← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · il ragno
Thread ID: 10362 | Posts: 13 | Started: 2003-10-09
2003-10-09 06:46 | User Profile
[COLOR=Navy]We've really been remiss in warehousing the most drooling neo columns and op-eds lately; bad move, as Suleyman Ahmad and Cal Thomas are your best recruiting tools. Now adding "Ralph Peters" to the master file. I put the name in quotes because, in media today, we err on the side of caution - you're assumed Jewish till proven gentile dupe.[/COLOR]
[url]http://www.sobran.com/columns/2003/030925.shtml[/url]
[B]Nutty Patriotism [/B] [I]/ Joe Sobran[/I]
September 25, 2003 America is still a great country, and it would be cruel to judge it by its patriots. I mean the sort of “patriots” who think the way to express your love for this country is to insult other countries.
The events of 9/11 have brought the nastiest jingoists out of the woodwork, and their most toxic venom has been directed against France for opposing war on Iraq. [B]Now that the war has failed in its express aims, the French are hated worse than ever. [/B] After all, they have committed the extremely annoying faux pas of being proved right by events. And as the French proverb says, it’s only the truth that really hurts.
[B]Nowhere has Francophobia been more relentlessly childish than in the pseudopatriotic New York Post[/B], where the columnist Ralph Peters has just published his latest tantrum. After a few swipes at the Democrats, he rails against “those, from Paris to Palestine, who hate our freedom, our values, and our success.” He names France’s president, Jacques Chirac, first among “morally bankrupt leaders.” He lumps the French among “Eurotrash” who are “the most notorious sexual predators in the developing world.”
According to Peters, France is “one of America’s ugliest enemies” and Chirac is “a moral pygmy whose lack of scruples is, fortunately, balanced by a lack of courage and power.” As for Chirac’s call for a “multilateral” policy on Iraq,
[I]Stick it where the bum hid his money, Jackie-boy. It was you and your frog princes who ruthlessly destroyed the possibility of a multilateral approach to dealing with Saddam Hussein by refusing to cooperate in any serious efforts to call the regime in Baghdad to account. It was you and your political pimps who split the Security Council in two, with France nobly defending the rights of dictators to die of old age on the Riviera. [/I]
It gets even more rabid. The French are “the parasites in Paris.” They have “never stood for human freedom.” In World War II “they didn’t even fight to free themselves.” Their opposition to the American war on Iraq was “reflexive and irrational. They hate us because we’re us.”
So what should we do now? We should “make an example of France for the benefit of those countries that actively strive to frustrate our efforts to spread human rights and freedom. Far from seeking reconciliation with Paris, we should miss no opportunity anywhere, in any sphere, to rub French faces in the merde.”
Peters isn’t through yet.
[I]France should be made to suffer, strategically and financially. The French stabbed us in the back. In response, we should skin them alive. If today’s America is the new Rome, France is a garbage-dump Carthage. And Carthage needs to be broken.... And we should pursue every possible avenue to reduce American purchase of any goods produced by the French. Perfidy must be punished. The French, who would be eating sauerkraut for breakfast, lunch, and dinner if we hadn’t liberated them, need to have their treachery shoved down their throats. [/I]
“First Baghdad, then Paris,” Peters concludes.
Treachery? Perfidy? Stabbing us in the back? The French were quite open about opposing the war — and about resisting the imperial arrogance shown by the Bush administration, an attitude displayed by Peters himself.
[B]Makes you proud to be an American, doesn’t it? No wonder this country is now feared and loathed around the world. [/B] And no wonder more and more Americans are looking for an alternative to George W. Bush.
Not only liberals but conservatives are feeling qualms about the reckless militarism that has passed, far too long, for conservatism. An older and truer breed of conservatism had deep reservations about trying to “spread human rights and freedom” by raw force.
Conservatism is where you find it. [B]When Teddy Kennedy, the archliberal, charged that we were taken to war in Iraq by “fraud,” he was expressing the kind of skepticism about the uses of power we should be hearing from more conservatives. Liberals are also doing the work of conservatives when they denounce the staggering price of this ill-conceived war. [/B]
Granted, it’s incongruous (and funny) to see liberal Democrats in green eyeshades fretting about budget deficits like yesterday’s Republicans, but [B]that’s two-party politics for you. When one party goes nuts, you’re stuck with the other one. [/B] And if Ralph Peters is any indication, the Republicans have gone nuts.
Joseph Sobran
2003-10-09 08:27 | User Profile
I have a number of books by Peters. Needless to say, I won't buy anymore since he has shown himself to be a court historian with his comment about the French not fighting in WW II. He knows that isn't the case. At one time I thought he was a good writer, but lately he has gone nuts. Writing for the NY Post is just one symptom. Sobran is on target with his column, particularly this:
[QUOTE]Now that the war has failed in its express aims, the French are hated worse than ever.[/QUOTE]
I saw an example of this last night on the O'Reilly Factor. The socialist mayor of Paris decided to make Mumia Jamal, or whatever the hell this cop killer's name is, a citizen of Paris. O'Reilly went nuts over this and decided that because Paris has an idiot for mayor, that this is all the more reason to boycott the French and hurt them diplomatically. Bill overlooks all the stupid mayors we have right here in America and some of the stupid things they do, like in the case of some cities that refuse to cooperate with the I.N.S. in detaining illegals.
Maybe Bill thinks I should boycott my own country.
2003-10-09 13:16 | User Profile
First off, I think Ralph Peters name is pseudonym. He must be a Tribe member.
[QUOTE]The events of 9/11 have brought the nastiest jingoists out of the woodwork, and their most toxic venom has been directed against France for opposing war on Iraq. [B]Now that the war has failed in its express aims, the French are hated worse than ever. [/B] After all, they have committed the extremely annoying faux pas of being proved right by events. And as the French proverb says, itââ¬â¢s only the truth that really hurts. [/QUOTE]
Yes, the truth does hurt the neo-con bastards like this animal Peters. You know, these sick and depraved brainwashers never take into account that France had experience in colonial and occupational endeavors, most famously, the debacle in Algiers. The French, for the most part, were more likely trying to prevent the arrogant morons in the US Gov't from a disaster in occupying Iraq. Yes, the French were right.
[QUOTE]After a few swipes at the Democrats, he rails against ââ¬Åthose, from Paris to Palestine, who hate our freedom, our values, and our success.ââ¬Â He names Franceââ¬â¢s president, Jacques Chirac, first among ââ¬Åmorally bankrupt leaders.ââ¬Â He lumps the French among ââ¬ÅEurotrashââ¬Â who are ââ¬Åthe most notorious sexual predators in the developing world.ââ¬Â [/QUOTE]
This defective individual, Peters, with relative rants like the above disqualifies him as anything more than a hack journalist. 95% of the US 'leaders' are severely bankrupt. Sexual predators? Pederasty, homosexuality, bestiality, you name it, happens everyday, every hour in the USA.
[QUOTE]Stick it where the bum hid his money, Jackie-boy. It was you and your [SIZE=3][B]frog[/B][/SIZE] princes who ruthlessly destroyed the possibility of a multilateral approach to dealing with Saddam Hussein by refusing to cooperate in any serious efforts to call the regime in Baghdad to account. It was you and your political pimps who split the Security Council in two, with France nobly defending the rights of dictators to die of old age on the Riviera. [/QUOTE]
Notice the ethnic smear this depraved and demented 'journalist' throws with impunity! Imagine ngger, jew, spc, zulu, gook, feminist in place of "frog"!!
[QUOTE]France should be made to suffer, strategically and financially. The French stabbed us in the back. In response, we should skin them alive. If todayââ¬â¢s America is the new Rome, France is a garbage-dump Carthage. And Carthage needs to be broken.... And we should pursue every possible avenue to reduce American purchase of any goods produced by the French. Perfidy must be punished. The French, who would be eating sauerkraut for breakfast, lunch, and dinner if we hadnââ¬â¢t liberated them, need to have their treachery shoved down their throats. [/QUOTE]
This human filth Peters, should be skinned alive for packing so many lies into one paragraph. France, just aesthetically speaking in things man-made, makes the United States look like the biggest garbage dump in the world. Morally, I dunno. In France on Sundays, everything is closed, save some restaurants and cafes. In the US, it's a day of gambling on endless sportscasts, drinking, shopping, revelry. Has Peters ever even been to France? Also, moronic, dim-witted, 80 IQ foolish Americans wouldn't even know that 50% of the English vocabulary is directly borrowed from the French language. When idiots like to say the "French would be speaking German if it wasn't for us" I usually reply with "it would've been easier to learn German than Russian". (no offense to Russian, of course, but only to mean the Soviets would have had all of Europe if it wasn't for Hitler.)
[QUOTE]ââ¬ÅFirst Baghdad, then Paris,ââ¬Â Peters concludes.
Treachery? Perfidy? Stabbing us in the back? The French were quite open about opposing the war ââ¬â and about resisting the imperial arrogance shown by the Bush administration, an attitude displayed by Peters himself. [/QUOTE]
Sobran makes some great counter points and is a fine theorist. I think the argument by Ralph Peters is also very old already. He wrote this in Sept, '03?? Clearly, the neo-cons are desperate people. The light of Reality is brightly shone upon those cockaroaches and they don't like it.
2003-10-09 13:32 | User Profile
WM, it's[I] Dolchstoss[/I].
2003-10-09 19:20 | User Profile
[QUOTE=jesuisfier]First off, I think Ralph Peters name is pseudonym. He must be a Tribe member.[/QUOTE]No - Peters just is a useful goy most of the time.
2003-10-09 19:26 | User Profile
I have posted on French losses in both wars previously, but Peters, to give him his due, is not entirely in the pocket of Jews and Republicans. Witness today's column in the [I]Post[/I].[QUOTE][B]BUSH'S BETRAYAL [/B]
By RALPH PETERS
October 9, 2003 -- JUDAS drove a hard bargain compared to President Bush. At least the great betrayer got 30 pieces of silver. All Bush is going to get for delivering the Kurds unto their enemies will be 10,000 Turkish troops - who will act solely in Ankara's interests, not in the interests of Washington or the people of Iraq. Bush's desire for Turkish forces is craven. Hoping to reduce U.S. troop commitments as an election looms, he verges on throwing away the practical and moral achievements won with our soldiers' blood.
His actions will backfire at home as surely as they will in Iraq. A Turkish presence will make things worse, not better. Turkey has one enduring aim: the suppression of Kurdish freedom anywhere in the region. That will be Ankara's immutable goal in Iraq.
The administration tells us, coyly, that the Turkish contingent will be stationed in the Sunni Arab area of central Iraq, far from the Kurds. But the Turks intend to play a waiting game, confident that American patience will fail and that we will look for any excuse to bail out - leaving the Turks in place to broker power.
Introducing Turkish troops into the Sunni Arab region, the sole area of Iraq even partly hospitable to dead-enders from Saddam's regime and to international terrorists, is as short-sighted as it now appears expedient.
The Turks will quietly rebuild ties with the Ba'athists and rejectionists, shielding them from justice. Ankara was comfortable with Saddam (who shared the neighborhood taste for killing Kurds), and Turkey's preferred government for a future Iraq would return the Sunni Arab minority to power.
Certainly, there is nothing wrong with rebuilding a working relationship between the United States and Turkey. But Iraq is the wrong place to do it. No troops from neighboring states should be allowed to meddle in Iraq, but we would be better off with Iranian troops than with Turkish forces.
The Turks can't see past their "Kurdish problem" (now that the Armenians are out of the way). [COLOR=Red][I]And, tragically, it appears that Bush and his electioneers can't see past November 2004. And, tragically, it appears that Bush and his electioneers can't see past November 2004[/I][/COLOR].
The administration is even dishonest about Kurdish "terrorists." The Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) has, indeed, engaged in terrorist actions against Turkish targets in the past. But if there ever was a case of freedom fighters using terror as a tool, it's the PKK. And, in recent years, the PKK has changed its practices. Its members are not innocents, but neither are they the bloody-handed murderers Ankara declares them.
By far the worst acts of terror in the struggle of Turkey's Kurds for elementary rights were committed by the Turkish military, not by the PKK. Anatolian Kurds remain a brutally oppressed people whose plight cries out for justice.
It appeared that Iraqi Kurds, at least, had found their long-awaited champion in America. Our defense of the Kurds and our support for their self-liberation were wise and moral actions. And the Kurds continue to yearn for constructive friendship with America. They know that no one else has the power - or the potential selflessness - to protect them.
But this is a terribly discouraging week for all Kurds. They know too well what disasters could follow a Turkish occupation of any part of Iraq. Even Iraq's American-backed Governing Council has protested the deployment of Turkish troops. Washington's response has been to tell them to shut up.
Doubtless, Bush's enforcers will bully most of the members of the council into accepting Washington's will. But our actions make a mockery of the values we have professed to the Iraqi people. One hopes that the leaders of Iraq's Kurds will take a public stand against the Turkish menace to Iraq's future. Americans of conscience will stand with them.
And President Bush? If he betrays the Kurds, as he appears blithely ready to do, there is at least one vote he will not get in the next election. Because international issues trump all others in this dangerous age, many of us have given Bush a pass on his greedy, polarizing domestic agenda as long as his foreign policy appeared effective, courageous and wise.
But selling out the Kurds would cancel every one of Bush's promises and successes. If the Democrats want traction against Bush's achievements abroad - which the president appears all too ready to sacrifice - the administration's abrupt, opportunistic disregard of Kurdish interests would be a good place to start.
And then the Dems can take on the Bush regime's love for Saudi Arabia.
Ralph Peters is a retired Army officer and the author of the new book "Beyond Baghdad: Postmodern War and Peace." [/QUOTE]
2003-10-09 23:18 | User Profile
This was written by a Jew.
2003-10-09 23:46 | User Profile
I did find this: [url]http://www.coalregion.com/Famous/peters.htm[/url]
[QUOTE]Famous Coal Crackers Notable Sons and Daughters of the Coal Region Writers
The Wall Street Journal has called Ralph Peters "the thinking man's Tom Clancy". Mr. Peters is a career military officer turned author. He has written a number of well-received military thrillers, as well as books and essays on military science and theory.
Recent thrillers by Ralph Peters include Traitor: A Novel, and The Devil's Garden. The non-fiction book Fighting for the Future: Will America Triumph? examines the military preparedness of the United States to fight the type of conflicts, terrorist and otherwise, likely to arise in the 21st century.
Ralph Peters currently lives with his wife in northern Virginia. For more information on this superb author, see this interview from the Pottsville Republican. [/QUOTE]
I read an interview at this site and must admit he does look more than a trifle Semitic: [url]http://www.americanheritage.com/AMHER/2003/01/shah.shtml[/url]
Writing as Owen Parry he wrote this: [B]*Our Simple Gifts: Civil War Christmas Tales[/B][/I] (2002)
Does anybody have a reference or source?
2003-10-10 00:23 | User Profile
Maybe Peters' mother is a Jew and his father is a Gentile. That would make him a full-fledged Tribe member sans the Jewish surname.
2003-10-10 01:19 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il Ragno] It gets even more rabid. The French are ââ¬Åthe parasites in Paris.ââ¬Â They have ââ¬Ånever stood for human freedom.ââ¬Â In World War II ââ¬Åthey didnââ¬â¢t even fight to free themselves.ââ¬Â [/QUOTE]
World War Two Deaths
France : 810,000 USA : 295,000
2003-10-10 01:48 | User Profile
Rabbi Silvergoldfeldwitz says: "Don't those stupid French people know that all political action in the world has to be Jew Approved?? It's the Jew Way or the blacklist. Choose one."
:)
2003-10-10 02:40 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Bardamu]World War Two Deaths
France : 810,000 USA : 295,000[/QUOTE]
Jew: 6,000,000 :shocking:
2003-10-12 08:00 | User Profile
Why should I dislike the French?? :unsure:
After all their culture has given us [B]Jean Marie Le Pen[/B]!! :)