November 2nd, 2006 2:03 pm
It’s good to see the Democrats’ hard work finally pay off.
Jihad Jaara, a senior member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group and the infamous leader of the 2002 siege of Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity:
“Of course Americans should vote Democrat.”
Muhammad Saadi, a senior leader of Islamic Jihad in the northern West Bank town of Jenin:
“Democrats’ talk of withdrawal from Iraq makes me feel proud. An American withdrawal from Iraq would prove the resistance is the most important tool and that this tool works. The victory of the Iraqi revolution will mark an important step in the history of the region and in the attitude regarding the United States”
Abu Abdullah, a leader of Hamas‘ military wing in the Gaza Strip:
“The policy of withdrawal proves the strategy of the resistance is the right strategy against the occupation.”
Abu Ayman, an Islamic Jihad leader in Jenin:
“I am emboldened by those in America who compare the war in Iraq to Vietnam.”
UPDATE:
Looks like the Iranians are joining the get-out-the vote efforts for Democrats, too. I guess that explains this.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Texas Rainmaker is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).
Graphics by: Margolis Media Works | Style by: Lisa Sabin - E.Webscapes
“I am emboldened by those in America who compare the war in Iraq to Vietnam.”
Ah, that would be President Bush, as per this Voice Of America bit, agreeing that the current spike in violence resembles the Tet offensive.
http://voanews.com/english/2006-10-19-voa12.cfm
Comment by endorendil — 2:34 pm
Really, endo? Where did he say he was emboldened by that comparison?
Comment by Texas Rainmaker — 3:21 pm
[…] Texas Rainmaker looks at all the valuable endorsements the Dems are getting. […]
Pingback by Support the Democrats! « Tai-Chi Policy — 4:10 pm
Endorendil, would that be the Tet offensive that dessimated the VC to the point that Gen Giap had to send NVA regulars into South Vietnam to carrying out the VC mission? You know, the one our news casters reported was a resounding success? Gen Giap relayed that he could not believe the American news media was reporting their defeat as a success. He knew then that he could wait us out, because the media was turning the tide in their favor. That’s quite an accolade for the news media, isn’t it?
Comment by Old Soldier — 5:59 pm
Hey, Endo…you have the jihadis on your side! You must be proud.
Comment by crushliberalism — 7:54 pm
Jason, the quote that Endorendil put at the top of his comment is a quote from your post (which, since you seem to have forgotten, is a quote from “Abu Ayman, an Islamic Jihan leader in Jenin”).
He is pointing out that Bush himself compared the situation in Iraq to the Tet Offensive in Vietnam.
Comment by forrest — 8:49 pm
“Jason, the quote that Endorendil put at the top of his comment is a quote from your post (which, since you seem to have forgotten, is a quote from “Abu Ayman, an Islamic Jihan leader in Jenin”).
I know it was the quote from my post, but it’s not a quote from Bush, to whom endo attributes it. Which is why I said, “Where did he say he was emboldened by that comparison?”
“He is pointing out that Bush himself compared the situation in Iraq to the Tet Offensive in Vietnam.”
Bush did not make the comparison. That was my point. Bush was asked about Friedman’s comparison to the Tet Offensive and Bush said “he could be right” but then he also says the violence has been there all along. He did not say he was emboldened by such a comparison, which is what endo claimed.
Nevertheless, the point of this post is to show who the terrorists would support in the election… again.
Comment by Texas Rainmaker — 8:54 pm
TR, the quote is from your post, and I am simply pointing out that Bush is among those who - according to you - embolden the Jihadis by agreeing that Iraq resembles Vietnam, and in particular that the current offensive looks like the Tet offensive. Too difficult? I also said Bush agreed with the characterisation, not that he made it himself. That’s because I know how you guys love to parse semantics, like what the meaning of “is” is.
OS, exactly. The Tet offensive was a resounding military success for the US, but it showed that the VC weren’t defeated yet. It was the US’s political leadership that made the Tet offensive into a defeat by making unrealistic claims about the status of the war.
Frankly, I don’t think the Ramadan violence qualifies as a “Tet offensive” (even if Bush agrees with that description) because it didn’t really make the same point. We all know that this kind of violence is going to continue for years, and I don’t think this changed because 106 soldiers died this month. It was much earlier on that jokers like “dead-enders” Rummy and “last throes” Cheney provided the Jihadis with easy Tet-like victories. Talk about “miscues”! Simply by showing they were alive and able to destroy whatever we were building, they were able to show that our leaders have HUA syndrome and are not playing straight with us. If we had had realistic expectations about the war, this wouldn’t have been possible.
Comment by endorendil — 4:23 am
”OS, exactly. The Tet offensive was a resounding military success for the US, but it showed that the VC weren’t defeated yet. It was the US’s political leadership that made the Tet offensive into a defeat by making unrealistic claims about the status of the war.”
Close, but too many errors. The American media didn’t care about whether or not the VC were defeated. At that point in time they had aligned themselves with the anti-war movement and reported what fueled the anti-war fires. Their goal, just like today in Iraq, was to effect a draw – a withdrawal without a clear victory. OBTW guess the dominant party of “political leadership that made the Tet offensive into a defeat…”
”I don’t think the Ramadan violence qualifies as a “Tet offensive”…”
You’re right but for the wrong reasons. Tet was a military strategy time to the Oriental New Year, this increased violence in Iraq is timed to our November elections. My prediction: if the Dems take the House (with or without the Senate) the violence will remain elevated, but not necessarily to the same level as now. Reason – to substantiate the Dems position of pulling out of Iraq, because it is un-winnable. If the Dems fail to take the House and Senate, the violence will subside, because the insurgents are getting the snot knocked out of them attacking hard targets. For someone who credits himself with being well informed about the situation in Iraq, you let the obvious slip right past you.
Comment by Old Soldier — 6:30 am
The American media reported the Tet offensive as a big offensive, which it was. The fact that LBJ had been trying to pretend that the VC were contained and on their way out is what caused the PR disaster. Unless you think that the press should have tried to hide the extent of the Tet offensive…
“OBTW guess the dominant party of “political leadership that made the Tet offensive into a defeat”
I’m of the humble opinion that we should learn from the mistakes of past wars, not use them as an excuse to make the same ones again. You prefer otherwise?
“For someone who credits himself with being well informed about the situation in Iraq, you let the obvious slip right past you. ”
No, I’m just not so myopic that I believe that these guys are obsessing about our election cycle. I’m sure a few of them do, but the vast majority just fights harder when they feel particularly angry and religious. Ramadan is a time when families gather. So it’s a time when people are most aware of their lost family members. They’re angrier than normal. And the sectarian differences burn extra hot when religion is the focus of every day life. They more religious than normal.
Please explain why you think that the violence should subside now, no matter who’s in charge in Washington. The violence hasn’t abated in the past 3 years. What is different now? Do you think these guys are out of ammo?
Comment by endorendil — 7:53 am
[Parental warning: explicit sarcasm]
Boys and girls, it looks like the Army Times has joined the defeatist chorus.
“In an editorial appearing in the Nov. 13 issue of Army Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times and Marine Corps Times, on newsstands Monday, the papers say it is time for the president “to face the hard bruising truth.”
“His strategy has failed, and his ability to lead is compromised. And although the blame for our failures in Iraq rests with the secretary, it will be the troops who bear its brunt,” the newspapers say.
What’s this world coming too, if even the Army is giving “aid and comfort” to our enemies?
Comment by endorendil — 11:14 am
endo - Army Times is part of the MSM. All of the Military Times publications are owned by Gannett Newspapers, which also owns USA Today, so you are misleading in your implications that these are “official military newspapers”. http://www.gannett.com/web/gan013.htm
Comment by SouthernRoots — 4:14 pm
Please point out where I called them “official military newspapers”, SR. In other posts, I have called them “the military’s own newpapers”, which is similar to TR calling the Boston Herald Kerry’s hometown newspaper.
The Army Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times and Marine Corps Times are publications serving the military. Their sources and readership are military personnel. They are the voice of the military.
Comment by endorendil — 3:23 am
endo - the “lie” is that they are NOT “the military’s own newpapers”, they are private publications owned by Gannett Newspapers and not DoD, or any of the service branches.
“which is similar to TR calling the Boston Herald Kerry’s hometown newspaper”
Wrong again. If TR had called the Boston Herald Kerry’s “own” newspaper (implying ownership and endorsement) then you would be more correct. But the only part of TR’s phrase you could challenge is whether Boston is really Kerry’s “hometown” - maybe it’s Cambridge or Denver, or Paris…
Here are some examples of “the military’s own newpapers”. Read through them, you might see alternative opinions and information than you get in your regular sources - you might even learn something.
http://estripes.osd.mil/
http://www.centcom.mil/
http://www.defenselink.mil/
Comment by SouthernRoots — 1:11 pm
Sorry, Endo, but I’ve got you dead to rights here.
First you say (sarcastically):
“What’s this world coming too, if even the Army is giving ‘aid and comfort’ to our enemies?”
The clear implication is that the Army is the one who expressed the view of the editorial.
Then you said the following:
“Please point out where I called them ‘official military newspapers’”
When you say “the Army is giving ‘aid and comfort’”, you can’t turn around and say “I never said that the military said that!”. So, Senator Kerry, you actually did say that the Army felt that way…before you didn’t.
Comment by crushliberalism — 3:29 pm
CL. you missed the “explicit sarcasm” before that post, did you?
But I stand by the description of the Army Times as being the voice of the military. The sources it uses are active military personnel, as is its entire target audience. Official DoD rags have there hands tied: they can’t openly criticize their commanders, and they certainly can’t venture into politics. I said before that if you’re looking for CentCom or the DoD to aks for Rumsfeld’s resignation, you don’t have to be worried: they can’t do that.
Now calm down and enjoy the election results rolling in.
Comment by endorendil — 7:52 am
But I stand by the description of the Army Times as being the voice of the military.
Of course you do, because you’re a moron.
Comment by crushliberalism — 8:33 am