As I tie all of these together, I see a plausible path to the report of colored ribbons. Iran has decided to mandate a national uniform. That part no one disagrees with. Now historically, how does Iran enforce laws like this? …

I bet your neighbor thinks he knows the answer to your question. He’ll conveniently lay the blame at the feet of (in no particular order):
US foreign policy and its imperial step-child Israel, globalization, capitalism and American multi-national corporations forcing poverty on the rest of the world.

Because, in his world-view, those are the root-causes of terrorism, Islamism, Jihad, civil wars in African countries, etc. Thus, if you neuter America and Israel, the world would be home free.

Twisted, isn’t it?

Not that I’m a big fan of the Saudis, but their government hasn’t called for Israel to be “wiped off the map” lately. Or doesn’t that qualify as “anti-Israel rhetoric?”

If “war is about destroying your enemy at any cost,” then how is it the Israelis have not yet destroyed their Arab and Persian enemies (which we all know they certainly have the power to do)? Sometimes, war is about saving the lives of the innocent and defenseless. Sometimes, war is about preserving freedom and repelling tyranny. Sometimes, as Sabba Hillel points out, war is necessary.

A neighbor of mine has a big sign on his front lawn: “War is not the answer”

I keep wanting to ring the bell and ask him “to what question?” Does he even know — or care? Or, like Johnno, does he just feel righteous spouting meaningless rhetoric left over from the 60s?

Well, at least he does it on his own front lawn and not on mine.

War is no good no matter where it comes from.

That depends on your definition of how the word “good” is applied. Yes, it is “bad” to have to fight a war. However, it is worse to refuse to fight when it is necessary. As one who probably would never have been born had the U.S. lost, I can only marvel at the depth of naivete and sheer ignorance exposed by the commenter who calls himself Johnno.

Not only would I (and my wife) never have been born had the U.S. not fought in Europe, but I would probably never have been born had the U.S. not dropped the bombs in Japan. My father (A”H) spent four years in the Pacific theater and my parents married after he got back.

Sabba Hillel

As L’il Mamzer pointed out these are all related problems. The Iraq Campaign was and is an essential stage in the War on the Islamist Terrorists. I have made many comment posts explaining this, here nad on Tim Blair’s blog, so I am not going to explain it to you now. I am sick and tired of explaining Strategy 101 to people who cannot understand or don’t bother to understand it.

As for the Iraq WMDs, the Duelfer Report stated that Saddam was prepared to resume his nuke project as soon as the heat was off. A few years and Iraq could have had nukes, if they did not have the opportunity to buy them from NorK. Saddam is so reckless a man, so greedy for power and wealth, that he started two wars to steal other peoples’ oil even without having any nukes. What would he, or his psychotic spawn, have done once he got nukes? We will never have to worry about that now.

Here is the situation. The Pharaohs of Teheran, who run a rather nasty tyranny over Iran, have impoverished the country seeking nuke weapons. As both Ahmedinejad and Rafsanjani have said they intend to destroy Israel with them. Ahmedinejad has also said that the Iranians need to get used to ruling the world. They have ruined their country seeking nukes for purposes of genocide and imperialist aggression, and you blather about how nasty America is and how we should be chasing a washed up Osama instead of fighting militant Islamism at strategic and grand strategic levels. If you cannot understand geopolitical and military strategy at least stop yapping and biting at the ankles of those who do.

I think that Bush needs to go and get bin Laden and stop straying from the mission: to stop al Qaeda.

Your mission differs from mine in many ways, but none so clearly as this: Al Qaeda, Ahmadinejad and the mullahs of Iran, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and Hezbollah, among others, are part of the same disease. That this fact either eludes you or is ignored by you is why those who cherish being able to live in a world where women can drive cars, vote, and won’t have to suffer from ‘honor killings’ are very worried. The biggest threat to freedom is from those who refuse to defend it.

Johnno – you are absolutely amazing. It is not often that I come across a person sooo … polarized…. so homogenously … into one purely political camp of thought. Usually, most people have a few thoughts or ideas that stray from the mainstream of a belief system. But you… dude … you’re an avatar!

Further, the responses to your ideas have also been good (as well as polite). I especially like Michael Lonies response as it is well balanced, accurate, and… commonsensical. ;)

But Johnno – I do hope that you post here more often as it gives me a point of reference – kind of like a ground to an electronic circuit – from which I can get proper perspective and balance.

It is true that I disagree with almost everything you say (I am saying this so that I do not appear disingenuous to the other lurkers at Meryls place), but what you do say has _real_ value to me.

Thank you and I hope to read many … many … more posts from you in the future (and I say this … truly … from the bottom of my heart). Thank you.

jgc

Ahmadinejad is also popular with Iranians, because Iran is treated like a child by the West. And if Iran hates Israel, and gets blamed, what about as I said the Saudi Arabians and their rhetoric. Even Israel seems to ignore their support for Hamas!! The US ignores their relationship with al Qaeda. Iran is officially an enemy of America and America dictates the world order. If Saudi is a US ally, Israel are assured that the US will control their anti-Israeli sentiment (still, the Saudis give more money to support Palestinian terrorists/freedom fighters (whatever you want to call them!) than do Iran or Saddam’s Iraq put together. When Saddam was a US ally, America ignored Saddam’s anti-Israel views too! And Israel had to go it alone to bomb Osiraq!

Let’s get real for a minute, though. The West actually takes Saddam and Ahmadinejad seriously! Like, these guys are a threat to the world! Well, if Saddam was such a threat to the world, we wouldn’t be here writing this stuff would we? He’d have us all killed with WMD. Saddam was the new Hitler and he was serious adversary material. It was proved he wasn’t. Saddam was more like Idi Amin, Pinochet or Galtieri than Hitler: a local strongman with ambitions beyond his realistic abilities. Iraq was nowhere near being a world threat (in about 200 years, maybe: but Saddam wouldn’t live that long).

Iran ain’t any more different. Ahmadinejad is more democratic than Saddam, Iran is less secular than Iraq and it is a lot bigger and is Shiite and Persian, not an Arab country and hates al Qaeda. And weren’t al Qaeda the boys who did 9/11 and aren’t caught. I think that Bush needs to go and get bin Laden and stop straying from the mission: to stop al Qaeda.

Iran, like Czech Republic/Slovakia, Hungary, Poland, Russia, Latvia, etc. can sort its own way to democracy in a peaceful way. It CAN do it and interference is the only thing that will destroy this hope. In this regard, I hope Iran gets nuclear weapons (although, like Iraq, I think they are decades away from it), as Russia had them and that sorted itself out nice and peacefully.

Iran with nuclear weapons: with an educated, mostly atheist population, and Ahmadinejad wanting to make the poor richer (what kept religiousity a large minority in Iran was the successive pro-Rich policies of the Shah and most IRI Presidents to date, especially Rafsanjani and Khatami), that can mean only one thing: Iran becomes secular, loses all interest in all revolutionary activities and becomes something like Republic of Ireland (once: the poorest, most nationalist and most religious country in Europe; now: secular, moderate and prosperous). all countries go through revolutions and these settle down: some quickly (Czech Republic, Latvia, Hungary, Romania), some not so quickly (Iran, Ireland, France, USA, Russia).

In WW2, the US/UK/USSR alliance committed all types of attrocities to win, and so did the German/Italian/Japanese alliance. The only difference was that the losers lost and the winners won!

The only difference? You are so, so lost.

If I were to make a long list in rebutttal to your patently asinine statement, it would begin by pointing out that had the Nazis won, I would never have been born because my parents would have been gassed and cremated, and yuo would only be writing what you write as a sycophantic mouthpiece of the Nazis. Come to think of it………..