In a sane world, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend," is nonsense. My friend need not fight for me, I am no cattle and they are not chattel. Or perchance that's what it means. Time to talk trade. Israel cannot have an open border with Gaza, Hamas wanted to police itself and its homeland for staunch reasons, after much prolonged warfare, the Israeli security left, and they have been two countries for almost ten years. Those of you in protest can eat shit. I don't live there, but I can remind you, there won't be an open border there, because terrorists want to kill innocent people. There won't be an open border for invasion, Israel isn't Obama. Israel and Obama are very different by comparison. One is wet behind the ears, newly introduced to the geopolitical scene, and only reacts if able to include ulterior motives - and the other is Israel. In the US we call 'two-state' a bipartisanship, or comradery, as the countries in conflict are two distinct states, there will be a border until the enmity ends. Cross, but use the checkpoint, like an adult. Don't be a place where the letter A is missing.
Islamic internecine conflict can be traced to one problem, they have a dispute over a single name spot in the family tree of descendants of a warlord, which makes zero alteration to their liturgy or religion. I've read selections because I always had heard Jefferson had also read it. It is as I describe, a book of Klingon war poetry. It might add that excessive heat and women so ugly they need be covered in public is bad for the mindset. I know there are vile threats to humanity in play, I know that the war-parties are occasionally sponsored by member states of the UN human-rights council ridiculously. In any good fiction they could wildly be the predetermined foes practicing anti-tourism to limit competition for what less water they have. It however seems that infamously they will kill or convert anyone in their path, but what I don't know is what will happen when they meet the sleeping giants, what happens when they wake whom only kill until they're done.
In hearing that one, after many, American journalists had been decapitated, I think the idea that they should be stopped is due in full. In general, if they are not true believers, don't tell me and mine to defend them, tell them they're heretics. Revolution is so old that rebellion doesn't talk to it anymore. Violence is certainly old enough that revolution and rebellion aren't on speaking terms. Enjoy your protectionist rhetoric, I always enjoy a good laff.
If the president wants to 'speak softly and carry a big stick' diplomatically that's well and good, I wish the vile stopped or victims given the power to defend themselves, in the least. If a headless loss of life doesn't encourage a revived necessity for the Bill of Rights, crawl into a hole. Reprisal is in order, tho it's gathering dust. We were told that in the wake of the Libyan civil war, yet another junta for dictatorship typical of the region, militants killed an American ambassador because of a parody video circling the internet, yet when the video of an illegal execution surfaces humanity rolls over in its sleep and our heroes in their graves. At least let us burn a bridge to nowhere or defenestrate a random bureaucrat. An investigation as to why the tragedy was not met in immediate response with wrath of scorched earth, is commencing at the speed of bureaucracy, three years later.
I'm waiting to see how our species devolves as who the true symbionts are, as recessive predation hibernates, to see what is feeding on dusts of war, what eats the invasive species, and so-on. More so manifesto *drops-mic*, if we can feast on vultures as hawks. In America, we have the luxury of revoking citizenship for terrorists, natural-born or naturalized. It would be nice if the rest of you did the same. It'd be an honor if we could swiftly deport any criminal, but our neighbors frown on that and we're not terrorists, despite what petty thieves and dictators might say.
I've been reading a lot of Jonah Goldberg lately, and if you read me or just this post, I just read an article "Libertarians in the Mist," and it is awesome. I can't quote the entirety in good taste, but here's my favorite part:
"Libertarianism is popular now because it is cool to say you’re libertarian even if - indeed, especially if - you are not libertarian. I've spoken at about 100 college campuses and I've made this point almost every time. Libertarianism is a bigger threat to conservatism among young people than liberalism is because given the culture today libertarianism is easier than conservatism. To be a conservative you not only have to judge people, you have to judge people out loud. And making judgments about right and wrong is a sin in today’s secular culture." ~ Goldberg, Jonah.Don't get a big head. I have a big head, one size hats do not fit all. The part that really moved me, be it by any number and form of advocated reasons, is that I agree. I've come to the belief that libertarian is a new way to spell liberal, and if anyone is truly libertarian they'll let me be a conservative. The article in general reminds me of another author me gusta who coincidentally founded 'National Review,' which is the distribution where I began reading his work. O. M. G. It's a small world after all and there's no reason the terrorists should have all the fun. There's no use trying to define liberalism, 'if you love something, let it go' as is sometimes said, let's just say that it's not conservatism.
"Though liberals do a great deal of talking about hearing other points of view, it sometimes shocks them to learn that there are other points of view." ~ Buckley Jr, William F.
