Ignorance is not an advantage, of course. But it does confer a clean slate. I did not have the prejudices others might have had, towards Bush or Democrats. My view of the Democrats were forged by their treatment of the Iraq War and the liberation of millions of oppressed people from what any classical liberal, would term a tyranny.

It didn’t last. and it didn’t last precisely because the opposition was not loyal, it was too busy trying to score political points and trying to claim the Short Victorious War for their own party, that they completely and utterly refused to use the Democrat party’s superior insurgency, guerrila, and propaganda abilities for the benefit of the United States of America.

I said this before, the Democrats are America’s war party, because the Democrats love having a war to improve the economy and make jobs, create unity, as well as acquiring political power. Thus, they are quite ruthless in perpetuating the war. Bush is not popular precisely because he does not give Americans what we want. We want blood, we want revenge, we want to see the terroists hang as much as any father of an abused and tortured daughter would like to see the man responsible killed for it.

Bush won’t bend to popular appeal, it seems to be against one of his principles for some reason. The Democrats have no such restraint when it comes to war. They will bomb, kill, slaughter, annihilate anyone and anything that gets in their way and the way of acquiring political populism and power in war. If they were in power. They are not in power.

Personally, I had to learn the Art of War and military history from the ground up, after 9/11. It was a gradual thing, not a formal education. All the talk and debate about Iraq, showed me the history of the Gulf War. And then it brought in politics, and generals, war atrocities, and so forth. These current events required context, so watching the History channelevery so often, I see a lot of that context just almost coincidentally. I piece things together, slowly, as I see the pieces and understand.

For 2 years, I had difficulty understanding what morale was, what propaganda was or should be, what Sun Tzu meant when he said the achime of war is to win without fighting.

It is as if you went from a 21st tech level and went back to the 19th century. To make 20 or 21st century gadgets, you’d need to make the tools, to make the tools, to make the technology, to make the gadgets.

I don’t excuse people who have not learned about war and history with new eyes after 9/11. What I am most amazed by is the number of people who have said that 9/11 opened their eyes, that it forced them to review their beliefs or consider new beliefs.

For me, it was about researching history so that I could form first beliefs.

“To marty, I guess most people don’t have the time or interest to learn World HIstory or Military history. Their loss.”

I can appreciate people have busy lives and it’s not like they get history in school, anymore, so it’s a real commitment to do, unless it’s an area of interest and even then is time-consuming.

But ignorance doesn’t stop people from having opinions, or feeling a need to opine. And it doesn’t stop politicians from mucking around to get votes. The debate, if you can even call it that, is at about a 3rd grade level…most Dems are arguing at about a 2nd grade level, so when the Repubs rise to the 3rd grade level, they’ve won. No one is challenged to really think things through.

I remember, back in late 2003, someone on a left-ish web site lamented that the debate on whether or not to go into Iraq never really happened because the anti-war people just used stupid, offensive slogans, so the pro-war people didn’t have to hone their thinking or arguments. This seems very prescient, now. If there was any skepticism about the post-Saddam occupation, it was so drowned out by the Moveon types that the pro-invasion crowd never had to really think about it, and therefore (many of us would say) they botched at least the first year of it.

Sad. We (U.S.) need a “loyal opposition.” Democracy’s greatest strength is that the contending sides force each other to do better. And it hasn’t been working in this case. There are other reasons than lack of historical knowledge (BDS comes to mind), but I think it’s a big part of it.

Article Here

To marty, I guess most people don’t have the time or interest to learn World HIstory or Military history. Their loss.

Predominately – during a recent talk, Christopher Hitchens said that modern Islamist terrorism started during Indian/Pakistani conflict. The Deobandi sect is as violent and fundamentalist as the Saudi Wahhabis. But the Islamist jihad became a problem worldwide after the Iranian revolution showed how politically powerful radical Islam could be and after OPEC recognized how much political power they had.

Most jihadis come from Pakistan’s madrassas and most madrassas are funded by oil wealth.