Hammering the P.C. "tyranny" in the U.S., Beck guest Thor advocated installing Noriega in Iraq
Discussing possible "solution[s]" to the war in Iraq with his guests, author Brad Thor and radio host Dave Glover, on the June 21 edition of his CNN Headline News' program, Glenn Beck asserted, "I don't know if you actually can win anymore with the P.C. bullcrap that we've got going on," and went on to ask Thor, "[C]an you win with this P.C. culture?" Glover suggested the United States should "fight it World War II style," while Thor lamented the "tyranny of political correctness we have in this country" and said: "You have to let loose the dogs of war, let these guys do what they need to do to get the job done. The fact is that after we did Nagasaki and Hiroshima, and I'm not saying that's what we ought to do now, but everybody respected us. Nobody messed with us." Beck agreed with Thor's atomic analogy: "I'm not saying we use nukes. I'm just saying, it was the same strategy with Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Drop it, you will save more Japanese lives."
Thor further recommended that the United States should "go grab (jailed former Panamanian dictator Manuel) Noriega, pull him out of his cell, ship him over there and give him Saddam Hussein's old uniform." He continued: "We need a dictator back in that country. That's all those people respond to. The Arab world is so messed up, they can't -- you can't give people democracy. They have to earn it. So let's put our own strongman in there like we did with the shah, and let's -- let's make it work."
From the June 21 edition of CNN Headline News' Glenn Beck:
BECK: Let's go to war. Who's got a solution on the war?
GLOVER: Fight it World War II style. What you said in the opening was perfect, either fight it or don't fight it, but don't fight it halfway and cost lives and waste lives. Go back to George S. Patton. Fight it World War II style.
BECK: You know, I don't know if you can win. I said this about six months ago on the program. I don't know if you actually can win anymore with the P.C. bullcrap that we've got going on. We're -- we've got a guy on in about a half hour on the "Real Story" tonight that is -- Navy SEALs. And the P.C. bullcrap that they had to go through almost got them killed.
Brad, can you win with this P.C. culture?
THOR: You absolutely cannot. It's a tyranny of political correctness we have in this country. You have to let loose the dogs of war, let these guys do what they need to do to get the job done.
The fact is that after we did Nagasaki and Hiroshima, and I'm not saying that's what we ought to do now, but everybody respected us. Nobody messed with us. But the minute we get all P.C., and we start backpedaling and doing this, what happens is that the toughest guy in the schoolyard wants to come and punch your lights out. And we're going to get hit again and again and again because we look weak.
GLOVER: Yes.
THOR: It's gonna happen.
GLOVER: Glenn, one of the worst parts of the war in Iraq has been that prior to invading Iraq, we still had the element of surprise. They didn't know what we were capable of. People still feared us the way that they did Israel before the Hezbollah fiasco.
Now we've proven what we'll do, just how far we'll go, and what we won't do.
THOR: And what will make us pull back. Exactly.
BECK: Well, here's the thing that kills me on the war. We're fighting a war, and we want to be this kind and gentle nation, because that's who we are. We are kind and gentle. But look up the definition of war. It's killing people, and it's killing them faster than they can kill you.
Why is it that nobody understands that if you fight with the -- if you unleash the military might of the United States, and you let these guys go in and fight with everything they got, you will save more lives.
It's -- I mean, honestly, and I'm not saying that we use nukes. I'm just saying -- it was the same strategy with Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Drop it, you will save more Japanese lives.
THOR: You will save -- exactly, which is why they let MacArthur go and relieved him of command in Korea, because he said the only way to win that was to nuke them.
GLOVER: That's right.
THOR: I think what we need to do -- and let's go grab Noriega, pull him out of his cell, ship him over there and give him Saddam Hussein's old uniform. Let Noriega -- we'll parole him early.
We need a dictator back in that country. That's all those people respond to. The Arab world is so messed up, they can't -- you can't give people democracy. They have to earn it. So let's put our own strongman in there like we did with the shah, and let's -- let's make it work.
Oh.
My.
God.
Glenn, just spare us your "PC Backpedaling" ... you too, Thor, and admit it ... you just want the chance to be big, tough he-men who slaughter people with the horrors of the atomic bomb. Don't mince words, don't fake and say you aren't really saying it. By raising that possibility, you have already committed yourself and condemned yourself.
Holy Moley.
good god.. you people are complete idiots. Everything that these guys said is accurate. We are losing the war in Iraq because our soldiers can't fight like soldiers. THIS is what Beck is saying you whiny treehugging pansies. I'm calling names because I'm so sick of liberal cluelessness. Our soldiers can't shoot at Iraqis until they are shot at. They can't blow up a mosque even if they KNOW that enemy soldiers are in there along with stockpiles of munitions. If a farmer were to stroll by with a mule fully loaded with explosives, our soldiers could not shoot him unless the farmer was carrying a gun. No gun? No shooting. THIS is the PC crap that Beck and the rest of the rational thinking crowd are worried about.
Debate world war II all you want, those bombs ended the war. The war today is being LOST because of jerks like you that make decisions based on law books and business decisions. Why don't YOU try and fight a war like this, you'll be thanking a soldier real quick for the freedom you have to spout off your stupidity in places like this.
No, it is not PC crap. Beck is a colossal ass and has no idea of what war is all about. Nor do you. I'm always amazed at the clowns who complain about the military's "Rules of Engagement".
One thing that all of the complainers have in common is that NONE of them has ever had to fight under any "Rules of Engagement".
War is not wholesale slaughter of everyone suspected of being an enemy.
What if I told you that I've got friends that DIED in the war because they couldn't shoot first? Snipers don't need second chances... walking down the street looking for bad guys and blam... the guy next to you is dead. Then they run into a mosque and you cant fire. THESE are the rules of engagement our soldiers are dealing with. To deny this proves that you are a brainwashed lemming. So take your peace-loving bullcrap and shove it where the sun don't shine. I'm talking about reality, you are in a fantasy world.
I'm living in a fantasy world?
You're the one living vicariously through your "friends" war stories, yet it's me who lives in the fantasy world.
I guess you proved my point. Beck doesn't understand the purpose of rules of engagement and neither do you.
Our forces are occupying Iraq. We are trying to bring freedom and democracy to the Iraqis.
Destroying a mosque or neighborhood because of a sniper drives more people into the insurgency camp. So, to get one sniper, you suggest that we create many more potential snipers.
I've also had friends killed by insurgents. The difference between you and I is that I was there fighting a war with my friends as they died.
Except, Beck and Thor aren't talking about fighting with "everything we have," but rather dropping a couple of A-Bombs to prove we're tough. He's not advocating it to save lives, but to show that "you don't mess with the US," ostensibly because we'll bomb everyone until you stop fighting, civilians, fighters, doesn't matter.
Oh, and if you can compare shooting an unarmed civilian under strong suspicion of being an enemy combatant with generations of birth defects and permanently destroyed land, then please, by all means, feel free to pour bleach down your throat the next time you want to kill that cold you have. It'll show those germs not to mess with you ever again!
Like it or not, we have "Rules of Engagement" which allow us to take the so-called "moral high ground," allowing us to win hearts and minds - meaning goodwill and allies - during conflicts. If nothing else, it makes a valuable psychological tool.
As opposed to non-valuable psychotic tools like Beck and Thor.
I'm calling names because I'm so sick of liberal cluelessness.
Check it out, everyone. Now the reich has a legitimate reason for namecalling. Does it work for us too, or is this another one of y'alls one sided rules of engagement?
"Drop it, you will save more Japanese lives."
Wow, why didn't this occur to me before???
Nuke a country, and you'll save their lives!!!
It's crazy enough, it just might work!!!
Estimated dead at Hiroshima: 140,000
Estimated dead at Nagasaki: 74,000
How many lives did we save again?
More lives than we saved at Dresden.
Oh, snap!
More lives than we saved in Iraq!
Look at Japan and Germany today. And we did save lives in Japan and dresden AMERICAN LIVES! Not to mention British Lives, Chinese, Russian, French, and pretty much everyone elses who wasn't in the axis powers. How many lives do you think we would've lost if we would have attacked Japan like we did normandy? I don't mind people debating the problems associated with the Iraq war because it has been bungled but to question the tactics used that saved millions of lives from two of the most ruthless and brutal nations in history (Germany and Japan circa ww2) is ridiculous. Hiroshima saved lives. Nagasaki saved lives. Dresden saved lives.
I'm not disagreeing with your premise that American lives were saved by bombing Nagasaki and Hiroshima. I'd disagree with you on the Dresden bombing.
This thread is not about American lives, but about Mr. Beck's claim that the strategy was to save Japanese lives by dropping atomic bombs. The strategy was primarily to save American lives by avoiding an invasion of mainland Japan.
This shows an ignorance of history and Beck's willingness to try to spin history to fit his rather narrow perspective.
Are you saying that dropping the bombs didn't save Jaoanese lives? How many would have been lost if the war would've lasted another say 5 yrs and required a land assualt on the mainland?
No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that Beck's statement implies that our intent was primarily to save Japanese lives by dropping the bomb.
While that could have been the result. The intent was to save American (Allied) lives and to bring an end to the war.
Beck, like others, is guilty of taking a grain of truth and adding his opinion, and then stating it as fact.
Don't get me wrong. My father was on a ship which would have participated in the invasion of Japan if the bomb had not been dropped. Had the invasion taken place, I might not be here arguing with you.
When the sinking of the Yamato brought an end of Japan's naval efforts, surrender was only a matter of time, not hundreds of thousands of additional civilian lives.
step away from the computer... you are too stupid to be here. Study some history... learn about the women and teenagers that were training to become kamakaze pilots in japan. Take a look at the massive land invasion that would have been the next step in the war that the bombs prevented. Hundreds of thousands more people would have died. Quit the knee-jerking and pick up a history book for once. Your passion is cute but dangerous.
I think you could learn a lesson or two as well. When you are discussing Japan, you discuss a military industrial complex run by a government that made a decision to protect their people from further bloodshed.
Terrorists, on the other hand - aren't the right always telling us they will kill regardless of their losses, that they bow to no government and could care less if we obliterated their governments? Why would bombing innocents into submission be effective if your point is they can't control the terrorists?
Why are we allowing others to plan and prosecute this war?
These three douche bags seem to have all the answers. I say we send them over to lead the next trip out of the Green Zone.
i COMPLETELY agree. There should be a rule in place that says, if any of these armchair idiots (who've never served) beat the drums of war, then they have to put their money where their mouths are. Beck, at this point, is becoming a public nuisance.
THOR: I think what we need to do -- and let's go grab Noriega, pull him out of his cell, ship him over there and give him Saddam Hussein's old uniform. Let Noriega -- we'll parole him early.
We need a dictator back in that country. That's all those people respond to. The Arab world is so messed up, they can't -- you can't give people democracy.
So WTF did we invade Iraq for? According to this guy Iraq would have been better off with Saddam still in power. Isn't that what he's basically saying?
And the thing is... he's correct.
Now that's the scary thing!
Thor IS correct. Still, the idea that saving more lives by bombing people sort of makes me wonder where these guys buy their crack.
But, Jeter, you're ignoring the "respect" we earned by dropping atomic bombs.I'm imagining a list made by a rational person of actions we,as a country, could take to earn global respect.Probably a long and interesting list.
The same assignment given to Beck's Power Rangers;
1. Nuke
Unfortunately that's true. Saddam kept the country running while he was kept in line by international pressure. The war has been a pointless waste of time, money and lives.
Not for those war profiteers who have made a mint off this little war crime, like Cheney and Rumsfeld and Bush's brother. It's just like the Nazis. They made personal fortunes from war crimes, too. Gangsterism, alive and well in Washington DC.
It's not better off with a dictator in charge, in my opinion, but what we did was remove their government and force something on the Iraqi people that they were not ready for. Freed of the dictator that kept everything stable, the people attempted to settle their differences in the way they felt was best - violent actions against each other.
Had they instead set aside their differences, presented a unified front against their dictator and asked for our help, things would be very different.
Instead, we took Iraq out of the oven too soon and instead of it rising and becoming freedom cake with democracy frosting, it fell into a messy morass.
mmmm, cake.
Invading, stabilizing and occupying a country of 27 million people means imposing your will upon them, something that simply cannot be done with 150,000 troops. Disbanding the army of the occupied country and relieving every Bath party member of their job also doesn't score you any hearts and minds.
just a small reminder, we did that for the Shah of Iran, and wow did THAT work great for us! Oh and don't forget we also supported Saddam in his coup and sold him arms and WMD's for decade. Well, whe I say 'we' I mean the repukes. And Manuel Noriega, adn a bunch of others . Might say that that is not a correct strategy to follow...
Yes, true, but if you remind people of the number of messes that have Republican fingerprints all over them, they invariably start screeching that you're "Blaming America first" as if that bunch of poorly marinated colon-dumplings were themselves the literal embodiment of America as a whole. The "personal responsibility" crowd can never actually be bothered to accept any responsibility for the clusterf***s they set in motion when they eventually come home to roost
quickly saving ' colon-dumplings' for future reference :)
To remind yourself why Gen. Powell's microwave meals never caught on?
"I don't know if you actually can win anymore with the P.C. bullcrap that we've got going on," - Glenn Beck
"tyranny of political correctness we have in this country" - Brad Thor
You guys are full of it. P.C. was a concoction by Conservative Think tanks to con the public into believing that only Conservatives can decide on how to dish out free speech. To the People of the United States don't play into this con job of the Conservatives don't play into it at all.
The only way Conservatives can legitimally play the P.C. card is if and only if the Conservatives were apolitical. Let's take a look at their hypocrisy and see how phony and political they are:
Burning a flag was ruled as speech by the United States Supreme Court. Over six time did the Conservative Republican controlled legislative branch try to ban flag burning.
With spins and convolutions the Conservative tries to rationalize how they can argue for flag-burning statues and against campus hate-speech codes.
When the first Amendment is successfully invoked the result is not vicotry for free speech in the face of a challenge from politics but a political victory won by the party that has managed to wrap it's agenda in the mantle of free speech - Stanley Fish
As far as your B.S about the Middle East not wanting democracy I have a news flash for you. I personally in the past 30 years have known the grass root people from the Middle East. Israelis, Palenstinians, Iranians and I can tell you that they have one thing in common with us grass root Americans and that one thing is that all these politicians running the countries around the world are all out of touch with the people and this includes Bush and his administration.
The only guy who got it right was Chavez when he said in his speech to the U.N talk to the people not the world leaders here what they have to say.
The problem in Iraq is a problem of Bush's makings. He created a weak central government, abolished the Iraq army and the Baath party, this guaranteed a bloodbath over there. So if you're going to point fingers point them not at the Middle East point them at Bush worst presidency of the United States history.
One last thing. Why don't you racists look in the mirror and see what those who don't like democracy really looks like.
Yowtch. That was scathing, and I hope you didn't include me in your attack. I can't think of a single form of government other than democracy that all people can agree they like at least a little. Hell, Democracy is the only form of government worth a damn because it ensures people get what they deserve.
I've no doubt that everyone wants Democracy ... for themselves. It's a people's ability to want democracy for everyone else in their unit (be it local, state, federal or whatever) that shows if they want real Democracy, isn't it?
always have to play the race card huh? People can't disagree without it being a race issue? That is a bunch of closed-minded b.s.
Sure, Bush has led this warhorribly. But give a little credit to the barbarian 12th century mindset of the people we are trying to liberate ok? The biggest mistake made was trusting that the citizens of these countries would rise up after we removed their evil murderous dictator. Instead, we got nothing but a bunch of thugs eager to seize their own power and kill others that they hate more than us.
Thor and Beck are right. The thugs only appreciate force and can only be kept down by brute force and the fear of rape/murder for their mistakes. They have no respect for logic or political maneuvers. They respect the sword.. that is why they still behead people that are alive. Frikkin barbarians... WHAT good has come out of the region in the past thousand years? If they want peace, they need to fight for it, not against it. Unforutnately our soldiers are being held back by POLITICAL CORRECTNESS: Dont shoot mosques, don't arrest imams, don't shoot until shot at, blah blah blah. THIS IS WHY WE ARE LOSING! Why is this so hard to understand?
Ok... rant complete. You may resume watching Rosie or Ellen reruns.
YOU are a fricking barbarian. Demonizing an entire people in order to make it more acceptable to indiscriminatly kill them. I am ashamed to be the same species as you. I just love the right wing talking point that it is the Iraqis fault that OUR invastion of THEIR country didnt go the way WE wanted it to. It has to be among the most amusing for its committment to delusional fantasy I have ever seen.
Llke your God Alan Colms, you have taken words and distorted them. Failure to cooperating with our military is PART of the reason this war effort is failing. The main reason is our ridiculous rules of engagement (those rules that most of the posters here deny the existence of).
As far as damning an entire poeple, it's my right to do so. Libs can call Bush Satan, they can insult our soldiers, they can trash religion (except for that bastion of peace, Islam), so I'm just taking a page from the Lib play book and offending you for a change.
Allah Ack Bacon!
I'm surprised that someone who feels the way you do is not stepping up and putting your ass in the line of fire.
No, not really, most of the bedwetters would rather just talk or bang their keyboards while others are sent to fight.
worrierking, stop interfering with cannonballs right to damn entire groups of people and eliminate the rules of war.
In fact, why don't you go confess your trespasses to the Almighty Alan Colmes !
;0)
The People will take a lot of abuses before they reach a point where they say enough is enough and over throw their government.
But the overthrow of government has been done. We did it, the French did it, the Russians did it, the Chinese did it.
But trying to force another country into a government won't work because it will be seen as intervention by foreign outsiders. There is a clash of egos the Iraqis would rather settle their power play with us out of the country; at least whatever results comes out of it even if it means a bloodbath is inevitable at least they can call the results their own and have a sense of pride. This is what we won't give them which is to say we are preventing them from carrying out true democracy. We forget we had a Civil War ourselves.
Bush invaded Iraq without provocation and now the country must be bombed because the some of the Iraqis won’t conform or don’t want their country occupied?
All because of a lie from Bush to Cheney to Powell to Rice. War Criminals all of them
Yup, just like the victim of a rapist when she struggles too much. She must be punished for not submitting to his will. It's the psychology of the psychopath.
I guess you'd rather have Iraqi women raped by Saddam and his henchmen, right? Iraq was the perfect country before we went in, right? Towns murdered, militants deployed... they LOVED america until we payed them a visit, right? ha...
No they didnt becuase they knew that when Saddam was comitting his worst attrocities the US was a strong ally of his. The rape and torture room argument would be stronger if we had closed them down instead of just putting them under new management
Thor? You've got to be kidding.
Who's next on his show. Odin? Zeus?
I just got "Hammering..."
Can I flag a whole story?
I am so ashamed at not catching that. Thanks.
I guess it's a good thing they didn't mention his spin along with the hammering.
“THOR: The fact is that after we did Nagasaki and Hiroshima, and I'm not saying that's what we ought to do now, but everybody respected us. Nobody messed with us.”
Everyone had to respect us because we were the only one with a bomb. Things have changed.
Fight WWII style?
How ridiculous! A country must have a standing army to fight(already been disbanded), territory to capture (already occupying the country) and a leader or government to topple (he's been executed). How on earth can a war, that has already been won, continue to be fought?
This is an occupation that is breaking our military. Over 50% of returning vets suffer from PTSD, this affliction is being compounded by extended deployments. Did our guardsmen, serving 3, 4, 5 tours, did they expect to be shipped around the globe when they signed up to serve their communities?
Breaking the military in this manner, is an example of the Republican way of ruining anything, and everything, they touch in their effort to rationalize the privatization of essential publicly funded institutions.
The military is stressed out becuase they can't shoot until shot at. They can't fight the way they were trained. Instead of doing what comes naturally for our soldiers they are forced to drive into IED's or go door to door looking for bad guys and hoping that they guy behind the door doesn't shoot. Nevermind the fact that these 'soldiers' don't wear uniforms, its even harder to find the enemy. THIS is why they are stressed out beyond belief. Unreasonable fighting conditions and moronic rules of engagements.
Right. 3 consecutive 15-month tours of duty in a bloody occupation by men and women, who are losing their jobs and businesses back home, has nothing to do with it. Their fellow soldiers are being denied medical benefits and treatment because they have been delegated as, what used to be called, mental defectives. But the problem is they aren’t allowed to indiscriminately kill enough people?
And no they can’t fight the way they were trained because they are trained for combat. They are not trained to be an occupying force, for that is their current role. They won the war. They are now occupiers.
Anyway, the private ‘security’ contractors are bound by no military code of conduct. They can kill civilians and bomb mosques. But that would be a stupid strategy, as it would set the entire population against their liberators. It’s about winning hearts and minds remember?
What strange liberators the Iraqi people must perceive us to be.
You really don't have a clue.
Why is it that the most insulting things said about our military always come from the bedwetters on the right?
Killing does not "come naturally" to a soldier. Only someone who's never been a soldier would say such a thing.
Our soldiers are not sociopaths.
The percentage of the American population involved in the WW2 conflict was a bit over 10%. For this conflict .5%. To do it right and produce 10% involvement would probably call for a draft, and we'd all have to cut back on our shopping. This would be hard to sell to either the left or the right. To sell it to both sides, well I don't see either the inclination, or the ability.
Agreed. But this comes from the base fact that to compare this war to WW2 is intellectually dishonest. Our enemy and the neccisity for our involvement in ww2 was obvious. We were attacked by a county, not a radical religious group. The choices for FDR were easier than those for Bush and the war was more popular. This war wasn't started by us (though going into Iraq was a mistake) but due to the course Bush has taken this war is severly unpopular. This war is essentially our most unique conflict since the civil war, though it is not similar to that war either.
The course Bush has taken? What specifically does the current crop of GOP candidates offer that is any different from the Bush/Republican surge?
Not much of a difference really but while we can debate the methods taken we must also look at the alternative. As I've said I didn't agree with the Iraq invasion and I'd like to see the soldiers come home now but one cannot say that Bush hasn't acheived results. Quite simply, we haven't suffered a second large scale attack since 9/11. As a conservative I disagree with many of W's policies that are decidedly not con. However, when he decided to go into Iraq the rules of engagement imposed on our troops have left them fighting a battle with a hadicap. In hindsight Iraq was a horrible decision but overall the "war on terror" has been a succes in that we haven't been hit again.
Once again you baselessly assert that the problem is we just arent killing enough innocent Iraqis. I dont think thats the problem
In hindsight Iraq was a horrible decision but overall the "war on terror" has been a succes in that we haven't been hit again.
I hit the post button before I finished replying.
"In hindsight Iraq was a horrible decision but overall the "war on terror" has been a succes in that we haven't been hit again."
You make it seem as though attacks on America were a common occurrence before 9/11. George Bush was asleep at the switch before 9/11 and he finally woke up after the attack.
And how has the "war on terror" been a success if more people want to attack us? The goal should be to lessen the amount of people who want to attack us."In hindsight Iraq was a horrible decision but overall the 'war on terror' has been a success in that we haven't been hit again." This rather specious argumentation. The number terrorist attacks worldwide has risen sharply since 9/11 although there have been no attacks on U.S. soil. To argue that Bush has made the U.S. safer is stretching. One might argue that Al Qaeda accomplished what it set out to do. In actual security (setting aside the constant fear mongering), Bush has done little beyond the very absolute minimum--so far, he has not even complied with the 9/11 Commission recommendations. What we now know (and some of us have long known) is that the Bush regime has invoked 9/11 to embark on an illegal, ill-advised, and generally disastrous war. He did this at the expense of hunting down the organization behind the attack on our nation, at the expense of international good-will and cooperation, at the expense of our own Constitution and international law, at the expense of the lives of our soldiers and the lives of innocent Iraqis, and at the expense of our national treasury. Most important, arguing about the success or failure of this war simply distracts us from the real issue: the war is illegal (declared illegal by the U.N.) and based on lies. Bush and his neo-con facilitators saw 9/11 not as a national tragedy but as a political opportunity.
Ok we know Beck is an idiot and who would expect anything better from his rightwing guests but to MISQUOTE Shakespear is inexcusable. Cry havoc and let SLIP the dogs of war.
You expect BECK... Glenn Beck... to get Shakespeare right? Cmon Solon, we disagree on virtually everything, but don't go thinking that Beck has even the faintest grasp on theatre. ;-)
Well that may be true but it was Becks guest that butchered the Julius Ceaser quote
"Can you win with this PC culture?"
That reminded me of a recent Daily Show report by Samantha Bee, "Americans Among Us":
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/player.jhtml?ml_video=88859&ml_collection=&ml_gateway=&ml_gateway_id=&ml_comedian=&ml_runtime=&ml_context=show&ml_origin_url=%2Fshows%2Fthe_daily_show%2Fvideos%2Fsamantha_bee%2Findex.jhtml&ml_playlist=&lnk=&is_large=true
"So let's put our own strongman in there like we did with the shah, and let's -- let's make it work."
Oh yeah, that worked out real well didn't it? The Islamic theocracy in place today in Iran is a direct result of our attempts to prop up the Shah. Let's just keep making the same mistake over and over again, it's bound to work eventually.
"...you can't give people democracy. They have to earn it."
When was the US appointed the authority to grant people democracy. (once they have earned it, of course)