Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts

Feb 1, 2009

The Race of the Trojan Horses

In the race of the Trojan horses, we have entered, it would seem, the final stretch.

Those of us with eyes to see and optical nerves still communicating with the brain - our voices drowned out in the hysteria - have a decision to make: continue languishing in the grandstand, or make some fast money.

We recommend the latter!

And so we provide our analysis by which you might inform your wager. Which Trojan horse will be the first to bring about the final end of Western Civilization?

Tommy-Boy Tolerance – American President Obama’s call for defense cuts , days after the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ most recent report that Iran may have enough low-enriched uranium by the end of 2010 to build a nuclear bomb, have vastly improved this steed’s standing in the match. The action validates in no uncertain terms the United States’ renewed commitment as a staunch ally in Europe’s Tolerance Above All suicide pact.

Compassion Candy – Hot on Tommy Boy’s heels is Compassion Candy! 40 years of Marxist-conditioning are paying off as the U.S. Congress prepares to impoverish the *world’s strongest economy via the purchase of $825 billion worth of political pornography while convincing they American people they do so in the interest of “the common good.”

*(as of 30 January 2009 noon-ish)

Stewardship Sue – Record cold temperatures and snow accumulations can’t stop this one! With the weight of the world on her shoulders (and the fire of the Apocalypse in her heart) Stewardship Sue is the long-shot winner in this race, promising to devastate the American (ergo – the world’s) economy through iron-fisted control of the world’s resources, processed and distributed according to the dictates of The Unicorn’s Book of Sparkle Flowers … that is… global climate change policy.

Ladies and gentlemen, place your bets. The race is on. The end is near. Good luck!

Cheers,

Charlie

Mar 16, 2008

The Weakest Possible Position

Unrivalled Churchill biographer and dear friend, Sir Martin Gilbert got it wrong in a recent interview with the Jerusalem Post. In it he elaborates upon parallels between the free world’s appeasement of Iran and the free world’s appeasement of Nazi Germany seventy years ago. Sir Martin notes that by the time Hitler invaded Poland in 1939, it became plain to even the most devoted members of that era’s peace movement that the preceding years’ Appeasement directives had greatly facilitated Germany’s meteoric military escalation while enfeebling Britain and France’s defences so as to place them in “the weakest possible position.”

"You'd lost your allies, you'd lost territory, you'd lost raw materials. You were in the weakest possible position," he explains.

As a result, Sir Martin points out, the Second World War was prolonged into a "a six-year war rather than a six-month war," producing worldwide death destruction and destitution the likes of which mankind had never known.

We submit however, that it could have been worse. We could have lost. Yet we didn’t. How? Because we were not actually in the weakest position possible.

For in fact, despite reckless under-funding of the military and suicidal rationalizations of bald-faced evil, the free world’s Arsenal of the Will was well-stocked and in fine repair. Faith, patriotism, honor, loyalty, commitment, work ethic … all were in abundance in the hearts and minds of virtually every man, woman, and child. Thus comprised the indomitable spirit of Judeo-Christian Civilization, resulting in the ultimate victory of Good over Evil.

In the decades since, however, we have witnessed the pell-mell depletion and desecration of that Arsenal of the Will. We have made a mockery of Faith; a joke of patriotism; a dishonor of honor; and a sin of loyalty, commitment, and work ethic. This spiritual disarmament has precipitated a number of practical arrangements which lend themselves handily to our eventual destruction.

Europe, having completed the sale of its soul and signed its contract with the devil (a.k.a. "The Lisbon Treaty") now wonders why it is powerless to stop even the “Soft Jihad” within its ever-fading borders.

Britain, only just now realizing it may well be too late, is scrambling to re-discover its essence after having denied it for sixty plus years, while flirting with throwing in the towel of sovereignty altogether and leaping into the void that is the European Union.

And America appears increasingly anxious to join the game, gleefully marching in step and chanting “O-BA-MA” like hearing-impaired Congolese kindergartners on their way to re-education camp.

This all in addition, mind you, to a present day neglect and under-funding of tactical military resources in Britain rivaling that of their Appeasing predecessors seventy years ago; with America – again – poised to follow suit.

Behold – THE weakest possible position: a civilization hollowed out from the core, comprehending little value in defending itself, primed to implode upon the slightest external pressure. Say, for instance, a nuclear Iran. How do you say “slam dunk” in Arabic?

Given this, Sir Martin’s gentlemanly caution waxes considerably more ominous.

"A grave mistake was made in the 1930s in finding all sorts of reasons for not regarding the Nazi threat as being a serious threat. Therefore, when you're working out your thoughts on the current situation, about fundamentalism, just remember that it is very easy for highly competent, educated, civilized, sophisticated people to find excuses and benign explanations for everything that happens."

Of this, we are painfully aware. Yet, Sir Martin remains hopeful.

“Do I have faith that the leaders know what the situation (with Iran) is? Yes. If they don’t then we’re in real trouble.”

Western Civilization, and indeed the world, cannot endure another dalliance with such “real trouble” Therefore let us do more than hope. Let us educate. Let us see to it that our leaders do, in fact, know the situation and act now, before it is too late; lest the dismal lesson Sir Winston Churchill draws from the disaster of Appeasement prove appallingly prophetic.

“Here is a line of milestones to disaster. Here is a catalogue of surrenders, at first when all was easy and later when things were harder, to the ever-growing German power. But now at last was the end of British and French submission. Here was decision at last, taken at the worst possible moment and on the least satisfactory ground, which must surely lead to the slaughter of tens of millions of people. Here was the righteous cause deliberately and with a refinement of inverted artistry committed to mortal battle after its assets and advantages had been so improvidently squandered.

Still, if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival.”

There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than live as slaves.”

- Sir Winston Churchill, The Second World War.

Cheers,

Charlie

Jan 4, 2008

The Bird’s Eye View on Iowa

At this junction of the American presidential horserace, we are compelled to reexamine the leading candidate’s positions regarding the gathering storm in Iran; whether you see it as such or not, the most important issue of this era. (Take it from one who’s been through all this before.)

For Ron Paul and the Democrats, the task is simple: it’s all Bush’s fault.

Examination of Republican positions, however, requires slightly more engagement of the intellect. Fortunately, our friends at The Israel Project have compiled key statements of all candidates for our perusal. Here I shall re-post those of the Iowa top “three”: Messer’s Huckabee, Romney, and Thompson/McCain. I shall then provide my invaluable commentary for further elucidation.

Iowa’s Choice #1 - Mr. Huckabee:

From Foreign Affairs magazine (Jan./Feb. 2008 edition)

“Whereas there can be no rational dealings with al Qaeda, Iran is a nation-state seeking regional clout and playing the game of power politics we understand and can skillfully pursue. We cannot live with al Qaeda, but we might be able to live with a contained Iran.”

What on its face appears reasonable is, upon further analysis, suicidal bolderdash. The Twentieth Century (namely World War 1, World War 2, the Cold War, The Gulf War, and throw in the September 11 attacks for good measure) was nothing less than a 100 year lesson on the disastrous ineffectuality of the concept of “containment.”

To his credit, Mr. Huckabee does not go so far as to recommend withdrawing military action from the table in attempts to persuade Iran to relinquish its nuclear ambitions. But we have heard language such as the following before, and it has ended – quite often – in disaster:

“When one stops talking to a parent or a friend, differences cannot be resolved and relationships cannot move forward. The same is true for countries. The reestablishment of diplomatic ties will not occur automatically or without the Iranians' making concessions that serve to create a less hostile relationship.”

We hope that either Mr. Huckabee or New Hampshire, come to their senses.

Iowa’s Choice #2 – Mr. Romney:

From his statement provided to The Israel Project (June 2007)

“To aggressively combat Iran's nuclear ambitions and exploit the regime's vulnerabilities, I have outlined a five-pronged strategy:

First, we should tighten economic sanctions. Denying Iran access to the international banking system is crucial. The U.S. and Europe should ensure that Iran finds it very difficult to obtain credit and make purchases in foreign currencies. In addition, I have called for strategic divestment among state pension funds from companies that support the Iranian regime's dangerous actions.

Second, we should isolate Iran diplomatically. Of course, we keep communication channels open. Yet, we should work to unite our allies against Iran’s actions and America should take no actions that legitimize Iran's defiance of the world. As part of this effort, Iran's President Ahmadinejad should be indicted under the terms of the Genocide Convention for incitement to genocide. As Governor, when former Iranian President Mohammed Khatami was invited to speak at Harvard University, I denied him state police security for his visit. It is wrong to welcome a person with open arms who has preached the destruction of Israel, developed nuclear technology, jailed dissident students in his country and has praised Hezbollah.

Third, Arab states must join this effort to prevent a nuclear Iran. These states should support Iraq's government; turn down the temperature of the Arab-Israeli conflict; stop the financial and weapons flows to Hamas and Hezbollah; and tell the Palestinians to drop their terror campaign and recognize Israel's right to exist.

Fourth, we must make it clear to the Iranian people that while nuclear capabilities may be a source of pride, it can also be a source of peril. The military option must remain on the table. The regime should know that if nuclear material from their nation falls into the hands of terrorists and is used, it would provoke a devastating response from the civilized world.

Fifth, our strategy must be integrated into a broader approach to the Muslim world. We must work with moderate Muslim communities and leaders to build a lasting Partnership for Prosperity and Progress - a global effort which would support progressive Muslim communities and leaders in every nation where radical Islam is battling modernity and moderation. This Partnership for Prosperity and Progress should help provide the tools and funding necessary for moderates to win the debate in their own societies. In the final analysis, only Muslims will be able to permanently defeat radical Islam. But we can and should support this effort.”

To the above we say verily, Amen. But the spud boy hair has got to go!

Iowa’s Choice #3a - Mr. Thompson:

From his commentary after speech given at Policy Exchange (June 2007)

“Obviously there are basically three choices that we have: Sanctions, regime change, or military option or fourth I suppose if you consider doing nothing… I think that we made some progress on sanctions but not nearly enough… but Iran is very vulnerable, I think, in many different ways… and some of these problems may work in our favor especially if we ratcheted the sanctions, certainly a blockade could also be an option… We are all in this together, the forces of civilization should be aligned against the forces of annihilation in this world.”

Bit light on detail, but the spirit is dead on. (After eight years of Bushie , you should all be used to this.) Mr. Thompson was also perhaps the most outspoken about the ridiculous NIE report of late.

From his statement issued Dec. 6, 2006

“The accuracy of the latest NIE on Iran should be received with a good deal of skepticism. It's awfully convenient for a lot of people: the administration gets to say its policies worked; the Democrats get to claim we should have eased up on Iran a long time ago; and Russia and China can claim sanctions on Iran are not necessary. Who benefits from all this? Iran.”

Score another point for home-spun, backwoods, American hillbilly insight!

Iowa’s Choice #3b - Mr. McCain:

From his address to Christians United for Israel (July 18, 2007)

“And every option must remain on the table. Military action isn't our preference. It remains, as it always must, the last option. We have some way to go diplomatically before we need to contemplate other measures. But it is a simple observation of reality that there is only one thing worse than a military solution, and that, my friends, is a nuclear armed Iran. The regime must understand that it cannot win a showdown with the world.”

We would submit that not EVERY option remain on the table (i.e. Mr. Thompson’s observation about the Left’s proposed policy of doing nothing.) However, Mr. McCain demonstrates some wisdom here, as he does in the following:

From his FOX news appearance (Dec. 9, 2007)

“The most over-rated aspect of our dialogue about international relations is direct face-to-face talks. BlackBerries work. Emissaries work. There's many thousands of ways to communicate. The question is are you going to have direct talks, and does that enhance the prestige of the president of Iran, who has said all these things about us, and has announced his country's continued distinction to the extinction of the state of Israel, or does it reach a successful conclusion? That's the question you have to ask when you talk about "face-to-face talks. "I'd remind you that when we stopped the bombing in Vietnam, we were going to talk in Paris. It took 2.5 years because of the shape of the table. Bombing started of Hanoi. And guess what? Negotiations started again.”

Here, here! I’ll take a ride on the Straight Talk Express for that.

There are, of course, numerous issues you all must take into account in selecting your candidate. We hope that our profile here has provided further clarity on what we believe to be the most pressing of all.

American conservatives - choose wisely. In terms of global security and defense of Western Civilization, England has abdicated virtually all responsibility. Your liberal counterparts are foolish children at best. More than perhaps ever before, the fate of the free world rests upon your decision. Do not make it lightly.

Cheers,

Charlie

Jan 1, 2008

Happy New Year 1938!

"I never worry about action, but only about inaction." - Sir Winston Churchill

Jews flee their homes amid increasing state persecution. A belligerent little dictator arms his nation against the will of the international community, promising genocide. The Western powers, befuddled by their own notions of “keeping the peace” and cultural deference, do nothing.

Seventy years since, is it 1938 all over again?

Following your perusal of the links above regarding Appeasement 2008, we invite you to sample from the following collection of links regarding Appeasement 1938. See if you cannot smell any similarities between the ineptitudes of then and now in the face of gathering storms.

We do. And it is not at all a pleasant smell.

APPEASMENT 1938

What is Appeasement?

The Munich Agreement: The quintessential example of Appeasement.

Further details regarding The Munich Agreement

The Munich Agreement itself - Sept 29 1938

The subsequent debate in British House of Commons, October 3, 1938
(Sir Winston’s chillingly brilliant denouncement of the Agreement begins roughly halfway into the document. A MUST read!)

“This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigour, we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.”

Free Republic collection of Sir Winston quotes regarding the travesty of Appeasement (and then some!) (Prepare to fall in love all over again!)

There's more to come, for we intend to "celebrate" this 70th anniversary of Appeasement the year through!
Cheers,

Charlie



Dec 6, 2007

No Gays, No Jews, No Nukes!


Churchill’s Parrot to Produce Stage Adaptation of
National Intelligence Estimate

December 6, 2007. New York – Churchill’s Parrot Productions LLC announced plans yesterday to produce a musical stage adaptation of the recently released National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), entitled No Gays, No Jews, No Nukes.

The NIE reveals that, while it appears Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in the fall of 2003, it remains quite willing and able to resume that program at the first opportunity. Nonetheless, interpretations of the eight page report vary widely.

“The things got more qualifiers and caveats than a Clinton legal brief,” says Quentin “Daphne” de Blovianne, director of No Gays, No Jews, No Nukes. “The language is just scrumptiously non-committal and leaves a lot to the imagination. It’s just begging to be made a musical. Well now it will be!”

De Blovainne notes that while U.S. President George W. Bush saw the report as cause to stay the course in efforts to dissuade Iran from developing nuclear weapons entirely, the media interpreted it as “embarrassing” and further cause for suspicion of the Bush Administration, and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad claimed the report a “victory.”

“It’s like a poem or a song. It means something different to everyone,” observes de Blovianne. “I don’t know anything about National Intelligence, but I do know musical theater, and this baby's got blockbuster written all over it!”

The musical’s “show-stopper” according to de Blovianne is the Gershwin-esque, Remote, Very Unlikely, Unlikely, Even Chance, Probably/Likely, Very Likely, Almost Certainly which plays on the reports “Explanation of Estimative Language” section. “In terms of musical comedy, it practically writes itself,” de Blovianne gushes. “My other favorite’s a breathless little romp called The Bureaucratic Rag. The Bureaucratic Rag traces the NIE’s evolution through request committees, proposal committees, concept committees, draft committees, critique committees, review committees (including the Directors of the National Clandestine Service, the NSA, the NGA, the DIA, and the Assistant Secretary/INR),and finally presentation to the President and senior policymakers. “It’s like My Fair Lady meets Waiting for Godot,” says de Blovianne. “To-die-for funny!”

The musical’s title - No Gays, No Jews, No Nukes - refers to Ahmadinejad’s previous declarations that there are no homosexuals in Iran, the Jewish homeland ought be wiped off the face of the earth, and that he has no interest in developing nuclear weapons, a claim he insists is validated by the 2007 NIE.

The Ahmadinejad Administration responded to news of the production through a prepared statement. “His Excellency applauds this celebration of Bush’s shame, discredit, and utter humiliation,” read the statement. “Being a big fan of musical theater he would love to see it. Unfortunately, as it will likely be produced by Jews and cast almost entirely with homosexuals, this will not be possible.”

No Gays, No Jews, No Nukes is expected to debut Al Qods Day (October) 2008.

###
Via his web log, http://www.churchillsparrot.com/, Charlie, Sir Winston’s 107 year old pet parrot, endeavors to reinvigorate flagging Western Civilization through regular injections of the Churchillian spirit, so desperately lacking in the enfeebled, addle-brained “culture” left us in the wake of the 1960’s.