Catch, Release, Die
We released a jihadi into the air, he resumed the fight, over here and over there:
Because liberals are blind guides in denial and viciously intolerant of any and all dissent from their militantly pacifist, Ameriphobic orthodoxy.
Was that too concise an answer? Not like me, is it? Well, then, let me add something I've said before and will doubtless say again: libs could rationalize their pacifism during the Cold War because the Soviet Union was masterfully surreptitious about their aggressive, imperialistic intentions, never being overt enough about their ultimate goal of planetary conquest (until their overt invasion of Afghanistan, which ironically set the origin of the current war in motion) to cut the legs out from under their "useful idiots" in the American left.
The Islamists, in the form of al Qaeda and the Iranian mullahgarchy, by gaping contrast, are about as subtle as a knee to the groin. They have for years declared and continue to openly proclaim their intention to destroy Israel and bring America and the West to its knees, and have repeatedly backed up their bellicose words with violent, murderous action. That is why we can't just bail out of this conflict, or negotiate a settlement - our enemies aren't interested in anything short of total victory, which means the entire world under the rule of the Islamic Caliphate. And they're willing to die en masse to attain it.
The bad guys, in other words, do not leave any room for pacifist rationalizing. Consequently, to pretend that we can just quit fighting, in Iraq or anywhere else, is not just flagrantly irrational, but overtly suidical. And yet that is precisely what they are demanding.
People villified Michael Savage when he coined the phrase, "Liberalism is a mental disorder." The needlessly extended "career" of Abdullah Mehsud is one more illustration of how it is a death wish as well.
A former Guantanamo Bay prisoner wanted for the 2004 kidnapping of two Chinese engineers in Pakistan blew himself up with a grenade during a clash with security forces on Tuesday, officials said.Admiral Morrissey has, not to rip off Paul Harvey, "the rest of the story":
One-legged Taliban militant Abdullah Mehsud killed himself to avoid capture after troops raided his hideout, interior ministry spokesman Brigadier Javed Cheema told AFP.
The Islamic rebel's death comes amid intensifying US pressure on President Pervez Musharraf to take military action against Al-Qaeda and Taliban safe havens in tribal areas along the border with Afghanistan.
Mehsud spent twenty-five months at Gitmo before getting released in March 2004. It took him all of six months to ascend to a leadership position with the Taliban afterwards. He ran a hostaging operation that went awry, holding two Chinese hydroelectric engineers captured at a dam project. The Pakistanis tried to rescue the pair in a military operation, but botched it. One hostage died, and Mehsud slipped away.
He spent the next three years conducting terrorist operations. The Pentagon had identified him as the leader of cross-border raids that attacked American forces in Afghanistan, the kind that has so frustrated NATO and led to American demands for the right to hot-pursuit missions into Pakistan. Mehsud also has at least one other connection to Taliban leadership: his brother Baitullah, a leading commander who has conducted a wave of suicide bombings in Pakistan recently.
Not only did Mehsud have information that could have helped intel to this very day, he's exactly the kind of higher-level terrorist we wanted to keep off the battlefield. His release cost many lives, starting with the Chinese engineer but likely Coalition troops as well, which are primarily American. Why did he get released from Gitmo? More importantly, why do we want to release any more of them?
Because liberals are blind guides in denial and viciously intolerant of any and all dissent from their militantly pacifist, Ameriphobic orthodoxy.
Was that too concise an answer? Not like me, is it? Well, then, let me add something I've said before and will doubtless say again: libs could rationalize their pacifism during the Cold War because the Soviet Union was masterfully surreptitious about their aggressive, imperialistic intentions, never being overt enough about their ultimate goal of planetary conquest (until their overt invasion of Afghanistan, which ironically set the origin of the current war in motion) to cut the legs out from under their "useful idiots" in the American left.
The Islamists, in the form of al Qaeda and the Iranian mullahgarchy, by gaping contrast, are about as subtle as a knee to the groin. They have for years declared and continue to openly proclaim their intention to destroy Israel and bring America and the West to its knees, and have repeatedly backed up their bellicose words with violent, murderous action. That is why we can't just bail out of this conflict, or negotiate a settlement - our enemies aren't interested in anything short of total victory, which means the entire world under the rule of the Islamic Caliphate. And they're willing to die en masse to attain it.
The bad guys, in other words, do not leave any room for pacifist rationalizing. Consequently, to pretend that we can just quit fighting, in Iraq or anywhere else, is not just flagrantly irrational, but overtly suidical. And yet that is precisely what they are demanding.
People villified Michael Savage when he coined the phrase, "Liberalism is a mental disorder." The needlessly extended "career" of Abdullah Mehsud is one more illustration of how it is a death wish as well.
posted by JASmius at 2:53 PM
<<< Home