Funny Greece/Olympics story - my cousin the sometime antiques dealer who lives in Buckhead was in Greece about 10 years ago, on a buying trip. While in Athens, a man asked her where she was from, and she said "Atlanta". The man became incensed, and said that Athens was entitled to have the Olympics on the 100th anniversary, and that the Coca-Cola Co. had "stolen" the Olympics for Atlanta.

My cousin looked him right in the eye and she said "Well, maybe y'all should have started your own Coca-Cola Co. 100 years ago to steal it back. But ya didn't." There's a kind of wisdom in that.

I recall that two days after 9/11, there was a soccer match in Athens between the Scottish and Greek national teams. Since the Scots are English speakers (more or less - heh), the Greek fans began chanting "Osama! Osama!" The Greek fans tried to burn an American flag before the match, but police stopped them, I believe. That's class. I mean, that makes the French look like stand-up guys.

And now Greece has the Olympics, and it's shaping up to be a total mess. Normally I'm not much for schadenfreude, but in all honesty I can't wait.

Jellyguy - I reject your assumptions wholeheartedly. Clinton owed nothing to Greece, certainly not an apology. If anyone owed an apology, it was and is the Greeks to us, for their reprehensible fondness for tyranny. We're talking about a country that founded a monarchy at the same time the rest of the world was trying to get rid of them, and had to be restrained from rushing headlong into the arms of the Soviet Union. (And yes, it was within our rights to restrain them.) And it looks like Greece is going to owe us (and everybody else) another apology when they fuck up the Olympics this summer.

As for WMD, that was given as a core reason to justify the UN's involvement, at the insistence of the French. The French then turned around and screwed us. The real reason we invaded Iraq was because we needed to stomp someone to reverse the imagery from Clinton's Mogadishu fiasco. Everybody knows this, and everybody understands why Bush had to find a legal context for the invasion. (You'd understand this too if you listened to country music - see Keith, Toby and Worley, Darryl.)

Saul - Nope. Nobody says that. You can read my Friendster testimonials if you want. http://www.friendster.com/user.jsp?id=119091 (See? They LOVE me.)

I mean, they might say I'm an asshole or a douchebag behind my back, but your specific listed elements of assholeness or douchebagness don't really conform to my actual character. And I don't have to have the last word. I just feel like since I'm the only conservative who posts to this blog, I ought to keep my end up. (Some people seem to be offended by the very fact that a conservative would have the audacity to even post here.)

Sterling, your response indicates that you DO know what I am talking about. And thank you for the proper response.

Now, I've picked up plenty of books in my time. Let me give you an alternative. In Europe, after destroying the Axis powers, we helped set up democratic regimes, because we knew this was the best way to combat Communism.

Why didn't we do the same everywhere else?

Please don't tell me that US meddling didn't in part help these murderers sieze and retain control of their countries. US involvement in these countries and others is well documented. Lets not forget that Clinton publicly apologized for US involvement in the coup that brought army colonels to power in Greece in 1967.

Why is this important? We sit on our high horse and preach morality, democracy and peace to the populations of other countries, while having spent 150 years doing exactly the opposite -whether for lofty goals like fighting communism, or pursuing morally ambiguous objectives, like securing access to vital supplies of raw materials.

Now, lets take it for granted that this is all in the past, and we have turned a new leaf, and we are now looking to bring peace and democracy to all the nations of the world.

Why should they believe us? Because we say so? Would you believe Hamas if they suddenly announced that they were renouncing violence? Would you be able to forget the countless innocents they've butchered?

More importantly, instead of coming up with bullshit excuses like WMD to invade Iraq, why can't Bush just come out and say that he doesn't like the bastard, and he's taking him out, and whoever doesn't like it can step outside?

He might get my support, he might not, but he would have my respect, for speaking frankly. I disagreed with a lot of Giuliani's policies, but I voted for him (twice), because the guy did EXACTLY what he said he would do, and he didn't lie about his motivations, nor did he sugarcoat things to avoid losing votes.

And please don't brand me a leftie or some supporter of Muslims. Conflict between the West and Islam may be inevitable. But we need to be smarter about this, because unlike the Germans, the Italians and the Japanese, these people have NOTHING TO LOSE, there are a LOT more of them, and by headbutting them blindly, we may be biting off more than we can chew.

Sterling...you are some kind of competitive asshole. I suspect the politics are really besides the point. You just need to have the last word and feel superior to others. I have no doubt this carries over into into your real life...and that there are many folks around you that talk behind your back about what a douchebag Sterling is. Have fun.

Jellyguy:

#1 I have no idea what you're talking about.

#2 You will find, if you pick up a book, that the US put none of the people you list into power. And if we supported them and gave them finance after the fact, it was because they were the least bad option available. Mao Tse Tung and Stalin together killed something in the vicinity of 75 million people. Communist governments kill the people they have no use for. We stood up against them - my understanding of the charges against Pinochet, for instance, is that his regime was responsible for the deaths of MAYBE 12,000 people. So we held our nose and supported him, to keep the Commies out, who would have killed far more people, the deaths of whom would have been ignored by the likes of you.

Funny how you lefties never gripe about the Communists. And now you take the wrong side in this conflict. You're reliable, I'll give you that.

"Go fuck yourself"?

That's the best you can do?

Sooner or later, I will go fuck myself. It didn't happen on September 11th, because I was a little late getting to work. But my time will come.

Chances are, when it does, it will be at the hands of people trained by Americans, put into power by Americans, and financed by Americans. You know, all those peace-loving democratic types, like Pinochet, Marcos, and Noriega. Or even Osama bin-Laden.

And, lest I forget, go fuck YOURself. With a sandpaper-encased baton.

Brah, your name is STERLING. That's a BITCH name!

At least I'm capable or arguing on points rather than ad hominem.

sterling, you are a complete idiot. your over-simplified views of muslims, the middle east, and the world in general are so pitiful, it's like you're wiping your ass with your college degree (an assumption).

Yeah, he was a flake like that. You'll note, however, the most popular Star Trek episodes and movies involve military conflict (or tribbles).

One other thing - somebody mentioned something about people in the Mideast not liking us. Let's be perfectly clear - since we're the ones with 8000 nuclear warheads, plus the world's largest Air Force and Navy and a not-too-shabby Army, it's the people in the Mideast who ought to be worried whether WE LIKE THEM.

Sterling, it's funny to me you're a Star Trek fan. Didn't Gene Roddenberry operate under a strictly humanist, non-violent live-and-let-live philosophy?

Seriously, do you people really not recognize the threat Islam represents? One of the problems I have with the left is that its proponents often have no sense of history, and no fixed principles. But let's look at some that the US represents:

Freedom of conscience: This means that people not be forced to worship a religion not of their choosing. It also means they not be obliged to support a religion they don't believe in. This is not permitted under Islam - unbelievers are either killed, forced to convert, or obliged to pay a religious support tax. Read the Koran - its spelled out quite neatly.

Equality under the law for all people: This means that people of all faiths, genders and races are treated equally by the state. This is inimical to Islam, which breaks people into hierarchies, and treats women as chattel. This is directly articulated in the Koran.

Freedom of expression: This means that people are free to criticize their government without fear of retribution or imprisonment, and to discourse on topics of all categories. The only two Muslim countries on the entire planet where people are free to criticize their government are Afghanistan and Iraq. (What do those two countries have in common? Hmmmm...) Further, whereas Christianity has been open to secular analysis and scholarship for HUNDREDS OF YEARS, even since before Martin Luther nailed his protest to the church door, Islam permits no such vivisection. You remember that Salman Rushdie fella, right?

These highlight just a few of the critical, deadly ways in which the Islamic worldview and belief system differs from our own. Muslim societies are fast growing in India, Southeast Asia, China and Europe - not to mention the US prison system. They do their utmost to impose their belief system wherever they get a toe-hold (as do we, but ours is liberal and commercial, and we don't stone adulterers or castrate homosexuals).

The West bottled up Islam following the Ottomans' failed siege of Vienna (YES, Vienna, AUSTRIA - look it up) on September 12, 1683. But now the cork's off and we have to confront them again. In the age of nuclear weapons and other horrible technologies that can kill so many, that means we either institute radical change in their societies - by hook or by crook - or within a few decades be forced to exterminate them before they exterminate us. Expansionist Islam wants us to submit to Islam or die - and expansionist Islam is on the move.

This problem isn't going away unless we do something about it - us and the other English-speaking countries, since most of the rest of the world doesn't seem to have the will.

Whoa, stirred up a little nest of hornets, didn't I?

Well, I can't answer you all because Star Trek's coming on in 5 minutes, but here's a sampling:

"Sterling, that is so ludicrously misinformed and hateful, I hardly know what to say.

Religious fundamentalism of any stripe--Christianity included--is dangerous. Islam is not solely responsible for the all of the violence in the world. Rather, the true tenets of Islam forbid it. It is the distortion of those ideas, just as in other religions, that leads to bloodshed."

Yeah, I'm real worried about the Christian, Jewish and Buddhist fundamentalists - difference is THEY bother me when I'm at the airport, whereas the Muslim variety is trying to destroy the West. And it might be hateful, but it's hardly uninformed.

"Drop a MOAB on the whole middle east , and make it a vacation spot for us freedom fighters . :0)"

I don't want to see any more people die than have to, but IF THIS ISN'T DEALT WITH, the nukes will definitely be out of the silos in 20 years. It's a catastrophe that has to be avoided.

"So, tell me, Sterling, after we are done exterminating the bad Muslims, whom should we blame next for being a despicable, murderous, hateful species? The blacks? The Asians? The... Jews?"

Go fuck yourself.

"When I was a kid it was evil Communism. Now it's evil Islam. What will it be next decade, Sterling?"

I don't know - why don't you lefties give me some notion who you're planning to sell us out to next? And I never said kill all the Muslims - I just meant that if you subtract current wars/conflicts involving Muslims from the set of all current wars/conflicts, you're left with what? The Zapatistas?

That's funny, I hear Al Qaeda has a similar real estate deal in the works, 'cept they've got a more temperate destination in mind.

Sterling ... I don't agree with everything you have stated above , but you hit the nail on the head with this statement :

"Subtract Muslims from the equation, and what we have is something very close to peace on Earth."

Drop a MOAB on the whole middle east , and make it a vacation spot for us freedom fighters . :0)

Tim & Trilby - What do you think elevates your opinion so far above other people's from both sides of the political spectrum resolved to give it a voice in commonly accepted and acceptable ways?

Sterling & James - I'm really at a loss for words. We've got to have a modicum of consensus in this country - even if Iraq looks better in five years, it will only be the end of the beginning. We sailed into this without any sound preparation, and seem unwilling even to go get a couple of hundred people in a little city who never will submit without being terrorized into it. Most Germans didn't like being vanquished one bit, but it had to be done. Also, we signally failed to kill the fleeing Taliban in Afghanistan when we had the chance. And most remarkably, the money and preachers from Wahhabi-Arabia are still being made and exported freely.

Oliver - The putative "international community" is a stooge for the lowest common denominator among a bunch of democracies, autocratic states and outright tyrannies. It's something to sensibly think about and try to improve, not an inspirational substitute for organized liberty.

The living dead are restlessly scheming, while tombstone silence has engulfed useful debate in the land of the free.

sterling, upstanding patriot that you are, why are you not in Iraq right now? Did you even try to sign up with the armed forces after 9/11? Hey, and how many care packages have you sponsored to send to our troops over there?

What exactly are you doing to support our troops?

Sterling, darling, 2 words:

Timothy McVeigh.

Devout crypto-Muslim?

Now, being a Greek, I have no love for Muslims. My dark skin and hair will attest to the countless rapes suffered by Greek women at the hands of such rabid dogs. And they still want half, oh screw it, all our land, even today.

But, you could also say that about my father, whose fair skin and green eyes are similar testament to a bunch of Pope-loving, God-fearing Italians forcing themselves on local Greek lasses over many generations on the Western, Venetiano-occupied side of Greece.

So, tell me, Sterling, after we are done exterminating the bad Muslims, whom should we blame next for being a despicable, murderous, hateful species? The blacks? The Asians? The... Jews?

I'd like to nominate the Italians, for raping my fore-mothers. But, hey, I'll follow your lead.

Please tell me whom I should hate. You do it so well.

Sterling, I've heard all your arguments countless times before, and I still shake my head at it. It's funny that you started out in this comment board calling those of us against the Iraq war "college sophomores", when it's your myopic views that are coming across as naive and simplistic, ie, sophomoric.

You're disgusted by "traitors"? I disagree with your terminology. The ones you call "traitors", I call humanistic realists who have the balls to openly disagree with our government's foreign and domestic policies, at the risk of being mistakenly and immaturely called "anti-American" by the likes of you and your brethren.

Let me be direct as well: I am disgusted by you. I'm disgusted because you sound like a racist self-preservationist. You stated, "Subtract Muslims from the equation, and what we have is something very close to peace on Earth." It sounds like you believe all Muslims are the cause of much of the turmoil in this world, and thus all Muslims should be eliminated. Your extrapolation to this conclusion is downright Hitler-esque: just substitute "Jew" for "Muslim". So unless you just simply admit to being a racist and hating Muslims, then you've got a serious problem in reconciling your beliefs with your words.

For the sake of your insane fucking argument, let's go ahead and do your ethnic cleansing and "subtract Muslims from the equation". What are we left with? Is it "something very close to [world] peace"? Or is it Rwanda, Bosnia/Herzegovina, Serbia, Tamil Tigers, Oklahoma City, Tokyo subway gassing, IRA, Pol Pot, Pearl Harbor, etc, etc, ETC?

Let's stop being sophomoric and close-minded, Sterling, and realize much of world's turmoil isn't about Islam per se. It's about any kind of extreme ideology under the guise of a belief system, be it religious, political, cultural, racial, what have you. Any type of extreme ideology that isolates itself from society at large is potentially dangerous, and that danger is manifested at its worst when believers begin to harm others, thinking it's the right thing to do because it's being done in the name of .

And in my opinion, the Bush Administration has done something similar to this, developed its own extreme ideology, isolated itself more and more from the international community, and misled our nation by inserting terms like "freedom" and "democracy" in explaining its actions, when we all know in the end it will be almost nothing like that for THEM or for US. Sterling, do you feel safer now overall and do you anticipate feeling more free after the June 30 pullout? I for one do not and don't think I will.

When I was a kid it was evil Communism. Now it's evil Islam. What will it be next decade, Sterling?

Support our soldiers, not the war. Love country, not this government. And let's all hope a few people in this country who think like Sterling will finally come to their senses, open their minds, and swing their vote come November (not because it's Kerry, but simply because it's not Bush).

Sterling, that is so ludicrously misinformed and hateful, I hardly know what to say.

Religious fundamentalism of any stripe--Christianity included--is dangerous. Islam is not solely responsible for the all of the violence in the world. Rather, the true tenets of Islam forbid it. It is the distortion of those ideas, just as in other religions, that leads to bloodshed.

Do you think Christian fundamentalists in this country support Israel because it’s the only democracy in the Middle East, or out of the goodness of their hearts? Far from it! They support the country’s goals because they believe that if Israel succeeds in defeating the Palestinians, driving them out of Jerusalem, and rebuilding the Temple, it will fulfill Biblical prophesy and bring about Armageddon. The Jewish people are nothing more than a means to an end (and a none-to-good end for the Jews themselves at that, as far as the Christian fundamentalists are concerned, since Jewish people are considered doomed unless they accept Jesus and renounce their own faith). On this level, Christian Fundamentalist support of an Israeli state is no different from Islamic Fundamentalist support of the Saudi Arabian state. The tactics may differ, but the arrogant intent is the same.

Clearly you are articulate and intelligent. For this reason, any belief in the notion that the extinction of Islam will lead to Peace on Earth is so incredibly naive and hateful that I can only assume that you suggest it in jest. If that's not the case, then I don't know what else to say to you.