Problem with the war

Part of me wishes for another attack on our soil, just to shut those mother f**kers up.

It's ridiculous.   I feel sorry that all of the soldiers have to listen to this GARBAGE.

I wouldn't vote for Hillary or Obama even if Borat was running for president.

[quote=FreeLunch]

It's ridiculous.   I feel sorry that all of the soldiers have to listen to this GARBAGE.

I wouldn't vote for Hillary or Obama even if Borat was running for president.

[/quote]

Obama is a muslim and Hillary is a muslim lover.

[quote=Amazon]1. That's irrelevant.
2. It's keep the soldiers there and keep political instability that harms both civilians and soldiers, or bring them back and admit it was a bad idea in the first place.
[/quote]

YOU ARE UNBELIEVABLY WRONG.

If we leave now, there will be the biggest genecide you've ever seen.  You know nothing about the war - all that you've seen is the media's representation. 

Bring them Back and admit it was a bad idea in the first place?  Is that the American way you phucking idiot?

"Well, bring 'em back.  The damn Commys think its mean.."  The majority of the political instability ARISES from the public outcrys of "this just isn't right."   -   the goal should be let's show these damn terrorist idiots that the U.S. isn't to be phucked around with.

We pull out now, that sets a damn presedence that'll never be forgotten.  You ARE an IDIOT.

[quote=Bobby Hull]Part of me wishes for another attack on our soil, just to shut those mother f**kers up. [/quote]
Couldn’t resist this one.

Man Hull, now you sound like the Democrat. While your at it go vandalize some HUMMERS with your Green Peace pals. Be careful what you wish for; you might actually have to grow a pair and pick up a weapon. Don’t ask don’t tell brotha.

My Guard Unit is deploying to Iraq early next year.In between missions I’ll be sure to post…

So, you can stay there. Then you’ve got political instability because you can’t force a democracy, you’ve got the debt growing ever larger, the death count growing ever larger, and you’ve also got an increasing amount of hatred from certain factions.

Alternatively, leave and let them work it out (It might be bloody, but it isn’t exactly calm there right now, is it?). This keeps the cost down and the soldier death count down.

I don’t care what you think the “American way” is; I’m Canadian anyways. All I can do is tell you that it is within America’s best interests to leave.

[quote=Amazon]So, you can stay there. Then you’ve got political instability because you can’t force a democracy, you’ve got the debt growing ever larger, the death count growing ever larger, and you’ve also got an increasing amount of hatred from certain factions.

Alternatively, leave and let them work it out (It might be bloody, but it isn’t exactly calm there right now, is it?). This keeps the cost down and the soldier death count down.

I don’t care what you think the “American way” is; I’m Canadian anyways. All I can do is tell you that it is within America’s best interests to leave.


[/quote]

yeah but pusses like Hull want another Vietnam b/c they’re not the ones that have to go fight in it. They say dumb things like “we wish there was another 9-11.” i’m sure the twin tower victim’s family are pulling for another attack too.

[quote=Amazon]So, you can stay there. Then you've got political instability because you can't force a democracy, you've got the debt growing ever larger, the death count growing ever larger, and you've also got an increasing amount of hatred from certain factions.

Alternatively, leave and let them work it out are you serious? (It might be bloody, but it isn't exactly calm there right now, is it?). This keeps the cost down and the soldier death count down.

I don't care what you think the "American way" is; I'm Canadian anyways. All I can do is tell you that it is within America's best interests to leave.
We really don't need a Canadians opinion.  Just be glad that you are harmless and we feel bad for you.
[/quote]

I truly understand based on your response that you are not informed about what is going on.  You are going to have to trust me on this one.  We can't just leave.  We are on the hunt.   We are doing the entire world a favor, and making a sacrifice for all of humanity.

Ya, I’ll set this straight right now: I respect those that do go there and risk their lives, I just think they shouldn’t have to in this particular situation.

There is no one else to do it.  What you've got to understand is that most countries are walking on Pins and Needles.

Next?  IRAN.  They are dangerous as hell.  What then?  Do we "let someone work it out?"

We've got to set an example.  Sure, the cost is a problem, But the USA can tax.  I'll pay higher taxes to make sure I don't die by a terrorist bomb.

No, you aren’t. Osama and most terrorist organizations can run into a cave and wait you out.

[quote=Amazon]Ya, I’ll set this straight right now: I respect those that do go there and risk their lives, I just think they shouldn’t have to in this particular situation.
[/quote]

Agreed.

i get orders, i deploy. do i agree with the war? yes. the way its handled; no. but that’s all part of duty.

anyway, i get annoyed when people like Hull assume someone’s a
democrat just because they didn’t vote for bush. trust me, a lot of
soldiers didn’t. we’re not just voting for president, we’re voting for
our chain of  command, and there was no one on that last ticket that
really displayed anything other than pseudo-balls. well, that and bush’s
deer in the headlights look that he always has.

[quote=Amazon]1. That’s irrelevant.
2. It’s keep the soldiers there
and keep political instability that harms both civilians and soldiers,
or bring them back and admit it was a bad idea in the first place.

[/quote]



And then what happens?

[quote=FreeLunch]

There is no one else to do it.  What you’ve got to understand is that most countries are walking on Pins and Needles.

Next?  IRAN.  They are dangerous as hell.  What then?  Do we "let someone work it out?"

We've got to set an example.  Sure, the cost is a problem, But the USA can tax.  I'll pay higher taxes to make sure I don't die by a terrorist bomb.

[quote=Amazon]So, you can stay there. Then you've got political instability because you can't force a democracy, you've got the debt growing ever larger, the death count growing ever larger, and you've also got an increasing amount of hatred from certain factions.

Alternatively, leave and let them work it out (It might be bloody, but it isn't exactly calm there right now, is it?). This keeps the cost down and the soldier death count down.

I don't care what you think the "American way" is; I'm Canadian anyways. All I can do is tell you that it is within America's best interests to leave.

[/quote]

Body count? The death toll is 1 month in Vietnam or 1 week in WWII.

The liberal media makes those #'s seem incredible but they are tiny in comparason to any other war we have fought. War sucks and death is part of it. Since when did joing the military ensure your safety? When you join you are making a great sacrifice for our country and our people and that is your choice, nobody is forcing your hand. If we were in the middle of a draft I may express a different view. They need to remove the media from Iraq and let them get the job done quickly. It is incredibly dangerous for people to undermine our power by openly protesting the war. They say they are supporting our troops but in reality they making it tougher for them to get the job done and come home.

[quote=FreeLunch]

We pull out now, that sets a damn presedence that’ll never be forgotten.

[/quote]

[quote=12345]

 It is incredibly dangerous for people to undermine our power by openly protesting the war. They say they are supporting our troops but in reality they making it tougher for them to get the job done and come home.

I’m sure the families of dead soldiers take solace in knowing that the body count is relatively low…

But still, do you think any human life and the anguish the inhabitants of that area are going through is worth it?

[quote=Amazon]I'm sure the families of dead soldiers take solace in knowing that the body count is relatively low...

But still, do you think any human life and the anguish the inhabitants of that area are going through is worth it?


[/quote]

I really do not think that the point of this war is JUST FOR the inhabitants of IRAQ.  It is a BIGGER issue than that.  We are trying to set an example that terrorism will not be tolerated.

Where would this world be now, 5 years later if Saddam was not dead.  Where would we be.  do you think this world would be a safer place?  You truly do not understand that the soldiers are not just fighting for IRAQ freedom.  They are fighting for the world.

[quote=Naqoyqatsi] [quote=Amazon]So, you can stay there. Then you've got political instability because you can't force a democracy, you've got the debt growing ever larger, the death count growing ever larger, and you've also got an increasing amount of hatred from certain factions.

Alternatively, leave and let them work it out (It might be bloody, but it isn't exactly calm there right now, is it?). This keeps the cost down and the soldier death count down.

I don't care what you think the "American way" is; I'm Canadian anyways. All I can do is tell you that it is within America's best interests to leave.

[/quote]

yeah but pusses like Hull want another Vietnam b/c they're not the ones that have to go fight in it. They say dumb things like "we wish there was another 9-11." i'm sure the twin tower victim's family are pulling for another attack too.
[/quote]

I may be wrong but having observed his communication style, I took Hull's point to mean, there is always the possibility of another terror attack in the background, and what we are doing now is a proactive attempt to stay in control, from a position of strength, and many Americans just take for granted the relative stability of the past few years. I don't get where you see him as being  pussy.

As far as having to go fight in it, that’s dangerous and tragic. Looks like the whole thing is poorly executed. But it is a career choice, and if nobody wants to do it, or take some kind of (moral) stand, looks like we can just plan on becoming a nation of fundamentalist Muslim pussys.

I still don’t get how the Islamic religion is relevant… Terrorists just misuse it to their own ends; real followers of Islam aren’t allowed to do such… things.

In closing, I’d like to quote one of the Founding Fathers (forgot which one): “You can’t force democracy.”.

Maybe you can't force democracy, but you can't just sit back and watch a Dictator kills all of his people.

That's why we're stuck.  From a logical perspective, it is not winnable, but from an emotional perspective its possible.

You’re right Amazon, not all muslims are terrorists…but unfortunately all terrorists are muslims.

Not really, Trsyn. At the moment any terrorist of consequence is a muslim, but I doubt there’s a single religion that is not guilty of having some… fanatics.

To FreeLunch: Yes, you can. It was done for a good while, and continues to happen now. Go try Kim Jong-Il… the one that actually said he DID have WMD.

We all have our opinions, the reality is there is just no solution to this problem. We pull out, and it becomes a launching pad for terrorism that will reach around the entire western world. We stay, and more and more of our guys die, with no chance of winnning. Honestly, we are in a no win situation, with no right answer. I fear that what happened in Glasgow today is just the beginning of the spread of terrorism to the west. A matter of time, before it returns to our soil. I fear it is also a matter of time before IRAN explodes and somehow, I am not EXACTLY sure how, really causes a big problem. And with our troops tied up, in Iraq and Afghanistan, we will be powerless to do anythiing. Can you imagine where this could lead/ A no win war, with a U.S. without the manpower to control its own destiny, and Gd forbid, no choice but to turn the middle east into another Hiroshima?

Its ghastly and frightening, but not impossible.

One things for sure, most of the world population that is alive today, will be living with this for the rest of their lives. 

[quote=pratoman]

We all have our opinions, the reality is there is just no solution to this problem. We pull out, and it becomes a launching pad for terrorism that will reach around the entire western world. We stay, and more and more of our guys die, with no chance of winnning. Honestly, we are in a no win situation, with no right answer. I fear that what happened in Glasgow today is just the beginning of the spread of terrorism to the west. A matter of time, before it returns to our soil. I fear it is also a matter of time before IRAN explodes and somehow, I am not EXACTLY sure how, really causes a big problem. And with our troops tied up, in Iraq and Afghanistan, we will be powerless to do anythiing. Can you imagine where this could lead/ A no win war, with a U.S. without the manpower to control its own destiny, and Gd forbid, no choice but to turn the middle east into another Hiroshima?

Its ghastly and frightening, but not impossible.

One things for sure, most of the world population that is alive today, will be living with this for the rest of their lives. 

[/quote]

Man Pratoman!  You are so right on many points.

My Bashing of Democrats was maybe not justified, however, it is the people that want to be PASSIVE and act like we can't make a difference that pisses me off.

When I talked to a soldier who has come back from Iraq, one thing he told me made me think of the vietnam situation.

All those guys look the same from the surface.  Nobody on the outside knows who the enemy is, UNLESS the IRAQIS "snitch" - and then they are jeopardizing their own lives.  Everyone is making a sacrifice, but we can't leave.  At the same time, we can't leave our country vulnerable.  Brutal situation.

Well, Hiroshima’s a city, while the Middle East is comprised of multiple nations… If the US were to try and nuke the whole thing odds are a nuclear winter would ensue, with a good chance of a global catastrophe. 

[quote=Naqoyqatsi] [quote=Bobby Hull]Part of me wishes for another attack on our soil, just to shut those mother f**kers up. [/quote]
Couldn't resist this one.

Man Hull, now you sound like the Democrat. While your at it go vandalize some HUMMERS with your Green Peace pals. Be careful what you wish for; you might actually have to grow a pair and pick up a weapon. Don't ask don't tell brotha.

My Guard Unit is deploying to Iraq early next year.In between missions I'll be sure to post...

[/quote]

Son, I make Rush Limbaugh look like John Kerry.

[quote=Amazon] At the moment any terrorist of consequence is a muslim, but I doubt there's a single religion that is not guilty of having some... fanatics. [/quote]

Call me when elements of those other religions start flying planes into buildings and preaching that killing non-believers is the path to nirvana. The refusal to the see the enemy for who he is is a major part of the problem.

Who is Ron Paul??? maybe he can resolve this problem... and many others.....

google ron paul or go to ronpaul2008.com

Give me liberty or give me death!

[quote=FreeLunch]

I really do not think that the point of this war is JUST FOR the inhabitants of IRAQ.  It is a BIGGER issue than that.  We are trying to set an example that terrorism will not be tolerated.

Where would this world be now, 5 years later if Saddam was not dead.  Where would we be.  do you think this world would be a safer place?  You truly do not understand that the soldiers are not just fighting for IRAQ freedom.  They are fighting for the world.

[/quote]

The world is a safer place today?

We are fighting terrorist? Where? Certainly not in Iraq.

Unfortunately for us, the world, and every person whose blood has been shed on Iraqi soil the smartest guys were not in the room the day the towers were attacked.

Fortunately-At the end of the Gulf War many Americans criticized Bush 1 for not finishing the job getting Saddam and completely destroying the Iraqi army. At that time, we did have some of the smartest guys in the room to guide us. They realized that killing Saddam and destroying his army would destabilize the country. That the religious tribal factions that make up the country would then fight for control and that Iraq's neighbors, especially Iran, would move to control the region. They realized that the 500,000 man army we had in place wasn't big enough to deal with the consequence of such an action.

Unfortunately- The Wolfowitz Doctrine outlining a new world order and embracing pre-emptive military strikes was adopted by Bush 2 and has become the Bush Doctrine. The deep thinkers who knew better either weren't there or weren't able to stop the blunderers from making one of history's most colossal mistakes. And here we sit, mired in a civil war, with our borders wide open, and terrorist running free world wide.

We cannot fight an Idealogy with an army.

yes, I saw that frontline episode also.

[quote=BondGuy] <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

The world is a safer place today? [/quote]

I guess it was "safer" before we fought back...even in <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Afghanistan. That was true before the Civil War, WWI, WWII, Korea, in fact every war I can think of. That’s not the same as saying the world won’t be a safer place after we’ve won.

[quote=BondGuy]We are fighting terrorist? Where? Certainly not in Iraq.[/quote]

Al Qaeda is in Iraq, they say the central battle ground is Iraq. I'd take their word for it. They also say we're a paper tiger and will run in the face of casualties. They say following our retreat, they’ll create a new safe zone/training ground for themselves. I hope we don't prove them right.

 [quote=BondGuy]

We cannot fight an Idealogy with an army. [/quote]

 Ask the Imperialists in Japan and the Fascists in German and Italy if they agree..

The Salem witches survived the Spanish Inquisition, the Jews survived the holocaust, and the extremist Muslims will survive the War on terror.

I cannot believe you would classify extremist Muslim terrorists with two other groups who were wrongfully persecuted. People like you are the reason we may never win the war against terrorism.

The fact they were wrongfully discriminated doesn’t change the idea of the argument that ideologies rarely die at the end of a barrel.

[quote=Amazon]The <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Salem witches survived the Spanish Inquisition, ...[/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

 Buy a history book, please... hint; start by looking at the centuries and continents of those two events…

[quote=Amazon] the Jews survived the holocaust, and the extremist Muslims will survive the War on terror. [/quote]

 Hmmmm, you're equating the Jews, a people in their entirety, with the segment of Islam infected with radicalism? You realize the Holocaust was an attempt to exterminate and entire group of people, while the poorly named “war on terror” is about defending modernity from a radical fringe that would erase it and replace it with a 15th Century existence, right?

Back to your “all religions” post, it’s basic moral equivalency, and as misguided as your logic above.

[quote=Amazon]The fact they were wrongfully discriminated doesn't change the idea of the argument that ideologies rarely die at the end of a barrel. [/quote]

The Jews and the Salem witches were "ideologies"?

Ideology: A relatively coherent system of values, beliefs, or
ideas shared by some social group and often taken for granted as
natural or inherently true.

[quote=Amazon]
Ideology: A relatively coherent system of values, beliefs, or ideas shared by some social group and often taken for granted as natural or inherently true.[/quote]

So, again, you figure the Jews and the Salem witches were ideologies? Do you understand the difference between a group and their "values, beliefs, or ideas" held by them?

I've seen some wtisted logic here before, but you may have set a new standard.

Again, call me when one of those other religions you mentioned earlier has a faction that's flying planes into buildings and/or ponfiticates that murdering non-believers is the path to heaven. Until then all the "every religion" claims in the world don't mean squat.

LOL…I overlooked Amazon’s first statement. I had no idea Salem was in Spain. Kinda throws out your credibilitiy right out the window.

Too true… I meant the Salem witch trials.

…

You get the idea of what I meant.

@Mike: A religion is an ideology. That makes Judaism an ideology. The holocaust is one of many attempts to silence an ideology, whether it be burning a neighbor or proposing world domination.

[quote=trisyn]I cannot believe you would classify extremist Muslim terrorists with two other groups who were wrongfully persecuted. People like you are the reason we may never win the war against terrorism.[/quote]

To win the war against terrorist we'd actually have to direct our efforts against terrorist. We're not doing that right now. As it stands, as well intentioned as we may be, we are viewed as the bad guys in the middle east. Please note the lack of a rose peddle greeting after the fall of Hussein. It is this lack of a rose peddle greeting that concisely shows our arrogant and complete misunderstanding of the people in this region.

Fighting terrorism is about hearts and minds, not guns and bombs. Terrorism is tool used to force political change. Want to win against terrorism? Show them that our way is better than their way. Pointing the gun that is the U.S. Military at people and telling them "It's our way or no way", as Iraq has shown us,  isn't the best way to get that done.

And those who say we are fighting terrorist in Iraq are right. Terrorist are among those we are fighting in Iraq. They weren't there when we got there, but they're there now. In fighting the war on terrorism we have unwittingly created a terrorist state. Our generation of Americans will surely go down in American history as the dumbest asses who ever lived.

Think about this: Their side wants everybody to live in the seventh century in shackles. Our side wants to give everybody a BMW, Ipod, and flatscreen TV with a life lived in complete freedom. And still we are losing. That's how bad our leaders are. How could we lose this?

It will get worse. Our borders are wide open.

[quote=mikebutler222]

 Ask the Imperialists in Japan and the Fascists in German and Italy if they agree..

[/quote]

We invaded another nation. Who's the imperialist now?

lack of a rose peddle greeting

What are you trying to say.   The Iraqis didn't have any  pink bicycles?

<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

[quote=Amazon]Too true... I meant the <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Salem witch trials.

...

You get the idea of what I meant.[/quote]

Actually, the Salem witches didn’t survive the Salem witch trial, but that’s the least of the problems with you poor analogy.

[quote=Amazon]@Mike: A religion is an ideology. That makes Judaism an ideology. The holocaust is one of many attempts to silence an ideology, whether it be burning a neighbor or proposing world domination.
[/quote]

Lunacy. The holocaust was an attempt to exterminate and entire ethnic/religious group, millions of people. The “War on terror” is an attempt to end the violence of a faction of radical Islam. The two have absolutely nothing to do with one another.

[quote=BondGuy] Fighting terrorism is about hearts and minds, not guns and bombs. Terrorism is tool used to force political change. Want to win against terrorism? Show them that our way is better than their way. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Ok, I'm a member of Al Qaeda, give me your evaluator speech.   

[quote=BondGuy]And those who say we are fighting terrorist in <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Iraq are right. Terrorist are among those we are fighting in Iraq. They weren't there when we got there, but they're there now. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Actually, that’s not true. Not only was Al Qaeda present in Iraq before we invaded, the terrorists that plotted the first WTC bombing in 1993 and the hijackers of the Achille Lauro , murderers of American Leon Klinghoffer, though Saddam’s Iraq was a great place to retire.

[quote=BondGuy] Think about this: Their side wants everybody to live in the seventh century in shackles. Our side wants to give everybody a BMW, Ipod, and flatscreen TV with a life lived in complete freedom. And still we are losing. That's how bad our leaders are. How could we lose this? [/quote]

What a profound misunderstanding of the enemy. And it’s funny you should make that suggestion while being critical of the war in Iraq, since giving them that freedom, the BMW, the iPod, etc, is what was behind overthrowing a murderous dictator.

To those who would kill us (and they’ve been plotting and carrying out attacks against us long before your favorite political target came to office) your BMW, iPod, flatscreen TV and what you call “freedom” is exactly why they want to kill you. The fact that your women go unveiled, that your decedent culture has infected theirs, your music, your non-belief, your support for “monkey” Jews in their homeland, those are the reasons they want to kill you. They, the radical Islamists, are convinced that you and I are a cancer on Earth, and the only way they’ll get their faithful back right with Allah is to kill us. No compromises, no debate, no negotiation.

You make the mistake you claim others have made, of overlaying Western attitudes over an Islamic culture. It’s just that lack of understanding of what motivates the radical Islamic faction that is the real risk to our safety.

[quote=mikebutler222]

<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

[quote=Amazon]Too true... I meant the <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Salem witch trials.

...

You get the idea of what I meant.[/quote]

Actually, the Salem witches didn’t survive the Salem witch trial, but that’s the least of the problems with you poor analogy.

There were witches in Salem? Wow, did I have this screwed up. I thought I read that there were people believed to be witches, which caused hysteria and led to innocent people being killed by their neighbors. An example to us all of the dangers of small thinking, gossip, and jumping to wrong conclusions. OR, if one believes they were witches one of great intolerance. Still, i thought they were people accused of being witches, not real witches.

[quote=Amazon]@Mike: A religion is an ideology. That makes Judaism an ideology. The holocaust is one of many attempts to silence an ideology, whether it be burning a neighbor or proposing world domination.
[/quote]

Lunacy. The holocaust was an attempt to exterminate and entire ethnic/religious group, millions of people. The “War on terror” is an attempt to end the violence of a faction of radical Islam. The two have absolutely nothing to do with one another.

Unfortunately- The Wolfowitz Doctrine outlining a new world order and embracing pre-emptive military strikes was adopted by Bush 2 and has become the Bush Doctrine. The deep thinkers who knew better either weren't there or weren't able to stop the blunderers from making one of history's most colossal mistakes. And here we sit, mired in a civil war, with our borders wide open, and terrorist running free world wide.

We cannot fight an Idealogy with an army.

Bond Guy, since you are one of the smartest people in the room, what do you think about this;

1. Implementation of the strategy has been poor and the results (more) tragic, partly due to Rumsfeld's optimism about containing American casualties through the use of techology.

2. History will judge the outcome, but so far this is a sort time frame for judgement.

3. Let's not kid anyone - " terrorists" blew up Wall Street, and the " Arab World" is being put notice and being held accountable. Of course it is about oil, and stability in the Middle East. It is about moving a giant American base from Saudi to Iraq, taking " the game " off our own playing field through a projection of power, and the lessons we have learned - the learnings - are what will ensure our survival.

4. I'm not buying this crap that the fundamentalists or even the moderates like us any less now than before 9/11. If you don't project when you are in a position of power, you are weak.

5. Where are our good friends the Saudis in terms of leadership of the Arab world - including Palestine? Trying to stay in power as dicators, they profit from the suffering of the Palestinian people. There is no leadership, because the Musline world at large is a diaspora, victim of corruption and repression.

6. Point is, America is calling the shots, rightly or wrongly about this chapter, and all of the "free" analysis and discussion in this country is a good thing. If Hillary takes the helm tomorrow, our relationship with the Muslim world will not change quickly, and the fruits of our efforts will continue to grow. And the French and the Chinese will continue to profit from whoever they can, while mocking U.S. policy.

7. You above others, working on Wall Street, understand that this is about economic stability. Keeping a stream of oil supertankers streaming around the world, to maintain economic stability while we develop alternatives. Bush has made a lot of mistakes, history will remember him as having set a workable course of action following 9/11.

8. The whole thing really is about the freedom to watch American movies and listen to French rock music - the freedom for individuals and markets on every single square inch of earth to choose. Too bad, our culture sweeps over the past and destroys many beautiful traditions and cultural liturgical and social customs. This is the price of globalization, there is no turning back. The part about Capitalism with a heart needs to be better developed, but we see that happening through the Gates Foundation, and even Bush's optimism.

9. I don't care who gets elected next, let's just not be hypocrital about the meaning of free markets and free choice, and our responsibility to commit to leadership.

[quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=BondGuy]And those who say we are fighting terrorist in <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Iraq are right. Terrorist are among those we are fighting in Iraq. They weren't there when we got there, but they're there now. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Actually, that’s not true. Not only was Al Qaeda present in Iraq before we invaded, the terrorists that plotted the first WTC bombing in 1993 and the hijackers of the Achille Lauro , murderers of American Leon Klinghoffer, though Saddam’s Iraq was a great place to retire.

You left out Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols.

[quote=BondGuy] Think about this: Their side wants everybody to live in the seventh century in shackles. Our side wants to give everybody a BMW, Ipod, and flatscreen TV with a life lived in complete freedom. And still we are losing. That's how bad our leaders are. How could we lose this? [/quote]

What a profound misunderstanding of the enemy. And it’s funny you should make that suggestion while being critical of the war in Iraq, since giving them that freedom, the BMW, the iPod, etc, is what was behind overthrowing a murderous dictator.

Don't you mean invading a sovereign nation on bogus evidence?

I misunderstand nothing. Their side uses religious fervor to control the masses , our side uses dollars.

To those who would kill us (and they’ve been plotting and carrying out attacks against us long before your favorite political target came to office) your BMW, iPod, flatscreen TV and what you call “freedom” is exactly why they want to kill you. The fact that your women go unveiled, that your decedent culture has infected theirs, your music, your non-belief, your support for “monkey” Jews in their homeland, those are the reasons they want to kill you. They, the radical Islamists, are convinced that you and I are a cancer on Earth, and the only way they’ll get their faithful back right with Allah is to kill us. No compromises, no debate, no negotiation.

They want to kill us because they want control. Everything you mention in your diatribe is their recruiting propaganda. Their leaders do not live the lives of pius men. Nor do they take the vow of poverty they force upon those they oppress. And oppression is the name of their game. They can't oppress us. We know them for the thugs that they are. That's why we have to go. We are a threat that they can't control. They use religion only to control their uneducated masses. They're as much about Islam as Brittney Spears is about Catholicism.

Our biggest mistake, underestimating them.

You make the mistake you claim others have made, of overlaying Western attitudes over an Islamic culture. It’s just that lack of understanding of what motivates the radical Islamic faction that is the real risk to our safety.

You're talking about the Bush team here. Big part of the current problem. That and creating a terrorist state. Like I said, dumbasses. Dumbasses all around, the Bush team ,and us, for letting him do it.

[quote=BondGuy][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=BondGuy]And those who say we are fighting terrorist in <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Iraq are right. Terrorist are among those we are fighting in Iraq. They weren't there when we got there, but they're there now. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Actually, that’s not true. Not only was Al Qaeda present in Iraq before we invaded, the terrorists that plotted the first WTC bombing in 1993 and the hijackers of the Achille Lauro , murderers of American Leon Klinghoffer, though Saddam’s Iraq was a great place to retire.

You left out Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols.

No, I didn't leave them out. But if you'd like to equate those two, fugitives from the law, with known terrorirts living openly in Saddam's Iraq, fine.

[quote=BondGuy] Think about this: Their side wants everybody to live in the seventh century in shackles. Our side wants to give everybody a BMW, Ipod, and flatscreen TV with a life lived in complete freedom. And still we are losing. That's how bad our leaders are. How could we lose this? [/quote]

What a profound misunderstanding of the enemy. And it’s funny you should make that suggestion while being critical of the war in Iraq, since giving them that freedom, the BMW, the iPod, etc, is what was behind overthrowing a murderous dictator.

Don't you mean invading a sovereign nation on bogus evidence?

The fact that the entire world's intelligence agencies figured wrong, and confused Saddam's refusal to allow the open and free weapons inspections he had agreed to for Saddam having WMDs doesn't change the fact that opening Iraq to freedom and the other Western values you mentioned was part of the reasoning.

I misunderstand nothing. Their side uses religious fervor to control the masses , our side uses dollars.

Come on, Bondguy, that simply makes no sense. The radical Islamists aim to install a Taliban caliphate along the entire map where Islam once held sway. That's the Middle East to Spain and they've been very, very open about it.

To those who would kill us (and they’ve been plotting and carrying out attacks against us long before your favorite political target came to office) your BMW, iPod, flatscreen TV and what you call “freedom” is exactly why they want to kill you. The fact that your women go unveiled, that your decedent culture has infected theirs, your music, your non-belief, your support for “monkey” Jews in their homeland, those are the reasons they want to kill you. They, the radical Islamists, are convinced that you and I are a cancer on Earth, and the only way they’ll get their faithful back right with Allah is to kill us. No compromises, no debate, no negotiation.

They want to kill us because they want control.

Control to establish the Caliphate.

Everything you mention in your diatribe is their recruiting propaganda. Their leaders do not live the lives of pius men.

Radical Islamists aren't driven by their vision of Islam? Bin Laden did live in a cave and plot to destroy the WTC because of a twisted vision of Isalm?

 They can't oppress us.

Been to the hole where the WTC was, lately? Seen the pictures of the US Embassies in Africa? The USS Cole? The Kobar towers?  What is it they can't do, short of occupying the country?

We know them for the thugs that they are. That's why we have to go.

Huh?

We are a threat that they can't control. They use religion only to control their uneducated masses. They're as much about Islam as Brittney Spears is about Catholicism.

Amazing....

Our biggest mistake, underestimating them.

No, it's thinking they're not genuine about their religious agenda. These aren't people looking for peaceful co-exisitance, these are religious zealots who want to kill you for being a non-believer.

You make the mistake you claim others have made, of overlaying Western attitudes over an Islamic culture. It’s just that lack of understanding of what motivates the radical Islamic faction that is the real risk to our safety.

You're talking about the Bush team here. Big part of the current problem. That and creating a terrorist state. Like I said, dumbasses. Dumbasses all around, the Bush team ,and us, for letting him do it.

No doubt about it, this fixation that it's "all about Bush plays" into the hands of the Islamists. They know they planned against us and attacked us prior to Bush. They know they don't give a rat's ass who's in the Whitehouse. They couldn't care less if Obama was there. But they do, no doubt, enjoy all this "it's all about Bush" stuff. The war against us was on before the 2000 election, it will continue long after the 2008 election. They know it's about their twisted view of Islam.

Execution was poor, at the same time, so easy to call them all dumbasses with the benefit of hindsight.

[quote=GolFA]

Unfortunately- The Wolfowitz Doctrine outlining a new world order and embracing pre-emptive military strikes was adopted by Bush 2 and has become the Bush Doctrine. The deep thinkers who knew better either weren't there or weren't able to stop the blunderers from making one of history's most colossal mistakes. And here we sit, mired in a civil war, with our borders wide open, and terrorist running free world wide.

We cannot fight an Idealogy with an army.

Bond Guy, since you are one of the smartest people in the room, what do you think about this;

1. Implementation of the strategy has been poor and the results (more) tragic, partly due to Rumsfeld's optimism about containing American casualties through the use of techology.

Agree, poor implementation. Deeper than technology. Rummy beleived we could do more with less. He hated the military buracracy and with blinders on fought his own military advisors when they told him Iraq would take more troops than he wanted to commit. The real truth is, had Ruumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz and Bush listened to real numbers they couldn't move forward. The amount of troops necessary to do job was more than we could commit.

2. History will judge the outcome, but so far this is a sort time frame for judgement.

Disagree. Invading Iraq was a wrong move. There was no need to invade. At least not at that time, for that reason. If we apply our reasons for invading Iraq to Iran we should be invading Iran. Iran is a real problem now. A clear and present danger. Yet, no invasion? As for Iraq, it wasn't a threat. There was no need to invade. The rest of the mess there is of our own doing. We destablized an incredibly volatile area of the world.

3. Let's not kid anyone - " terrorists" blew up Wall Street, and the " Arab World" is being put notice and being held accountable. Of course it is about oil, and stability in the Middle East. It is about moving a giant American base from Saudi to Iraq, taking " the game " off our own playing field through a projection of power, and the lessons we have learned - the learnings - are what will ensure our survival.

What lessons have we learned? That an army can't defeat ideaology?

4. I'm not buying this crap that the fundamentalists or even the moderates like us any less now than before 9/11. If you don't project when you are in a position of power, you are weak.

Kinda like a bully flexing his muscles? Wolfowitz would love you. Essentially we've become the imperialist forcing our ideaology upon the world. This doesn't sit well with the fence sitters, makes us look bad to our friends, and let's the extremist say "See i told you they were no good." Does this spread hatred? I don't know, but it sure doesn't spread love.

5. Where are our good friends the Saudis in terms of leadership of the Arab world - including Palestine? Trying to stay in power as dicators, they profit from the suffering of the Palestinian people. There is no leadership, because the Musline world at large is a diaspora, victim of corruption and repression.

Yup, and we're helping them do it. For oil of course!

6. Point is, America is calling the shots, rightly or wrongly about this chapter, and all of the "free" analysis and discussion in this country is a good thing. If Hillary takes the helm tomorrow, our relationship with the Muslim world will not change quickly, and the fruits of our efforts will continue to grow. And the French and the Chinese will continue to profit from whoever they can, while mocking U.S. policy.

7. You above others, working on Wall Street, understand that this is about economic stability. Keeping a stream of oil supertankers streaming around the world, to maintain economic stability while we develop alternatives. Bush has made a lot of mistakes, history will remember him as having set a workable course of action following 9/11.

Agree that our presence in the middle east is purely strategic in nature, to protect our interest. We can thank Wolfowitz for his important work in this area. Prior to Wolfowitz our middle east interest were completely unprotected.

Disagree about Bush setting a workable course. Bush completely dropped the ball. We are not safer today than we were in 2003. The middle east is not a more stable place, it is a less stable place.

8. The whole thing really is about the freedom to watch American movies and listen to French rock music - the freedom for individuals and markets on every single square inch of earth to choose. Too bad, our culture sweeps over the past and destroys many beautiful traditions and cultural liturgical and social customs. This is the price of globalization, there is no turning back. The part about Capitalism with a heart needs to be better developed, but we see that happening through the Gates Foundation, and even Bush's optimism.

9. I don't care who gets elected next, let's just not be hypocrital about the meaning of free markets and free choice, and our responsibility to commit to leadership.

Free markets are the key to economic prosperity. Unfortunately for this one region of the world, millions of people are a long way from the starting gate of free markets.

[quote=BondGuy] Fighting terrorism is about hearts and minds, not guns and bombs. Terrorism is tool used to force political change. Want to win against terrorism? Show them that our way is better than their way. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><?:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O />

Ok, I'm a member of Al Qaeda, give me your evaluator speech.   

[quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=BondGuy] Fighting terrorism is about hearts and minds, not guns and bombs. Terrorism is tool used to force political change. Want to win against terrorism? Show them that our way is better than their way. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><?:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O />

Ok, I'm a member of Al Qaeda, give me your evaluator speech.   

[/quote]

Bond Guy is assuming that we are dealing with rational people who have a similar world view as we do, instead of dealing with people who have been brainwashed since youth to hate, who are certifiably insane and who have no intention of listening to anything we say.

The more we talk, the weaker they percieve us to be.......and they are right.

[quote=BondGuy][quote=GolFA]

Unfortunately- The Wolfowitz Doctrine outlining a new world order and embracing pre-emptive military strikes was adopted by Bush 2 and has become the Bush Doctrine. The deep thinkers who knew better either weren't there or weren't able to stop the blunderers from making one of history's most colossal mistakes. And here we sit, mired in a civil war, with our borders wide open, and terrorist running free world wide.

We cannot fight an Idealogy with an army.

Bond Guy, since you are one of the smartest people in the room, what do you think about this;

1. Implementation of the strategy has been poor and the results (more) tragic, partly due to Rumsfeld's optimism about containing American casualties through the use of techology.

Agree, poor implementation. Deeper than technology. Rummy beleived we could do more with less. He hated the military buracracy and with blinders on fought his own military advisors when they told him Iraq would take more troops than he wanted to commit. The real truth is, had Ruumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz and Bush listened to real numbers they couldn't move forward. The amount of troops necessary to do job was more than we could commit.

Yep.

2. History will judge the outcome, but so far this is a sort time frame for judgement.

Disagree. Invading Iraq was a wrong move. There was no need to invade. At least not at that time, for that reason. If we apply our reasons for invading Iraq to Iran we should be invading Iran. Iran is a real problem now. A clear and present danger. Yet, no invasion? As for Iraq, it wasn't a threat. There was no need to invade. The rest of the mess there is of our own doing. We destablized an incredibly volatile area of the world.

No, for example, North Korea is contained through multilateral pressure. Pragmatism dictates taking each situation separately.

You may be right about the invasioin being a mistake, but looking at the situation right now, I'm not sure about that conclusion.

I'm sure the action and timing has as much to do with a lack of resolve of the American people ( there was a window) - which seems to be born out now. Ironically, this lack of resolve becomes a self fulfillment.

Maybe 9/11, with its implications of fundamentalist (Saudi) support, or at least the Saudis being out of control, fused part of my brain.

3. Let's not kid anyone - " terrorists" blew up Wall Street, and the " Arab World" is being put notice and being held accountable. Of course it is about oil, and stability in the Middle East. It is about moving a giant American base from Saudi to Iraq, taking " the game " off our own playing field through a projection of power, and the lessons we have learned - the learnings - are what will ensure our survival.

What lessons have we learned? That an army can't defeat ideaology?

I was thinking more about the military experience - my guess is the American military has learned a lot, and having the capability to project power - not always use it, but to be clear about the potential in the future - that we have learned a lot.

4. I'm not buying this crap that the fundamentalists or even the moderates like us any less now than before 9/11. If you don't project when you are in a position of power, you are weak.

Kinda like a bully flexing his muscles? Wolfowitz would love you. Essentially we've become the imperialist forcing our ideaology upon the world. This doesn't sit well with the fence sitters, makes us look bad to our friends, and let's the extremist say "See i told you they were no good." Does this spread hatred? I don't know, but it sure doesn't spread love.

You're right, this does not spread love, or maybe it is tough love. It seems like you are being logical, but you don't fully extend your logic: our role is to maintain the (potential) to project military power. The French role is to sell weapons to anyone they want. The Chinese role is to secure oil in any manner possible, to prevent economic and social disruption.

Logically, if you never exercise power, you don't really have it. My impression is, there was a lot of self interest ( including the stability of a society that includes a large Muslim population), and economic self interest, around support of our actions.

Not whining, because Hilary or whoever will just pick up the ball and keep running. But there is so much hypocracy, people say, this is just about oil. Of course it is about oil. People say, we are just projecting force and pissing off the entire Muslim world. Yes, that's right. Think it through.  

5. Where are our good friends the Saudis in terms of leadership of the Arab world - including Palestine? Trying to stay in power as dicators, they profit from the suffering of the Palestinian people. There is no leadership, because the Musline world at large is a diaspora, victim of corruption and repression.

Yup, and we're helping them do it. For oil of course!

Of course. If the world goes into a dark recession, we are all screwed. More children in Indonesia will go to bed hungry if the global economy gets shut down by a few people.

6. Point is, America is calling the shots, rightly or wrongly about this chapter, and all of the "free" analysis and discussion in this country is a good thing. If Hillary takes the helm tomorrow, our relationship with the Muslim world will not change quickly, and the fruits of our efforts will continue to grow. And the French and the Chinese will continue to profit from whoever they can, while mocking U.S. policy.

7. You above others, working on Wall Street, understand that this is about economic stability. Keeping a stream of oil supertankers streaming around the world, to maintain economic stability while we develop alternatives. Bush has made a lot of mistakes, history will remember him as having set a workable course of action following 9/11.

Agree that our presence in the middle east is purely strategic in nature, to protect our interest. We can thank Wolfowitz for his important work in this area. Prior to Wolfowitz our middle east interest were completely unprotected.

Disagree about Bush setting a workable course. Bush completely dropped the ball. We are not safer today than we were in 2003. The middle east is not a more stable place, it is a less stable place.

You may be right.

8. The whole thing really is about the freedom to watch American movies and listen to French rock music - the freedom for individuals and markets on every single square inch of earth to choose. Too bad, our culture sweeps over the past and destroys many beautiful traditions and cultural liturgical and social customs. This is the price of globalization, there is no turning back. The part about Capitalism with a heart needs to be better developed, but we see that happening through the Gates Foundation, and even Bush's optimism.

9. I don't care who gets elected next, let's just not be hypocrital about the meaning of free markets and free choice, and our responsibility to commit to leadership.

Free markets are the key to economic prosperity. Unfortunately for this one region of the world, millions of people are a long way from the starting gate of free markets.

Too bad about the meltdown of American resolve. It comes from complacency. Most Americans have never visited a developing country. The real implication is that our own existence here is more threatened, and you can thank people of average intelligence everywhere for confusing the important issues.

[quote=Dust Bunny][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=BondGuy] Fighting terrorism is about hearts and minds, not guns and bombs. Terrorism is tool used to force political change. Want to win against terrorism? Show them that our way is better than their way. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><?:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O />

Ok, I'm a member of Al Qaeda, give me your evaluator speech.   

[/quote]

Bond Guy is assuming that we are dealing with rational people who have a similar world view as we do, instead of dealing with people who have been brainwashed since youth to hate, who are certifiably insane and who have no intention of listening to anything we say.

The more we talk, the weaker they percieve us to be.......and they are right.

[/quote]

I agree. Yet I still want to hear that elevator (not "evaluator", gezze) speech.

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=BondGuy][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=BondGuy]And those who say we are fighting terrorist in <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Iraq are right. Terrorist are among those we are fighting in Iraq. They weren't there when we got there, but they're there now. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Actually, that’s not true. Not only was Al Qaeda present in Iraq before we invaded, the terrorists that plotted the first WTC bombing in 1993 and the hijackers of the Achille Lauro , murderers of American Leon Klinghoffer, though Saddam’s Iraq was a great place to retire.

You left out Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols.

No, I didn't leave them out. But if you'd like to equate those two, fugitives from the law, with known terrorirts living openly in Saddam's Iraq, fine.

[quote=BondGuy] Think about this: Their side wants everybody to live in the seventh century in shackles. Our side wants to give everybody a BMW, Ipod, and flatscreen TV with a life lived in complete freedom. And still we are losing. That's how bad our leaders are. How could we lose this? [/quote]

What a profound misunderstanding of the enemy. And it’s funny you should make that suggestion while being critical of the war in Iraq, since giving them that freedom, the BMW, the iPod, etc, is what was behind overthrowing a murderous dictator.

Don't you mean invading a sovereign nation on bogus evidence?

The fact that the entire world's intelligence agencies figured wrong, and confused Saddam's refusal to allow the open and free weapons inspections he had agreed to for Saddam having WMDs doesn't change the fact that opening Iraq to freedom and the other Western values you mentioned was part of the reasoning.

I misunderstand nothing. Their side uses religious fervor to control the masses , our side uses dollars.

Come on, Bondguy, that simply makes no sense. The radical Islamists aim to install a Taliban caliphate along the entire map where Islam once held sway. That's the Middle East to Spain and they've been very, very open about it.

To those who would kill us (and they’ve been plotting and carrying out attacks against us long before your favorite political target came to office) your BMW, iPod, flatscreen TV and what you call “freedom” is exactly why they want to kill you. The fact that your women go unveiled, that your decedent culture has infected theirs, your music, your non-belief, your support for “monkey” Jews in their homeland, those are the reasons they want to kill you. They, the radical Islamists, are convinced that you and I are a cancer on Earth, and the only way they’ll get their faithful back right with Allah is to kill us. No compromises, no debate, no negotiation.

They want to kill us because they want control.

Control to establish the Caliphate.

Everything you mention in your diatribe is their recruiting propaganda. Their leaders do not live the lives of pius men.

Radical Islamists aren't driven by their vision of Islam? Bin Laden did live in a cave and plot to destroy the WTC because of a twisted vision of Isalm?

 They can't oppress us.

Been to the hole where the WTC was, lately? Seen the pictures of the US Embassies in Africa? The USS Cole? The Kobar towers?  What is it they can't do, short of occupying the country?

We know them for the thugs that they are. That's why we have to go.

Huh?

We are a threat that they can't control. They use religion only to control their uneducated masses. They're as much about Islam as Brittney Spears is about Catholicism.

Amazing....

Our biggest mistake, underestimating them.

No, it's thinking they're not genuine about their religious agenda. These aren't people looking for peaceful co-exisitance, these are religious zealots who want to kill you for being a non-believer.

You make the mistake you claim others have made, of overlaying Western attitudes over an Islamic culture. It’s just that lack of understanding of what motivates the radical Islamic faction that is the real risk to our safety.

You're talking about the Bush team here. Big part of the current problem. That and creating a terrorist state. Like I said, dumbasses. Dumbasses all around, the Bush team ,and us, for letting him do it.

No doubt about it, this fixation that it's "all about Bush plays" into the hands of the Islamists. They know they planned against us and attacked us prior to Bush. They know they don't give a rat's ass who's in the Whitehouse. They couldn't care less if Obama was there. But they do, no doubt, enjoy all this "it's all about Bush" stuff. The war against us was on before the 2000 election, it will continue long after the 2008 election. They know it's about their twisted view of Islam.

[/quote] [/quote] [/quote]

Please give me a web address for the religion entitled "Radical Islam"

Do they have their own seperate Qur'an?

I can find Islam. It's got quite a following. And it's got some pretty heady stuff, as do all great religions.

And I can find all sorts of information about the ideaology of radical islam. But nothing that points to it as a religion.

The people who want to kill us are not religious zealots. I should say the leaders of this group are not religious zealots. Zealots,yes. Zealots who are using religion to acheive their goal of world domination. Confimation? Look no further than Taliban leader Mullah Omar. He lived the life of a king in a posh home while enforcing strict Sharia law on those he oppressed. Cut me an effin break about it being about religion. It's about power and money. Isn't it always?

[quote=Dust Bunny][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=BondGuy] Fighting terrorism is about hearts and minds, not guns and bombs. Terrorism is tool used to force political change. Want to win against terrorism? Show them that our way is better than their way. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><?:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O />

Ok, I'm a member of Al Qaeda, give me your evaluator speech.   

[/quote]

Bond Guy is assuming that we are dealing with rational people who have a similar world view as we do, instead of dealing with people who have been brainwashed since youth to hate, who are certifiably insane and who have no intention of listening to anything we say.

The more we talk, the weaker they percieve us to be.......and they are right.

[/quote]

Bunny, I don't see how 70% of Americans could even understand what you are saying here.

Having lived overseas and visited Jordan, and many developing countries, I am prepared to be strong and compassionate.

Mistakes have been made, who knows what bigger mistakes the mealy mouthed opportunistic opposition will sell us. Honestly, if I had to choose an opportunistic " liberal", I think Hillary would be the most ruthless against the Muslim anarachists. Looks like the whiners are going to get what they wanted, their cake and eat it.

[quote=Dust Bunny][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=BondGuy] Fighting terrorism is about hearts and minds, not guns and bombs. Terrorism is tool used to force political change. Want to win against terrorism? Show them that our way is better than their way. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><?:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O />

Ok, I'm a member of Al Qaeda, give me your evaluator speech.   

[/quote]

Bond Guy is assuming that we are dealing with rational people who have a similar world view as we do, instead of dealing with people who have been brainwashed since youth to hate, who are certifiably insane and who have no intention of listening to anything we say.

The more we talk, the weaker they percieve us to be.......and they are right.

[/quote]

Actually you're right and wrong about what i said. First, I'm not the one who came up with the win'em over strategy. It was Wolfowitz. And it was embraced by Rice, Cheney et al. The good news there is that it shows that our leaders had a firm grasp of what was needed. Even with the ongoing debackle, much if not most of the region is populated by rational reasonable people who are down with our game plan of economic prosperity. Unfortunately the strategy took a tragic turn when it was decided we could force our view on people we don't understand. As for the crazies, and extremist, we're not reaching them in any way. And as i reread my comments i didn't say we could.

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=Dust Bunny][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=BondGuy] Fighting terrorism is about hearts and minds, not guns and bombs. Terrorism is tool used to force political change. Want to win against terrorism? Show them that our way is better than their way. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><?:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O />

Ok, I'm a member of Al Qaeda, give me your evaluator speech.   

[/quote]

Bond Guy is assuming that we are dealing with rational people who have a similar world view as we do, instead of dealing with people who have been brainwashed since youth to hate, who are certifiably insane and who have no intention of listening to anything we say.

The more we talk, the weaker they percieve us to be.......and they are right.

[/quote]

I agree. Yet I still want to hear that elevator (not "evaluator", gezze) speech.

[/quote]

Ok you wanted it, here it is:

Come to America and get your 72 virgins without blowing yourself up! We will search high and low to find each and everyone of you 72 virgins. We'll even throw in some wine and a free nite at the motel 6 on I-75 in Sarasota. It will be heaven on earth. Can life get any better?

Yeah, I know the plan has one flaw. But hey, these guys aren't that smart.

[quote=BondGuy][quote=Dust Bunny][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=BondGuy] Fighting terrorism is about hearts and minds, not guns and bombs. Terrorism is tool used to force political change. Want to win against terrorism? Show them that our way is better than their way. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><?:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O />

Ok, I'm a member of Al Qaeda, give me your evaluator speech.   

[/quote]

Bond Guy is assuming that we are dealing with rational people who have a similar world view as we do, instead of dealing with people who have been brainwashed since youth to hate, who are certifiably insane and who have no intention of listening to anything we say.

The more we talk, the weaker they percieve us to be.......and they are right.

[/quote]

Actually you're right and wrong about what i said. First, I'm not the one who came up with the win'em over strategy. It was Wolfowitz. And it was embraced by Rice, Cheney et al. The good news there is that it shows that our leaders had a firm grasp of what was needed. Even with the ongoing debackle, much if not most of the region is populated by rational reasonable people who are down with our game plan of economic prosperity. Unfortunately the strategy took a tragic turn when it was decided we could force our view on people we don't understand. As for the crazies, and extremist, we're not reaching them in any way. And as i reread my comments i didn't say we could.

[/quote]

But I think you agree that it comes down to a behavioural problem. We have interests, we protect them. Have you stood at Ground Zero, if not, you need to, especially working the capital markets.

We have taken control of a situation. Saying we are out of control is not accurate - it is still the Muslim and Arab world that is unable or unwilling to provide some leadership or support here.

Our behaviour is rational and self interested. Recognizing the management mistakes of Bush, we need to keep our eye on the big picture. This problem is never going away, rather, it is a process of containment. There is now plenty of time and room for feel good cooperation. If solutions (amongst the world community) do not emerge out of where we are right now, then it will still be about protecting American interests. Be prepared for a decline in our quality of life if the citizens of the world choose mediocrity.

[quote=BondGuy]Please give me a web address for the religion entitled "Radical Islam" [/quote]

Please don't tell me you doubt they exist....

[quote=BondGuy]

Do they have their own seperate Qur'an? [/quote]

They have their own reading of it.

Again, seriously, tell me you're kidding.

[quote=BondGuy]And I can find all sorts of information about the ideaology of radical islam. But nothing that points to it as a religion.[/quote]

Not a religion? Wat do you think it is, a misunderstood Rotary Club?

 [quote=BondGuy]Look no further than Taliban leader Mullah Omar. He lived the life of a king in a posh home while enforcing strict Sharia law on those he oppressed. Cut me an effin break about it being about religion. It's about power and money. Isn't it always?

[/quote]

If you have proof that Omar was violating Shira law, a lot of people would love hearing about. So far as I know, there's no vow of poverty involved. Is your point that the heads of this radical strain of Islam enjoy being the big guys? Well, so what? It's still the ideology they're living by and recruiting with.

[quote=GolFA] Honestly, if I had to choose an opportunistic " liberal", I think Hillary would be the most ruthless against the Muslim anarachists.  [/quote]

Huh?

[quote=BondGuy][quote=mikebutler222][quote=Dust Bunny][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=BondGuy] Fighting terrorism is about hearts and minds, not guns and bombs. Terrorism is tool used to force political change. Want to win against terrorism? Show them that our way is better than their way. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><?:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O />

Ok, I'm a member of Al Qaeda, give me your evaluator speech.   

[/quote]

Bond Guy is assuming that we are dealing with rational people who have a similar world view as we do, instead of dealing with people who have been brainwashed since youth to hate, who are certifiably insane and who have no intention of listening to anything we say.

The more we talk, the weaker they percieve us to be.......and they are right.

[/quote]

I agree. Yet I still want to hear that elevator (not "evaluator", gezze) speech.

[/quote]

Ok you wanted it, here it is:

Come to America and get your 72 virgins without blowing yourself up! We will search high and low to find each and everyone of you 72 virgins. We'll even throw in some wine and a free nite at the motel 6 on I-75 in Sarasota. It will be heaven on earth. Can life get any better?

Yeah, I know the plan has one flaw. But hey, these guys aren't that smart.

[/quote]

It would be interesting to hear you flesh out your theory with a realistic example.

[quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=GolFA] Honestly, if I had to choose an opportunistic " liberal", I think Hillary would be the most ruthless against the Muslim anarachists.  [/quote]

Huh?

[/quote]

I mean, Hillary is mealy mouthed and opportunisitic in her war postion, but (when) elected, she'll just build on the work of Bush. She'll take the credit for an aggressive foreign policy while she taxes the piss out of us and makes us all consider working for someone else so we can "enjoy" her particular brand of Socialism.

[quote=GolFA][quote=BondGuy][quote=GolFA]

Unfortunately- The Wolfowitz Doctrine outlining a new world order and embracing pre-emptive military strikes was adopted by Bush 2 and has become the Bush Doctrine. The deep thinkers who knew better either weren't there or weren't able to stop the blunderers from making one of history's most colossal mistakes. And here we sit, mired in a civil war, with our borders wide open, and terrorist running free world wide.

We cannot fight an Idealogy with an army.

Bond Guy, since you are one of the smartest people in the room, what do you think about this;

1. Implementation of the strategy has been poor and the results (more) tragic, partly due to Rumsfeld's optimism about containing American casualties through the use of techology.

Agree, poor implementation. Deeper than technology. Rummy beleived we could do more with less. He hated the military buracracy and with blinders on fought his own military advisors when they told him Iraq would take more troops than he wanted to commit. The real truth is, had Ruumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz and Bush listened to real numbers they couldn't move forward. The amount of troops necessary to do job was more than we could commit.

Yep.

2. History will judge the outcome, but so far this is a sort time frame for judgement.

Disagree. Invading Iraq was a wrong move. There was no need to invade. At least not at that time, for that reason. If we apply our reasons for invading Iraq to Iran we should be invading Iran. Iran is a real problem now. A clear and present danger. Yet, no invasion? As for Iraq, it wasn't a threat. There was no need to invade. The rest of the mess there is of our own doing. We destablized an incredibly volatile area of the world.

No, for example, North Korea is contained through multilateral pressure. Pragmatism dictates taking each situation separately.

We invaded iraq because we believed they had weapons of mass destruction. Iran is developing the ultimate WMD. That is my point.

You may be right about the invasioin being a mistake, but looking at the situation right now, I'm not sure about that conclusion.

I'm sure the action and timing has as much to do with a lack of resolve of the American people ( there was a window) - which seems to be born out now. Ironically, this lack of resolve becomes a self fulfillment.

The lack of resolve will become self fulfilly. That's what happens when you botch the job. Moreover, the invasion should never have happened.

Maybe 9/11, with its implications of fundamentalist (Saudi) support, or at least the Saudis being out of control, fused part of my brain.

3. Let's not kid anyone - " terrorists" blew up Wall Street, and the " Arab World" is being put notice and being held accountable. Of course it is about oil, and stability in the Middle East. It is about moving a giant American base from Saudi to Iraq, taking " the game " off our own playing field through a projection of power, and the lessons we have learned - the learnings - are what will ensure our survival.

What lessons have we learned? That an army can't defeat ideaology?

I was thinking more about the military experience - my guess is the American military has learned a lot, and having the capability to project power - not always use it, but to be clear about the potential in the future - that we have learned a lot.

Maybe relearned. They seem to have forgotten the lessons learned in Vietnam. Powell, one of the few Vietnam vets advising Bush, had it right. He was the lone voice against invading. he warned of exactly the outcome we face today  They couldn't get rid of him fast enough.

4. I'm not buying this crap that the fundamentalists or even the moderates like us any less now than before 9/11. If you don't project when you are in a position of power, you are weak.

Kinda like a bully flexing his muscles? Wolfowitz would love you. Essentially we've become the imperialist forcing our ideaology upon the world. This doesn't sit well with the fence sitters, makes us look bad to our friends, and let's the extremist say "See i told you they were no good." Does this spread hatred? I don't know, but it sure doesn't spread love.

You're right, this does not spread love, or maybe it is tough love. It seems like you are being logical, but you don't fully extend your logic: our role is to maintain the (potential) to project military power. The French role is to sell weapons to anyone they want. The Chinese role is to secure oil in any manner possible, to prevent economic and social disruption.

Logically, if you never exercise power, you don't really have it. My impression is, there was a lot of self interest ( including the stability of a society that includes a large Muslim population), and economic self interest, around support of our actions.

Not whining, because Hilary or whoever will just pick up the ball and keep running. But there is so much hypocracy, people say, this is just about oil. Of course it is about oil. People say, we are just projecting force and pissing off the entire Muslim world. Yes, that's right. Think it through.  

There is nothing wrong with projection of power to protect our interests. There is nothing wrong with swinging that stick when all other channels prove fruitless. That's not what the Bush admin did or is doing. Iraq was not a threat, terrorist or otherwise. Iraq was a vendetta. A score to settle. If anything, strategically, looking at it's impact on the region, destablizing iraq was a mistake.

5. Where are our good friends the Saudis in terms of leadership of the Arab world - including Palestine? Trying to stay in power as dicators, they profit from the suffering of the Palestinian people. There is no leadership, because the Musline world at large is a diaspora, victim of corruption and repression.

Yup, and we're helping them do it. For oil of course!

Of course. If the world goes into a dark recession, we are all screwed. More children in Indonesia will go to bed hungry if the global economy gets shut down by a few people.

6. Point is, America is calling the shots, rightly or wrongly about this chapter, and all of the "free" analysis and discussion in this country is a good thing. If Hillary takes the helm tomorrow, our relationship with the Muslim world will not change quickly, and the fruits of our efforts will continue to grow. And the French and the Chinese will continue to profit from whoever they can, while mocking U.S. policy.

7. You above others, working on Wall Street, understand that this is about economic stability. Keeping a stream of oil supertankers streaming around the world, to maintain economic stability while we develop alternatives. Bush has made a lot of mistakes, history will remember him as having set a workable course of action following 9/11.

Agree that our presence in the middle east is purely strategic in nature, to protect our interest. We can thank Wolfowitz for his important work in this area. Prior to Wolfowitz our middle east interest were completely unprotected.

Disagree about Bush setting a workable course. Bush completely dropped the ball. We are not safer today than we were in 2003. The middle east is not a more stable place, it is a less stable place.

You may be right.

8. The whole thing really is about the freedom to watch American movies and listen to French rock music - the freedom for individuals and markets on every single square inch of earth to choose. Too bad, our culture sweeps over the past and destroys many beautiful traditions and cultural liturgical and social customs. This is the price of globalization, there is no turning back. The part about Capitalism with a heart needs to be better developed, but we see that happening through the Gates Foundation, and even Bush's optimism.

9. I don't care who gets elected next, let's just not be hypocrital about the meaning of free markets and free choice, and our responsibility to commit to leadership.

Free markets are the key to economic prosperity. Unfortunately for this one region of the world, millions of people are a long way from the starting gate of free markets.

Too bad about the meltdown of American resolve. It comes from complacency. Most Americans have never visited a developing country. The real implication is that our own existence here is more threatened, and you can thank people of average intelligence everywhere for confusing the important issues.

Or maybe it's not within our power, whatever, to be able to get these people to the starting gate. We'll just have to take it as it comes. The current threat is much less faceless than an entire nation of people.

I believe the american people are fed up with the half assed way we've prosecuted the war. If we had to invade, why not do it right? As the truth behind the quagmire is exposed more and more people say enough is enough. Had Bush gone in with a well executed plan and enough troops, even if a draft had been needed, i think he would have gotten the support he wanted, and Iraq would be a very different place today. That support would still be there.

[quote=mikebutler222]

Is your point that the heads of this radical strain of Islam enjoy being the big guys? Well, so what? It's still the ideology they're living by and recruiting with.

[/quote]

My point is that there is no such religion as "A radical strain of Islam"

There is only Islam.

They are using a misreading of the Quran to recruit the weak, poor, and uneducated. They are using religious oppression to keep themselves in power. Power being the key word.

As an Irish Catholic I'm practicing as much Islam as they are.

[quote=BondGuy][quote=mikebutler222]

Is your point that the heads of this radical strain of Islam enjoy being the big guys? Well, so what? It's still the ideology they're living by and recruiting with.

[/quote]

My point is that there is no such religion as "A radical strain of Islam"

There is only Islam. [/quote]

Gee, given that both the radical Islamic terrorists and representatives of "moderate" Islam (the ones that don't feel compelled to kill non-believers) disagree with you, perhaps you should reconsider. It’s like arguing that abortion clinic bombers aren’t driven by their twisted view of Christianity.

[quote=BondGuy]

They are using a misreading of the Quran to recruit the weak, poor, and uneducated. They are using religious oppression to keep themselves in power. Power being the key word.

As an Irish Catholic I'm practicing as much Islam as they are.

[/quote]

No one's arguing that they haven't perverted the religion. OTOH, it IS that perversion that they're pursuing. Arguing whether or not it's "really" Islam is rather pointless, and it gets you no closer to determining how to overcome it. In fact, it leads you in the wrong direction. Again, Al Qaeda couldn’t be clearer about their aims, and the methods they plan on using.

[quote=GolFA][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=GolFA] Honestly, if I had to choose an opportunistic " liberal", I think Hillary would be the most ruthless against the Muslim anarachists.  [/quote]

Huh?

[/quote]

I mean, Hillary is mealy mouthed and opportunisitic in her war postion, but (when) elected, she'll just build on the work of Bush. She'll take the credit for an aggressive foreign policy while she taxes the piss out of us and makes us all consider working for someone else so we can "enjoy" her particular brand of Socialism.

[/quote]

You could be right about that. One thing's pretty certain, whoever is elected, unless he/she is simply brain-dead, will continue on Bush's foundation. Oh, they’ll deny it, and try a “clean break” with Bush in the interest of improving world opinion of the US, but he/she will do it anyway.

It's one thing to rant and rave and hug Michael Moore and try to do the "I'm with you" with the Bush-hating, there-are-no-terrorists, I-heart-Rosie crowd. It’s another, when the weight of the office is on you to try close your eyes to what Al Qaeda really says they’ll do, and what they’re planning to do, all in the name of a very, very real strain of radical Islam.

It’s like Carter saying he’d pull US troops from South Korea if elected. Once he got in office and saw the facts, up-close and personal, the real North Koreans, what they’d do to South Korea had we left, even a softy like Carter couldn’t do it.

I understand we can't place links here, but here's some information from a reformed Jihadi;

By HASSAN BUTT

When I was still a member of what is probably best termed the British Jihadi Network - a series of British Muslim terrorist groups linked by a single ideology - I remember how we used to laugh in celebration whenever people on TV proclaimed that the sole cause for Islamic acts of terror like 9/11, the Madrid bombings and 7/7 was Western foreign policy.

By blaming the Government for our actions, those who pushed this "Blair's bombs" line did our propaganda work for us.

More important, they also helped to draw away any critical examination from the real engine of our violence: Islamic theology.

[quote=BondGuy][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=Amazon]Too true... I meant the Salem witch trials.

...

You get the idea of what I meant.[/quote]

Actually, the Salem witches didn’t survive the Salem witch trial, but that’s the least of the problems with you poor analogy.

There were witches in Salem? Wow, did I have this screwed up. I thought I read that there were people believed to be witches, which caused hysteria and led to innocent people being killed by their neighbors. An example to us all of the dangers of small thinking, gossip, and jumping to wrong conclusions. OR, if one believes they were witches one of great intolerance. Still, i thought they were people accused of being witches, not real witches.

[/quote]

Ok, I guess my mind was just completely confused on that entire subject. My point , without an example, being: You can't kill an ideology with a gun.

And, yes, the holocause is comparable because one faction took arms up against another faction to try and destroy it. (Be it Nazis against Jews, or Americans against radical Muslims.)

You can't kill an ideology with a gun.

Sure you can. 

"Too bad about the meltdown of American resolve. It comes from complacency. Most Americans have never visited a developing country. The real implication is that our own existence here is more threatened, and you can thank people of average intelligence everywhere for confusing the important issues. "



Americans need only look in their own backyards to visit a developing country. While we completely obsess with the loss of life in aiding a fledgling democracy, we appear to overlook the ills of our own society - just look at the murder rates in our cities! First stop on the developing country tour? How about Oakland, CA, then straight (outta) Compton, Detroit, you name the rest.



We need to help the Iraqi government in any way as long as they continue to ask for our help. Screw this screwed up media in our country!

[quote=Dust Bunny]

You can’t kill an ideology with a gun.

Sure you can. 

[quote=Amazon] [quote=Dust Bunny]

You can't kill an ideology with a gun.

Sure you can. 

[/quote]

I guess you can... but it's nearly impossible. If you want to crush an ideology your best bets are temptation/propaganda. Essentially, offer them something they can't get where they are currently (or more likely, make it only seem like that) and make it seem as though your way is the right way by any means necessary. Sound immoral to you? Well, it's try and gun them down, miss a few, they plan revenge and probably cause another 9/11 incident; or try and weaken the will to join the terrorists among the general populace and try to convince terrorists that there views are somehow wrong.
[/quote]

Same offer;

I'm an Al Qeada member, let's hear your elevator speech.

[quote=Amazon] try and weaken the will to join the terrorists among the general populace [/quote]

Killing the leaders is the best "will-weakener" there is.

Doing nothing is the biggest emboldener (for further info, google 9-11).

Free markets are the key to economic prosperity. Unfortunately for this one region of the world, millions of people are a long way from the starting gate of free markets.

Too bad about the meltdown of American resolve. It comes from complacency. Most Americans have never visited a developing country. The real implication is that our own existence here is more threatened, and you can thank people of average intelligence everywhere for confusing the important issues.

Or maybe it's not within our power, whatever, to be able to get these people to the starting gate. We'll just have to take it as it comes. The current threat is much less faceless than an entire nation of people.

I believe the american people are fed up with the half assed way we've prosecuted the war. If we had to invade, why not do it right? As the truth behind the quagmire is exposed more and more people say enough is enough. Had Bush gone in with a well executed plan and enough troops, even if a draft had been needed, i think he would have gotten the support he wanted, and Iraq would be a very different place today. That support would still be there.

We don't have many liberals talking about free markets, or putting what is happening into any economic context.

The American people are fed up, but the prosecution of the war has been meant to minimize American casualties and win over the hearts of the Iraqi people - essentially, immediately give them unknown freedoms.

Unfortunately, for lack of any better ideas, the best idea seems to be " just do it " and initiate some behaviours in the Muslim world and by extension the Arab world - they align the economic reality of free markets with the status quo of fundamentalist expansionism.

When liberals here start taking responsibility for managing a stable world economy, they will earn the right to help steer the foreign policy ship.

Right now, all I see are a bunch of sniveling munchkins complaining about how things might have been - Harry Reid is the munchkin king, and the thought of him helping set our national economic course ( in terms of national security, for starters) scares me.

I thank God for Bush's courage, his ability to keep his sh*t together, not sure I could have handled the pressure.

Put this in the context of all of the American sacrifice that helps us celebrate the 4th, freedom.

[quote=Amazon] [quote=Dust Bunny]

You can't kill an ideology with a gun.

Sure you can. 

[/quote]

I guess you can... but it's nearly impossible. If you want to crush an ideology your best bets are temptation/propaganda. Essentially, offer them something they can't get where they are currently (or more likely, make it only seem like that) and make it seem as though your way is the right way by any means necessary. Sound immoral to you? Well, it's try and gun them down, miss a few, they plan revenge and probably cause another 9/11 incident; or try and weaken the will to join the terrorists among the general populace and try to convince terrorists that there views are somehow wrong.
[/quote]

The problem is that we aren't dealing with people who are rational.  The terrorists, like those Doctors in England and Scotland have been brainwashed since childhood to hate.  They have lost the ability to have rational thought processes.  To assume that we can use gentle persuasion as a tool to change their minds is about as insane as trying to pet a pit bull that has been abused all of its life.

The rest of the population has been beaten and cowed into submission by the Imams and other despots.  All they want to do is live so like the German citizens in WWII they go along with the program, hope that they can keep under the radar and won't be killed themselves.  Seig Hiel  Allah Akbar  same thing.

[quote=opie]

[quote=Amazon] try and weaken the will to join the terrorists among the general populace [/quote]

Killing the leaders is the best "will-weakener" there is.

Doing nothing is the biggest emboldener (for further info, google 9-11).

[/quote]

Also Google bin Laden's "strong horse" analogy

Just don't vote Hillary or Obama!

Oy Gavolt am I glad I missed this thread!

At the same time I'm glad I found this thread, it's been great for my tomato plants!

WIMC - you need to trim this jungle of plants.  Prune the bush to promote healthier growth of your tomato.

Makes me hungry for BLT's!!

"Prune the bush to promote healthier growth of your tomato."

I refuse to get into a politcal discussion here! He's your President, Right or Wrong!

But thanks for reminding what the weekend joke was gonna be!