15 votes

Dana Loesch thinks Iraq was going to attack us

Dana Loesch, CNN TV commentator, was asked if she had a principle that permitted her to decide when we should go to war, and when we should not? She answered: I haven't even thought about it, implying that she didn't have a principle. When confronted with the fact that she didn't have a principle, she argued that she did have a principle and that her principle was, whenever our interests are threatened we should go to war. An examination of her principle proved that there was no principle. In her attempt to be consistent she argued that Iraq threatened the United States and that justified our invasion of Iraq. When asked point-blank whether Iraq was going to attack us, she said: yeah! At that point she became defensive and started making false accusations about our representations prior to the interview. The bottom line is that she doesn't have a principle and apparently, doesn't even know what a principle is. Part two.


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Her Principle For Going To War

Whenever the interests of politically connected US corporations are threatened then send someone else's kids to die for that cause. At least that's probably what it works out to be.

She thought you meant

She thought you meant principal of her high school.

Obviously she is right. Iraq

Obviously she is right. Iraq was on the verge of invading the USA.

Iraq, a world super power, was already spending more than the entire rest of the world combined on its war machine.

Iraq had already established bases in Mexico and had built them up with tens of thousands of troops with the latest state of the art technology in tanks, field artillery, missiles, helicopters, reconnaissance. Using its armada of high tech satellites and spy technology it had already mapped out every military installation, and productive manufacturing locale in the US, and most importantly the location of U.S. oil fields, supply lines and wells so that it could secure them immediately upon its invasion of the U.S.

Iraq was operating and funding covert operations and political fronts within the US.

Iraq had moved an entire fleet of high tech naval warships, loaded with WMDs, aircraft, and smart missiles into the Carribean. It had developed long range bombers that they could launch from Bagdad itself to run sorties all the way to St. Louis, dropping its high tech bombs and missiles.

The U.S. was obviously a completely outmatched sitting duck, just waiting to be invaded by Iraq.

Or maybe Dana and I are just mixing up which country was actually doing these things to the other.

Let it not be said that we did nothing.-Ron Paul
Stand up for what you believe in, even if you stand alone.-Sophia Magdalena Scholl

Dane Bramage

Dane Bramage

Seems to me Dana Loesch needs a few phone calls

to her show to continue the discussion on "principles". Is Mark Dice out there looking in on this thread? He's pretty darn good at getting people to phone mob neo-con talk show hosts. Maybe Mr. Dice can team up with Mr. Helfeld on this issue. Just thinking out loud.

Say You Saw Her On Aim TV

But then take the receiver away from your ear lest you be deafened by screaming.

"Bipartisan: both parties acting in concert to put both of their hands in your pocket."-Rothbard

I think I agree.

Whens the next show?

I think its obvious now....

...that 99% of the so called political media are paid to push an agenda given to them by their masters, and if they are good loyal servants, their masters will let them keep their show/column/blog and maybe even let them peddle a "book" to their audiences so they can cash in on the success of their brainwashing. (That's why you have Mark Levin, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity spending untold amounts of air time pitching their books)

Seriously, the programs might be somewhat popular but look at the quality of advertising you often see - Goldline, Work from Home (Herbalife), androtestosterone supplements, reverse mortgages, identity theft protection, tax and debt settlement scams, etc. These companies prey on the weak, the scared, the uneducated and the elderly. This is not a lucrative advertising market, unless you peddle a product that exploits human weakness and gullibility.

I know its not easy to completely unplug from this toxic environment, but I urge you to do so. Just cancel cable television - get Netflix and Apple TV to watch your favorite programming commercial free. Listen to Ron Paul Radio or Robert Wenzel or whatever it is you want to listen to. You will be happier, and you will make the propagandists furious.

I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. ~ Thomas Jefferson

Don't get me wrong, I don't

Don't get me wrong, I don't quite agree with Ron Paul. I do believe that there are times when "pre-emptive" war is necessary.

I just don't think the Iraq far came anywhere close. We stood up to the Soviets and did not go to war...Nazi Germany should be the standard.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

SteveMT's picture

"Pre-emptive war is necessary" when plans are already in place

and the government is corrupt.

The war with Iraq was planned well before 9/11:

September 24, 2010 08:00 AM
New Documents Show Bush Administration Planned War in Iraq Well Before 9/11/2001 - By karoli

All of us knew it but couldn't prove it. Now we can prove it. Newly declassified documents published at the National Security Archive prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the Bush administration planned to topple Saddam Hussein and invade Iraq as early as January, 2001, and were making strategic plans and resource allocations as early as November, 2001.

The Patriot Act was written well before 9/11:

Ron Paul: “The PATRIOT Act Was Written Many, Many Years Before 9/11 [And The Attacks Simply Provided] An Opportunity for Some People To Do What They Wanted To Do”
Posted on December 9, 2011 by WashingtonsBlog

Ron Paul: Patriot Act, Wars Planned Before 9/11

Politico notes:

Ron Paul isn’t backing down from his position that the U.S. has provoked terrorists through foreign military occupation and that officials tried to capitalize on Sept. 11 attacks.

“Think of what happened after 9/11, the minute before there was any assessment, there was glee in the administration because now we can invade Iraq, and so the war drums beat,” Paul said Thursday night before a packed room of more than 1,000 students and supporters. “That’s exactly what they’re doing now with Iran.”

You should check out the book written by Thomas Woods:

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History.

In the book, he reveals that FDR pushed for war when there wasn't a need for it. FDR provoked Germany and Japan into prolonging a war that could have ended much sooner.

Love thy enemy.

The thing is, Woods does have

The thing is, Woods does have some point that we "provoked" Germany and especially Japan into attacking us.

But at what point is "existing" also "provoking"?

For example, Germany was not happy about our allowing asylum for war refugees. So do we cave, and give in to them? Or do we stand strong? Japan didn't like some of our policies regarding the energy trade, IIRC. Again, do we stand firm, or do we back down?

Other nations will always have complaints against us. They will even complain when we don't do anything, since inaction is itself action. When they attack us, we can't just put the blame on ourselves.

Germany was a powerful country with a strong military that was tearing through Europe, and tearing through our allies. They were eventually going to fight the US, no question. Going on the offensive in that case makes sense.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

What we did cannot honestly be called 'existing'

In the span of about 50 years leading up to WW2, Japan went from being a pre-industrial ,peaceful nation (and our closest ally in Asia) to launching a surprise attack with a highly skilled and developed military which killed 3000 Americans. how is this possible? How did Korea get divided? How did china become radicalized leading up to Mao's revolution? Why did the 'isolationist' united states have tens of thousands of troops in the Phillipines/pacific BEFORE the war started? How did Japan go from being a pre-industrialized, peaceful nation, to engaging in the biggest war the world had ever seen up to that point against Russia, and win? Why did Teddy Roosevelt support the defeated Russians over his supposed Japanese allies when it came time for Russia to pay endemnities(which it never did)? How did the Japanese public go from gathering by the thousands in the streets to cheer for visiting Americans, to an overwhelmingly anti-American attitude in less than a generation?

Who funded Hitler's rise to power? If we wouldn't have stopped him, would he really have conquered the world? Why did we ally with an even bigger mass murderer (Stalin) to defeat him? Why did we intervene once Stalin and hitler had become enemies? Would it not have been a good thing to just let two evil tyrants duke it out and save our own blood and treasure? If we truly believe freedom and capitalism are the path to prosperity, why are we so threatened by communism/nazism/fascism?

If you really want to understand WW2, look at how we got into WW1. Ask yourself if you really trust those same people when they began to tell people WW2 was necessary. Read Charles Lindbergh. Read 'the imperial cruise' or 'blowback' or 'the creature from Jekyll island' if you want the full story.

Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

Germany eventually fighting the U.S. would have been..

a false alternate universe to the universe that should have been where we weren't involved with provoking Japan and Germany into war with us.

Love thy enemy.

That Germany was tearing through our allies...

is not a valid argument to jump into WWII.

There is another argument that could be said that if we were not lending our support to Britain, Germany would have left them alone. Why wouldn't they? They had their demands met by virtue of regaining what was lost by the Versailles Treaty that we imposed upon them.

Love thy enemy.

Our allowing asylum for war refugees..

had nothing to do with why we eventually went to war with Germany. It was our involvement in Japanese affairs, and ultimately, discounting negotiations that would have been successful with the Japanese by allowing them to keep a barrier with the Soviet Union that led to America declaring war on Japan.

Love thy enemy.

"Interest" is the Principle for War.

Dana may be the war-monger propaganda whore - in this instance /interview she was quite clear (about what she thinks is 'true'), and repeated it many times, - Jan was not grasping it. She said we should go to war when our "Interests" are threatened. When Jan asked about Principle for war she repeated = "Interest".

This is standard thing in foreign policy, & often quoted. See Wiki -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendship (para 5) =

[[ Regarding this aspect of international relations, Lord Palmerston said:
“ Therefore I say that it is a narrow policy to suppose that this country or that is to be marked out as the eternal ally or the perpetual enemy of England. We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.[25] ”

This is often paraphrased as: "Nations have no permanent friends and no permanent enemies. Only permanent interests." ]]

A religious man / a spiritual teacher said = "No permanent friend, nor a permanent enemy - The only reality in this illusory world is Truth."
[[ Thus the key to a spiritually successful life lies in realising that we have no permanent friends, nor any eternal enemies. The various struggles we go through are the result of the world of illusion we live in. The diverse obligations we fulfil and the rewards we receive are the results of our own past and present thoughts, words and deeds. ]] this man forgot satan, cannot see danger.

"Interest" is not a principle

The term "interest" cannot represent a principle any more than having a "reason" is a principle. It is a vague noun that can be twisted to mean anything. And who is the "we" whose interest are being threatened? Certainly not mine.

So the current principle being followed on the surface is "the government will wage war against any entity around the world that works against the will of said government to increase its control over trade, economies, people and resources." The government SHOULD rightfully have its interests threatened if it is behaving in a forceful and violent way, as it is.

Below the surface, the principle is actually "those who have taken control of government power will wage war against any entity that works to gain freedom or independence and wishes to withdraw from any system of control."

Principle, as % Over Principal.

I fully agree with your 2nd & 3rd para. Re the 'vague noun', that is what is was meant to be - to escape the negative connotations associated with "The Interest", i.e. U$ury. Inter'est in'Volves the mind, enslaves.
As regards the demand for or threat to "Interest" see a 2 minute video = Economic Hitmen - (for the proverbial pound of flesh) -

this is what is observed in reality: Interest is a tool of war.
Interest over the Principal = Principle for Contention.

Interest is banned in Scriptures, for folks with faith.
Interest is sacred (principle) for zion with influence in the west.
Bone of contention between borrower & lender, owners & robbers,
North & South, and interest is the cause of high taxes imposed by govts.

Never Forget

The only country that actually benefited from the Iraq War and 9-11 was Israel. Is this what is meant by "interests"?

Netanyahu said it about 9-11


Bush Security advisor Zelikov said it about Iraq. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0329-11.htm

U$ Wars for Zion's Interest.

+1, & thanks for posting. Its good & useful to store links to important pieces of info. Netanyahu is now PM of Zion.

Thank you! That sooo needs to

Thank you! That sooo needs to be said right now.

The US givernment game them

The US givernment gave them the gas that was used to kill all those people you propaganda whore. Perhaps be a journalist and start telling people the truth.

These rabid neocon warmongers

such as Dana Loesch don't feel the need for any "principles".
They are satisfied to have ambitions of world domination.

Just check out that look on her face!
She can't believe anyone has the audacity to question her absurd positions.