Until the King Speaks …

While we’re all waiting for the Dear Leader to come down from the mountain and deliver his address to the nation on his plans for Afghanistan, I thought I’d alert my readers to my blogging for The Hill – Capitol Hill’s newspaper of record – where I’ve been contributing my thoughts on “The Question of the Day.” Both today’s and yesterday’s question was about Afghanistan, so please go check it out, here and here.

That should give you something to do while I’m writing up my response to Obama’s prime time address. Since the speech isn’t being delivered until 5 pm PST, my response will be posted a few hours after that.

Will Obama Out-BS Bush?

Obama’s speech from West Point tonight may drive the final wooden stake into liberals’ hope that their guy would create a Brave New Order in Washington and the world.

The fact that Obama is following in Bush’s footsteps – talking to an audience of captive individuals who would be ruined for life by a single catcall – is a sign of how archaic hope for change and reform has become.

If Obama honestly admitted that he is sending American boys to die to help assure the profits of drug kingpins like Karzai’s brother, I could at least respect the president’s candor.

But the odds of truth breaking out during Obama’s visit to West Point are slim and none – and “Slim just left town,” as Dan Rather says.

WHICH ‘safe haven,’ Mr. Obama?

If things run on schedule, Mr. Obama will announce tomorrow that he and his organization will be sending approximately 34,000 more U.S. troops to harass and sometimes kill men, women and children (as “collateral damage”) in Afghanistan.  And then he has to sell his unpopular decision. If previous statements are any guide, his main excuse will be “We have to deny al’Qaeda ‘safe haven’.” 

Question: “If you believe the official mythology,

1. “In what country did the 911 al’Qaeda pilots get ‘safe haven‘ to train? 

2. “In what country did the Madrid train bombers get ‘safe haven‘ to prepare?

3. “In what country did the London bombers get ‘safe haven‘?”

HINT: It’s NOT Afghanistan.

The answers to the three questions are:

 1. U.S.A.

 2. Spain

 3. England

How many troops will Mr. Obama send to THESE terrorist states to deny al’Qaeda ‘safe haven?’

By way of context, there are approximately 193 countries in the world, each of which can supply al’Qaeda with equivalent ‘safe haven.’

According to CIA and military intelligence sources, currently there aren’t 100 al’Qaeda operatives in all of Afghanistan.  So, Mr. Obama, what are your other excuses?
 

Minarets: Ban Them, or Bomb Them?

Well, the Swiss – or, more accurately, a majority of voters in democratic Switzerland – have gone and done something wrong and dumb, approving a referendum that bans the construction of minarets. Libertarian demerits are certainly in order. But one very wrong, very dumb thing the Swiss have not done is launch any wars of aggression against Muslim peoples, or  anyone else, for that matter.

Which makes it all the more cringe-worthy to read this libel on Andrew Sullivan’s blog:

Good God. Why not synagogues? Or did a neighboring country try that already?

Wow. Straight to the Nazi jab, huh? Never let it be said that Harvard doesn’t make ’em like they used to.

For the record, this is the same Andrew Sullivan who penned this epochal gem eight years ago:

[B]in Laden proves that the best form of persuasion in that part of the world is not rhetorical but military. Pummel them and they will respect you. Talk to them nicely and you’ll end up like Robert Fisk. Best of all, pummel them and then talk. The most persuasive piece of rhetoric yet unleashed in this conflict has been the daisy cutter bomb. It’s the only argument that much of this clearly depraved culture actually respects.

Expect more Swiss-bashing from some of the very people who have cheered on the most egregious abuses of Muslims. They’re extremely alert to the dangers of isolationism, you know.

UPDATE: This is too rich. Jeffrey Goldberg, Sullivan’s colleague at The Atlantic, gets in on the anti-Swiss sanctimony. Hah! If the United States or Israel were to attack Tehran tomorrow – which just might halt the construction of a minaret or two – Goldberg would leap to his keyboard to defend the decision as regrettable but justifiable. Again, I’m not a fan of bans or bombs, but the former have the distinct advantage of being reversible.

Support Antiwar.com With Your Black Friday Shopping

Thanks to everyone for helping us reach our quarterly fund goal.

You can continue to help Antiwar.com as you do your holiday shopping. Instead of battling the crowds during and after Black Friday, you can shop online at Amazon.com. You may not know this, but Amazon sells much more than books. You can buy almost everything, short of cars and real estate, on Amazon.

Amazon offers the most of the same Black Friday deals you can get in the stores, while you:

  • Avoid the sales tax
  • Get free shipping on most orders
  • Make easy returns
  • Support Antiwar.com (we get a percentage on all Amazon purchases made through our direct link):

Check out some of the deals:

When you buy on Amazon, make sure you click on the Amazon button on the front of Antiwar.com, or simply go to http://antiwar.com/amazon. Better yet, make it a bookmark so that all Amazon purchases will go to support Antiwar.com.

viewpoint highlights
breaking news
© 2024 Antiwar.com. All rights reserved.
Antiwar.com Blog Stock Photos provided by our partner Depositphotos