I think I read that it was Ronald Regan who said, "The opposite of war isn't peace; it's surrender."

Pro-victory--well said.

Works for me. These rhetorical wars are part of the whole in advancing positions. I'd just as soon advance "Victory" since everyone will choose their own arms anyway. As you stated, why concede anything?

So does that mean we use the "V" sign a la Winston Churchill, or should we show the back of our hands to the crowd a la European verison of the middle finger?

Or maybe a rapid alternating version?

Absolutely brilliant!

Jay, What do you think the response would be if instead of replying to the "anti-war" crowd that you (we) are "pro victory" you replied that you (we) are "anti-surrender". Seriously, this has been a "war " where I find it difficult to actually state with clarity what victory will be or look like. If I understand history, this fundamenatlist movement has waxed and waned in its impact over the centuries - initially locally and now globally. But it is quite clear to me that we cannot retreat or surrender to any threat the terrorist movement directs at our civilization.

If "anti-war demonstrators" were consistently referred to as "pro-terrorist demonstrators" it would drive them nuts. It seems most view them in that light anyway and it would quickly catch on. With everyone but the MSM, of course.

Choosing a stupid name doesn't stop you being pro-war. It just makes you look and sound stupid. It's as pathetic as the Fox News decision to start calling suicide bombers "homicide bombers." But maybe that didn't sound so bad to you.

If war were declared against Iran because of its almost certainly non-existent nuclear weapons program, calling yourselves "pro-victory" would also fail to change the fact that you are pro-war. Of course, as in the case of Iraq, even when you were presented with incontrovertable evidence that that program did not exist, you would continue to deny the facts. "Pro-victory! Pro-victory!"

So how about anti-reality? Or pro-delusion? There are plenty of other choices - pro-American Empire, would be one. (That'll get the deluded ones going..."We don't have an empire...quack, quack, quack..)

And when you say that you were attacked first, take a look back at history. The United States didn't start the invasions of the Middle East - that was countries like Britain, France and Russia. But when you took over from the Europeans and supported the eviction of Palestinians from their land, you donned their mantle of guilt. (Ah yes, mention of Palestinian land will get you going too, won't it...because having lived on that land longer than your country has existed is obviously no reason to claim that it is theirs...Pro-victory! Pro-victory!)

Here's another possible name - pro-oil.

Or here's another thought. Read 1984...or Animal Farm, come to that - because your "Pro-victory! Pro-victory!" sounds rather like the barnyard animals conned by the pigs into chanting "Two legs bad! Four legs good!"

"Pro-victory! Pro-victory!"

It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen. Winston Smith, his chin nuzzled into his breast in an effort to escape the vile wind, slipped quickly through the glass doors of Victory Mansions, though not quickly enough to prevent a swirl of gritty dust from entering along with him.

....

He took down from the shelf a bottle of colourless liquid with a plain white label marked VICTORY GIN. It gave off a sickly, oily smell, as of Chinese ricespirit. Winston poured out nearly a teacupful, nerved himself for a shock, and gulped it down like a dose of medicine.

....

He took a cigarette from a crumpled packet marked VICTORY CIGARETTES and incautiously held it upright, whereupon the tobacco fell out on to the floor.

...

The Ministry of Truth -- Minitrue, in Newspeak -- was startlingly different from any other object in sight. It was an enormous pyramidal structure of glittering white concrete, soaring up, terrace after terrace, 300 metres into the air. From where Winston stood it was just possible to read, picked out on its white face in elegant lettering, the three slogans of the Party:

WAR IS PEACE

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

The Ministry of Truth contained, it was said, three thousand rooms above ground level, and corresponding ramifications below. Scattered about London there were just three other buildings of similar appearance and size. So completely did they dwarf the surrounding architecture that from the roof of Victory Mansions you could see all four of them simultaneously. They were the homes of the four Ministries between which the entire apparatus of government was divided. The Ministry of Truth, which concerned itself with news, entertainment, education, and the fine arts. The Ministry of Peace, which concerned itself with war. The Ministry of Love, which maintained law and order. And the Ministry of Plenty, which was responsible for economic affairs. Their names, in Newspeak: Minitrue, Minipax, Miniluv, and Miniplenty.

Ah, cat, you make me laugh. Thanks for that.

Cat is obviously pro-Saddam's-mass-graves. I never understood that particular cult of moonbatism. They claim to care but really don't, that part I get, they're inherently dishonest, but they don't even care enough to try make it look like they believe the crap they spew. How can you be that poor of a liar with all those years of experience?

>Choosing a stupid name doesn't stop you being pro-war.

And have the name Anti-war doesn't stop you from being capitulators.

Or here's another thought. Read 1984...or Animal Farm, come to that - because your "Pro-victory! Pro-victory!" sounds rather like the barnyard animals conned by the pigs into chanting "Two legs bad! Four legs good!"

Only to the mentally deranged people like you who don't understand Animal Farm but pretend like they do.

I think that we can conclude that Pro-Victory strikes exactly the right chord. It annoys exactly the right people.

It seems that some people are comically stuck in that "negativity equals intellecutal superiority" rut that I've noticed from Berkeley frosh.

Oh, there you go... stop calling them anti-war and use the term pro-defeat instead.

Supporting the jihadist is not anti-war.

The only way to abolish war is to surrender to any who threaten you. To be truly anti-war is to ask to be enslaved.

Cat? Animal House doesn't mean what you think it means.

argh..... Animal Farm

sheesh

"Cat is obviously pro-Saddam's-mass-graves."

A sharp-suited, but not so sharp-minded member of your government used that lie when he was debating the war with the veteran Labour MP Alice Mahon. He was shot down in flames when she pointed out that she had been campaigning against Saddam Hussein and his murderous regime when Bush Sr., Reagan and Rumsfeld etc were providing him with his weapons. She nailed him on his lie and reduced him to silence, but you happily babble the same tired lie. That only reflects badly on you.

But go for the "Pro-Victory" slogan. Anything that makes you look like the bleating idiots you are is fine by me. Now I give way to your Two Minutes of Hate.

cat said:

"A sharp-suited, but not so sharp-minded member of your government used that lie when he was debating the war with the veteran Labour MP Alice Mahon. He was shot down in flames when she pointed out that she had been campaigning against Saddam Hussein and his murderous regime when Bush Sr., Reagan and Rumsfeld etc were providing him with his weapons. She nailed him on his lie and reduced him to silence, but you happily babble the same tired lie. That only reflects badly on you."

You might want to check link this out, seeing as how badly you are offended by liars, I am sure you are not spreading such lies of your own intentionally.

http://www.command-post.org/archives/002978.html

B Moe, you're assuming Cat cares that it is lying, that's not the case, never has been, never will be.

B Moe, I followed your link - and out of officially recognized arms sales to Iraq up to 1990, the United States ranked No. 11, just after Libya. I also followed the link within that link - which showed that official US arms sales to Iraq started in 1983 - the same year that Donald Rumsfeld shook hands with Saddam Hussein in Baghdad - just after he had used chemical weapons for the first time.

Yep, we helped get him going early on to stop Iran from spreading Islamic fascism. We made a bad decision and it made us even more obligated to remove him.

But France was still selling arms to Iraq 20 years later, long after even those gutless, reeking wastes of oxygen voted to block arms sales in the U.N. Not that it would matter to Cat, it's a fact, not a moonbat belief.

Since I'm getting dangerously close to being banned by the webmasters - as my very last comment today, let's get away from the French and the Libyans and return to the original subject:

Pro-Victory! Pro-Victory!

"banned by webmasters"

translation

"This thing is moving beyond talking points and I got nothing."

Banned? Who said anything about banning? I do believe you are the first person to bring it up. Unless you've been banned before and are back again somehow, I'd say you're being paranoid.

Here's another "Winston" quote for you, cat:

Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory there is no survival.
–Winston Churchill

I think we've all read Animal Farm (House! ha!), and here's a tip for you: it's FICTION, no matter how politically prophetic you imagine it to be.

Typical for the "Reality"-Based Commune to see the world through the lens of fiction, though. ;-)

cat:

Not to suggest that I speak for them, but given what I've seen Kevin, Jay Tea and even Paul put up with around here, I'd say you're safe.

You're too insignificant to bother banning.

Shorter cat:
Root for the losers! America sucks! America sucks!

I really did mean it when I said I was making my last comment, but after reading the protestations of the credulous, I have to reply. Silverbubble and jpm - ask Jay Tea if he ever hits the block button. That's all, just ask - I'm sure you want him to confirm that I'm a paranoid moonbat. He does, of course, have every right to ban me - I'm a guest here, and an unwelcome one at that. But, nevetheless, ask him if he has hit that button.

"If war were declared against Iran because of its almost certainly non-existent nuclear weapons program"

Oh, so a country that's basically a layer of sand on top of an ocean of oil is working to build nuke plants for electricity. Uh-huh.

Next I guess you'll tell us that "the Great Satan" is a cute little nickname likening us to an adorable furry puppy called "Satan" featured in Iranian cartoons.

"pro-American Empire, would be one. "

You think having the whole world live in a representative republic with guaranteed rights would be a bad thing? Hell, getting conquered by the United State of America was the best thing ever to happen to my neck of the woods.

"Here's another possible name - pro-oil."

Yeah, I'll buy that. Oil makes machines go, and machines replace human labor and make slavery unprofitable. So, yeah, put me down as pro-oil.

Now when the moonbats let us have as many nuclear plants as we need, then we'll ease up on importing and using oil. But I'm not holding my breath.

Oh my God! No matter how much I want to leave, there always seems to be someone who says something that just has to be answered. Beth - you really should be careful about quoting Winston Churchill. Here's another Churchill quote:

"I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against uncivilised tribes."

Who were the "uncivilized tribes" he was condemning to a truly horrifying death? The Kurds of Iraq. The same Kurds who were gassed decades later by Saddam Hussein. And this is a man you want to quote to back up your argument?