The war is easily won, but we do not want to win: we want a long war.
War ends We win: when we pass a law that makes the minimum price of gasoline at the pumps: $1.75/gallon; billion dollar/million barrel per day ethanol stills will not be built without protection from OPEC monopoly pricing rusting out our new stills.
The ethanol investors do not build ethanol distilleries because monopoly OPEC would lower the price to rust out their billion dollar million barrel a day ethanol still. Brazil is energy independent: ethanol; All their cars come built running on ethanol; Archer Daniel Midland made millions on $1.00 gallon ethanol in the 1990s; that trumps any canard/invalid objection to ethanol. Use Cellulose ethanol, not corn ethanol.
With all the cars running on ethanol; the price of oil will collapse and the radical Moslem hordes will no longer have the funds we used to give them from gasoline sales to finance the war against us.
Sharia people are at war with The West because Sharia people believe Islam can not survive against: a free market economy with free speech to criticize Islam, representative Republic.
no such thing as "moderate Islam".... As Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan said
The governments of the world led by the USA and international law, have defined a set of war rule parameters that guarantee no war can be won by good guys and that guarantee nice long lasting wars with lots of weapons sales.
Generals: Patton. Eisenhower, Marshall , Sherman et al would all be war criminals under current international law and Europe would be under Hitler.
Cut off terrorist infested areas: no phones, no lights, no motorcars not a single luxury. No food, no water, nothing till they give up the terrorist. Better the terrorist and their hostages should die right there than have a hundred year war where the world is terrorized for 100 years.
Intelligence analyst: Getzel
‘My Endorsement is Irrelevant’
Sen. Chuck Hagel on the war, the campaign-and his new book
Email To A Friend
Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.
When politicians write books, they usually provide the view from 30,000 feet: painting in broad strokes about American greatness, and writing in a reassuring tone about the challenges ahead. Nebraska Republican Senator Chuck Hagel is different. In his new book, "America: Our Next Chapter," Hagel not only takes a level view of the nation's toughest domestic and foreign policy problems, he suggests it may be time to scrap the two-party system altogether. Hagel doesn't just talk a post-partisan game, either: he's yet to endorse his party's candidate for president, John McCain, with whom he has disagreed over Iraq since 2005 (when Hagel compared it to Vietnam), and, more recently, over the issue of increasing troop levels. While preparing his questions for this week's congressional testimony on Iraq by General David Petraeus, the commander of that eventual surge in troop numbers, and Ambassador Ryan Crocker, America's point man for political progress in Iraq, Sen. Hagel spoke to Newsweek's Seth Colter Walls about the war, the purpose of hope in politics, and the unforgiving straitjacket of partisanship. Excerpts:
Newsweek: How big of an issue do you think Iraq will be this fall, particularly for Sen. McCain?
Sen. Hagel: First of all, Iraq is one of the most urgent and pressing issues facing our country. It's going to have to be dealt with, and the American people have turned a corner in measuring this, in any poll you can cite. They are opposed to our continuing in Iraq. They now believe it was a mistake to go into Iraq. Meanwhile, the generals have told us we are not going to be able to sustain our redeployment rates. Still, there's $12 to $13 billion a month going into Iraq. Whether John McCain is president or someone else, it's going to be a very big issue--in the election and after.
You haven't endorsed McCain, and suggested you may not endorse anyone. You've also criticized various proposals for withdrawing from Iraq on the Democratic side. Is sitting out the endorsement game a reflection of your dissatisfaction with the way Iraq is being handled overall?
Look, each of the two eventual candidates is going to have to develop his or her policy to present to the American people on how they intend to get out. 'I'm going to get us out of Iraq.' That's not a plan. That's not a policy. That's not a program. In the primary, that's where [Barack] Obama and [Hillary] Clinton have come down. They'll have to frame that up and they're going to have to develop that and explain it to the American people and our allies around the world. [McCain] is going to have to do the same thing. 'We're gonna stay and we're gonna win, as long as it takes,' is not a plan. Is he prepared to keep 150,000 troops there indefinitely?
It will be fleshed out. You will see that become quite clear as we get down into the last stages of the general election. I know it seems like we've been at this forever, but we're still months and months away from the first presidential debate. There will be time for candidates to develop their policies. Elections are all about self-correction. The broad themes McCain, Obama and Clinton are running out are fine, but that's just the beginning. Campaigns put flesh on the bones. Even though we've got these tremendous challenges, within all that universal challenge is opportunity.
So who reflects that opportunity best, out of the three remaining candidates?
I'm a long way from endorsing anyone. What I want to see is a president who can bring this country together. This country is so divided. According to a recent poll, 81 percent think we're going in the wrong direction. If we have a president who doesn't [create] consensus, we will not only have squandered an opportunity, we will put this country in a hole we may not be able to get out of. The three candidates all have some understanding of that, I think.
This next president is going to have to reach out to other party. A strong, bipartisan candidate--that's what I'm going to be looking for. I don't care, really, quite honestly, what party he or she comes from. I'm a Republican. That's fine. But this is not about Republican or Democrat. The polls are very clear on this.
- 1
- 2
- Next Page »










Discuss