What comes after the retreat

[DesertFox]

I was rewriting history, while walking along some cold lakeshore the other day. My thought was: if Churchill had only come to power in 1937, Chamberlain would have been installed to replace him in 1940.

Had Churchill been in power, and refused to sign Munich, he would have been blamed for the outbreak of war.

I can just hear the prattle in an English pub, circa 1950. "He pushed Hitler to it! Had it not been for Churchill, Hitler would have been satisfied with the Sudetenland, and England would never have had to surrender. Everything was Churchill's fault!"

Today, everything is Bush's fault.

More (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/12/talk_the_walk.html)

[Bluemoon_Rising]

He lands it! I had this very same discussion with family members, a discussion which included our family's one remaining Democratic hold out . . . my moronic aunt. That's my fear. That in order to get at victory we are going to have to take an extra long way around the park precisely because Churchill came before Chamberlain in this instance and things have gotten tough -- too tough for the sort of wussies we seem to be producing here in America anymore.

[Beowulf]

I prefer George Patton's words:

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. That's a bunch of horse dung. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his."

In short, what Democrats don't see is that these Islamic fundamentalists long ago declared war on America and that they want the Democrats, along with every other American, dead. That's where the above statement comes in. Kill them first! But, since Democrats want surrender, retreat and finally, giving away America, they have sealed all of our fates.