Conservative Home's debate blogs

Conservative Home's reference blogs

Blog powered by Typepad

Conservative blogs

How is David Cameron doing?

  • Tracker 2
  • Extreme Tracker

« William Hague's joke fest | Main | David Cameron on Labour's 'graveyard of initiatives' »

October 01, 2006



oh dear, what a lot of unmitigated nonsense.

War on terror indeed.

How can we fight a war without an enemy who can be defeated?

For every jihadist we kill, three more arive in their place.

Terror is spreading outwards financed by American consumption of Arab oil.

People in Malaysia are taught to hate Jews by Arab pamphlets funded by oil wealth, despite the fact that they are unlikely to ever meet a jew in their life. Extremism spreads to Indonesia, financed by wealthy Islamic groups indirectly funded by Western oil consumption.

How do these idiots imagine we can win the war on terror?

It is not like defeating Hitler's Germany, where you drop enough bombs and they surrender.

There is no visible enemy. The enemy is being bred inside our country. We cannot defeat it by attacking the Middle East.

These neocons are dangerous and foolish.


For every jihadist we kill, three more arive in their place.

Terror is spreading outwards financed by American consumption of Arab oil.

Americans don't consume Arab Oil - We Do, Japan does, China does.........the Us is 50% self-sufficient - We aren't.

The US imports from Venezuela and Nigeria

It is Europe that is dependent on ARAB and Russian Oil


It is not like defeating Hitler's Germany, where you drop enough bombs and they surrender.

but they never surrendered while their leader was alive..................and it only cost 38 million dead in Europe and 6 years


"You claim the future, and you will see more of it than I will. But I am content and inspired in my late years..."

This sounded like the speech of a man on the brink of retirement, not a future presidential contender.

Re neoconservatism, I don't think McCain is really a neocon at heart, perhaps it's an indication of how totally neoconservative ideology dominates US politics outside the far left that he now sounds just like one. McCain advocates the neocon policy of "Invade the world, invite the world", as the small remaining band of paleocons describe it - regime change abroad, continued mass immigration at home. A policy that weakens us and plays precisely into the strengths of our enemies.
Future generations will not judge them kindly.


Re the perniciousness of the neocon invade-invite strategy, Noah writes at
re the torture bill, now passed:

"I am appalled that we are even considering legalizing torture while standing resolute in our refusal to apply appropriately targeted screening techniques at points of entry into the United States. This President has been willing to go the people demanding the right to declare anyone an enemy combatant and torture that person, but he is not willing to go the people and say that ethnicity, religion, age and sex should determine who is subject to more aggressive searches before he boards an airline. I can find no good excuse, and no good moral justification, for his preference in this regard."

Denis Cooper

"Conservatives believe in a short list of self-evident truths: love of country;..."

Well I'm afraid that rules out most modern British politicians, as they take pride in loving any country other than their own. After all, we're all "citizens of the world" now, and you shouldn't expect preferential treatment just because you're British.


David Davis spoke a little about his love of country and did it well, I thought. I agree that this, which would have gone without saying among almost all Conservatives even ten years ago, now seemingly marks DD out as "right wing".


Of course there is a war on terror and it has been around a long time as Winston Churchill observed 106 years ago

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries!
Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia
in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent
in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture,
sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the
followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this
life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The
fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his
absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the
final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a
great power among men.

Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the
religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No
stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund,
Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread
throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were
it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the
science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern
Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of
ancient Rome."

Sir Winston Churchill (The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages 248-50
(London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1899).


Those who say that you cannot defeat the Islamic terrorists and that we should withdraw from Afghanistan and Iraq never tell us their solution.To abandon the mass of those who do not want terror to the brutal fundamentalists who have no care for anyones life, rich or poor,Muslim or Christian, young or old. It is an old mistake that if you seek to appease your enemy by giving them what they want they will go away and leave you alone. That is a 'Neocringe', we tried that before and it failed. Those like Mathew who always glibly refer to Neocons use that to avoid the real question.



Gadfly - I'd recommend first a policy of de-escalation, as advocated by William Lind:

"Those who do not want terror" will unfortunately still unite against a foreign occupier, ie us. There's not much point killing people to save them, especially when they kill us too.

This wouldn't stop Osama bin Laden trying to kill us, but it would lessen his recruiting pool.


Excuse my ignorance but does this mean that McCain is going to run for President, because I thought he hadn't "officially" decided yet.

The Orator

As a conservative I believe that the phrase "steadfast opposition to threats against our security and values that matches resources to ends wisely" is self-evidently confusing, and probably balony. Is it a typo?

Andrea Jones

I agree! I wouldn't refer to BIG-spending democrats, but DIFFERENT spending. McCain would spend big by being confrontational and starting wars America can't afford to wage. He would have no money for people who are struggling --not unless they should give up altogether, become drug addicts and commit crimes. In that case, McCain would have plenty of money to shut them in prisons.

McCain was charming, likeable, appealing in his speech. He was admirable as a military hero, husband and father. However, he has tired ideas. His bankruptcy as a leader is obvious, as he adopts Obama's key idea --change at this late time.

Breaking news is that unemployment is up. We need solutions to today's problems. McCain has made his contribution and should be content to retire and enjoy his old age.

The comments to this entry are closed.

About Conservative Home

Blog of the week


  • DVD rental
  • Conservative Books

Compassionate conservatism