Tweet
You guys will love this one 
General George S. Patton once said, "Watch what people are cynical about, and one can often discover what they lack."
Those on the left seem to be cynical about everything to do with the war on terrorism. I think if Patton were alive today, he would say liberals lack the courage to fight the enemy, and he would slap a few of them around.
Liberals are also cynical about the way the military handles terrorist prisoners. I am sure Patton would tell liberals they lack the basic understanding of warfare and prisoner handling, and he would challenge them to spend a few days on the front line to see how things are really done. Then he would slap a few of them around once again.
A soldier's job is to kill the enemy, or, as Patton also said, "The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his." The sooner liberals understand the true meaning of war, the sooner we can make the "other bastard" die for his country.
To prove how out of touch with reality liberals are these days, look at the uproar that occurred because of comments made by Lieutenant General James Mattis. General Mattis, who has commanded troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, was recently speaking at a forum in San Diego about strategies for the war on terror.
Mattis said: "Actually, it's a lot of fun to fight. You know, it's a hell of a hoot. ... It's fun to shoot some people. I'll be right up front with you, I like brawling."
General Mattis is the kind of general I want leading our troops into battle. Marines are there to kill the enemy, not coddle them. They need a leader like General Mattis.
But of course there was an uproar by liberals. Jeff McCausland, director of the Leadership in Conflict Initiative at Dickinson College in Carlisle, Pa., countered, "Clearly, for an officer from any service to say that publicly is unprofessional and inappropriate and sends a terrible message to subordinates."
I disagree. I think the general's troops loved the message sent and probably feel the same way.
What do liberals think Marines are doing in Iraq, handing out condoms to AIDS patients? Would liberals rather General Mattis had said: "I hate to fight. I think war is much too bloody. I think we should stay home and polish our nails and listen to show tunes."
Somehow, I think liberals would.
Liberals, especially young liberals, seem to forget that war is a very nasty thing. It is not a panty raid on a women's dormitory at a local college or a beer-chugging contest at an off-campus bar. In battle, the enemy has one thing in mind: He wants to kill. War is a contest of kill or be killed, and it is not nice.
The closest most leftists have come to battle is fighting police at various protests in the United States and around the world. Their idea of warfare is yelling obscenities at local police and hurling the occasional rock or bottle. A liberal's badge of honor is spending a few hours in jail after being arrested at a protest in Seattle or Washington, D.C., and getting his or her mug shots taken.
Yet even with their lack of experience in real warfare, liberals seem to think they have all the answers about how the military should treat captured terrorists and how best to fight the war on terrorism. Some liberals even claim that the U.S. Constitution protects terrorists.
I think they have a lot to learn.
First, prisoners captured in Iraq are not leftist protesters staging a sit-in on the steps of a federal building, singing "Give Peace a Chance." Prisoners in Iraq have not studied "Activism 101" and have never heard of Martin Sheen, Janeane Garofalo or Al Franken.
They are terrorist thugs who behead captured men and women, showing no remorse over the act. They are murderers trained by al-Qaida or other terrorist organizations. They want to kill American men, women and children. They have no rights.
Prisoners captured in Iraq are not handled with kid gloves and gently placed in a paddy wagon the way liberal protesters arrested in Seattle are. They are trying to kill Americans when captured and would love nothing better than to kill their captors and escape to fight another day. Captured terrorists should be treated like a rabid dog waiting to bite its handler and thrown in a cage.
I really do not care how inhumanely we treat the captured terrorists being held at Guantanamo Bay or Abu Ghraib Prison. They are murderers and thugs. I think terrorists should lose all human rights once they take the path of terrorism. A tough approach is the only deterrent these killers will understand.
If making a terrorist wear a pair of women's panties on his head will help save one innocent life by gaining information on future terrorist acts, it is worth the effort. Victoria's Secret and Fredrick's of Hollywood should contribute panties to the war effort. Maybe we would get a few more confessions.
I think General Mattis would agree. I know General Patton would.
Link: here
General George S. Patton once said, "Watch what people are cynical about, and one can often discover what they lack."
Those on the left seem to be cynical about everything to do with the war on terrorism. I think if Patton were alive today, he would say liberals lack the courage to fight the enemy, and he would slap a few of them around.
Liberals are also cynical about the way the military handles terrorist prisoners. I am sure Patton would tell liberals they lack the basic understanding of warfare and prisoner handling, and he would challenge them to spend a few days on the front line to see how things are really done. Then he would slap a few of them around once again.
A soldier's job is to kill the enemy, or, as Patton also said, "The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his." The sooner liberals understand the true meaning of war, the sooner we can make the "other bastard" die for his country.
To prove how out of touch with reality liberals are these days, look at the uproar that occurred because of comments made by Lieutenant General James Mattis. General Mattis, who has commanded troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, was recently speaking at a forum in San Diego about strategies for the war on terror.
Mattis said: "Actually, it's a lot of fun to fight. You know, it's a hell of a hoot. ... It's fun to shoot some people. I'll be right up front with you, I like brawling."
General Mattis is the kind of general I want leading our troops into battle. Marines are there to kill the enemy, not coddle them. They need a leader like General Mattis.
But of course there was an uproar by liberals. Jeff McCausland, director of the Leadership in Conflict Initiative at Dickinson College in Carlisle, Pa., countered, "Clearly, for an officer from any service to say that publicly is unprofessional and inappropriate and sends a terrible message to subordinates."
I disagree. I think the general's troops loved the message sent and probably feel the same way.
What do liberals think Marines are doing in Iraq, handing out condoms to AIDS patients? Would liberals rather General Mattis had said: "I hate to fight. I think war is much too bloody. I think we should stay home and polish our nails and listen to show tunes."
Somehow, I think liberals would.
Liberals, especially young liberals, seem to forget that war is a very nasty thing. It is not a panty raid on a women's dormitory at a local college or a beer-chugging contest at an off-campus bar. In battle, the enemy has one thing in mind: He wants to kill. War is a contest of kill or be killed, and it is not nice.
The closest most leftists have come to battle is fighting police at various protests in the United States and around the world. Their idea of warfare is yelling obscenities at local police and hurling the occasional rock or bottle. A liberal's badge of honor is spending a few hours in jail after being arrested at a protest in Seattle or Washington, D.C., and getting his or her mug shots taken.
Yet even with their lack of experience in real warfare, liberals seem to think they have all the answers about how the military should treat captured terrorists and how best to fight the war on terrorism. Some liberals even claim that the U.S. Constitution protects terrorists.
I think they have a lot to learn.
First, prisoners captured in Iraq are not leftist protesters staging a sit-in on the steps of a federal building, singing "Give Peace a Chance." Prisoners in Iraq have not studied "Activism 101" and have never heard of Martin Sheen, Janeane Garofalo or Al Franken.
They are terrorist thugs who behead captured men and women, showing no remorse over the act. They are murderers trained by al-Qaida or other terrorist organizations. They want to kill American men, women and children. They have no rights.
Prisoners captured in Iraq are not handled with kid gloves and gently placed in a paddy wagon the way liberal protesters arrested in Seattle are. They are trying to kill Americans when captured and would love nothing better than to kill their captors and escape to fight another day. Captured terrorists should be treated like a rabid dog waiting to bite its handler and thrown in a cage.
I really do not care how inhumanely we treat the captured terrorists being held at Guantanamo Bay or Abu Ghraib Prison. They are murderers and thugs. I think terrorists should lose all human rights once they take the path of terrorism. A tough approach is the only deterrent these killers will understand.
If making a terrorist wear a pair of women's panties on his head will help save one innocent life by gaining information on future terrorist acts, it is worth the effort. Victoria's Secret and Fredrick's of Hollywood should contribute panties to the war effort. Maybe we would get a few more confessions.
I think General Mattis would agree. I know General Patton would.
Link: here
Comment