Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Warning to Liberals

This post contains actual research and statistics that may confuse or further imbalance the postmodernist libtard mind.

Moonbats should (please) consult a psychiatrist before reading.

TJ's Anti-Contrarian Blog is not responsible for psychotic breaks or loss of psychological equilibrium that may affect libtards who do not read and follow the above exhortation.



A recent research effort out of Harvard shows that Moonbat criticism of the Iraq War has contributed to the deaths of US servicemembers.

Here is the Abstract:

Are insurgents affected by information on US casualty sensitivity? Using data on attacks and variation in access to international news across Iraqi provinces, we identify an “emboldenment” effect by comparing the rate of insurgent attacks in areas with higher and lower access to information about U.S news after public statements critical of the war. We find in periods after a spike in war-critical statements, insurgent attacks increases by 5-10 percent. The results suggest that insurgent groups respond rationally to expected probability of US withdrawal. As such counterinsurgency should consider deterrence and incapacitation rather than simply search and destroy missions.


So basically this report says that Liberals have contributed to the deaths of military service members because they don't possess the common sense God gave a screwdriver.
While they continue to claim it is their right to bitch, (to which I would agree) they do not take into consideration the impact their statements have on our troops (which is why they should refrain).

War is not a game. While leftards attend protests as if they were social events, where they mindlessly regurgitate their confusion and inability to comprehend this war effort, our troops have more to lose.
This exact same lack of common sense was displayed by Jane Fonda, John Kerry and other imbeciles during Vietnam. However the libtard penchant for running away is not limited to Iraq or Vietnam. The study also recorded the anecdotal impact on other
wars -- one footnote citing Theodore Roosevelt's response to whining crybabies.

If you are too stupid to learn from history, perhaps you should just shut up. When I was growing up I used to hear "Children should be seen and not heard."
This should also apply to those with the intellect of children.

5 comments:

LEB said...

The research cites "public statements," not just demonstrations as you single out. A significant number of prominent, vocal conservative/Republican voices have been raised in opposition to the war (from the start and ongoing). Or do conservatives get a "by" on public expressions of disagreement with the war? Same for retired Generals?

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/iraq/20070923-9999-1n23generals.html

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/duncan1.html

http://www.amconmag.com/2004_02_02/article3.html

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/02fa3a12-2d74-11dc-939b-0000779fd2ac.html

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MWZjMDBlZDg2MDlmMDM4MmE1MGFmNjlkOTE5OWVkOTc=

Best,

LEB

RT said...

A significant number of prominent, vocal conservative/Republican voices have been raised in opposition to the war (from the start and ongoing).

Because they either had an axe to grind with W. (because he wouldn't bow to them on another issue) or because they might be sent to D.C. from a liberal leaning state or because they are wusses afraid of making the hard decisions and when the tiniest bit of dissension occurred, they got weak in the knees and their spines turned to jelly.

Rogue said...

LEB,

No, conservatives get no passes from me. I've taken several of them on at their own blogsites. Much like you do here. But they are "few and far between" compared to the anti-war actions of the Looney Left.

I know two of the most vocal retired Generals personally Wesley Clark and Merrill McPeak - both were egomaniacs while they served. They rank themselves up there with the Obamessiah in relation to their "world-saving" ability. I can't speak for other generals to which you may point (except Zinni, but I didn't know him). There is a third egomaniacal General Officer (who I will not name) who has yet to take a public position on Iraq, but I believe I know which side of Contrarianism he will fall. It seems that Generals reach the stratosphere in money and power, then become liberals -- much like the corporate CEOs who take a $400 million pension, then donate to Hillary Clinton. In many cases it's about self-loathing guilt.
But, clearly Petraeus has made Eaton look like an incompetent.

Your William F.Buckley article did less than articulate withdrawal. He simply pointed out the problems.

Your link to Rep. John J. Duncan listed James Webb as a conservative...BWAHAHAHA - a pro-abortion, pro-gay rights conservative? Only in Bizarro Libtard World.

LEB said...

Rogue, thanks for taking the time to read the links and post a thoughtful response.

As for conservatives or republicans that speak out against the war, and generals, since they fall under the "public statement" umbrella, shouldn't your posting take them to task as well, rather than just "liberals?"

Per the Buckley article, I think the words here are precient:

When the Romans were challenged by Christianity, Rome fell. The generation of Christians moved by their faith overwhelmed the regimented reserves of the Roman state. It was four years ago that Mr. Cheney first observed that there was a real fear that each fallen terrorist leads to the materialization of another terrorist. What can a “surge,” of the kind we are now relying upon, do to cope with endemic disease? The parallel even comes to mind of the eventual collapse of Prohibition, because there wasn’t any way the government could neutralize the appetite for alcohol, or the resourcefulness of the freeman in acquiring it.

So while he does not directly advocate withdrawal, he directly addresses the futility of continuing the current course of action.

Another Buckley article: http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/buckley200602241451.asp

And, finally, one rather closer to now, that comes as close to him directly advocating withdrawl - and some of the most articulate reasoning behind that stand:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YTFjYTE3ODg4NGE1MjhlNjQ1YTllYWFmMjc4OGFlZmE=

Best,

LEB


Best, LEB

Rogue said...

LEB,

So far, as great a man that he was, Bill Buckley is being proven wrong.

You can never anticipate the vagaries of war. In fact, even during an engagement, the "Fog of War" obstructs the final outcome.

Again, my point is...I would not have enough space in 20 blog pages to list the Leftards that advocate withdrawal. At worst your references show that conservatives are not monolithic. Can you say the same about the Left?