This Is Not A Democracy, It's A Republic........
Maybe the threat of a pullout and the thought of facing all that violence with out the Americans is nessasary to bring the Iraqiis together,if at the same time we let the world know we`re not far away and can come back faster and harder than the last time,maybe we leave enough troops to guard the borders and fight al queida in Al anbar, we will never know unless we try.I think we would see in a short time if the Iraqiis are willing to stop fighting among themselves and unite in order to keep our protection and our finances,at that time strategies could change.If signs of real progress are being seen,we could then send in those needed to rebuild.~`If they still show no signs of willingness to die for the very same reason our troops are dying ~freedom~ then any futher efforts by us will be fruitless.Personally, I would prefer to find out how determinded they are to be free, before Iran gets the bomb.Then maybe we can be sure they will be an ally when or if we go into Iran
Obama is the answer... all terror attacks will be dealt a major reply by him... . NO RESPONSE!
Carol I was trying to be nice to you but you make it hard
You have got to be the most delusional individual I have read this week,you even beat out lesturd.
you are void of any knowledge of history or Islam for that matter,pick up a book and read,before the last of your 16 braincells are lost....you are CLUELESS
Carol ... if the media would present an accurate picture of Iraq for once, you'd find that yes, the Iraqi people want us to leave ... but not now. They'd like nothing more than to stand on their own but they've been cowed and intimidated by the brutality of their so-called "brother" muslims. They know the only thing standing between them and death are the combined US and Iraqi forces. Uplifting and positive news is now starting to flow from Iraq. Unless you get your news from other than the MSM, you'll never see it. The surge is working, Iraqi's are finally beginning to understand. We must see this through.
For those who like polls......
* According to a recent USA Today/Gallup poll, 61% of Americans oppose “denying the funding needed to send any additional U.S. troops to Iraq,” and opposition is up from 58% in February. (3/23-25, 2007).
* A Bloomberg poll reveals 61% of Americans believe withholding funding for the war is a bad idea, while only 28% believe it is a good idea (3/3-11, 2007).
* A recent Public Opinion Strategies (POS) poll found that 56% of registered voters favor fully funding the war in Iraq, with more voters strongly favoring funding (40%) than totally opposing it (38%); (3/25-27, 2007).
* POS found also that a majority of voters (54%) oppose the Democrats imposing a reduction in troops below the level military commanders requested (3/25-27, 2007).
* A separate POS poll finds 57% of voters support staying in Iraq until the job is finished and “the Iraqi government can maintain control and provide security for its people.” And 59% of voters say pulling out of Iraq immediately would do more to harm America’s reputation in the world than staying until order is restored (35%); (2/5-7, 2007).
* A Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll show 69% of American voters trust military commanders more than members of Congress (18%) to decide when United States troops should leave Iraq. This includes 52% of Democrats, 69% of Independents and 88% of Republicans (3/27-28, 2007).
* According to a recent Pew Research survey, only 17% of Americans want an immediate withdrawal of troops (4/18-22, 2007). That same poll found a plurality of adults (45%) believe a terrorist attack against the United States is more likely if we withdraw our troops from Iraq while the “country remains unstable”
* Should a date for withdrawal be set, 70% of American believe it is likely that “insurgents will increase their attacks in Iraq” starting on that day. This is supported by 85% of Republicans, 71% of Independents and 60% of Democrats. (FOX News/Opinion Dynamics, 4/17-18, 2007).
* An LA Times/Bloomberg polls reveals that 50% of Americans say setting a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq “hurts” the troops, while only 27% believe it “helps” the troops (4/5-9, 2007).
darwin you are going to make the libtards heads explode with all these facts at one time......this could get messy
Hellpig You are void of knowledge, period.
Darwin I get my imformation from Cspan 1-2and3 and Cspan.com I prefer to hear what is being said on the house and senate floor and in the committee hearings instead of letting someone tell me what they want me to hear and think.
You should check it out.Watch your government at work, all on film.I think you might enjoy it.
Great carol, C-SPAN ... that explains alot.
I get mine from people on the ground in Iraq and Iraqi's themselves ... Which is better? Only John Edwards hair dresser knows for sure.
Then Carol you clearly have a comprehension problem
This the (left) reminds me of pre WWII when people refused to see hitler for who he was and said as long as it don't bother us well leave it alone....
we all,well most of us know how that turned out
cspan 3 really? never heard of it....
also pelosi blocked tv coverage when they took over,so exactly what are you watching? the grandstanding defeatist reid?
Washington Journal Entire Program (04/27/2007)30 minutes into show he takes calls from moms and dads of troops these are the polls I use.
House Hearing on Accuracy of Battlefield Information (4/24/2007)
This one long but unbelievable.No spin on Cspan.
Try these and get hooked on the truth.
Carol:link us or be gone with your rhetoric
provide proof to your comments,otherwise your posts are meaningless
like this
C-SPAN: WASHINGTON JOURNAL - ENTIRE PROGRAMAsk Washington Journal guests a question Call-In Numbers Support Republicans: (202) 737-0001 Support Democrats: (202) 737-0002 Support Independents: ...
www.c-span.org/videoarchives.asp?
CatCodePairs=Series,WJE - 63k - Apr 27, 2007 -
you failed to mention that there are call lines for dems repubs and indy's
just like a libtard cherry picking the news,yeah you are a no spin zone all right...LMAO
NEXT!!!!!!
Another thing Carol WTF do parents comments have to do with anything?
The children of these parents VOLUNTEERED for the military so obviously their loyalty lies therein
Sounds like these parents are having a hard time letting go,their opinion is irrelevent.
I'm with Darwin I'll listen to the boots on the ground before some sniveling parent like sheehag
I live near two military bases (army/af) and I keep hearing the same thing. The MSM isn't reporting fairly. Shocking isn't it?
I'd lay off the MSM/cspan and talk with people who actually have family & friends over there.
Here's the drill: -
Pakistan is fucked.
General Musharrif barely has a grip. The gaff is "unofficially" being run by extremists. There are parts of the country that are no go to westerners as well as anyone from the Pakistani government.
Hope ya'll ain't relying too much on this allied country.
Death to Pakistan.
Oh My!!
Our presence in Iraq must have lead to the Americans being held hostage in Iran for 444 days back in 1979 too.
What lunacy.
Jenn, I dont think the Liberal Loones even remember how many times we were attacked wayyyyyy before 9-11 ever happened.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/61.../uk/
6195914.stm
You gotta love it. 5 terrorists get convicted of a bomb plot and people here complaining about "foreign policy" as the reason!
No, the reason is these fuctards wanted to murder infidels at the shopping center- simple as that.
now that they've been convicted- one way ticket to gitmo please. Or better yet, a simple pistol shot in the back of the head would do.
you're making a very liberal point. we shouldn't have invaded iraq anymore than we should invade france. let muslims kill each other not us. and thank god we're geographically seperated from people. I'm sure the buddhists in thailand who have to deal with the muslims in the south would agree. don't trouble trouble.
lester said: "let muslims kill each other not us".
Earth to Lester. If they just left it at that, they would be no problem.
You must be suffering from amnesia- 9/11 happened before we went into Iraq.
we were in iraq before 9/11. we were patrolling the no fly zone and we had sanctions on iraq. the effects of which were felt by the population, not saddam. and we had troops in saudi arabia even though we knew the people were against it. and we were supporting egypt and saudi arabia. and israel. we were very much in Iraq and the middle east long before 9/11.
yeah lester, and then there were the crusades- so I'll take the hit for that as well.
Hey, Jenn, are we in Thailand too? Apparently, we are because it is so bad over there that Thailand's government is preparing to deal with a civil war between the Muslims and the Buddhist for God's sake. Buddhist are some of the most peaceful peopel on the planet, yet they are arming themselve by the thousand and forming militias.
Why? Because over 2000 of them have been slain at the hands of al-Qaeda and other terrorist Islamic groups, simply for being Buddhist. The violence is not limited to just them however, many Muslims who were thought to be assisting the government are also finding their heads missing in Thailand.
When you have Buddhist running to grab their guns you have a SERIOUS problem. I guess we should pull out of Thailand too.
concerned citizen- but the thailand muslims aren't after us. no one is saying muslims aren't nutso. but thailand has a problem where the southern thalianders are more burmese than thailand-y. religion is a part of it but not total.
also, here's something I just wrote
There has been some speculation about Prince Harry, who isn't a prince of anything in reality, going off to patrol southern iraq . Some think he will be a target for terrorists, needlessly putting the rest of his unit at risk. some like the idea of him going and getting killed or kidnapped. the insurgents have apparently claimed they will do something like this.
This is not a sanctamonius post about class and the military. When I say EVERY soldier is prince harry I simply mean
1. They are all targets for insurgents
2. they are all likely to be used in insurgent propaganda, either via video tape/ upload to the net or simply being another in the number of dead.
I think the added precaution that will no doubt be taken to protect his royal highness will compensate for the added risk of his being a political target.
Nic burg wasn't a celebrity. he became a political figure in his kidnapping and death simply by the virtue of his being american.
I think the point Jenn was trying to make is that this is not just a war because we are there. This is a war of radical Islam against anything not Islam. Whether it is in Iraq, Israel, Pakistan, Spain, England, Thailand, the Phillipenes or on our very own soil.
We are not 'causing' this because we are in Iraq. It is happenening in many place where we have no forces or influence of any kind, against many other cultures besides our own.
It will continue to happen if we leave and may even increase if we are seen as defeated in Iraq, because it will embolden them to take further actions. Osam bin Laden himself said that our defeat in Mogadishu and our subsequent withdrawal taught him that America did not have the will to fight. Those our the words of our mortal enemy and no one elses saying that our unwillingness to fight him only made him grow more bold.
but leaving somalia saved alot of american lives that wuold have been wasted in a fruitless effort to referee a civil war.
the best move would have been to not go in in the first place
Well since we went on a humanitarian aid mission at the request of the UN and since Clinton sent the military in to remove Adid after he slaughtered 20 Pakistani Peacekeepers, I do not have a proble with us going there.
Did it really save American lives?
Osama bin Laden has stated that his decision to declare his fatwa on us was based upon his observations of our conduct in Somolia. This led to the bombings of several US embassies, the USS Cole bombing and eventually the attacks on 9/11.
Based on those statements, you could easily ask, did our premature withdrawal of American involvement in Somalia after we took a few casualties save American lives or cost them?
well, firstly we weren't fighting al queda in somali we were fighting war lords. if yuo look at the record of the debate in the senate or the newspapers, no one said bin laden at any point. and we were there for a full six months after we voted ourselves out (mainly by republican votes btw)
and don't fall for bin ladens rhetoric. they decided to go after the US to make use of the momentum they had from driving the soviets out of afghanistan ( note: they didn't follow the russians back to moscow) (chechnya is a different story)
al queda has attacked us for our presence in the middle east and would be doing so regardless of somalia.
hezbollah didn't attack us in beirut because they saw from vietnam that we would leave. they attacked us to get rid of us.
They are attacking us here ... they're slowly subverting our laws and demanding special rights and privileges. Explusion of all muslims, with certain exceptions is the only true answer to the danger we're heading towards.
I never said we were in Somalia to fight al Qaeda. I said they learned from that debacle that we did not have the stomach for casualties and lacked the will to fight.
You liberals are so willing to go talk to our enemies, yet when they speak plainly about their intentions and their purpose, you tell us not to fall for their rhetoric. Funny. You should know your enemy and study him. When he proclaims that this mistake you made is what allowed me to think I could attack you, then you do not make the same mistake again.
Ok, so by your logic. We sould close all embassies, withdraw to our own borders, tuck our heads between our legs and pray they leave us alone. Were were not 'in' Kenya when they struck our embassy. We were not 'in' Yemen when the Cole was ripped to shreds, other than to refuel. We were not 'in' the Middle East when those tower fell.
I will agree that this fatwa was partially inspired by our actions in the Middle East and the support of Israel, but if we give in to terrorism and end that support then they have truely won.
They attack us because they are commanded to. It is taught in the Qur'an. We are infidels and deserve death.
Qur’an 7:97-99, “What! Do the people of the towns then feel secure from Our punishment coming to them by night while they sleep? (9
What! Do the people of the towns feel secure from Our punishment coming to them in the morning while they play? (99) What! Do they then feel secure from Allah's plan? But none feels secure from Allah's plan except the people who shall perish.”
In World War II, Japan attacked us because they feared the power that the United States would bring to the war if we were to enter it. They assumed that by knocking out our ability to hold the Pacific, we would return to our shores, licking our wounds and not challenge them. They were sorely mistaken. They awoke a terrible might within the United States and set in motion their own eventual defeat. Had we cowered at that moment, had we withdrawn our forces so that we did not have to face a war, Europe would have been lost and the impact of that decisons would have changed the face of the world. The Jewish people would have been wiped out and most of Europe would still be under German control.
Instead, we rose and fought and utterly defeated our enemies. Now the country that attacked us call us a friend and millions are free from persecution and oppression at the hands of brutal regimes. All because America fought. This is no different.
first of all, I'm a libertarian not a liberal.
and again, al queda did not decide to strike us because we left somalia, nor should we stay somewhere because someone will deduce something about us if we do. we fight for our own vital intersts. there were none of these in somalia, beirut or bosnia.
your interpretation of ww2 is a bunch of nationalistic bs. really, we should have aided the spanish republicans in the 30's. but world war two was a bunch of huge governments battling for suprememcy and a bunch of avoidable statecraft that proved nothing.
if the only statment of bin ladens you've ever read in the one about somalia you don't know the man's philosphy or motivation.
make all the excuses you want for imperialism. we either leave the middle east or we will be driven out in a way we don't like. the writing is on the wall.
plus, it's a shithole we should leave by choice, whether we are wanted or not.
For starters I have read and studied many of the statements from bin Landen, Hamas, Hezbollah and others. I merely point out to you in the words of our own enemies that any weakness on our part will only serve to encourage them.
My interpretation of WWII is what? Oh my God. So why did Japan attack us then? What was the point? Do you deny that Europe would have been lost had it not been for our intervention?
We should have aided the Spanish in the 30's? Well for that matter we should have squashed Hitler like a bug in 1938 when he first started making aggressive overtures.
"world war two was a bunch of huge governments battling for suprememcy and a bunch of avoidable statecraft that proved nothing."
Uhm, no. World War II was a totalitarian regime rising up and dominating all of Europe while the outside world struggeled to defend itself. World War II was the slaughter of millions of innocent people for whom statecraft meant nothing. World War II could have been avoided by checking Hitler at his own border instead of trying to assuage and appease him. Remeber the famous line, "There will be peace in our time! Uh, did anybody see where Poland went. I swear it was just here."
I have read and studdied this enemy, I know that bin Laden's hatred for the United States stems from many sources, but was spurned by the reliance of Saudi Arabia on the United States for their defense and thier rejection of his offer of assistance and protection. He offered them 12,000 armed men in defense of Saudi Arabia during the 1991 Gulf War. He was rejected and then demanded that all non-Muslim military bases be removed from Saudi soil.
Finally, he declared his fatwa against the United States:
"the ruling to kill the Americans and their allies civilians and military - is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque (in Jerusalem) and the holy mosque (in Makka) from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty Allah, 'and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together, and fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah.'"
"I will explain to you the reasons behind these events, and I will tell you the truth about the moments when this decision was taken, so that you can reflect on it. God knows that the plan of striking the towers had not occurred to us, but the idea came to me when things went just too far with the American-Israeli alliance's oppression and atrocities against our people in Palestine and Lebanon."
So because we responded to the request of Saudi Arabia to protect it and liberated Kuwait and because we support the right of the nation of Israel to exist, he has struck out at us.
So should we surrender Israel to the wolves?
Should not respond when we are asked to help defend others against aggression and invasion by a dictatorial regime?
Again, should we just cower inside our own borders and hope they start to like us?
Wilsonianism at its finest.
the only way we will be "cowering" is if we listen to you. a fool and their money are soon parted. you're all wrapped up in this nationalistic fervor but that doesn't give you a right to my tax dollars.
"I merely point out to you in the words of our own enemies that any weakness on our part will only serve to encourage them."
good. i hope we encourage them to kick us out ofd the middle east. it's a shithole. israel fended for itself just fine 1948-1967. we aren't beholden to them. I've never heard of a country that needs another country for it to survive. not in the first world.
You can't spend your way out of terrorism. the solution is cheap but politically difficult. you learned the wrong lesson on 9/11. we didn't learn that we had cut ourself off from the world, we learned that we can't go poking our nose into the middle easts business and not get something for it in return from the people.
yuo brought up the perfect example: saudi arabia. it wasn't only bin laden who wanted us off their soil. it was the PEOPLE. the government is unelected. same as pakistan, egypt , jordan, and most of our other so called "allies". they don't represent the people. we knew full well the saudi population didn't want us there.
the leaders of the middle east are a bunch of tyrants. the people aren't much better by and large but hey have the right to self determination. they've chosen democracy in the past with attaturk and mossadeugh.
and you aren't addressing the root causes of world war two. big government was in: FDR, Hitler, stalin. the world was going thruogh a very bad phase mainly as a result of world war one and the depression. and if we hadn't intervened at operation barbossa (and saved europe for stalin! yay!) i imagine the russian and germans would have battled it out. they'd probably still be there. obviously we could have a much larger discussion about that preventable war.
fuck wilson, fuck fdr, fuck lincoln.
end the welfare / warfare state!
freedom! liberty! littlehouse on the prairie! aaaaaaa!!
You know lester I do agree with you that our freedoms and liberties are disappearing ... but it's been happening for a long time. On the other hand, Islamic fascism must be destroyed wherever it is ... including the United States.
Darwin,
The $64,000 is how we do it. Staying the course doesn't seem like a good option. Then again, there may be no good options here.
So you would not have had us liberate Kuwait and defend Saudi Arabia from Iraq?
You would also have us withdraw completely, support and otherwise from the Middle East?
So, when a nation, such as Saudi Arabia, is facing invasion by a hostile force, such as Iraq, and they ask for our assistance in defending thier country, we should do what? Turn our back on them and deny assistance?
Do you think that our intrests were not served by preserving the Saudi nation and liberating Kuwait?
Whenever we do something it will enevitably piss off one party or another. We cannot make everyone happy. We cannot turn our backs on our allies due to threat of force. Israel is an ally. To an extend, so is Saudi Arabi, albeit more of a fair weather friend than ally. You said earlier that we should not stay somewhere because someone might feel that our leaving means that they can attack us. By that same logic then we should not leave somewhere and abandon our allies because someone might think that give them cause to attack us. We should do so based on our own intrests.
The lesson we learned from 9/11 was that when anyone declares war on the United States of America, be it a nation or an organization, we should hunt them down and end it immediately instead of ignore them until they bring the war to our shores. If you did not learn that lesson then there is nothing I can do for you.
Oh, and about Hitler and Stalin battling it out. It is widely accepted by historical scholars that the ONLY reason that Germany was not successful in Europe is that it began fighting a war on opposing fronts. Had we not shown up to bolster England and liberate France, Hitler could have focused his might on Russia and crushed Stalin.
In hindsight we probably should have let Saudi Arabia be overrun. At least fight their own battles. Maybe it would have dealt a death blow to the Saudi monarchy. As it stands now, Saudi Arabias second major export to the US is Wahhabism, a nasty, virulent form of islam. They're flooding the US with cash building mosques, schools and teaching hatred of the west and the Jews.
Also with the gift of hindsight ... an interrupted oil flow would have put a boot in Congress' ass to drill our own vast oil reserves and stop our dependence on foreign oil. Stupid politicians.
darwin- if we had turned the saudis down, we would have had a war between al queda and saddam! al queda had offered to defend saudi arabia. whether they would have achieved it or not in besides the point. that would be killin two birds with NO stone in the grand manner.
concerned guy- well the kuwaitis were victims of their government who were drilling sideays into saddams territory because they knew their american slaves would come and save their ass. i admit that it is better for the kuwaitis that we came. but seriously, look at the can of worms it opened up. the US is not interventionist by nature. we did alot of stuff because of the cold war. but there's no cold war anymore
"The lesson we learned from 9/11 was that when anyone declares war on the United States of America, be it a nation or an organization, we should hunt them down and end it immediately instead of ignore them until they bring the war to our shores."
I agree. clinton AND bush both failed to get bin laden pre-9/11. I agree it should have been much more of a priority. but this is the US government we're talking about here. I mean FEMA, the corps of engineers, rummy. it's a beurocracy where qualified people are sometimes passed over for cronies. it's not just the state department or the department of education. it's every department. the government sucks. we are not at all capable of even doing a marginal job on the task of transforming the middl east. the DHS can't even make a working no fly list.
my solution is to cut back on international commitments and on the power government has domesticly. my opinion about islam and their governments is probebly about the same as yours. I'm a libertarian: socially liberal, fiscally consevative. most of the muslims i know are socially conservative and leftist in politics. I can't abide by that at all.
my solution is not one that involves our federal government because i don't believe they are capable. it's that simple.
seriously, as of 9/10 I had no problem with us supporting israel and the various dictators in the middle east. it made perfect sense. it provided stability and israel was the model for democracy. well, that's gone now. clearly the people of the middle east, invcluding the most dangerous ones, were not feeling the paradigm.
so nice to know you israel. sorry we can't have another 9/11.
Note lester everything I've said was with the benefit of hindsight. We simply must finish the job we're doing there now. I see no option of us pulling out unless Iraq is stabilized.
iraq was created by the british out of the wreckage of the ottoman empire. the kurds want no part of it and the shias and sunnis both want to run all of it. especially the sunnis.
we will probably all be in our graves before that place is stable.
and not only is OUR sucky government screwing up at every turn I heard a guy on the radio today who just got back from iraq who said the iraqi government is totally out ot lunch. they were talking about taking 2 months off for the summer and have accopmlished jack shit. they are paralyzed with fear. there's no leadership. his name was lawrence j korb
lester,
If you had any brains you'd be stupid. Also, you're either a multi-personality, a liar, or you really believe that people will disregard your previous posts in favor of your new found sympathy for Israel. You have consistently condemned Israel and their pre 9-11 policies so cut the crap about how you actually agreed with the US position of supporting them. In your own words you believe Israel is the root of all evil in the mid east and they should be wiped off the map.
Also, let Bin Laden defend Saudi Arabia? Are you fucking nuts? Do you REALLY believe Bin Laden's offer to help Saudi Arabia had even a glimmer of humanitarian intent? It was about power you schmuck and a desire to expand his network so that he may better attack US interests.
The Kuwatis weren't victims of their government, albeit corrupt, they were victims of a madman bent on taking over all the oil resources in the middle east. Quit reading redacted copies of the history of the world you buy online through shiachat. We didn't open that can of worms.
Your comment about hezbollah attacking us in Lebanon because they knew we would leave is void of the real motivation behing the attack. We were attacked because we stood in the way of the Islamification of Lebanon. We were attacked because of our support for Israel. We were attacked because we support democracies. Has a familiar ring to it, doesn't it? Do we again let history repeat itself?
If we never went into Iraq, Israel would still be attacked. If we leave Iraq, Israel will still be attacked. If we leave Iraq, we'll still be attacked. Iraq is the product of the Islamic revolution of 79, a war THEY started with us when they kidnapped our citizens at our embassy in Tehran. Iraq is the product of the marine barracks bombing. Iraq is a product of the embassy bombings in Africa. Iraq is a product of the USS Cole bombing. Iraq is a product of Saddam's refusal to abide by the terms of the armistice after GW1.
The democratic "PLAN" to end the war will do nothing but lenghten it. It will add new chapters of continued attacks until we once again are attacked on a 9-11 type scale, or worse.
Concerned,
While it may be partially true that Japan feared the power the US may bring to the war, that is NOT the reason they attacked us. That would fly in the face of that reasoning. It is true that they intended to cripple our ability to defend the Pacific, but they attacked because the US oil embargo against Japan would cripple THEIR ability to prosecute THEIR expansionist policies.
The democratic "PLAN" to end the war will do nothing but lenghten it. It will add new chapters of continued attacks until we once again are attacked on a 9-11 type scale, or worse.
And staying behind won't lead to the same sort of results? You may as well shake a Magic 8 ball (and me too for that matter) because there's no way to logically arrive at that conclusion. More often than not, I am finding consequentialist arguments very unpersuasive.
Do you really think our success there, to whatever extent we have it or had it, will deter people who will blow themselves up to kill as many of us as possible? Totalaitarian fanatics will not be deterred.
It is why we have to find them whereever they are and deal with them, not sit here and make consequentialist arguments or half-baked moral justifications. We're beyond that now.
Iraq is the product of the Islamic revolution of 79, a war THEY started with us when they kidnapped our citizens at our embassy in Tehran. Iraq is the product of the marine barracks bombing. Iraq is a product of the embassy bombings in Africa. Iraq is a product of the USS Cole bombing. Iraq is a product of Saddam's refusal to abide by the terms of the armistice after GW1.
Don't you mean Iran? I always figured Iraq to be about launching democracy in the Middle East and watching repressive regimes fall under the weight of freedom, or some such shit that apologists for the Bush Doctrine tried to blow up my ass. Central planning is for communists.
Billy, what do you think our endgame is? Do you think we really can help them establish a democratic form of government?
If we win, what exactly are we winning at this point? I'd like your thoughts.
Don Geek,
The fact that you're finding consequentialist arguements unpersuasive is not surprising. Many people are resigning themselves to that mindset. The question you have to ask yourself is what were your thoughts on those arguements on 9/12/2001? Has the enemy since been neutralized? Do we know have nothing to fear? Some argue that they have in fact been emboldened and strengthened. I'd suggest that their perceived strengthening is more a product of diluted resolve on our part.
As for whether or not "I meant Iran", No. After re reading my post I can understand where you may have drawn that conclusion. Sorry for the lack of clarity. What I said, or what I meant to convey was that Iraq is a product of the Islamic revolution of 79. My inference to the war "THEY" started was to the Islamists. We can go back and forth on who threw the last punch but that is ignoring the 800 lb. gorilla in the room, radical Islam. I find myself less and less comfortable with having to qualify the problem by prefacing Islam with radical as it seems to be getting harder and harder to make a distinction between the two.
What is my endgame? What do we win? Well Geek, the first one is a tough one because MY endgame is unpalatable to most at this point. First, we'd have to fight this war under the banner and phrase that became so common following the 9/11 attacks, "United we stand". We're not. That is why divided we fall. We have not brought the full might of this country to bear on our enemies out fear of alienating the muslim world. The time limit for fear of that happening expired on 9/11 in my book. People in this country are more interested in howa new Hummer would look in their driveway than how a war worn Hummer would look in a victory parade down 5th Avenue. I can tell you that doing nothing is NOT an end game, unless you have a different version of the end of the game that I do. Which brings me to "What do we win". How about a return to normalcy. How about being able to live in a country where we don't have to scrape the charred splatered bodies off the streets of our cities. How about showing the world that they can send their kids to school without fear of having to go to the morgue to identify their mangled bodies after a car bomb explosion. There are far more good people in this world than bad. Too many have the spine of a paramecium though. If we stand up together against evil we will win. If we cower in fear or continue to play partisan games in the deadly arena we are in now, we surely will lose. What we will win Geek is what we can least afford to lose, our freedom and our morality.
For some points of clarification, the removal of Hussein from power and the establish ment of a Democracy in Iraq is not a Bush doctrine. It is actually a Clinton one. The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 made that the official policy of the US. Clinton chose not to use force before 9/11 happened. Bush chose to hasten the process with force after 9/11 changed the stakes.
Everyone thought Saddam was a threat before 9/11. Everyone thought he had a renewed weapons program and they were worried he would develop and use chemical or possibly even nuclear weapon. Before 9/11 I think people were more worried that he would use them on his own people again or on his neighbors. After 9/11, the biggest fear was that once he had them, he would give them to those who had hit. I think this is what stayed Clinton's hand when it came to full scale military force. He did not view him as an imminent threat and hoped that selected military stikes would convince him to comply with UN weapons inspectors. It did not and the stakes changed in September of 2001.
I agree that the situation in Iraq is as complicated and difficult as you could get. I also agree that the ultimate success or failure of operations in Iraq will depend heavily on the Iraqi government stepping up to the plate. This is why I have never opposed a timeline for the Iraqi government, but not the foolishness of a publicly announced timeline for the withdrawal of our troops. You NEVER telegraph your intentions to your enemies. Ever! Whether it is tactical information or strategic planning, you do not tell your enemy, "Hey guys, we are planning on leaving in about three months. So, uhm, you just behave and wait until we are gone, then you can pretty much do whatever you want."
We don't necessarily have an End Game, because we do not know what the end will look like. We did not have an end game in World War I or World War II until we could see that the end was in sight. I hate to say this but you cannot always plan things to the n-th degree. The problem is that our enemy will most likely not cooperate with our plans. We do need an overall strategic roadmap, but you cannot cripple your military leadership with arbitrary timelines and rules of engagement imposed by congressmen.
This should not be a partisan issue. If this were a Democratic President and a Republican Congress trying to hamstring our military, I would be just as outraged.
I will agree that our government seems currently incapable of solving even our most simple problems, from both sides of the aisle. The problem is this huge division along political lines has turned into a political game of gotcha. Our Congress is to busy waisting its time chasing issues of no relevance, passing wothless non-binding resolutions, investigating crimes that never occurred and fighting over political appointees, to focus on the real matters at hand. This occurred with a Republican congress and is occurring with a newly elected Democratic one. This is rediculous.
We have got to pull ourselves together or the division in this country will continue to make us weak and vulnerable to our enemies. I just do not see that happening in the current politcal atmosphere.
CC,
Well put.
Very well put.
I'm working on drafting a response. I'm swamped though.
billy- If you want to believe that fine. but you can't have my tax dollars to carry it out. if the only way we can survive is by perpetual war than I'd just as soon move.
and we didn't go to iraq to establish democracy. nor would that help us. if the entire middle east stopped being run by religious weirdos and was instead run by the people, israel would be gone instead of just in danger and the US would be driven out quickly and violently instead of slowly. all the 9/11 hijackers were people who thrived in democracy and understood it perfectly.
Johnny jihadi isn't going to work at starbucks in baghdad instead of being a terrorist.
"but not the foolishness of a publicly announced timeline for the withdrawal of our troops. You NEVER telegraph your intentions to your enemies."
are you a general? we told hitler e were going to defeat him, that's telegraphing it.
besides, we'll have to leave eventually one way or another. they can just as easily wait a decade till we leave as a month. they aren't going anywhere.
lester the waste of time,......."the 911 hijackers were people who thrived in democracy and understood it perfectly".......Is that why they voted with the lives of 3000 innocent people????? They had about as much of a grasp on democracy as you have on reality.
We don't promote perpetual war lester, but we are engaged in a perpetual defense of freedom, and YES, I CAN have your tax dollars to effect that, or you may REALLY want to consider moving because obviously, your understanding of this democracy is far from perfect.
billy- the point is they had been exposed to and thrived in democracy and they still hated americas foreign policy. there is no style of government that you could impose on the middle east that would make them accept US hegemony and israel. you could do ten regime changes and you won't find a leader the people feel represents them who also thinks the US supporting dictators and giving missiles to israel is okay. the person doesn't exist.
we are not at all engaged in a perpetual defense of freedom. we are in a perpetual defense or OUR freedom. if your war on terror involves my civil liberties or me being the target of terrorists or taking MY tax dollars than YOU are clearly the enemy of MY freedom.
lester, That's some pretty stiff kool aid you're drinking there fella. I never said impose any style of government on them. I say start the annihilation machine until I hear the word UNCLE in Arabic. Bring them to their prayer worn knees. Bring back the goddam crusades. Overwhelming force with NO pause until we have an unconditional surrender. The entire muslim world is at fault until which time as they rise up, renounce and convict their terrorist brothers. What would the outcome have been had we tried to 'root out' only Nazis in world war II. What if we had decided to give the civilian population of Japan a pass? Have the Islamists given civilians a pass ANYWHERE ? No, they MURDER them in the name of ALLAH. We continue to duck while they shoot at us from their mosques. We continue to play defense while they plot more attacks from within the mosques here in the US. Why should we respect a religion they don't? This war will NOT be won until the PEOPLE of the muslim world rise up and say ENOUGH. Until the people of the muslim world realize it is the terrorist scum that is responsible for this war. Imagine if tommorow, the Islamists handed over bin Laden and Zawahiri and said "Enough is Enough", we are laying down our suicide vests, let's live in peace. How quickly do you think this war would end? They are the terrorists that are trying to kill you. They are the terrorists that when one of their leaders emerges that respects Israel's right to exist, they assasinate them. (Sadat, Gemayel, Hariri) They are the enemy of freedom, your's and mine. They do not "thrive" in democracy, they despise it. Suicide is not a description of thriving. What civil liberties have you actually lost there lester? None. Who is really to blame for increased vigilance in this country since 911? No lester, you've got me all wrong. I'm not a fan of playing pansy politics hoping someday they may see the light. I want to bring this conflict to a screaching halt. The problem with polls is you're either satisfied with the way the war is going, or your not. You can count me in the NOT column. However, that doesn't mean I am for surrender or retreat as the pundits would like to interpret those polls. I am for a major escalation, not a pitance of a 'surge', and you know what lester, there are a whole lotta folks out there who feel just like me. We didn't fire the opening rounds here. We have the ability to crush our enemy and I pray to God we find the will to do it, with your tax dollars, before any more of our citizens are lost.
billy- "Overwhelming force with NO pause until we have an unconditional surrender."
from who?
you'd rather kill every muslim person than let them choose their own leaders instead of having us do it?
and they aren't against israel because israel is a democracy. they're against it because they feel the land is theirs, which it was for 18 centuries.
what you really need is a touch of cynicism. your a conservative. you know how annoying the federal government is. don't you think the people of the middle east could also conceivably be annoyed by it? not to mention out trashy culture, abortion, and whatnot. the western way of life is a horror show from the outside.
lester,
Your descriptive writing skills need some work. First 'thrived' and now 'horror' ? Hop on you tube and view the videos of the 911 attack if you're unsure of the proper application of the word 'horror'.
lester: "not to mention out trashy culture, abortion, and whatnot. the western way of life is a horror show from the outside."
We're a horror show? Then WTF do you call a 12 year old kid sawing some guys head off? Or stoning a woman to death while she's buried chest deep in the ground? Or hanging rape victims because they were raped? Or strapping bombs on your chest and blowing men, women and kids to bits? Then after all that ... claiming God tells them to do it. Just what are you drinking tonite?
Oh, and as to the question "from who?",....Iran would be a good start. Sure would save alot of time talking about their nuclear weapons (er, energy) program. We could launch from Iraq. Then, I'd have to say send an air mail package to our dear friends over in Pakistan. Aw heck lester, we could even drive there from Afghanistan. However, I'd be willing to bet that bin Laden and Zawahiri would arrive Fed Ex after the Pakistani's smell the barbeque of their neighbor to the west. Then Syria, it will make the campaign in Turkey that much easier. You do realize Turkey needs to rebuild it's infrastructure anyway and the next time we need to get in or out of Iraq from the North they just may be a little more accomodating, what's left of them. Why heck lester, think of the frequent fryer miles we'd be racking up. Besides, you know I've always wanted to visit the pyramids in Egypt. Those guys just don't know how to share antiquity with the world though. Maybe they need some motivation. Somewhere along the line they'd get the message we're serious, don't ya think?
Now, don't get me wrong lester. I'm not saying we should OCCUPY these countries, or even SUGGEST they install a puppet regime to the US. No, it'll be their flaming cinder. All theirs. After all lester, I'm not a barbarian. Just a simple 'turn over bin laden and c., say your sorry you give, and we're outta there. Oh, except for the oil. We're gonna need to have a Sunday come to meeting sitdown with the Saudis. They'll understand since the region will then be stabilized. Besides we can offer them Yemen.
if you take israel too it's a deal
Now that's the lester we know and hate. The one who'd sell out anyone just to get rid of the Jews. Good shiapet, good shiapet.
acs student loan servicing acs student loan servicing acs student loan servicing. gmac car loan rate gmac car loan rate gmac car loan rate.
canada consolidate loan student canada consolidate loan student canada consolidate loan student. buy cheap roulette wheels online buy cheap roulette wheels online buy cheap roulette wheels online.
Sorry for my ignorance. But what's a "leftard" ??
Why are you posting on a dead thread?
Liberals receive their support because, everyone wants the world to be a better place. Republicans feel this can be done through free-capitalism and ensuring higher classes while democrats ensure the lower classes and want socailism. I think it would be valid to offer the democrats their own country. divide the U.S. into two segments democratic/republican. Then al who want a strong government can go left, while others go right. This is the solution to make a working democracy.
Commenting by HaloScan
