Ok. I've had enough...

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 97
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by midwinter

    I can see the headlines now:



    "War Going Way Better Than You'd Think"



    "Economy Doesn't Suck As Bad As You Think It Does"



    "Chance That Rest of World Will Hate Us Less by 2005"



    "No Terrorist Attacks Today: Major Victory in War On Terrorism"








  • Reply 62 of 97
    common mancommon man Posts: 522member
    George W Bush is not to blame for terrorism! Those who decapitate innocent people are responsible for their actions and should be held accountable! The left whines and moans about America "upsetting the international community" and "creating terrorists" by our policies. What the left does not understand is that we don't care about "the international community" any more than it cares about us. We must take care of our own security and defend ourselves against those who want to harm us. The left would have us hold hands with terrorists and "learn to understand them". We don't want to understand them sir, we want to kill them. George W Bush understand this and that is exactly what he is doing.
  • Reply 63 of 97
    faust9faust9 Posts: 1,335member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Not Unlike Myself

    I'd be curious to see what POSITIVE news someone could come up with about Bush that wouldn't be a product of the echo-machine which is their news source.



    I can sit and mull over what Bush has done for me, my family, my company, and my nation over the last 3 years and his 'positive' list is..... empty, hum, now there's a surprise... Anybody seen a website (that is in some way credible) which lists some GOOD stuff about Bush? (I'd love to read up, maybe if I start searching now by Friday I can get a half dozen together....)




    More Americans are politically aware, active, and I think we'll have a record voter turnout this cycle. That's a positive I guess. The why may not be positive which begs the question "Do the ends justify the means?"





    PS. Here's some political fodder for the Neo-Cons to lap up and the lefty's to decry for years to come. Have fun. http://www.angelfire.com/ok/funwithunclejim/bush.html
  • Reply 64 of 97
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Common Man

    George W Bush is not to blame for terrorism! Those who decapitate innocent people are responsible for their actions and should be held accountable! The left whines and moans about America "upsetting the international community" and "creating terrorists" by our policies. What the left does not understand is that we don't care about "the international community" any more than it cares about us. We must take care of our own security and defend ourselves against those who want to harm us. The left would have us hold hands with terrorists and "learn to understand them". We don't want to understand them sir, we want to kill them. George W Bush understand this and that is exactly what he is doing.



    Uh, but the main and pretty much only reason we went over there was Saddam's massive arsenal of american killing WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!



    Uh, where are they?



    That alone pretty much defuses any sheild beating, flag waiving, sweep it under the carpet, gloss over, let's change our main reason after the fact, unrelated, rhetorical statement like the one above.





    If anything what we've done in the middle east in the past year will only make terrorism worst by building resentment agaisnt an enterprising bully.





    Your kind of reasoning might have worked in the middle of the last century. The world is different now and in a real sense we depend on each other. Which is as it should be.



    So yes we'd better care about the international community. We need them.
  • Reply 65 of 97
    faust9faust9 Posts: 1,335member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Common Man

    George W Bush is not to blame for terrorism! Those who decapitate innocent people are responsible for their actions and should be held accountable! The left whines and moans about America "upsetting the international community" and "creating terrorists" by our policies. What the left does not understand is that we don't care about "the international community" any more than it cares about us. We must take care of our own security and defend ourselves against those who want to harm us. The left would have us hold hands with terrorists and "learn to understand them". We don't want to understand them sir, we want to kill them. George W Bush understand this and that is exactly what he is doing.



    C'mon man!!! Where in history has battling terrorist organizations resulted in a win for the good guys? FARC, French Revolutionaries (where terrorism was first coined), Israel, N.Ireland, Algeria where? Fighting terrorists with guns a lone is not the answer as history has shown. Understanding why there are people who hate you and making concerted efforts to bridge to divides is. We had a chance to quash a huge terror network had we invested hundreds of Billions into Afghanastan to rebuild it and capture UBL. What happened with that? A rebuilt Afghanstan would have shown the ME we do care, a war with Iraq doe not.
  • Reply 66 of 97
    naplesxnaplesx Posts: 3,743member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by faust9

    C'mon man!!! Where in history has battling terrorist organizations resulted in a win for the good guys? FARC, French Revolutionaries (where terrorism was first coined), Israel, N.Ireland, Algeria where? Fighting terrorists with guns a lone is not the answer as history has shown. Understanding why there are people who hate you and making concerted efforts to bridge to divides is. We had a chance to quash a huge terror network had we invested hundreds of Billions into Afghanastan to rebuild it and capture UBL. What happened with that? A rebuilt Afghanstan would have shown the ME we do care, a war with Iraq doe not.



    Japan held a very similar view of the US/West. They were not the terrorists that we know today, rather a nation. Similarities are there none the less, In particular the fanaticism.



    The US fought them militarily and won. And won them over as a nation, so one could draw some parallels between now and then. Of course there is the Nazis. And so on....
  • Reply 67 of 97
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Common Man

    George W Bush is not to blame for terrorism! Those who decapitate innocent people are responsible for their actions and should be held accountable! The left whines and moans about America "upsetting the international community" and "creating terrorists" by our policies. What the left does not understand is that we don't care about "the international community" any more than it cares about us. We must take care of our own security and defend ourselves against those who want to harm us. The left would have us hold hands with terrorists and "learn to understand them". We don't want to understand them sir, we want to kill them. George W Bush understand this and that is exactly what he is doing.



    This is foolish and wrong. This is foolish and wrong. This is foolish and wrong.



    This cartoon version of "liberals" is inaccurate and ignorant. This cartoon version of "liberals" is inaccurate and ignorant. This cartoon version of "liberals" is inaccurate and ignorant.



    Can you hear me now?



    Nobody wants to hold hands with terrorists. Nobody. Nobody. Nobody.



    The liberals on this board are arguing strenuously for a better result via better tactics.



    We are saying that the Bush admin's war on terror is being incompetently waged by self defeating means.



    Can you hear me now?



    We are saying that America can be more secure if it actually concentrated on thwarting terrorists and funded actual domestic security programs as opposed to playing politics with the idea of terrorism and squandering money blood and honor in a country irrelevant to our security.



    CAN YOU SEE HOW THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM "WANTING TO UNDERSTAND" TERRORISTS? CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?



    (This post brought to you by the Association for Drumming the Truth Into Unusually Thick Heads)
  • Reply 68 of 97
    naplesxnaplesx Posts: 3,743member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by addabox

    This is foolish and wrong. This is foolish and wrong. This is foolish and wrong.



    This cartoon version of "liberals" is inaccurate and ignorant. This cartoon version of "liberals" is inaccurate and ignorant. This cartoon version of "liberals" is inaccurate and ignorant.



    Can you hear me now?



    Nobody wants to hold hands with terrorists. Nobody. Nobody. Nobody.



    The liberals on this board are arguing strenuously for a better result via better tactics.



    We are saying that the Bush admin's war on terror is being incompetently waged by self defeating means.



    Can you hear me now?



    We are saying that America can be more secure if it actually concentrated on thwarting terrorists and funded actual domestic security programs as opposed to playing politics with the idea of terrorism and squandering money blood and honor in a country irrelevant to our security.



    CAN YOU SEE HOW THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM "WANTING TO UNDERSTAND" TERRORISTS? CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?



    (This post brought to you by the Association for Drumming the Truth Into Unusually Thick Heads)




    The liberals on this board are pummeling Bush upon any and all perceived opportunities they see. The liberals on this board are pummeling Bush upon any and all perceived opportunities they see. The liberals on this board are pummeling Bush upon any and all perceived opportunities they see.



    Hear that?



    The liberals on this board criticize yet offer no real solutions. The liberals focus on every negative about Bush, their country and their military in order to bolster their hatred for this president. The liberals here seem to do this because he won the election in such a close manner and then went on to govern if he had actually won the election instead of sheepishly hiding under his desk for 4 years.



    The liberals here seem to pine for some other shoe to drop to the detriment of the US, to further bolster their hatred. "See, those soldiers abused Iraqi prisoners, therefore this proves Bush is corrupt." Sound familiar?
  • Reply 69 of 97
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Terrorism is not a nation.



    Terrorism is not an ideology.



    Terrorism is not a people.



    Terrorism is not a region.



    Terrorism is a tactic.



    We are fighting a "war" against a tactic.





    The occupation of Iraq is not the "war on terror" and arguably harms that cause.



    Talk of WWII, in this context, is absolutely meaningless, and amounts to nothing more than an appeal to the only "good result" the unimaginative can summon up in regard to America occupying another country.



    Talk of WWII, in this context, casually and foolishly conflates the broad mandate of the WOT with the particulars of Iraq.



    There is no legitimate point of comparison.
  • Reply 70 of 97
    common mancommon man Posts: 522member
    W can't hide within our shell, no matter how thick we make it We must go to the problem and eliminate the problem. Domestic protection is a huge and essential part of the war on terror. Of course the left opposes The Patriot Act too ,so I 'm at a loss as to what you want. Regardless, the world is too small to assume something going on across the globe is not a threat to us. It's important for us to know what is going on in countries like Iraq. The seeds of terrorism must not be allowed soil to germinate and set down roots. What happens across the globe matters here.
  • Reply 71 of 97
    common mancommon man Posts: 522member
    Yes terrorism is a tactic but it is practiced by people called terrorists. Our goal is to find those people and kill them.
  • Reply 72 of 97
    naplesxnaplesx Posts: 3,743member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by addabox

    Terrorism is not a nation.



    Terrorism is not an ideology.



    Terrorism is not a people.



    Terrorism is not a region.



    Terrorism is a tactic.



    We are fighting a "war" against a tactic.





    The occupation of Iraq is not the "war on terror" and arguably harms that cause.



    Talk of WWII, in this context, is absolutely meaningless, and amounts to nothing more than an appeal to the only "good result" the unimaginative can summon up in regard to America occupying another country.



    Talk of WWII, in this context, casually and foolishly conflates the broad mandate of the WOT with the particulars of Iraq.



    There is no legitimate point of comparison.




    Terrorism is performed by people and those people have some things in common. Can you discern what hat is?



    And you can wage war on people.
  • Reply 73 of 97
    faust9faust9 Posts: 1,335member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Common Man

    W can't hide within our shell, no matter how thick we make it We must go to the problem and eliminate the problem. Domestic protection is a huge and essential part of the war on terror. Of course the left opposes The Patriot Act too ,so I 'm at a loss as to what you want. Regardless, the world is too small to assume something going on across the globe is not a threat to us. It's important for us to know what is going on in countries like Iraq. The seeds of terrorism must not be allowed soil to germinate and set down roots. What happens across the globe matters here.



    Too late there killer and save the demagoguery. The war in Iraq is not the war on terror. The war in Iraq is a furtherance of an ideological goal. We had an opportunity to destroy a prolific terrorist organization and rebuild a country. We decided to invade another country prior to the completion of our initial cause. That is germinating the seeds of terrorism. We had world support against terrorism (even from the ME). We squandered that by invading Iraq.



    Again, which terrorist organizations have been crushed by combat?
  • Reply 74 of 97
    faust9faust9 Posts: 1,335member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by NaplesX

    Japan held a very similar view of the US/West. They were not the terrorists that we know today, rather a nation. Similarities are there none the less, In particular the fanaticism.



    The US fought them militarily and won. And won them over as a nation, so one could draw some parallels between now and then. Of course there is the Nazis. And so on....




    Man-O-Man is this ever a stretch. The only commonality between the two conflicts is the word war. The conflicts themselves are in no way similar. The support for these wars is in no way similar. The cause of entry into these wars is in no way similar. Get real.
  • Reply 75 of 97
    wrong robotwrong robot Posts: 3,907member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Common Man

    Yes terrorism is a tactic but it is practiced by people called terrorists. Our goal is to find those people and kill them.



  • Reply 76 of 97
    shetlineshetline Posts: 4,695member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by NaplesX

    And you can wage war on people.



    You can wage war on windmills too. They might be giants, after all.



    (And what are we gonna do unless they are?)
  • Reply 77 of 97
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Common Man

    W can't hide within our shell, no matter how thick we make it We must go to the problem and eliminate the problem. Domestic protection is a huge and essential part of the war on terror. Of course the left opposes The Patriot Act too ,so I 'm at a loss as to what you want. Regardless, the world is too small to assume something going on across the globe is not a threat to us. It's important for us to know what is going on in countries like Iraq. The seeds of terrorism must not be allowed soil to germinate and set down roots. What happens across the globe matters here.



    I agree completely.



    Which is why I would actually fund things like port security, nuclear facility security, and industrial facility security. The Patriot Act doesn't do that, it just makes it easier to avoid constitutional restriction if the government happens to decide you're a bad guy, like this poor schmuck.



    It is certainly true that what goes on across the world can affect us. That's why I would favor some kind of coherent program to control the distribution of fissionable materials and atomic weapons. That's I would favor actually putting resources into Afghanistan to finish what we started. That's why I would favor reengaging the international community so we could work together to limit the spread of WOMD and identify and neutralize terrorists.



    But we can't do any of that because all the attention and money is being poured into Iraq, where there were no WOMD and no al Qaeda.



    So, one more time: it isn't about being "soft on terrorism" or not. It's about strategy and tactics.



    I do so wish that some of our conservative posters would avail themselves of something other than "the liberals hate America and are crypto-faggot appeasers who would rather drink white wine than stand up and fight like real men" bullshit fake news organs. It gets really really really old.
  • Reply 78 of 97
    faust9faust9 Posts: 1,335member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by NaplesX

    Terrorism is performed by people and those people have some things in common. Can you discern what hat is?



    And you can wage war on people.




    Hamburgers are made by people too (if you want to play the strawman game). Things made by people must be tantamount to terrorism. MickyD's must be a terrorist organization--quick call the Crisco Kid (John Ashcroft).



    You know what else you can do to people? Educate them. You can heal them. You can stop supporting oppressive regimes. You can support uprisings from within instead of invading them.



    [edit]fixed typo's
  • Reply 79 of 97
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by shetline

    You can wage war on windmills too. They might be giants, after all.



    (And what are we gonna do unless they are?)




    Hold on tighter, to avoid being thrown to the wolves!
  • Reply 80 of 97
    naplesxnaplesx Posts: 3,743member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by faust9

    Too late there killer and save the demagoguery. The war in Iraq is not the war on terror. The war in Iraq is a furtherance of an ideological goal. We had an opportunity to destroy a prolific terrorist organization and rebuild a country. We decided to invade another country prior to the completion of our initial cause. That is germinating the seeds of terrorism. We had world support against terrorism (even from the ME). We squandered that by invading Iraq.



    Again, which terrorist organizations have been crushed by combat?




    Pakistan? SA? Iran now admitting to importing centrifuges? What is it, like 30,000 US troops in Afghanistan?



    Looks like many things happening on the WOT front. I am not sure what you are talking about. There is a new book out about the LONG relationship between SH(Iraq) and OBL(Al-Qaeda), you should read it. The author is Steve Hayze I think. i heard an interview with the guy and he seems very credible.



    Of course I am sure the "usuals" will find a way to marginalize him or his credentials.
Sign In or Register to comment.