Is Bush's Terror War to protect America....

Status
Not open for further replies.
"When do we invade Saudi Arabia? Libya? The Sudan? Manila? Sri Lanka? Korea? China? Mexico? Canada?"

In your own life, do you try to do everything at once or do you start with the most important job?

Canada? Can you spell hyperbole?

John
 
Do you think that no terrorists entered this country through Canada?

And what makes Iraq "more important" than, say, North Korea (a country that actually could hurt us with nuc-u-lar weapons... )?
 
cee tee

Yes, there are a lot of bad people in the world. Yes, Saddam was one of them. There are others, too. When do we invade Saudi Arabia? Libya? The Sudan? Manila? Sri Lanka? Korea? China? Mexico? Canada? Terrorists have been "harbored" in all of the above places, and then some.

We'll never end radical religious extremism unless we kill all the religious extremists, not only Muslims, but Christians, Hindus, and Buddhists. Then, I guess we'll have to round up all those extremists of atheist persuasion, and kill them, too. How lond do you suppose that'll take? [/sarcasm]

In my opinion, since we'll never be able to kill them all, the next best thing is to be selective about who we kill. If a person or group attacks us, we should leave no stone unturned, until we root out that person or group, and kill them. Religious extremists of whatever stripe should be able to feel it in their bones... attack the United States, and you'll never find a hole deep enough to crawl into.

Our business shouldn't be "nation-building" (a concept abhorred by Bush in his Presidential debates). Our business should be finding those who attacked us, and removing them from the planet. My own thanks go out to any who serve in this conflict. My sorrow is that they've been used as tools to get the wrong job done.
Click to expand...

Well said; I like the cut of your jib. And your philosophy, being correct, exposes the complete and utter failure of our present leader to do his job - which was to get Osama's head on a plate.

The whole bit about the Iraqi gov't paying for suicide bombers is as against ISRAEL, not us!!! What's that got to do with us? Why should we INVADE a country and spend years there dying and nation-building, just to help keep Israel safe? They've won every war they've fought; they have advanced technology. Let them stand on their own two feet. Iraq was no threat to us at all. As for WMDs, see above....
 
It's painfully apparent that critics who claim Saddam had no ties to terrorism directed at the US, Israel and her other Allies would prefer to engage in any other argument than the one they posited; that Saddam posed no theat to the US and/or did not sponsor or harbor terrorists. Small wonder, when the facts illuminate their idiocy.

Suddenly, they all become global strategists, budget experts or anything but experts on Saddam not having ties to terrorism. It's called "watch the bouncing liberal" as they attempt to change the subject to deflect from the fact that they are either intellectually devoid or dishonest.

How many years were you willing to permit Saddam to thumb his nose at the world while he supported terrorism against the United States while the UN engaged in self-enrichment and not know if Saddam was going to continue his pursuit of WMD, delivery systems or deliver WMD's into the hands of terrorists?

I believe 12 years was enough. Saddam was a big boy. He signed up to a cease fire with conditions. He violated those conditions, by any measure you care to use. Be a sheepdog or be a sheep. I don't care. Second guess the sheepdog all you wish. But don't expect to claim that you know better what threat posed by individual wolves might be when your initial claims have been irrefutably discounted time and time again.

There are limits to being insipid. Know them.
 
"And what makes Iraq "more important" than, say, North Korea (a country that actually could hurt us with nuc-u-lar weapons... )?"

Somebody has to make that decision...and it ain't you.

John
 
[QUOTE="johnbt]Somebody has to make that decision...and it ain't you[/QUOTE]


But he does work for me. And I wanna know.

Great lack of answer, BTW.
 
The attempt to link Saddam to islamist terrorists is a farce. They hated him, he hated them.

The links to the palestinians is meaningless. What Arab leader has not backed the palestinian side of the israeli/palestinian conflict?

It's all after-the-fact justifying of a misbegotten war. No imminent threat, no wmds, no ties to al quaeda. Nothing but a distraction from the real foe, and a waste of lives and money and military resources...

A complete and utter foriegn policy abortion, with no good options for getting out of it...

There are limits to being insipid. Know them.
Click to expand...

...limits to being insipid? That's like someone saying they wear size extra-medium...:D
 
That is total BS, there were numerous foreign fighter training camps in Iraq, I have personally been in two, Salmon Pax and the MEK facility in Fallujah. Abu Massoud Zaccaria was actually the Emir of Al Q'iam (were the Iraqis used to make Nerve gas in the Yugoslavian built Super Phosphate factory) prior to the US invasion.
 
Such shortsightedness is astounding

Go ahead, let's tie our hands behind our back so much so that we lose to the Islamofascists. Then, when they eventually impose their rule over you or we can't do anything without fear of reprisal, see if you get your freedoms back.

Maybe if you ask really, really nicely they'll let you send your little girl to school or miss prayer one evening.

Gotta win the war. Period.
 
Go ahead, let's tie our hands behind our back so much so that we lose to the Islamofascists. Then, when they eventually impose their rule over you or we can't do anything without fear of reprisal, see if you get your freedoms back.
Click to expand...

That is complete hyperbole. How exactly are they going to impose their rule over us? I'd be interested in how a bunch of fanatics barely out of the Middle Ages would be able to conquer and defeat the United States and impose their rule over us. That statement is ludicrous fearmongering.

Their grand master plot took five years to plan. Even then, only parts of it worked as planned, and that was against an unsuspecting an unprepared United States.

The terrorists can't take my freedom. Only my own government can do that.
 
"How exactly are they going to impose their rule over us? I'd be interested in how a bunch of fanatics barely out of the Middle Ages would be able to conquer and defeat the United States and impose their rule over us."

That kind of pride is the same pride that caused the Romans to eventually be overcome by the hordes and barbarians.

They simply lost the will to fight and maintain their civilization, bit by bit, piece by piece, over many years.

How foolish to say "it could never happen here".
 
So much leftist drivel from people with post counts under 100. :barf:

I provide indisputable FACT that Saddam sponsored, initiated and supported terrorism and the short-bus riders pull out their blinders, earplugs, "farce" missile and begin mumbling (drooling?) liberal talking points.

Do your homework people. November will soon be upon us.

My work here is done.

Unless one of the window lickers happens to have John Kerry's (or their own) "plan" to deal with Islamic terrorism on hand and cares to cite it. :rolleyes:

Wait, that would be the leftist party of "IF". :eek:
 
When do we invade Saudi Arabia? Libya? The Sudan? Manila? Sri Lanka? Korea? China? Mexico? Canada?
Click to expand...

You young fellows are so impatient. Haven't you heard the joke about the old bull and the young bull? :D

In time, grasshopper. In time. :)
 
It was a foreign fighter training facility, that training Mujaheddin, true it was started as during the Iran-Iraq for anti Iran's however they were also anti-western.

It pretty simple how the impose their will upon us, the first model is Europe in which through migration, apathy and low birth rates of the locals (sort of like the reconquests) they become the majority. The second model involves the use of nuclear weapons or other WMDs, with all the petrodollars they have they will eventually acquire nucs, or one of the Islamic states with them will fall. At that point, an already weakened west who have no stomach for the use of nuclear weapons premptively and still requiring POL from the region either submit or their economy is strangled.


But the big problem is not so much they can win, it is a problem that they will not stop trying until they are dead. So they may not understand the futility of their struggle but that doesn't stop them from taking a lot of people with them.
 
That kind of pride is the same pride that caused the Romans to eventually be overcome by the hordes and barbarians.
Click to expand...

empires eventually collapse.
simple fact of life...deal with it.

p.s: nothing "leftist" about that. greed will eventually do you in.
 
The Roman empire collapsed when its citizens' were more interested in games than conquest and the Roman Army become more foriegn than Roman.
 
sure. that was but one empire.
there's also the many chinese empires, byzantine empires, ottoman empire, persian empire...you get the idea.
empires collapse, and we're about due.
 
Wow

You're right, we are defeated already - why try. We can't possibly survive if we learn from others' mistakes. We're DUE for a demise. We DESERVE it because we are such capitalistic pigs.

If I were an Islamofascist, I'd want the entire world to think that way while I rolled right over them.

Maybe when we give them nuclear abilities, don't fight them, respect their religion, and let them control us they will quit killing us like they did before we went to Iraq.

I mean, 9/11 was such a nice day and all - they were so merciful when they only killed a few thousand of us unprovoked by that aggressive, false war.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top