Neither the White House or the Democrats should respond to these thugs. Do you think FDR responded every time the Japanese taunted him?

We are a strong enough country not to let the words of these gnats bother us.

And if the Iranians want to take us on, we've got a few thousand ICBMs we can send their way. We shouldn't lose a lot of sleep over them.

My guess is they're trying to figure out the right words.

You know, the words that will indicate they're serious on the WoT but won't be threatening to the enemy, that shows their determination to help Iraq yet will indicate that our patience approaching exhaustion, that will appease both the people who believe that the WoT MUST be fought and the people who can't see fighthing under any circumstances, and will satisfy their critics at home and critics of our foriegn policy abroad.

In other words, they're probably trying to craft a message that will please everyone and anger no one.

Stoop to their level. Never. We're smarter than that. Adults don't get into yelling matches with children.

Well Kim, this is three of these kinds of posts in a row.

Now, I can definitely understand why you question Democratic leadership. I can understand why you are unsure about them taking control of both the House and the Senate. I really can. In the past 6 years, they have dished out more than their fair share of criticism, and have fallen pretty damn short on coming up with ANY solutions.

So ya, I hear you.

But I have to draw the line when you even entertain the idea that a win by Democrats, who are supported by MILLIONS of Americans all around you, is actually a good thing for terrorists and leaders like Khamenei.

Divided we fall.

Do you really doubt your fellow Americans this seriously, or are you just completely entrenched in partisanship.

Yes, there has been a slight power shift. I'm hoping that maybe some of the Red/Blue madness can calm down enough so that we can all start to remember some commonalities. I'm hoping that things can start heading in a better direction.

I mean: peep.

Stoop to their level or scared the support provided to the terrorists over the past three years will have been for nothing. They still hat you and want to remove your head. The terrorist think or know the dim's are gutless cowards and they're rubbing their nose in the BS the dim's have spread around the world.

This is going to be one of the funniest two years in U.S. history.

With all of the terrorist threats (some will eventually happen when they find someone with a brain) I wouldn't take a job as janitor in any of the congressional building for $200,000 a year. The NYC financial district would require in excess of $500,000 per year. I'll fight in my state, but i'm not going to become an open target for cowards that will come at night with 'support from 50%' of the citizens.
LMAO

Scrapster:

Huh? I think I missed your point.

One simple reason :

If the Democrats ignore these, they go to the big stupid quote-fest in hell, never to be seen again. Yah, we'll get coverage of them on blogs which only conservatives read, and AP will mention them once in a release that'll land somewhere deep in the Lifestyle section, below the fold.

If they answer, the New York Times and various other sundry trai media outlets will report the first quote that seems even slightly intelligent - and we're talking intelligent as defined by the NYT, here. That'll be all news chans stuff.

Good guys can afford to be stupid. Not much evolution happening on our sides, outside of once a generation. Bad guys tend to be sharks, and if you kill anything even slightly assumed to be a threat or a failure (why else would they be so pro-gun control), you end up with some damn fast steps to bigger and badder evil.

Its funny that now that the Democrats gained some power, 'unity' has replaced 'dissent' as the hallmark of patriotism.

And if the Iranians want to take us on, we've got a few thousand ICBMs we can send their way. We shouldn't lose a lot of sleep over them.

Typical Democratic Strategy. Ignore the problem until you have thousands or millions killed on both sides instead of nipping it in the bud today.

The first real solid proof that the dim's don't have a plan nor a clue was when they called in George McGovern, one of the biggest idiots (matches Daschle) to ever serve in the congress.

Now we know we're in real big trouble but millions will die before the dim's admit it.

Bring it on terrorists, it'll be a walk in the park.

jpm100:

ok, so what would you prefer to have happen right now?

And by the way, I havent just jumped onto the anti-partisanship bandwagon this week. I've been sick of this bullshit--FROM BOTH SIDES--for about 5 years now.

Scrappy:

What's your plan?

All the Democrats need to say is something like,

"Citizens may have heard terrorists claiming our electoral victory is a victory for them. Terrorists should remember that they are the enemies of the whole United Sates, not just the Republicans. We Democrats have differences with the Republicans as to how to do things, but we will kill terrorists as surely as the Republicans will."

That's all. No shouting match, no followup, no dialog with madmen...just a simple statement of intent.

I'd love to see it, because you can't let statements like that go unanswered. Words and propaganda are weapons too.

IraqPundit is asking why the Democrats aren't responding to al Qaeda's, Iran's, and Syria's statements

Uh... 'cause we, like Bush, don't give a shit about their propaganda. Why are you so insistent on publicizing their propaganda?

I've been sick of this bullshit--FROM BOTH SIDES--for about 5 years now.

You statement assumes a symmetry that does not exist. It's the Democrats who decided to make Partisan fodder out of it. The war was begun with bad information, but good intentions and nearly everyone's support. Who was hurt, though? Saddam and the Bathists. At the time, the initial phase of the war seemed like a fair price for deposing Saddam, even to the Iraqi people from what I could tell.

Then, either through mismanagement or inevitable consequence, the occupation has evolved into something that is going take years. But are we wronging the Iraqis by staying there and giving it a chance?

Questioning the effectiveness of how the war is being run is a good thing. Proposing Phase Redeployment is proposing a Rout and does harm.

First, if it is allowed to happen, it will lead to a slaughter of the Iraqis who supported us. A great way to generate faith in current and future allies. So just the talk about it will cause our allies to be demoralized cause them to lose faith in us.

Next, Iran and Al Queda will divvy up Iraq. Creating a more powerful Iran in the Middle East and essentially giving Al Queda a state they can function freely in again. Not only will that screw over the Iraqi people, especially those who showed support for the US who will be slaughtered, it is not in Americas direct interest either. If you don't believe allowing AQ and Iran to grow in power will haunt the US, you've been asleep for the past 30 years.

This is not to mention the damage of reinforcing the Paper Tiger image. This is the very point the terrorist are making with their statements. And the image is quite meaningful in demoralizing our allies and upping the moral of our enemies and their followers. So allowing the Islamofascists to promote that image without a comment from the Democrats to the contrary, does harm the US.

Many on here genuinely see the harm in the Democratic Proposals and Behavior. If the Iraq was was a mistake, it would be like spilling milk. If you spill milk, you don't just get up and walk away and let it spoil. You clean up the mess.

Btw, don't misread this election. Democrats weren't elected, Republicans were punished.

ryan: how about authorizing the Intel services to use all methods necessary to track and arrest the "terrorists", including the wiretap program of the NSA, Oop's can't use that, the dim's already leaked it to the NYT's. Maybe track financial transactions of the "terrorists", Ooop's, same as the NSA program. Anyway there are some really smart people in the intel service now and they'll come up with something ,if authorized to use it, and they'll use it until they brief congress, then it'll be in the NYT's. They'll just have to keep digging to stay one step ahead of the dim traitors.

How about the dim's who have declared themselves in charge of the world since Wednesday coming up with a plan (the sure don't have one now) to protect America. They might make a trip to the U.K. and copy whatever MI5 and MI6 are using. Na, that won't work, they're using wiretaps and financial tracking + following several thousand known terrorists around until they screw up. Can't do that in the U.S. the police might walk up on Slick Willie getting another BJ.

My personal plans are to stay away from all large cities, maybe cities all togather. Don't need to visit anyway. Just stay home, mind my own business and laugh at the dimwits as they stammer, studder and flounder around in a very dangerous world.

If you're in the military, get the he** out.
If you were thinking of enlisting, don't.

Let the lefties join up and take a turn.

Frankly, I don't put all that much faith in what some annonomous "terrorist" says.

I mean I don't get all that worked up when ScrapIron goes off on a tear, and he seems to be about as committed to his cause as the average wild eyed pistol waver you see on TV.

Anyway, if you read and listen to the quotes that you're hearing in the international press, they are not directed at the incoming congress or the American people. They are directed for the most part at George W. Bush, personaly.

Apparently, they don't like him.

I don't eiether.

But George Bush promised to be a uniter, and I'd agree that he's done that well.

John

Scrapiron,

I am a US citizen living on the far side of the world (since 2002). I was born in 1965, which, thanks to the Army's recent change in recruiting age from 35 to 42, puts me just under the limit to enlist. Part of my previous life included working on the Comanche program for Boeing, before I left the States. Oh, and I have an MBA as well, from Tulane.

Recently I had given serious consideration to moving back to the US and joining up, if I could secure a billet in Intelligence. I am not in the greatest of physical shape, but could probably focus hard enough on PT to pass basic, and I am too old to fly (even if I could get a deferment for my age, I'd still have to get a deferment for my eyes, since I had RK years ago). So Intelligence attracts me, and I would have liked to do my part.

I hesitated on talking to recruiters, though, due to concerns about the upcoming election. And for good reason. The thought of Alcee Hastings gaining the chair of the House Intelligence Committee turns my stomach, and Pelosi's "situation to be solved" comment about Iraq leads me to believe that she is chomping at the bit to begin the Dems' vaunted "phased redeployment" - similar to the redeployment of US troops out of Vietnam in 1973 through 1975. Ditto on Murtha and Webb. I have a friend who was on one of the last helos out of the US Embassy in Saigon in 1975. The thought of abandoning Iraq in a similar manner is just so wrong to me on so many levels that I can't even begin to express it.

Meanwhile every one of America's enemies rejoices over the Democratic victory last Tuesday. Without fail. The last time our enemies were so interested in US politics was during Vietnam. That should tell us all something, but sadly, most on the left side of the aisle seem to have missed the message.

Democrats have staked out a position that weakens our intelligence gathering capabilities and ignores the continual drumbeat of Islamic militarism. Not to mention the emerging threat of Chinese expansion and the continual requirement of protecting the underbelly of the West, which is the flow of oil out of the middle east. And I haven't even mentioned the immigration issue.

If Carter and Clinton's derision and starving of the military are any indication, the US is in for some rough times in the world.

So no, I don't think I will be signing up. And the reasons why I won't, they sadden me.

Maybe they're busy crafting a harshly worded letter? That'll show those tyrants! It always does doesn't it?

ryan said:

But I have to draw the line when you even entertain the idea that a win by Democrats, who are supported by MILLIONS of Americans all around you, is actually a good thing for terrorists and leaders like Khamenei.

(See? I finally learned how to cut and paste.)

I think you're misreading Kim's post. She didn't say that a Democratic win was good for terrorists and their supporters. They did.

All I have to say is bring it on...those 72 virgins can't be kept waiting you know...

Kim/InstaPundit

You folks watch Sean Hannity way too much. That's the same kind of dumb shit attempt at a "gotcha" pseudo cross-examination question he asks. Of course, the loons of the right who are the denizens of this site think it's a big piece of red meat and they, like dogs, attack it.

Who gives a shit what a terrorist says, wants, feels, thinks or believes. Their constant communiqués does say one thing. Bush has been useless in getting rid of them.

I will enjoy the next few years reading the utterly inane threads like this one and watching the rabid dogs eat the red meat folks like you toss at them.

I have been on the "Partison" side of things for a long time. When the Republicans had the power, they squandered it. And for that I hold them responsible.

Now is a new day and I am going to go out on a limb and wish the Democrats well. I do so in hopes they truly recognize the situarion we are in and will face up to it with resolve.

I hope they have been on the back side of this conflict in their way of playing the role of the "loyal opposition." And now that they are the ruling party, they will exercise that power to the benefit and protection of this country. I love and have given too much for this country to want otherwise.

So, how to respond to comments from thugs like this. Show them we can kill terrorists just as easily with Democratic leadership as with Republican. And, here's a hint Democrats, do it better than Republicans and you will keep this power for years.

"And if the Iranians want to take us on, we've got a few thousand ICBMs we can send their way. We shouldn't lose a lot of sleep over them."

jpm100 is 100% correct.

Dems bash Bush for fighting terrorists ON THEIR TURF. But what they want is for ANOTHER 9-11 to occur so that MILLIONS of us are killed so that they can kill MILLIONS of them.

Typical liberalism. Kaz, think before posting.

Actually Hugh, I'd be more worried about your precious democrat party lurching to the right after this election. Unless every single one of those "conservative" democrats loses their spine, this country is moving to the right faster than you think. and Reid & Pelosi will have a little rambunctious party on their hands. Which is fine.

Ignore it all you want (or stick your fingers in yours ears), but this country is more right of center.

The truth is that the situation in Iraq couldn't be better for Iran. Iran is mostly Shi'it and now the Shi'its in Iraq, who are a majority, are in power. Iraq, Iran's enemy for so many years is now a weak and chaotic place and clearly gives them more power because a major enemy has been neutralized. Iraq, furthermore, is draining us, just like Afghanistan helped drain and bring down the USSR. Iraq has also tied our military down so that we couldn't be more threatening to the Taliban. All our Arabic translators had to go to Iraq when we need them in Afghanistan.

Truly sad every other country sees the Dems for the sniveling wimps that they are.

My personal plans are to stay away from all large cities, maybe cities all togather.

Good God! I've never seen such a bunch of sissies in my entire life. You all can cower in your bunkers for the next twenty years (as long as the Dems are likely to hold power) but the rest of us are getting on with our lives.

Some of your right-wingers seem to have forgotten how YOUR side supported a Democratic President when he (Clinton) launched a cruise missile attack in an attempt to assasinate bin Laden in Afghanistan. Here's what Dan Coats Republican Senator from Indiana said:

While there is clearly much more we need to learn about this attack [on Osama bin Laden] and why it was ordered today, given the president's personal difficulties this week, it is legitimate to question the timing of this action.

I'll bet that statement put the fear of God in bin Laden!!!

I usually try to avoid ad hominems when I disagree with someone...but Kaz, I think I'll indulge this once.

Your statement about Dan Coates' comment, and your attempt to compare it to current activities regarding the MSM and Democrats to Bush, is just plain stupid.

Not once, to my recollection, did we EVER give away any plans that Clinton might have used against the "enemy" (yes, I'm putting that word in quotes, because the peoples Willy "fought" were not actual enemies of the US, save OBL), BEFORE OR DURING THE FACT. Compare THAT to how NYT, ACLU and others have given away, or praised those who gave away, information and tactics on how Bush was applying current strategy to fight the GWoT.

So yes, AFTER THE FACT, we questioned Willy's pitiful attempt at assassinating OBL - in no small part BECAUSE it was so damned pitiful to begin with.

Goering lost the Battle of Britain because he assumed wars could be won without boots on the ground, but hell, at least he used lots of airplanes to attack England. Willy, however, thought that he could take out al-Qaida with nothing more than a couple Tomahawk missiles - and to add insult to such a pitiful attempt, he made sure everyone around knew about it in advance (via a warning to the Pakistani government given before the attack), thus assuring that his Tomahawks would be doing nothing worse than pounding sand.

So go ahead and get on with your life, as long as you have it. Between open borders and signals to the enemy that the US is truly a paper tiger, it won't be a quiet life for long.

Idiot.

/rant off

Wanderlust
If Clinton's actions were pitiful, what then of Bush's 8 months before 9/11? Also republicans, like Orin Hatch, said Clinton was being stupid to worry about al Queda. The Battle of Briton being lost had something to do with those "Few.." who fought so well and bravely and to the pluck of the British people. Bombing the cities was supposed to power their will to fight but made them mad as hornets. There is a lesson there.

The Dem response top this as been the Dem response to Islamic terrorism in general. Put your head in the sand and pretend it does not exist.

It's funny to see the Dems are suddenly lost for words on an issue.

Our trolls here have decided instead of answering the question to simply attack our host. If you don't like what our host says, simply proceed to another blog. It's the fascist left that deems to tell others what can and cannot be discussed.

The reason Desm won't respond is simple. They don't want to offend part of their base who support the terrorists.

Steve:

I know that reality is difficult for the loons of the right to grasp. The country wants the middle. not the fringe of either side. Conservative? Like the loons who write the silly tripe here? I think not.

47% identified themselves as "moderates" in this election. Did ya ever stop to think that's why your side lost? Oh,sorry, I forgot. The loons never stop to actually think about anything.

Anyone think you could have threads like this over at the kos kiddies or du? If you try to say boo -- BANNED. Threads on those sites look like a circus with the elephants holding on to each other's tails except that each poster there has his nose up the next posters ass. That is the reason you see so many liberals with crooked noses. Someone stopped and those behind him didn't. Wouldn't it be hilarious to see the lefties on this blog in person to tell "where" they use to roam.

Kaffir, I gave an answer. The hard fact is there are more terrorists in Iraq than ever before. We are in great danger of being bled to death in Iraq and Afganistan.

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/

9/11: Five Years After
Why al Qaeda Hasn't Hit the U.S. Again
John Mueller
The myth of the omnipresent enemy.

1. If al-Q is "just bidding their time," this article shows numerous instances where it really doesn't take