ToucanSam Report This Comment Date: November 14, 2005 10:02PM
Very touching link. The first part was WWII, from a time that made me such an
American Patriot. The latter part, the middle east, which has done just the
oppsite. Like Vietnam. I'm not a damn tree hugger, but, why excatly is the US
involved in the middle eastern affairs? Probably not for any reason the media
has told you.
Another thing, I've seen some unedited, uncensored video of the US going ons
over there and it's not what is on the TV and it's not exactly by the
"rules". Anyway.....
[
www.reopen911.org]
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 14, 2005 11:26PM
i know were they are...
in Washington DC
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 15, 2005 05:13AM
we are there to keep the fanatics from taking over the majority of the worlds
oil supply and creating total havoc on the world population. just think what
would happen if one of these fanatical regimes had control of the supply. you
think prices are bad now. it could cause a world economy depression.
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 15, 2005 06:17AM
the ones in control now are easily regulated cause they only care about $.
TruthfromGeorgia Report This Comment Date: November 15, 2005 03:51PM
I think you hit it dead on the head Fossil -- and that is what is so
frightening (not that you got it right, but rather the situation you describe).
(A) We need to keep the fanatics from taking over. (
the ones in control throughout most of the
middle-east now are relatively manageable because they are rational and do care
about money. The problem is that thinking past (A) and (
, one gets to: (C) The fanatics are not manageable
because they are not rational and do not respond to ordinary economic and
political pressure -- they don't give a f*^k because they see their calling as
otherworldly; and (D) by deposing one of the previous gready but manageable
leaders (Saddam) we (the US) have opened the door to fanatics taking over a
country in which they had no real presence before (because they were brutally
repressed -- not that we should complain).
We have, by our actions, created exactly the situation that Digger has rightly
pointed out that we need to avoid. That is why at the moment we cannot pull out
of Iraq. As much as I hate it, the truth is that it would be worse to cut and
run because then we assure the world of the worst possible result. We broke it,
now we have the responsibility. A la Colin Powell's WalMart principle.
I am afraid, however, that cut and run is exactly what Bush will do in 2006:
Declare victory and begin the draw-down process in time for the November 2006
national elections. You can see Blair already going down that route.
The problem as I see it is that Bush & Co radically misread the situation
and now have no clue how to deal with it -- quite frankly, nobody does. But I
also do not trust Bush to actually care enough about the US and the world make a
difficult decision and stick with it. He has, in the past, chosen his political
party and its donors over the good of the country multiple times.
In my mind, we cannot aford to lose Iraq, and that is why we need someone other
than the present administration running the damn show over there. It is kind of
like an ill-advised take-over in the corporate world. What would the
shareholders do? (1) Give the CEO who decided on the venture a couple of years
to make it work; (2) fire his ass if he cannot show value; and (3) bring in
somebody new to fix the mess. That is what this country needs to do.
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 15, 2005 04:33PM
there's 3 more years to prove that wrong. bush will prove all the doubters
wrong, just wait and watch. tony Blair just doesn't want to get hit. he will
play a more quiet role from the rear, but he will not falter either. there will
be an American presence in Iraq for a LOOOOONG time. just like every other
confrontation in the past. it's the way of people who care enough to expend all
kinds of effort to squash discrimination and exploitation in the world. someone
has to deal with these problems, we are the only country,besides the u.k., that
has the conviction to dive right in despite what the pussies of the world would
want to happen. " oh, it's so mean, we just don't think that's the right
way, waaaahhhhh" fucking pussies! if your so smart then what is the right
way? no one seems to have a answer. so while they're waffling, the terrorists
are regrouping and planning future attacks. the way it is now they can't
recruit, plan or much else very effectively. and it will only get harder for
them, cause the rope is tightening up and were going to drop the platform
eventually!
Truth_from_Georgia Report This Comment Date: November 15, 2005 10:35PM
Actually, I disagree. The way it is now makes it easier for them to recruit.
(1) They have a great motivator -- "look what the evil Americans are doing
to our fellow Muslims, and in infidels control the holy cities of Najaf and
Karbala nonetheless." (2) We have our military and logistics so tied down
to Iraq, that we cannot spend half the time and energy that we should in other
areas -- a truly global war on terror should include us seeking out terror
whereever it is. Right now we are just trying to figure out how to staff the
next troop rotation. (3) the terrorists have replaced the aging "Soviet
Afghanistan" trained terrorists with a new generation of "American
Iraq" trained terrorists -- al Queda-type networks and interested
individuals are coming from all over to Iraq now and spending 6 months to 2
years fighting us there. Sure, we may knock out a good number, maybe even more
than half of those that come, but some are sure to slip out again and now we
have the next batch of leaders, safely home again in Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia,
Mali, Pakistan, wherever.
I agree that the US needs to take the role in weeding out terrorists, but we
need to be smarter about it than we have so far been.
Sorry, on the whole, this war in Iraq was not necessary, and it is making us
weaker and the terrorists stronger. That is not just my opinion, read what
various intellegence and political heavyweights have to say (such as the time a
year ago that the British embassador called George Bush "the greatest
recruiting sergeant Al Queda could ever have."
Not good strategy, not good execution. I hope, however, that you are right
about the next 3 years Digger. And I am not saying we are out by then, because
we will not be, I am saying that I expect that by September, 2006, there will be
an announcement that we are reducing troop strength by half -- now if that is
suddenly reversed on November 15, 2006 (the day after the election), I might not
be surprised, but I do expect that come 2008 we will be down to less than 50,000
in Iraq regardless of how well things are going there or not going there.
Again, I hope that I am wrong, but I think you have much more faith in this guy
than I.
Truth_from_Georgia Report This Comment Date: November 15, 2005 10:39PM
British embassador to Italy that is: [
msnbc.msn.com]
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 16, 2005 12:54AM
Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we? Was it or was it not started by
Islamic people who brought it to our shores on September 11, 2001? Were people
from all over the world, mostly Americans, not brutally murdered that day, in
downtown Manhattan, across the Potomac from our nation's capitol and in a field
in Pennsylvania?
Did nearly three thousand men, women and children die a horrible, burning or
crushing death that day, or didn't they?
And I'm supposed to care that a copy of the Koran was "desecrated"
when an overworked American soldier kicked it or got it wet? Well, I don't. I
don't care at all.
I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for
incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11.
I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the Middle East start caring
about the Holy Bible, the mere possession of which is a crime in Saudi
Arabia.
I'll care when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi tells the world he is sorry for hacking off
Nick Berg's head while Berg screamed through his gurgling and slashed
throat.
I'll care when the cowardly so-called "insurgents" in Iraq come out
and fight like men instead of disrespecting their own religion by hiding in
mosques.
I'll care when the mindless zealots who blow themselves up in search of nirvana
care about the innocent children within range of their suicide bombs.
I'll care when the American media stops pretending that their First Amendment
liberties are somehow derived from international law instead of the United
States Constitution's Bill of Rights.
In the meantime, when I hear a story about a brave marine roughing up an Iraqi
terrorist to obtain information, know this: I don't care!
When I see a fuzzy photo of a pile of naked Iraqi prisoners who have been
humiliated in what amounts to a college hazing incident, rest assured that I
don't care!
When I see a wounded terrorist get shot in the head when he is told not to move
because he might be booby-trapped, you can take it to the bank that I don't
care.
When I hear that a prisoner, who was issued a Koran and a prayer mat, and fed
"special" food that is paid for by my tax dollars, is complaining that
his holy book is being "mishandled," you can absolutely believe in
your heart of hearts that I don't care!
Truth_from_Georgia Report This Comment Date: November 16, 2005 03:47AM
Agreed on at least some of what you say. But when billions of Muslims
increasingly blame the US and the West for their shitty lives and the fact that
they, who believe themselves the chosen and true worshipers of God, are
demonstratively behind the rest of the world, then I do care -- and so should
you.
There is a right way to fight this war and there is Bush's way. They are not
the same.
I understand that your position is basically the same as Bush's -- "Bring
'em on," but you are not in Iraq. I understand that your position is that
the US does not need friends in this world, but the past few years have proven
that EVERYBODY needs friends some time (see, e.g., North Korea).
It is this simplistic view of the world -- that what goes on here will not have
consequences 20 years down the road -- that we can simply kick ass on everyone
who opposes us, that is going to get us in real trouble. The rest of the world
significantly outnumbers us, and we cannot shut our borders forever.
Yes, a fanatic cannot be reasoned with and is better killed, but one should try
to avoid creating 10 more in his place -- that is what we are doing now.
Do I know how to run this thing? Hell no. But Bush has provent that he sure
doesn't either -- and you, 238240, are way out in left field.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 16, 2005 07:01AM
What's with these fucking towers that people keep posting? Are they some sort
of 'historical' skyscraper or something? Jesus, how boring.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 16, 2005 09:13AM
I would prefer Right field..
Truth_from_Georgia Report This Comment Date: November 16, 2005 02:44PM
Good one.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 16, 2005 07:24PM
I won't rest until every fucking muslim gets his just deserts and blown to
fucking pieces. Filthy fucking scum i hate the bastards and always will. We hate
them they hate us and thats they it will always be. Blair can shove his
multicultural Britain up his fucking arse
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 16, 2005 11:59PM
I won't rest until a bit later tonight, when I get tired and go to bed.
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 17, 2005 03:58AM
these people are not muslims, but a bastard child of said religion
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 18, 2005 01:43AM
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat
Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use
them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all
those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow".
William J. Clinton
HE DID FAIL TO RESPOND AND IT TOOK BUSH TO TAKE SADDAM OUT.
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 20, 2005 01:00AM
whether people like it or not, it was the right thing to do.
aDCBeast Report This Comment Date: April 12, 2006 09:47AM
What does Saddam have to do with 9/11 ? Oh .. I forgot. nothing.
