They cheer on Israeli attacks on the Palestinians. The reason might be that most people in the countries they want to invade and occupy happen to be Muslims. And many immigrants are Muslims too. So this connection probably explains some of the difference to the USA, where most immigrants are not Muslims but Mexicans.