Not A Bad Idea Actually

Blah blah blah blah then..

Ralph Peters at the NY Post: For now, Maliki and his pals are using our troops to buy time while they pocket our money, amass power and build up arms. But they've written us off for the long term.

Does that mean we should leave?

Not yet. Iraq deserves one last chance. But to make that chance even remotely viable, we'll have to take desperate measures. We need to fight. And accept the consequences.

The first thing we need to do is to kill Muqtada al-Sadr, who's now a greater threat to our strategic goals than Osama bin Laden.

We should've killed him in 2003, when he first embarked upon his murder campaign. But our leaders were afraid of provoking riots.

Back then, the tumult might've lasted a week. Now we'll face a serious uprising. So be it. When you put off paying war's price, you pay compound interest in blood.

We must kill - not capture - Muqtada, then kill every gunman who comes out in the streets to avenge him.

Exactly correct, but I didnít know Improbulus Maximus worked at the NY Post. It is Improbable to the max that we will. Because we didnít the first time, when we should have.

Also see: Bill Roggio at The Fourth Rail.

Posted by: Howie at 08:49 PM


1 Would be a great start, but Bush Jr. has about as much bravery as his old man. So there's no way we'll do it. Half measures are the rule of the day from these clowns.

Posted by: cory at October 26, 2006 09:23 PM

2 I didnít know Improbulus Maximus worked at the NY Post - Howie

Shhhhhhh. .'s a secret!

Posted by: heroyalwhyness at October 26, 2006 10:01 PM

3 Improbulus Maximus "works" at the New York Times.

When I think Improbulus Maximus' work, I think of a cross between Jaysson Blair and Divine.

Posted by: Dill Doe at October 26, 2006 10:07 PM

4 There's old newbie again.

Posted by: Darth Odie at October 26, 2006 10:11 PM

5 You're exactly right, Howie. We should have killed that gangster in an Imam's clothing a long time ago. So what if they take to the streets? We'll just kick their asses again-wouldn't be the first time. Mahdi Army myass.Just bring out the M1s and Bradleys and be done with it.

Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at October 26, 2006 11:03 PM

6 We said it back then that he should have been killed. I guess we were right after all. Killing your enemies is hardly ever a bad idea.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at October 26, 2006 11:20 PM

7 I knew my diatribes would eventually ripple out and touch the sheeple eventually.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at October 26, 2006 11:40 PM

8 Improbulus Maximus meant to say that he knew his dipstick would eventually dribble out and touch the sheep eventually.

Posted by: Dill Doe at October 27, 2006 12:52 AM

9 Maliki's response to our timetable for Iraq taking control: " Not of concern " That pretty much says it all! Time to start nuking up!

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 27, 2006 01:36 AM

10 Dill Doe. AKA the sheep.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 27, 2006 01:42 AM

11 Rusty should start a board so we can place bets on the identities of
lefturd trolls, who frequently change their handles but never their
stupidity, and are thus fairly easily recognized. The winner of each
cycle could get a prize such as posting an original column.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at October 27, 2006 06:37 AM

12 I agree 110% Death to al-sadr! death to his followers, death to his family and friends fuck em. they want to make this a long... drawn out war... i love it. for every american they kill, the americans kill 1000 muslims. the more muslim deaths the bettre. they have a backward religion that needs to moderize. do you see christians burning heritics at the stake? witch hunts? accusing innocents of colloborating with the satan and then putting them to death? i say muhammed is satan..... what a violent religion. made by a crzy madman pedophile in old days.... cmon ppl think about it. how can this world have a religion who says its ok to shed blood? honor killings? making woman possesions, mutilating ppl as a punishment, killing a human being in the name of their god? for shame! lets kill of the muslims.....

Posted by: hank at October 27, 2006 07:45 AM

13 Every time I see these assholes in a group yelling death of America, I wonder why a explosion doesn't occur. If we can take pictures of their demonstrations why can't we get some payback? I guess the chickenshit liberals still have say in our government.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 27, 2006 07:59 AM

14 As I recall, back when Al-Sadr made a name for himself defying the Provisional Authority, the Libs were saying Al-Sadr should be negotiated with. LOL. Can somebody name me one single problem that has been resolved through negotiation? Just one.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at October 27, 2006 08:45 AM

15 I have posted on al-Sadr for quite a while now. It is plainly obvious Maliki is working with the militias especially the Mahdi. I would like to see the US start taking the same tactics to heart that the enemy does. We should stir up the nest by attacking a target and when these asshats come running to help, we pick them off with snipers and IED's.

Posted by: SeeMonk at October 27, 2006 10:50 AM

16 Dmned good idea;
As a matter of fact didn't General Jack Pershing write the book on this when he defeated the Islamist terrorists in the Philipenes? (my knowledge of your country's history is limited)

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at October 27, 2006 12:05 PM

17 Our troops do practice "bait-and-eliminate". Back during the seige of Fallujah, out troops would have the translators spew out the most insulting things imaginable over the loudspeakers of psy-ops vehicles in order to draw insurgents out of the mosques they were hiding in like pussies. They would become enraged by the insults and come storming out firing blindly, only to be cut down ina hail of accurate American lead. This needs to be a standard MO in U.S. military doctrine.

Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at October 27, 2006 03:42 PM

18 That bait-and-eliminate is good tactic, as it is easy to stir up cockroaches.

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 27, 2006 03:58 PM

19 Hank, good to see you've figured things out. Stick with us and you'll be up to speed in no time!

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 27, 2006 03:59 PM

20 To Jesusland Carlos

Negotiation got me out of a speeding ticket once, but I was in the wrong, admitted it, and said I was sorry. My argument amounted to 'Oops! Will this affect my insurance?'

My state of mind was based on the certain knowledge that any other behavior than polite behavior, would just get me in more trouble. The officer knew I meant it, and that I knew who had the power. Don't dis the cops in a small town.

Anyway, if we are going to be negotiating, we need to be the strong, "Don't F' with me!" type. Not the type the Dems would make us be.

Can you picture Nancy Pelosi, holding a jar of vaseline? "Oooh! Negotiate with me, you big fierce Jihadi prince!"

Shall we all join Rusty in his 'prayer' session?

Y'know I really guess I have to stop calling myself an independent. Like I'll ever, ever see a third party that can really win. If the Repubs will kill Jihadi's and somehow stop the left, I'll go straight ticket for them.

And when I read myself, why do I seem so mean?

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at October 27, 2006 05:40 PM

21 Michael,

your example proves what I've said before-- that negotiation is useful among friends or would be friends, but useless amongst enemies. Amongst enemies negotiation is just a tactic to get the upper hand.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at October 28, 2006 08:47 AM

22 Ah ha! And next the conversion of Larry. Fact. Conservatives have more fun.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 28, 2006 07:34 PM

23 I doubt I'll let myself be converted to a deletist commie. Maybe they have more fun. Deletion is a cheap sport.

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 30, 2006 05:28 PM

Processing 0.0, elapsed 0.0053 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0026 seconds, 31 records returned.
Page size 15 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.