Sunday, February 8, 2015

On Greta Van Susteren Saying that the "War on Terror" Won't Be Over Until We Either Kill Them All or They Surrender

So, not in any of our lifetimes, is what she's saying.

7 comments:

Les Carpenter said...

Prepare for the coming cultural clash, it will be epic.

Just what the MIC salivate over.

Follow the money.

dmarks said...

I don't think that making colossal mistakes like Obama giving more than a billion in mad-money to the Muslim Brotherhood maniacs in Egypt helps matters.

The issues of taking military action against them, and where, and with whom, and for how long is a huge point of contention, and rightly so.

But just having the US stop directly subsidizing this should be non-controversial. A no brainer.

Jerry Critter said...

War use to be wages against a government. You can topple a government. Now, wars, at least our recent ones, are against ideas. You don't defeat an idea with guns and bombs.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

I largely agree with all of you guys. But I certainly wasn't opposed to blowing up those terrorist training camps and putting a bullet in bin Laden's slanthead.

dmarks said...

Interesting, Jerry... When was the turning point? Around WW2?

Jerry Critter said...

Once again, dmarks, you are off the mark. The billion [and a half] went to the Egyptian government.

According to PolitiFact,

"In fact, the aid package was for the nation of Egypt, not the Brotherhood. The Brotherhood may control the largest bloc of seats in parliament, but it's not even a majority. Not only that, the country itself continues, for now at least, to be controlled by the military. And more than 80 percent of the aid package is military aid."

dmarks said...

Once again, Jerry, I was dead on.

Politifact sometimes is wrong. Here they are erroneous to claim some sort of difference between directly giving to dictators and giving to a government controlled by dictators.

The over a billion given to Egypt should have stopped as soon as the maniac terrorists took it over.