Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users

Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.
What I will miss most:
England 28%
The Air Force 11%
Laura Bush 7%
Jenna Bush 52%

Votes: 95

 It's time to surrender.

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Mar 03, 2002
As the US sobers up from the mass confusion following our defeat in the Islamic attack on New York, it is time to make a realistic assessment of our situation. Al Qaeda still has its leadership, its money, and more volunteer footsoldiers than ever. The US is just as vulnerable as we were before Sept. 11, and we are much poorer, and much more alone, with fewer and fewer allies every day. What allies we do have are wholly unreliable piss-pots like Pakistan.

We are in exactly the same situation as the Japanese Empire after the bombing of Hiroshima. What came next was Nagasaki, and then unconditional surrender. Will we make the same mistake and wait to lose another city, or will we wise up, and negotiate the best deal we can, while we still have the chance?


More stories about Politics
Capital Punishment Should Serve the People
America the Beautiful
Luv Yr Enemies: Viva Chile y el General Pinochet!
Reparation and reconcilation - the time is right.
Abortion or Treason? Towards a more populous America
Conscription: the return of American values
The Terrible Truth About Gun Owners
Gutless In Seattle
A paean to masochism: A new philosophy of life.
Isolationism Versus Go-F*ck-Yourself-ism
America is still the greatest
what now for US Israel-Palestinan policy?
"Cowardly" terrorists
Adequacy sheds light at our darkest hour
Chile to bomb the U.S.A.
You are not Irish, They are not Republicans. Please stop sending them money and guns.
Kill Yr Idols: Usamah bin Muhammad bin Laden
An Early Analysis of Today's Attacks
On the Establishment of a Palestinian State
Achieving Justice for bin Laden
Ban All Guns Now!
The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, terrorism, and decolonisation
Why Supporting Israel Helps Everyone
America's Case for Packing Heat
What To Do About Arafat?
Save America's Gangs
Reasserting America's Manhood
Ancient History for Ignorant Americans
Kill Yr Idols: The American Electorate
America is Better than God
Beam Me Up: There's No Intelligent Life in Congress

More stories by

Enough already! Ban programming.
Kill Yr Idols: God
Monsters Incorporated: Film Review and Merchandise Buyer's Guide.
Review: The Spitfire Tour at EWU Nov. 20
Are you Adequate?
Tolkien, autism, and geeks: peas in a pod.
The End of Hacking: A Holiday Un-Buyer's Guide
Foreigner hacker indicted for stealing US films.
Remember. Do not eat today.
Caffeinated mints, and getting into the body you desire.
Teenage problems, teenage solutions.
No, you STILL can't look at Kate or Ashley, and if you do you are a filthy pervert.
The Bush Administration admitted the failure of the American system from the first day: a free and open society doesn't work. Secret justice by a self-chosen oligarchy is superior to public jury trials. If you want to win, you must be ruthless. These are the tactics that Islam has used to triumph over the West, and it has left even our highest officials utterly demoralized. George W. Bush has taken to drinking again and even set up a "shadow government" to try to pick up the pieces after Washington DC is destroyed. If our own leaders no longer nurture any faith in the American experiment in Constitutional government, why should we?

It's time to admit that in a dog-eat-dog world, the rat race doesn't always go to the swift, nor the just. It goes to those with the most wealth and the fewest scruples. In the case of the September 11 attacks, victory went to those who were least hesitant to hit below the belt.

Empires fall. It's a fact of history, and now it's our turn. The thing to remember is that it has happend to the best of them and in the long run they all learned that you can survive and adapt to any humiliation. The British demonstrated that. The French surely did. Who are we to think that we are above throwing in the towel when the writing is on the wall?

Americans have always been smart, and we know how to make the best deal we can. It's time to apply that same Yankee good sense to the current chance at negotiation. We have now a golden opportunity to placate the millions of angry Muslims of the world while preserving much of what we value most. Not our cherished liberties, of course, but those who kicked our asses didn't need such frills did they?

As a starting point, I offer the following suggested Terms of Surrender:

  • Disarmament: Give up all overseas bases, long range missiles and aircraft, and all weapons of mass destruction. This one is obvious. As a has-been empire, the US has no more need of aggressive military power.
  • Territory: Offer the crown jewel of Europe, and our closest ally, the UK, as our major territorial concession. Half the Muslim world has been dreaming of throwing British colonialism back at their oppressors for centuries, and they would jump at the chance to grind the English under their iron boot. The irony is that this will mean virtually nothing as far as the day-to-day life of the average British subject, who has never really known freedom or democracy anyway. If we don't give them Britian, we have to give them something; next time maybe we won't antagonize our opponents so much, now that we realize that we could be the losers. Everyone knows our little war in Afghanistan was fought more to make us feel better than to strike any kind of meaningful blow against Islam, but symbolically, they feel injured. Muslims won't be satisfied if they don't get something to make up for their losses, and believe they have punished the West for our impudence. Hopefully, enslaving Great Britian will be enough to stem their wrath, if not, they can have California.
  • Retribution: The President and his cabinet will naturally be put on trial by an Islamic court. This will be a rough sort of justice by the standards of the former American system, but these days, it's about as good as any other quality of justice you could get. After weighing the evidence, the Mullahs will find them guilty and George W. and his cohorts will be stoned to death by a mob of black-draped women. Sadly, most of our troops who attacked Islamic peoples will also have to be handed over. They will probably feel a bit betrayed, but do we really have a choice? It's pretty doubtful that all of them will be stoned along with their leaders; there's just too many. Chances are they will survive a while in a desert prison somewhere, and we will be able to forget them soon enough.
  • Reparations: A sum in the neighborhood of $100 billion should do it. Note that this is really a symbolic payment. The real monetary reparations will come from control of the entire oil market, not just extraction, but transportation, processing and consumption. This will make the Arab world far wealthier than even the richest oil shiek today can imagine, yet mean little to the US consumer. We can expect a policy that encourages dependence on inefficient transport, expansion of highways and more urban sprawl, and only token research into alternative energy.
After the initial shock of occupation by an Islamic garrison and the installation of the Nation of Islam as our interim government, what will our new lives be like? Pretty much the same, especially in the deep south, where the moral rules of the Koran are generally held in high regard anyway. Some of the more libertine urban areas will have a tough time of it, but we will discover that tolerance, even in New York City, was mostly a thin veneer anyway. Underneath, we were always as narrow and fascist as Islam will demand that we be. The new flag will look kind of funny at first, but we were never really that attached to the old one anyway. The Germans and Japanese didn't miss their Imperial flags much after a few years, and neither will we.

What can you do now? Well, forget about the president. Obviously, he isn't going to initiate a surrender process that will land him in the dock. Most likely, he is working on setting up some offshore accounts so he can flee the country at an opportune moment and live out his retirement in the manner of Idi Amin or the Shah of Iran. The problem is, we can't wait for him to get it together. We all know how bad George W. is with money. Congress needs to act, and you and I need to encourage them to do so. Once they pass a resolution of surrender, the President can be arrested and the shadow government may begin negotiations.

Should we wait any longer? Maybe, if you like to gamble. But what are we waiting for? We have as many bargaining chips now as we ever will. If we wait until Bush slips away, we won't have him to hand over to our conquerors. They won't be pleased, you can be sure, and will want something to make up for it. Probably our virgin daughters. Does that sound so good to you?

Of course not. It's time to surrender in the most dignified way we can, and cut a deal. Yes, tears will be shed, but isn't that the way of things? Just remember that the free and just America we used to care about so much is already gone, and what we are surrendering now is only the material remnants of a broken empire.


Interesting take. (none / 0) (#12)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Mar 3rd, 2002 at 10:12:45 PM PST
You think it's in our best interest to convert to the Muslim religion? Are you a Muslim? I think you fail to realize that freedom made the US the great country it is. Interesting take. I agree with a lot of what you said, especially the parts about the free US we used to care about being no more. Giving up is not the right thing to do. We should simply stop being idiots with regard to foreign policy. That's the real solution.

dont worry, you'll learn to love it (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 12:22:34 AM PST
You think it's in our best interest to convert to the Muslim religion?

Why would that matter? In a few generations Americans will recite Osama with more zeal than they currently reserve for Jefferson. If your present dissolute way of life was "in your best interest", there would be more of you than the 1.3 billion muslims who whipped your modern ass. It's social darwinism in action; survival of the fittest isnt interested in the losing population's arbitrary system of values. (For obvious reasons in the foreseeable future, you should be gratified science isnt your strong suit.)

are you a muslim? (none / 0) (#25)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 03:35:37 AM PST
In a few generations Americans will recite Osama with more zeal than they currently reserve for Jefferson.
Where do you get that silly idea?
If your present dissolute way of life was "in your best interest", there would be more of you than the 1.3 billion muslims who whipped your modern ass.
I didn't say it was, in fact, I said that I agreed that our system isn't as free as it pretends to be. Which muslims `whipped our modern ass?'
It's social darwinism in action; survival of the fittest isnt interested in the losing population's arbitrary system of values.
I agree. Religious populations that aren't able to adapt to change will cease to exist.
For obvious reasons in the foreseeable future, you should be gratified science isnt your strong suit.
Are you talking about me, or who you seem to think I represent? Fortunately, personal attacks fail when you're attacking someone who is anonymous. :)

How long have we got? (none / 0) (#13)
by Mint Waltman on Sun Mar 3rd, 2002 at 10:28:15 PM PST
How much time will pass between the moment of our official surrender and the moment the Muslim garrisons are installed on Main Street USA? Specifically, I'm curious how long it will take our remaining military to train the warriors of the Islamic faith how to operate our planes, tanks, ships, helicopters, etc... in order to effectively suppress the inevitable uprisings against occupation carried out by uppity partisans. Plus, which tech paradigm will prevail in the post-occupation US? Will I be allowed to keep my indoor plumbing?

You have a very good point. (none / 0) (#15)
by John Wainright on Sun Mar 3rd, 2002 at 10:38:49 PM PST
There are many things I will be concerned about should this come to pass.
Of primary importance is will my quiet suburban street be turned into a circus of peddlers, con artists and shamans.
I really do not wish live fowl to be hawked on my impeccably manicured lawn.
Also will the public works dept's of our cities be able to keep up with the piles of animal feces that would accumulate on our boulevards.
This surrender is just a bad idea from a practical standpoint.

Read the article. (none / 0) (#20)
by tkatchev on Sun Mar 3rd, 2002 at 11:22:01 PM PST
The author clearly noted that in the future USA will be ruled by an interim government from the Nation of Islam.

Which means that your lifestyle will remain wholyl American, and you won't really need to live under Arab occupation.

Peace and much love...

Our lifestyle will remain wholly American... (none / 0) (#26)
by hauntedattics on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 07:46:05 AM PST
except that all men will be required to wear bow ties, start cosmetics companies, and accuse their best friends' daughters of plotting to kill them.

On the subject of the poll... (none / 0) (#14)
by RootComplex on Sun Mar 3rd, 2002 at 10:35:28 PM PST
Doesn't Jenna Bush sound like a porn star name?

They'll never stop the Catholics (5.00 / 2) (#16)
by Office Druid on Sun Mar 3rd, 2002 at 10:43:41 PM PST
I know the U.S. may have had it, but I'm not through with being a Catholic. I love our faith, and I don't want to become Muslim, ever! We are the original Christian Apostlistic Cathoilc faith. We won't go down just because cowards can bomb us. They may be 200 million more Muslims in the world than Catholics, but I won't let that stop us. Imagine if the Taliban really did rule the U.S.! It would suck, they'd take away my video games, smash our Cathedrals and make our liberated women degrade themselves in terrible attire. So George Bush is an alcoholic drug addict liar dictator. Let's kick him out and become part of the Vatican. I'd much rather do that than become a Muslim

No you're not. (none / 0) (#19)
by tkatchev on Sun Mar 3rd, 2002 at 11:19:10 PM PST
You split away from the original Apostolic Church around 1000 A.D. because you wanted to worship your fascist Bishop of Rome instead of Christ.

Peace and much love...

Worship GOD, not Christ (none / 0) (#97)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Mar 9th, 2002 at 10:38:14 PM PST
Worship GOD, not Christ.
Christ said to not worship him.
"Praise Jesus" is blasphemy!
Jesus said to worship God only.
He is a jealous God.

A difference without distinction (none / 0) (#27)
by Mint Waltman on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 08:16:06 AM PST
My choices are living under a repressive Islamic theocratic government, or possibly converting to heretical Catholicism, and taking up arms against the occupiers. The most obvious choice, the third choice, suicide is ruled out by my Christian beliefs. I'd say the best option left to me and my fellow Christians would be to continue to worship in secret. It may be dangerous. Lord knows, it'd be just a matter of time before those Muslim savages begin torturing and killing us for sport and entertainment, but the True Faith has survived similar atrocities in the past.

Football at the Colluseum (none / 0) (#91)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Mar 8th, 2002 at 03:56:03 AM PST
and those cute little lions who are soo hungry before a game....

California? (5.00 / 2) (#17)
by doofus on Sun Mar 3rd, 2002 at 11:00:57 PM PST
I happen to believe that California is worth more to us than it is to any follower of (apparently) the One True Faith.

I recommend we give them New York City and the surrounding area up to Yonkers or White Plains and let them have at it with all of their fury, so that later in this century Snake Pliskin can rescue a future (figurehead) President of the United States who looks remarkably like Donald Pleasance.

But, if you insist on keeping New York City giving them Florida solves two problems; we pay reparations to the victors and the Palestinians get a homeland.

Hell give em everything EXCEPT San Francisco (none / 0) (#60)
by astrix on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 09:35:10 AM PST
We don't need the rest. Enslave the rest of the population.

"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty" --Thomas Jefferson

*whoooosh* (none / 0) (#65)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 11:25:54 AM PST
Hear that?

That's the sound of an ICBM being fired at San Francisco.

Eat shit and die.


unfortunately (none / 0) (#74)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 07:28:13 PM PST
you'll still be gay. I suggest you come up with a different plan. Have you tried honesty?

I surrender necessary? (none / 0) (#18)
by jvance on Sun Mar 3rd, 2002 at 11:10:39 PM PST
Isn't there an easier way to get them to take California?
Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

Wow cool article (none / 0) (#22)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 12:45:42 AM PST
I was just thinking the same thing. U.S.A. as a great power cannot remain a great power forever. I can't tell you when U.S.A. will lose it's power but I fear that it may happen in our lifetime. And I also fear that many Americans including possibly myself will die.

Oh, death. (5.00 / 1) (#23)
by elenchos on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 12:58:42 AM PST
We're all doomed to die. No avoiding that, my friend, no matter who sacks our empire. I'm reminded of the words of the great Stoic, and the greatest of the Roman Emperors, Marcus Aurelius, in his Meditations:
    Do not despise death, but be well content with it, since this too is one of those things which nature wills. For such as it is to be young and to grow old, and to increase and to reach maturity, and to have teeth and beard and grey hairs, and to beget, and to be pregnant and to bring forth, and all the other natural operations which the seasons of thy life bring, such also is dissolution. This, then, is consistent with the character of a reflecting man, to be neither careless nor impatient nor contemptuous with respect to death, but to wait for it as one of the operations of nature. As thou now waitest for the time when the child shall come out of thy wife's womb, so be ready for the time when thy soul shall fall out of this envelope. But if thou requirest also a vulgar kind of comfort which shall reach thy heart, thou wilt be made best reconciled to death by observing the objects from which thou art going to be removed, and the morals of those with whom thy soul will no longer be mingled. For it is no way right to be offended with men, but it is thy duty to care for them and to bear with them gently; and yet to remember that thy departure will be not from men who have the same principles as thyself. For this is the only thing, if there be any, which could draw us the contrary way and attach us to life, to be permitted to live with those who have the same principles as ourselves. But now thou seest how great is the trouble arising from the discordance of those who live together, so that thou mayest say, Come quick, O death, lest perchance I, too, should forget myself.
There. See?

I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill

Which reminds me of the words ... (none / 0) (#46)
by Ben Reid on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 07:44:38 PM PST
... of Blaise Pascal.

As I know not whence I come, so I know not whither I go. I know only that, in leaving this world, I fall for ever either into annihilation or into the hands of an angry God, without knowing to which of these two states I shall be for ever assigned. Such is my state, full of weakness and uncertainty.

And from all this I conclude that I ought to spend all the days of my life without caring to inquire into what must happen to me. Perhaps I might find some solution to my doubts, but I will not take the trouble, nor take a step to seek it; and after treating with scorn those who are concerned with this care, I will go without foresight and without fear to try the great event, and let myself be led carelessly to death, uncertain of the eternity of my future state. [Pascal, Pensees]

To be easy and content, indeed to boast of a state of carelessness in a matter which concerns you, your eternity, your all, seems indescribable to me.

oh no (none / 0) (#28)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 09:15:09 AM PST
like that would be a bad thing.

You left out one thing (5.00 / 1) (#24)
by lowapproach on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 03:22:12 AM PST
One thing I do admire about the Islamic system is the way that they treat any who upset the carefully ordered patriarchy of the devout. To me, the oppression and hatred leveled at women of education, homosexuals and intellectuals are the closest things to a silver lining here.

No, no, wait a second.

"If the future were really discernible, political science would enjoy more respect than it does, and determinism - the belief that historical, cultural, economic, and other antecedent forces determine the future of both individuals and nations - would not be such a disreputable word." [An excerpt from Kaplan's Warrior Politics, pgs.68-69 (New York: Random House, 2002).]

Even with a military suffering under the strain of supporting endless contingencies, Afghanistan's government fell apart with a few hundred Americans advising the rebels and a few thousand bombs dropped over the course of six weeks. I don't know why the media loves to overrate al-Qaeda and its capabilities, but it's not because they play good defense or score the crucial points at home.

And this makes you feel safe? (5.00 / 1) (#29)
by elenchos on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 11:34:32 AM PST
Was the WTC destroyed by Afghanistan's government?

Al Qaeda is still out there, resilient as ever, and they are the ones who will carry out the next attack. We've seen how devastating their offense is, and why do you scoff at their defense? What have they lost? A couple encampments in Afghanistan? Some tents? They still have their human capital, both leaders and followers, and they have not only the money they had before, but more dontations coming in every day from all over the Muslim world. And even if we somehow destroyed Al Qaeda, whatever that would mean, what is to stop another, or another ten, equivalent organizations from taking its place?

We are so screwed. The news from the front in Afghinstan isn't so good today, by the way, and even if it were, what how does that help us?

I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill

Your only hope. (none / 0) (#30)
by tkatchev on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 11:48:32 AM PST
Your only hope is if it turns out in the end that WTC was carried out by an clandestine group inside the U.S. government in order to bolster support for themselves. Certainly there is much supporting evidence for this hypothesis.

Peace and much love...

The fact that you are probably right scares me ! (5.00 / 1) (#36)
by dmg on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 01:41:02 PM PST
Certainly there is much supporting evidence for this hypothesis.

I really really don't want to have believe this, but you know, its about the only explanation that makes sense when you ask the question "who benefits from the WTC attacks ?".

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

Really? (none / 0) (#40)
by lowapproach on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 02:30:13 PM PST
Name it.

How about this for starters: (none / 0) (#42)
by dmg on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 03:52:15 PM PST
Who we need fear

The national newscast - I believe from CBS - reported that Attorney General John Ashcroft had announced that the PASSPORT of one of the suicide hijackers - had been found --- 8 blocks from the WTC Twin Tower clean-up site. --- Now, let me get this straight. The planes that crashed into the Twin Towers blew up, burned up, and were incinerated - along with everyone on board -- BUT - as a last act, one of the Arabic kamikaze hijackers took his passport from his pocket and frisbeed it out the --- out the WHAT? . . . no window was open as the plane crashed into the steel structured office building.

Somewhat fishy, no ?

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

Or this (none / 0) (#44)
by dmg on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 04:02:41 PM PST
Did NORAD Send The "Suicide" Jets?

It wouldn't be the first time the US Govt did something naughty, would it ?

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

Uhh (none / 0) (#45)
by lowapproach on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 07:28:36 PM PST
You have it from authorities as incontrovertible as Jim Condit ("The name you can trust"), Jr., of the well-known confluence of Web foreign-policy news,, and Carol Valentine, curator of the Waco Holocaust Electronic Museum. Quod erat demonstrandum.

Address for me the following minor concerns, and I'll concede the point:

* How much space inside the aircraft would be taken up by a remote-control assembly that could bypass the yoke and power column in the cockpit? Please attach all schematic drawings to your reply.

* Were the maintenance crews and pilots co-opted by the CIA to miss these items during scheduled maintenance and pre-flight inspections before the first flight that day?

* How were transmissions to the remote-control apparatus done? VHF? Laser? Tiny elves clinging to the ailerons and whispering?

* How does it benefit the U.S. military to have yet another open-ended contingency operation with no more fucking people than we had before it started? [Personal irritation speaking here; my friends and I are on the hook for short-notice deployments to the former Soviet republics, Oman, Saudi Arabia and anywhere else that has Muslims for rotations lasting up to six months. If this were really a move to rebuild the military, they certainly are taking their time about it. -ed.]

I realize that most people here can read the word "Freemasonry" and accept almost anything, but take it slow for those of us who aren't quite on the same page. Thanks.

the more interesting question is (none / 0) (#50)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 11:45:22 PM PST
how such an attack could have eluded the west's intelligence agencies. Or did it? Both are legitimate questions.

As I understand it... (none / 0) (#57)
by because it isnt on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 03:27:15 AM PST
Afghanistan was one of the few middle-east countries without any US moles in it, due to lack of funding to the intelligence agencies. All the political worry was over Iran and Israel, so that's where the resources went.

So who is responsible for the terrible atrocity? Is it the beancounters? Why no, if they had more tax money to work with, this would not be an issue. We can therefore conclude that ultimate responsibility for the September 11th attacks lies with tax-dodging libertarians. -- because it isn't

Bwaaa haaa haa haa haaa (none / 0) (#58)
by dmg on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 05:27:29 AM PST
Afghanistan was one of the few middle-east countries without any US moles in it, due to lack of funding to the intelligence agencies. All the political worry was over Iran and Israel, so that's where the resources went.

Ha ha ha. lack of funding. Good one !

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

Everywhere you look - the evidence points to USA (none / 0) (#63)
by dmg on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 10:39:09 AM PST
Let me repeat, I do not want to believe this stuff. Its just that, well, the evidence speaks for itself.

In some ways, Americans should feel safer knowing that the 9-11 incident was caused by their own security forces. The alternative - a group of highly effective nuclear armed jihadists does not bear thinking about.

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

I don't feel any better... (none / 0) (#64)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 11:24:27 AM PST
If the WTC attack was carried out by our own security forces for political purposes, we are truly fucked. Would you put it beyond such an agency to detonate a hydrogen bomb in a major U.S. city to get a desired effect? It would be a lot easier for the CIA to smuggle one into the U.S. than it would for Al Qaeda.

Either way we are fucked. (none / 0) (#66)
by dmg on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 11:46:16 AM PST
If the WTC attack was carried out by our own security forces for political purposes [I'm convinced that it was] we are truly fucked. Would you put it beyond such an agency to detonate a hydrogen bomb in a major U.S. city to get a desired effect? [No, I wouldn't expect any competent agency to rule out anything. That would be like defeting yourself before you started] It would be a lot easier for the CIA to smuggle one into the U.S. than it would for Al Qaeda. [If or when the unthinkable happens, remember this].

I think the intelligence and security agencies are playing a long-term game called 'preserve the empire'. As such, petty things like 'morals' are quite likely to fall by the wayside. In the long run, its about defeating Islam, in the short term its about getting the Oil flowing, and taking peoples minds of the largest bubble economy collapse since the Dutch tulip bubble of the 1600s.

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

right (none / 0) (#102)
by carrotrope2002 on Wed Mar 13th, 2002 at 02:43:33 PM PST
Well, I heard the CIA was trying to send Louis Freeh all the details, until they found he doesn't have email.

Then they tried to warn the DOD but they only had 300 feet of string and one dixie cup.


Credit where credit is due (none / 0) (#37)
by lowapproach on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 02:27:12 PM PST
The World Trade Center was destroyed by twenty-odd people who will never return to the duty of Allah. Al-Qaeda itself is probably not a monolithic association of suicidal pilots, and anyone who tries to take an airplane away from its passengers and crew with box-cutters will probably have a very difficult time convincing them not to resist.

So there will be another attack. We have our own departments of creative violence working on the problem, and thus far they have shown every country in the Middle East and elsewhere that harboring someone the U.S. wants is a Bad Idea. Bin Laden needs a lot of things to function, and one of them is a local government willing to look the other way as he gives practical military training to non-military members within their borders. He can hide himself, but his organization badly suffered and will have to think about their level of exposure to American intelligence, should they decide to resurface. All of this has led to a cumulative reexamination of the level to which we fund and prioritize the needs of the military and civil intelligence bureaus, another thing that bodes well for our protection in the future.

No one said it would be easy. For a change, Americans might actually have to dwell on the world around them and watch coverage of our foreign policy instead of Friends or Titus. They might actually have to think about presidential decisions that put friends and family in danger as they deploy to parts of the world unfamiliar to the average high school student. Unpleasant, but hardly impossible; with as terrible a track record as inevitability has had in the history of the twentieth century, I'm not interested in surrender to the new Mongols just yet.

The Ben Dover Clan (none / 0) (#53)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 02:04:55 AM PST
I guess if you end up in prison, u'll run
around screaming go ahead and do me and get
it over .

You'll want to not wait for the inevitable,
you'll want your prison sex up front, and
not fight to save ur ass .


I do not know who you are, or what you are,
but me and lots of other ppl are looking
forward to seeing a UAV drop that hellfire
missle right on Osmama's unsuspecting head .

Killing Osama will not kill Al-qaeda, and
it MAY take genocide to bring peace to
the middle east, we are civilized enough
to try the alternatives first .

Al-qaeda is not .

If they had a nuke they would use it .

And then for the frist time, the modern world
would see the trident, the polaris, and a
few other submarine MRV's do their horrific
work .

Glass parking lot, hard outer shell, easy
drilling once you make it to the sand .

Keep in mind during the 6 day war, Israel laid
all of the middle east low, and a instant
replay can be had for the price of one nuke
in downtown Israel .

You thought the 6 day war was bloody???

Hold on to your johnson rod cowboy, its time
to glow, Israel packs close to 1,000 nukes
now and some (Mr. Sharon) have been itching
to use them .

Phuck with the bull, and you get the horns .

Alot off ppl think what happened in Afghanistan
was our militaries best effort, remember that
this is the stipped down clinton era
military, not the one that it will soon
become .

Back in 1984 oliver north spoke to congress
why he had a $36,000 security system installed.

he said " Osama Bin laden "

They laughed and some of the senators could
not pronounce the name .

Well the dumb asses can now, and as
Admiral Yamamoto said after Pearl Harbor,
we have awakened a sleeping giant .

Eisenhower said beware the miltary industrial
complex, and they are good words, the radical
muslims will reap what they sow .

Satellite is hunting them world wide, AWACs
is hunting them world wide, the control
ships are the mobile command centers .

No where to run, no where to hide .

Another attack on US soil will just serve to
further anger those that already plan
the death of the radical islamic movement .

I am not just talking Al-qaeda, I am talking
Saudi Arabia, new drilling in Siberia, new
drilling in the Arctic .

Like bush said, you can deal with them, or if
you are too cowardly we will .


Ex-MislTech ...

What Eisenhower Meant (none / 0) (#67)
by doofus on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 11:59:30 AM PST
Eisenhower said beware the miltary industrial complex, and they are good words, the radical muslims will reap what they sow.

Funny how you heard the words but don't understand their meaning. Eisenhower didn't say "beware the military-industrial complex" as a verbal threat to other nations. He said it as a warning to all Americans. He saw the collusion (you may have to look that word up) between the DoD and the various defense contractors of the time as a dangerous relationship that could/would have major repercussions throughout the world.

And, he was right.

For example, who do you think armed Al-qaeda? If you follow the serial numbers of those rocket-propelled grenades and Stinger missiles, the Howitzer-like cannons, heck even the pick up trucks they drive, you may be dismayed to learn their port of origin.

Why does the USAF, USN and USMC need something called Joint Strike Fighter? Because Lockheed Martin has sold F-16s to every country that wants them (and those sales were approved by the US government).

So, while it's nice that you have remembered a historical sound-bite, you still need to learn how to analyze, synthesize and place in to context what those sound bites mean.

Here's one to practice on: "I am not a crook."

Hmm (none / 0) (#76)
by lowapproach on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 01:11:29 AM PST
"Why does the USAF, USN and USMC need something called Joint Strike Fighter? Because Lockheed Martin has sold F-16s to every country that wants them (and those sales were approved by the US government)."

Perhaps. It might also allude to the fact that all of the services' fighter airframes are approaching their second or third decade of service. If this is a military-industrial complex to fear, then I would hate to see one not reduced to starvation wages. It's not quite 3% of GNP with separation controls placed on personnel [translation: "You want to get out, per your contract? Sorry, our retention policies during peacetime suck and we need you right where you are."] while its military forces expand their coverage to some new hellhole every eighteen months.

It annoys me to see those bumper stickers that read "It will be a great day when schools have all the money they need and the air force has bake sales to buy a bomber," for two reasons. First, I have a reminder that many adults with education ranging from bachelor's degrees to doctorates can sum up their knowledge of foreign policy with a bumper sticker. Second, it tells me that they don't appreciate how far $300B goes when it has to support contingencies everywhere in the world, with victory assured ten minutes after arrival and no casualties. All of these things cost money, and that the Air Force does what it does with 25% fewer airplanes and 45% fewer people than it had for Desert Storm should tell you that the military-industrial complex ain't what it used to be.

Yours truly, the soothing, reassuring voice of the right-wing conspiracy.

Wow, you really know how to step on your dick. (none / 0) (#77)
by elenchos on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 02:03:29 AM PST
If "aging airframes" were the only problem, new F15s, 16s etc can be, and are, built. Is that the best justification you have for the Joint Strike Fighter? Or the F22, or God knows what more they want. I woudn't make too big a deal of this, except that you are snotty enough to toss unfounded insults on those who put education over military hardware? Didn't the --former-- Soviet Union try that too? You're the one whose grasp of foreign policy comes from bumper stickers if you think all that matters is getting a really good value for the money we waste on the military. Even in the most optimistic scenario, all they do is win battles, as in Afghanistan. Yet we still lose the war, and still have no doemstic security from terrorism.

None! They can't protect us. They can drive us into the poor house, and inspire more kids to hate us to their dying breath, but they cannot, have not, protected us. Painful to realize, I know.

You're a crew chief, aren't you?

I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill

Thanks, but it's hardly the only problem (none / 0) (#79)
by lowapproach on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 12:21:44 PM PST
I'm not a crew chief, maintainer or pilot, but my friends who are crew chiefs, maintainers and pilots will tell you as a mass that twenty or thirty years of flying will cause malfunction and fatigue even in the best-maintained aircraft. The design itself has since been eclipsed in prototype, and the only place in the world where you can buy a new F-15 is Japan.

It's not an unfounded insult, and it has nothing to do with valuing military hardware [only part of the equation; people become at least as important] over education. My grievance is the idea that the government's naming some normally astronomical sum to the care and feeding of its foreign policy makes it easy for the mass of people to believe that all of its problems for defense are amply funded.

The former Soviet Union's demise had, since you mention it, much more to do with lack of military funding than educational funding. After Gorbachev went under house arrest and the coup began in earnest, the armed forces assigned to the Moscow district sided with Yeltsin and the reformers mainly because they weren't getting paid on time, or enough. I'm not saying that there ever is an option of spending on education and defense - indeed one always needs to make those investments - but your example doesn't do much for your argument. It does help mine, in that you, knowledgeable in some other field and therefore empowered to speak out on any field, will argue this bullshit assumption into the ground.

I could address the last question of whether or not we can protect you against domestic terrorism, but I won't. I'm not sure that any form of protection that does not alter the Bill of Rights completely [specifically, rights of free speech, assembly and due process] will, but that's for some other time.

'empowered' because of second-hand knowledge? (none / 0) (#80)
by elenchos on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 12:40:11 PM PST
That's rich.

Do you honestly believe that it is somehow impossible to keep producing more copies of existing hardware? Why? Because they broke the mold? I guess. So you're trying to tell us that our existing planes' wings are going to fall off and the only choice is to spend billions developing all-new state-of-the-art toys?

That's fantastic. Even the defense industry doesn't try an argument that lame. At least they justify the "need" for more advanced hardware by the fact that countries like our "ally" Pakistan have F-16s. It's only readicals like me who pay attention to who it was who worked so hard to make sure Pakistan got those planes: the same people selling the newer planes to us. If Micro-Soft tried a ploy this transparent to move their product they'd be sued by forty State's Attorneys General.

But good Americans like you don't even question. Your partially right that our safety can't be guranteed, or even reasonably hoped for, by use of force. Hence the reason why pouring more money into weapons is a disaster, not just for the economy, but because it distracts us from solving the real problem.

And the beginning of the real solution to the real problem is for Americans to quit being do culpably ignorant.

I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill

Call it what you will (none / 0) (#82)
by lowapproach on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 02:24:37 PM PST
I could do some research and email you later, but the fact is that airplanes stop being made for the same reason that you can no longer buy the original Air Jordans: the marketplace moves on, and reopening the production line has a cost that repays itself only when mass consumption is guaranteed. This is why we no longer fly the EF-111: for the number of hours it was mission-capable, it spent so many hours being repaired and demanded so much in the way of spare parts that it was less cost-effective to fly than the then-new F-117A.

Maybe the defense industry should try arguments as lame as mine, but then I remember that they have to sell their products to people who may well believe that airplanes last forever until they crash. [I wonder why we've had so many helicopter crashes recently? Could it have anything to do with the fact that they have already exceeded their predicted obsolescence?] The parlance in the maintenance business is the mission-capable rate, or the amount of time in a year in which an airplane can do what it's supposed to do. The wings don't fall off because of boroscope examinations at regular intervals, in which all fatigue problems are identified and passed along to the metals shop.

There are enough sources on aviation that have not been co-opted by the Man that you can verify this, independently. You probably don't drive the same car for more than a quarter-century if you drive it every day, and the airlines don't fly Boeing 707's any more. Without trying to be insulting, take the next intuitive leap and apply it to fighters and strategic airlift.

I believe that the ultimate solution to the problem is building the world up to a level of material comfort matching that of the West, one country at a time, which probably matches your line of thought. However, I also believe that failure to match power with determined opposition is suicide, and I would not have the United States stand on the wrong side of a modern-day Melian Debate simply because the military is abhorrent to a minority.

Hello good sir. (none / 0) (#84)
by Stretch on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 03:55:56 PM PST
I read an article on some other site which stated that the B-52 (Stratofortress) which has been successfully carpet bombing our arbitrary enemies for the past 40 years will continue to carpet bombing them for the next 40. I respect the fact you want the good ole U.S. of A. to remain a super power and babysit every impoverish, no-future nation but if only 10% of the military funding went to schools, or other such liberal nonsense, we may not need new billion dollar planes to shoot million dollar smart bombs to overkill Afganistan's local yokles every 10 years.

Apples and Oranges (none / 0) (#98)
by John Wainright on Sun Mar 10th, 2002 at 01:49:48 AM PST
The B52 is not subject to the stresses that a fighter is. Hypersonic speeds and the power to get them there cause stress on the metals as stated above.
You may liken it to a company's fleet of vehicles. While they may replace the sedans every 3-5 years, their long haul vehicles (tractor trailer or delivery trucks) may be in service 10 - 20 years or more.
The B52's are big enough to refit as needed with what ever tech gear is needed and still stay viable. It's a proven design with one mission, Bomb the Hell out of a target.
The article you references was very fine by the way.
I'll leave the discussions of budgets and spending to others. Suffice to say it's the way things have always been. The decline of our schools is a tragedy but I point to the lessening of respect for ones fellow man and the theory that we are not responsible for our own actions as the catalyst for that.

Hello? Great Britain here! (none / 0) (#31)
by BCFH on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 11:55:22 AM PST
"Territory: Offer the crown jewel of Europe, and our closest ally, the UK, as our major territorial concession." Sod off.

Right on (none / 0) (#32)
by budlite on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 11:57:29 AM PST
Taking into account world history, the UK and the rest of Europe have more right to offer up the US than the US has to offer up Alaska.

Correct (none / 0) (#33)
by BCFH on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 12:48:21 PM PST
Seeing as we used to own 1/5th of the known world, including most if not all of the USA, and the rest of europe owned what we didn't (which was still a considerable amount), would propose that we offer the entire continent of North America, excluding Canada which to my knowledge has done nothing to offend anyone, to the entire islamic world, so they have somewhere to fight and we don't have to worry about it hurting our oil supplies

Well, I suppose you could try. (none / 0) (#34)
by elenchos on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 12:54:51 PM PST
Perhaps England should send an emissary to Osama bin Laden and offer to surrender and hand over the US to him. The thing is, do you think he would take you seriously?

He will say, "Pah! Stop wasting my time. Send someone with the power to negotiate, not some underling!"

But if it would make you feel better, give it a shot.

I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill

yes, but... (none / 0) (#49)
by BCFH on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 11:31:16 PM PST
What I said is merely a slight change to what you said earlier, about giving the UK to Osama. It would be met with equal, if not more contempt, seeing the state of our country...

goddamn i hate imperialists... (none / 0) (#35)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 01:11:38 PM PST
Seeing as we used to own 1/5th of the known world, including most if not all of the USA, and the rest of europe owned what we didn't

British and the Muslims (none / 0) (#51)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 01:31:49 AM PST
Hehe, trolls will be deleted, this all looks
like trolls to me .

You guys crack me up, the british went into
India with violence and only stayed as long
as the Indians responded with violence .

Once the Indians realized you were only there
to get their money and they refused to use
or buy anything british, you left .

Its all about the money , LOL .

As far as us surrendering to the Muslims,
this is not Rome, we don't ride chariots,
we have aspects of the military that the
COMMON man does not even know exists .

I do, I am ex-military, and I do not know
all of it, but enough to tell you that we
are the last super power .

China likes to think they are one too, but
they are not, europe likes to think this is
just post WW2, but it is not .

This is the age of the Aegis weapon system,
if you don't know what it is, then you are
no smarter than the muslims that will
indirectly die because of it .

Their are things that have been made in the
desert at Sandia, and other less known labs
that would shake the foundations of the earth
if they knew they existed .

The Israeli's along in the 6 day war laid
the middle east low, if you wanna see an
instant replay, it can be arranged .

They have over 1,000 nuclear weapons, and have
considered this option more than once .

The great glass parking lot of oil .

Once you got past the hard outer shell, the
sand is good drillin' .



FINALLY!! (none / 0) (#56)
by BCFH on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 02:49:46 AM PST
SOMEBODY finally works out WHY we invaded everywhere. It's for the same reason Hussain invaded Kuwait- THE FUCKING MONEY!!

I find your posts insightful... (none / 0) (#62)
by Mint Waltman on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 10:24:24 AM PST
but your crude approximation of Nostradamus' quatrains belies the fact that you are an occultist whose presence here will likely only attract more Satan worshipers to adequacy.

But after surrender and Islamic Takeover... (none / 0) (#38)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 02:28:46 PM PST
...won't the new Islamic Empire have to deal with Christian Terrorists/Crusaders? My suspicion is those would be way worse than Osama... or maybe that's what your plan is hoping for?

It's not Islam vs. Christianity, it's the State vs. Terrorists. The problem is the state can't surrender because another group of terrorists will just spring up to resist the surrender terms. And the terrorists can't surrender because there's no one leader of all terrorists.

Surrender might be preferrable to perpetual violence, but it's logically impossible. Oops.

And theres another problem.... (none / 0) (#100)
by BCFH on Sun Mar 10th, 2002 at 11:58:43 PM PST
Surrendering britain ALSO means surrendering Northen Ireland... then Islam would be in trouble

Another upside (none / 0) (#39)
by Ernest Bludger on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 02:29:44 PM PST
is that the American automobile industry may end up following the lead set last century by Germany and Japan, and start producing quality cars at a reasonable price. In the long term this would help counter some of the adverse economic impact of short-term reparations that were made as part of the surrender conditions.

War? (none / 0) (#41)
by thecapn on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 02:53:51 PM PST
I see a lot of posts in reference to Osama Bin Laden and his followers wanting to topple the American government and end our way of life. I think we may have lost site of what the conflict stemmed from. We have give countless amounts of military aid to Isreal and have helped the repel the other Arabian nations and that pissed the Arabians in that area off. So much so that they threatened action against the US on numerous occassions. From the standpoint of what's fair, we have almost no right to be in the Middle East at all. From a religious standpoint, we have every right to be there to defend the Holy Land. The attack on the World Trade Centers was evil in every right but I don't think it was in any way unprovoked. And while it was aimed at ending our support of Israel, I don't think it was in any way aimed toward toppling the US. I think the media may have somewhat of an influence on teh current general view of the war. 2 years ago no one knew or cared about the Taliban and how badly it treated it's women and citizens. Now it seems as if our country has been enemies with them for years. Let us not also forget that Osama Bin Laden was hiding in Afghanistan and was in a location that Taliban leaders themselves supposedly didn't know. Don't you think that after countless bombings and their government being on the brink of destruction that the Taliban leaders would have finally given up the location of Osama? I think we might want to take a more honest approach to our crusade in the Middle East and not look at it as a war to protect the American way of life, but as a war of vengeance upon one man who wreaked death and havoc upon our nation.

I have this sort of problem every day. (none / 0) (#43)
by nathan on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 03:55:10 PM PST
As a middle-class Saudi youth, I frequently say to myself, "I wish I could have thrown my life away against America for Islam, because of America's support for Israel." Then I go play pool and clandestinely drink beer and, like the Sept 11 gang, frolic with strippers and prostitutes.

Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

Now you've done it. (none / 0) (#47)
by tkatchev on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 10:13:05 PM PST
Now you'll have the FBI and the SS (Secret Service, not what you thought of first) after you.

It's not that scary though -- they'll probably just want to interview you. People involved in national security are surprisingly laid-back.

Peace and much love...

Me too. (none / 0) (#68)
by because it isnt on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 12:32:19 PM PST
As a Palestinian youth, I think to myself just how much I love America, a land of freedom that allows anyone to make an honest living. -- because it isn't

Taliban (none / 0) (#78)
by rsknapp on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 11:33:37 AM PST
Actually, we SUPPORTED the Taliban. We paid them a great sum to get them to declare that cultivating opium poppys was contrary to the will of Allah.

Politics (particularly Drug politics) makes strange bedfellows.

Do not smirk at the will of wondorus Allah (5.00 / 1) (#48)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Mar 4th, 2002 at 11:10:46 PM PST
Your attempts to portray humble followers of Islam such the Al-Quieda jihadi as marauding buccaneers is in exceedingly poor taste. Those who sacrificed themselves on 9/11 and who continue to do so in the struggles against Israeli imperialism are working to alert the world of holy message of God's love. The sole aim of these groups is the liberation of the Holy Land, and the restoration of fair and just Islamic rule (true democracy, in other words) over traditional Muslim areas of the world.

For the benefit of those of you who sit up nights clutching your handguns, waiting to cut down the barbaric hordes of scimitar-waving invaders with hot infidel lead, I will state this more plainly: we do not wish to transform the United States into one huge Islamic vassal state. Let it be known that we do not covet your Slurpees, your Martha Stewart limited edition bedsheets, your Budweiser frogs, or your Oakley sunglasses with titanium frames and interchangeable polarized lenses. You can keep your Astrodomes, your Epcot Centers, your Bellagio Hotel music and light-show dancing waters extravaganzas. Your Britney Spearses, Alicia Keyses, and Halle Berries are of no interest to devout Islamic males. Rest assured that merciful Allah, whose wisdom is as boundless as the skies, has his own plans for your country which he is perfectly capable of seeing through without our help.

I am highly disappointed that a reputable news source such as is willing to engage in such scurrilous scare-mongering. The demands of Al-Quieda and other jihadi are reasonable and modest: end the tyrannical domination by the United States and Israel of traditionally Islamic lands, and we'll stop blowing ourselves (and you) up. A simple either/or proposition, fully in compliance with the benevolent Islamic law under which millions of people have thrived for millennia. If our demands are met, we won't even try to prosecute your hooting orangutan of a President for war crimes (he's your problem. Don't expect us to get rid of him for you). Fomenting disinformation about the servants of the true God plotting to dominate the pasty, ill-mannered inhabitants of the pagan West, as if we were a pack of debased Mongols, is just irresponsible.

Thank you for this opportunity to set the record straight. I await your apology forthwith.

LOL (none / 0) (#52)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 01:33:22 AM PST
Hate to burst your bubble, but Jews and Christians had a claim on the Holy land long before the first towel head arrived.

Second when the Arabs did control the old city, they forbid all but Muslims from entering. Used tombstones as walk ways and other such pleasentries. I think that the Israelie gov't with U.S. support should give them a taste of their own medicine. Kill every Muslim Arab who comes within 100 yards of their 3 most holy sites. Then they might have a reason to complain. Till then they should shut up and sleep with their camels.

Mr. Sharon (none / 0) (#54)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 02:21:14 AM PST
Mr. Sharon knows what to do, the 6 day war
part 2, and get it right this time .

Just like the US going into Iraq, they showed
the iraqi looters leaving kuwait on what is
now know as the road of death .

We killed common looting criminals, too bad,
the fact that they were not original recipe,
but "Extra Crispy" is concern for Colonel
Sanders not an army trying to win a war .

You know why they won't fight Israel, and
they come mess with the US, becasue they
know what Israel will do .

And with Mr. Sharon with hand on button,
it is not pretty .

I agree with ALOT of the muslims demands,
lets get the hell out of the middle east
and get all of our oil elsewhere .

If the women think it is their religious
obligation to be beaten then so be it .

blockade the whole damn place, and shoot
down any planes going in or out .

It will be their little paradise Oasis .

Why they tolerate their royalty having gem
encrusted runways for their planes is beyond
me . As to leaving the middle east for
Saddam to over run I am all for it , but
he does not get to sell a drop of oil after
he does .

Let Saddam do all the work, and we can clean
up after wards .


Ex-MislTech ...

hahahahahha (none / 0) (#61)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 10:14:23 AM PST
The demands of Al-Quieda and other jihadi are reasonable and modest: end the tyrannical domination by the United States and Israel of traditionally Islamic lands, and we'll stop blowing ourselves (and you) up.

That's a nice split infinitive, bitch! Since you cannot write good,I advise all who read this post to berate the author! Learn the language, Momar!

facial egg (none / 0) (#103)
by bungatron on Sat Mar 16th, 2002 at 09:10:18 AM PST
Actually, that *isn't* a split infinitive. There isn't even anything remotely resembling an infinitive in the whole tract you quote.

Remember to harder try in the future!

Humph. (none / 0) (#70)
by hauntedattics on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 03:51:01 PM PST
For someone who 'doesn't covet' all the fabulous goods and services the U.S. has to offer, you certainly know a lot about them. More than I do, in fact.

Maybe it's time I tried a bit harder with the pop culture thing. I can't even compete with this freakazoid.

Heh... you're kidding of course. (none / 0) (#71)
by elenchos on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 04:03:41 PM PST
Surely you mean no disrespect towards our future rulers?

I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill

Yep. (none / 0) (#72)
by hauntedattics on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 05:31:27 PM PST
Sure I'm kidding, M. Laval. Or was it Petain?

Petain (5.00 / 1) (#73)
by jvance on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 05:58:45 PM PST
He was a great war hero and patriot too.
Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

You're thinking 1918. (none / 0) (#81)
by hauntedattics on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 01:40:33 PM PST

Yep. (none / 0) (#88)
by jvance on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 08:33:23 PM PST
And then look what happened to him.
Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

Yeah. (none / 0) (#89)
by hauntedattics on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 12:06:08 PM PST
Just like Hindenberg. Well, OK, not really.

Give them the Land O' Sand (none / 0) (#55)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 02:34:52 AM PST
Let them have it, let Saddam over run them
and take it all over, and after all the
bloodshed blockade it and saddam gets to sell
no oil, if he tries, bomb the pipelines .

If he tries trucks, bomb them too .

Oh well .

Let them have their Land O' Sand and all
the dictators they can stomach .

Let them kill each other over and over for
time immemorial .

The more they kill each other the less time
they have to kill us .

perfect the hydrogen fuel cell, the methane
fuel cell, switch as many cars as possible
to natural gas .

Hell all of UPS in LA is natural gas .

Toyota releases the first hydrogen powered
car this coming year ...

Toyota , Thank you from the heart of the
environment .



a wise man! (none / 0) (#93)
by djdaforce on Fri Mar 8th, 2002 at 11:45:15 AM PST
I'm with you 100%!

Why not sit back as "neutral" spectators like we did in WW2 let the f*****s kill themsleves like the Russkies and the Germans did back then and only step in when the time is right! when everyone is begging us to come out of the sky to give them that helping hand!

Why didn't our military inteligencia think of that? I'll tell you why... cause they've got their heads so far up greedy yet short-sighted capitalist buts! Buts that can't see past their own insignificant lifes but want everything now.

They've sold out!

Clever (none / 0) (#59)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 07:29:20 AM PST
Using the exact same propaganda we in the west spew out and making it pro-islam. Old trick, but makes you view it in a much clearer manner.

Another slight from the Americans (none / 0) (#69)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 02:46:57 PM PST
Once again, you Americans have displayed your ignorance of international affairs, by neglecting to mention your closest unreliable pisspot ally, Canada. I feel slighted.

A cunning plan... (none / 0) (#75)
by RootComplex on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 09:55:08 PM PST
What you've failed to realize of course, is that there's a very deliberate reason we Americans never bring up Canada in international discussions such as this:

We're all going to flee to it eventually, and we'd rather not have our secret-secret hidey-hole revealed. Or even thought of as a sovereign nation, really. More incognito that way.

Well, time to get back to practicing my francais.

one problem (none / 0) (#83)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 02:29:06 PM PST
I guarantee you that we have a computer somewhere with its own self-generating energy source that's hooked up to some kind of gizmo that signals America's complete fall/destruction. At that point the computer launchs every single Nuke we have and destroys the planet. Because I GUARANTEE you that the American military would rather destroy the planet than see the US go under, PERIOD.

Keep dreaming (none / 0) (#85)
by dmg on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 04:19:58 PM PST
At that point the computer launchs every single Nuke we have and destroys the planet.

Although we have a lot of nukes, we do not have nearly enough to destroy the planet. But not to worry, our capitalist industries are doing a fine job :-)

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

unfortunately... (none / 0) (#86)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 07:20:22 PM PST
the military tried to save a few bucks (thank the liberals wanted Klinton to cut the military budget for that) by using open-source software to launch the missles. Don't count on the nukes to be there when you need them...

A gurantee like that means everything... (none / 0) (#87)
by elenchos on Wed Mar 6th, 2002 at 08:17:31 PM PST
...coming from such a trustworthy source.

Note for those trying to sound convincing: saying "I GURANTEE" and "PERIOD" is nice and all, especially in all caps, but when you can't even give one single solitary bit of evidence to back up your opinion, it really looks weak. We are forced to assume that you had no choice; lacking any facts, you give no facts. So we conclude that your imagination has run away with you. That's good, really; imagination is good.

But so what? Aren't you wasting everyone's time?

I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill

i certainly hope so!! (none / 0) (#90)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Mar 7th, 2002 at 11:27:26 PM PST

One thing at a time (none / 0) (#92)
by djdaforce on Fri Mar 8th, 2002 at 11:21:43 AM PST
That device may or may not exist but eitherway, arguments for and against its existence are beyond the scope of this exercise. We are still here, as potent and as determined as ever to fire the shit ourselves so why hesitate? Hesitation leads to doubt, doubt to hesitation. It's a vicious circle and there's only one way out of it... The axis of evil has already been defined so we are definitely on the right track and just goes to show that there are (significant) others that think alike. Afghanistan? I say get our brave men and allies out and nuke the God damn place. Blow it up sky high and do everyone a favor. With the media on our side most of the western world might not even realise, those that do will probably soon forgive and forget and those that don't, well f*** em, you can't please em all. And don't give me any shit about the innocent people that will perish cause I ain't buying. Had they been on the side of the good and just they would have been doing their bit to rid the world of their "oppresive" leaders but instead they choose to walk around in ridiculous attire and pretend that all is well.


the soviet union had something like that (none / 0) (#94)
by PotatoError on Fri Mar 8th, 2002 at 08:53:58 PM PST
Some big reactor that was supposed to spew out mass clouds of radioactive material into the atmosphere and destroy life on Earth.

Honestly its what I heard..dont know if its true of course.

Losing the War: A Way Out (none / 0) (#95)
by Laura Mercy on Fri Mar 8th, 2002 at 09:23:36 PM PST
A country as advanced as ours must have some method of mass sterilization it can apply to Muslims the world over. Or perhaps emasculate them entirely, allowing Muslim ladies the convenience of shedding a layer or two on particularly balmy days without fear of arousing the urges the Muslim people find so spiritually hazardous. Such a procedure should be routine for every young Muslim man visiting Guantanamo, as well as those encountered abroad.

Naturally, at home we wouldn't want to violate the rights of American Muslims. They could be offered compensation for submitting to the procedure. If any refused, they should probably be deported and operated on at the government's discretion.

And if none of the above appeals to them, they need only be reminded that Jesus can save their testicles as well as their souls.

You see, they are being welcomed openly to join the West as brothers. They can't justly throw it all away, unless they want endless misery.

Time is on Islam's side (none / 0) (#96)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Mar 8th, 2002 at 10:36:15 PM PST
Islamics are having more children than Christians-and way more than the secular cultures of the west-this shows zero signs of changing.

Hitler! (none / 0) (#99)
by elenchos on Sun Mar 10th, 2002 at 02:06:41 AM PST

I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill

Islam (none / 0) (#101)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Mar 12th, 2002 at 09:09:46 PM PST
Interesting looks like none of the pro islamic cheerleaders have even touched the koran. It is full of lies and just plain stupidity. And catholic's are not and have never been true Christians. They are idol worshiping idiots. Look they worship mary the mother of Jesus and he never talked to her as mother but rather woman.

oh please (none / 0) (#105)
by gohomeandshoveit on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 12:11:16 PM PST're telling me that Catholics have never been Christians. Right. Now tell me, did Christianity come into being when Jesus was born, or did it occur in the 1500's, when Martin Luther broke away from the CATHOLIC Chuch? There was no other Christian religion besides Catholicism until the Protestant Reformation. Why don't you go read history books instead of holy scriptures you are most likely translating into another language and then back to English?

Nobody likes a cynic (none / 0) (#104)
by gohomeandshoveit on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 12:04:08 PM PST
This elenchos guy sure is cynical. You might as well tell us to commit suicide because we're all going to die anyways. Come on, there are ways to beat these mad Muslims who don't know jack about how the world works. Most Muslims don't care about the U.S. being here, and certainly don't want to run it. So, if we wan't to stop their insane bombing campaigns against ourselves and Israel, then we must play the quiet theif, slinking in the shadows and then picking away at their "system" (whatever it is) bit by bit. We must be subversive in taking away their confidence, and then we slowly beat them into submission not from without, but from within. Even though empires will not last forever, I'm damn well not dying a Muslim or under Islamic influence, and we must take action to get these mad Muslims off their high horse and back to fixing their own countries before they can "fix" the world.


All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 The name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to