Read the Introduction to this blog

Found this graphic at the Free Republic site
I’ve just spent a couple hours surfing the net trying to get a sense of America’s response to the Iraq Vote.
As I have read various articles, blog posts, and the most excellent coverage at Pajamas Media I really get a sense that the great divide in our country comes down to a misunderstanding of the history of the middle east, and how controlled they have been by Marxist thought, money, and influence. I was listening to Air Amerika yesterday as I drove my kids to school. I am always more curious to hear the liberal take on events than what the conservatives are saying.
As the local Boulder host was going on and on about American Imperialsim, I just turned it off and explained to the children a little of the history. I thought I would take the time to do that here on my blog as well.
I think the ultimate test in the whole debate is, Will Iraq become a state of America, or a colony??
It is a good question to ask. Because if Bush was simply shoving American Imperialism on Iraq and Afghanistan, it would seem to me that he would also be forcing them to join us as the newest addition to the US.
But no, shortly after the war started Bush handed the Iraqi people their sovereignty, they elected the founders who wrote the constitution, and now they have elected a parliament. To say, Michael Moore like, that this could have happened by the common people “rising up” and overthrowing Sadaam and setting up a Democracy WITHOUT American help is simply denying the reality of how Iraq was being run.
Iraq was being run as a typical Communist state. And why shouldn’t it be? The soviets were the funders and political parents to Sadaams society.
I found this interview on Frontpage to be most enlightening
Ion Mihai Pacepa Interview
It truly does address so many of the issues that the left seems to be unable to understand. I would challenge anyone to read it, and really ponder the reality of the things that Ion Pacepa says. If you can accept even half of what he claims, I think we can begin to agree on some basic points.
And really the bottom line is this….Is America safer now than we were with Sadaam in power???
Another great place to do some serious reading and pondering is Jayna Davis’s web site. Her information yet again, changes the whole picture and context of the war.
In time these sorts of things will be more fully exposed. Those who willfully put heads in the sand and are determined to believe that so called American Imperialism is the cause of all that is wrong in the world will never be convinced, and that is fine, it is a free country.
I choose to believe that in fifty years, history books will mark this week as a huge turning point in Freedoms march around the world. And I am so pleased to be the sister of a soldier who served in Iraq for a year. The sacrifice of his wife and three sons, and the worry of my parents while he served, all of it has been worth what just happened yesterday.
If liberals who are against the war and question Americas roll in spreading democracy would simply take some time to study the history of the middle east and the relationships that were forged during the height of the cold war, I think they would have an easier time understanding that the war on terror is just another front of the cold war. Really the war on terror is the final legacy and residue, a sticky, nasty, black residue, from the war between Freedom and Tyranny that was waged during most of the 20th century.
I really feel for Liberals. They have been so brainwashed by university studies, (and it has been my experience that the more schooling someone has had the stronger the marxist ideologies are embedded in their psyches) that it is an act of God for them to break out of that knee jerk emotional reaction that comes up when the sacred cows are slaughtered and served on toast. “what? America actually did something noble and good? Impossible.” “you mean, this war really was all about freedom and democracy?? No….”
Liberals are like the NOBLES in Braveheart.

A Noble from the Movie Braveheart
They sit on both sides of the fence and watch the way the wind blows, and when it is in their best interests they go one way or another, never taking a stance, but waiting to see how things will simply affect them personally.
What I predict is that we will see all kinds of spinning, spinning, spinning of words, positions, etc.. in the coming weeks, as politicians especially recognize it will be surivival emotionally to be “for the war after we voted against the war with our words….etc…
And what the heck is up with Joe Biden. Here we have this American Senator who in all the pieces I read about him today was talking about the Iraq constitution as if it does not exist. Is he not aware that the whole point of the first election was to pick the founders who would write the constitution. Which they did, and the whole point of the second election was to accept or reject that constitution??? Which they in fact did accept.
He is talking like the constitution has not even been written yet. Anyone else notice this?? Why is he so dumb?
God bless the iraqi people. I was simply praying for the past 24 hours that no one would die while voting. I have not heard the final numbers, but it seems like very few people were killed. (talk about voter disenfranchisement and disempowerment). Update: Just read that three people were killed during the election.
UPDATE: chat at Free Republic on this topic
Sadaam was obsessed with Stalin
Stalin and Saddam
Posted by Ed
In the current History Today, Simon Sebag Montefiore discusses some of the issues that he considered while writing a book on Stalin’s inner circle. I was really struck by one particular series of anecdotes:
“When I was researching Stalin, I learned that most of the great decisions of his rule took place not in the Kremlin but in his dachas, particularly those in the south. Few historians had visited all these so I set off to find them in the bandit republic of Abkhazia on the Black Sea, which can only be reached by UN Peacekeeping helicopter.
When I was at one of them, I asked the old caretaker if anyone else had visited them all, fearing that she would answer that Robert Service or Richard Overy had just left. ‘No,’ she answered, ‘but in the 1970s there was an Arab gentleman who visited every one.’ ‘Who was that?’ ‘Saddam Hussein.’
Saddam was obsessed with Stalin, and Ba’athism was an Arabist pastiche of Bolshevism.
When a Kurdish leader was invited into Saddam’s personal apartments to negotiate, he was amazed to find, in addition to bottles of Johnny Walker whisky, virtually everything written about Stalin translated into Arabic. The comparisons were legion–and not lost on Saddam: Tikrit and Gori are just a few hundred miles apart. Both men were brought up by strong mothers, rejected by weak fathers, protected and inspired by stepfather figures. Both rose through terrorist exploits.
Saddam, born in 1937 the year of the Soviet Great Terror, seemed to directly ape Stalin’s Central Committee Plenums of that year when he took power and held his famous meeting when his leadership rivals were arrested. But Saddam, despite his attempts at fiction writing, lacked Stalin’s subtlety, statesmanship, vision, his mastery of men, the power of his fanatical Marxism–and his intellectualism. ‘I’m seventy and I never stop studying,’ said Stalin.”
More Here
Mark Steyn on the Iraq Election
Jenny Hatch