60 Minutes

[12Footer]

Re: 60 Minutes

Originally posted by mrbscott19:<br /> You people seem to follow your leaders so blindly, it's sickening.

One nation, under God, indevisable, with liberty and justice for all....<br />And there is little you can do to stop it..<br />As for the endless comparisons to Hitler from some people, Pitiful!

 

[SCO]

Re: 60 Minutes

You make some good points wrt human rights mrscott. I have never thought the altruistic reasons were the basis for all this. But, by freeing these people, they can show the Arab world there is a better way, so it is not so altruistic after all, but a solution to our problem. I disagree about the WMD, because the power of the nation of Saddams Iraq coupled with the terror network had tremendous potential, whether or not yet realized at the time of our invasion, to do us harm. Had we not gone in, that threat in the post 911 world would be ever present. It would have been dangerous to allow Saddam to continue "Dissing" us after the hit we took that day. If you rattle your sword, you have to pull it out or everyone knows your a paper tiger. How much more dangerous can it get than that. We have to fight, our bluff has been called. Our timidity leading up to 911 is the proof of the notion that we must fight. That timidity was a cause of 911, but we're smarter now. I personally don't think whether or not we were justified to go into Irag is the question(though we were). The question is whether or not it was the right thing to do to defeat alqeda. PW2 and I disagree on this point, but are essentially just arguing about the best way to win the war and what it will take. If a republic Iraq takes hold, if the Alqeda plans for a terrorist zelot middle east is thwarted.... MrScott, who are your leaders? Are you a US citizen?

 

[Elmer Fudge]

Re: 60 Minutes

In my opinion,i believe we did the right thing in getting rid of Saddam, however i cannot help feeling that we were suckerd by the Iranians with the help of Mr Chalabi. It seems they wanted Saddam gone as much as we did, they are betting the country will eventually revert to shia rule and become an iranian ally,which in the long term would be tragic.

 

[SCO]

Re: 60 Minutes

Elmer, I gotta think/hope that we were using Chalabi for our own interests and that no real trust was part of the decision making. My own scientific poll of one(me) reported that when we were attacked, we should set up camp in Iraq and Afghanistan and disrupt those havens of antiamericanism. Iraq because Saddam's string had run and we could opportunistically, Afghanistan because they openly harbored/were Alqeda. Whether or not it was the right thing to do is a ??? If not, then Bush did the best he could and mistakes were made. If so then Bush will be immortalized in history with Churchill/ FDR.

 

[mrbscott19]

Re: 60 Minutes

I am an American, born and raised. I don't really follow anyone. No politician can be trusted. They all have an agenda, and thats not good for the country no matter how you look at it.

 

[mrbscott19]

Re: 60 Minutes

Originally posted by 12Footer:<br />

Originally posted by mrbscott19:<br /> You people seem to follow your leaders so blindly, it's sickening.

One nation, under God, indevisable, with liberty and justice for all....<br />And there is little you can do to stop it..<br />As for the endless comparisons to Hitler from some people, Pitiful!

It doesn't change my point....fear is a tool.

 

[PW2]

Re: 60 Minutes

SW, post a new thread on Reaganomics, Bushonomics, Clinton's economic theory, or whatever it is you would prefer, and I will gladly debate/discuss it.<br /><br />You should know that I got convinced over time that Reagan's theories had some merit, especially in the circumstances he faced. And I got convinced over time that Reagan was fundamentally a pragmatist, and tried to do things that worked--had good people that studied real data, and modified course as he felt necessary. Now I did not necessary agree with all Reagan tried, but like any experimental scientist, sometimes you have to try things you don't think will work, and give them a chance.<br /><br />And SCO comparisons between Iraq and Normandy invasion are completely baffling to me. There is in no way any similarity at all between the two.<br /><br />As far as Kosovo, there is no comparison as well. Ethnic cleansing was currently going on, needed to be stopped, the effort was supported by the UN and oversawn by NATO, and we never went in as an occupying power.<br /><br />We adopted the stated "Bush Doctrine" of preemption, and that policy absolutely requires that we somehow have exceptionally accurate intelligence, and we can show that left alone, it poses a clear and present danger to the US and the rest of the free world---and, of course, be correct in that assessment.<br /><br />Iraq did not qualify in any of these criteria.<br /><br />You simply cannot take governments out simply because you do not like them, and you are big enough and strong enough to pull it off.

 

[ob]

Re: 60 Minutes

You simply cannot take governments out simply because you do not like them, and you are big enough and strong enough to pull it off. <br />--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />I think there was a little bit more than dislike that motivated our presence in Iraq.If the US simply took out countries that weren't to our liking ,Cuba would be the Great Barrier Reef II.We maintain a presence there which keeps them in check.

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: 60 Minutes

While I don't agree with Plywoody, I understand some of his positions. There is one I come close to agreeing with him on.<br />This is the point that careful planning and execution of this war is needed. Wasted time, money and lives is a most important concern for our national security.<br />Where plys views this breach of competence in the invasion of Iraq. I see it in our recent performance in Iraq.<br /><br />It's strange that the supporters of Bush and the war in Iraq here on this forum don't see it as well.<br /><br />A month ago on another simular thread, I brought up this "game" we've been playing with the enemy in Iraq. This particular enemy is completely identified, visible, and engaged in our face daily. <br />Some months ago our finest military machine had this enemy, Alsadr and his militia surrounded. We were told months ago by the military Alsadr had only a matter of hours, not days, hours before he'd be worm dirt. Instead our military backed off. Then they negotiated with him. Then we moved back in. Then we backed off. Then back on him. Then more negotiations. Then we move back in. Then we negotiate. Then we are back on him.<br /> Three stinking months later, we take pop shots and negotiate.<br /><br />Now mind you, I'm just a poor working stiff like most of you. I'm not a military genius and dang sure won't win awards for diplomacy.<br />But at some point common sense has to kick in over blindly following a fool. And low and behold a few military experts speak about the blatant foolishness.<br /><br />It makes me sick to hear the left call this Bush's Vietnam. But it makes me more sick that Bush/Rumsfeld seem to want it that way.<br />I understand this war will be difficult, long and be at multi fronts.<br /> BUT IT MAKES ME VERY VERY DISGUSTED THAT OUR CIVILIAN LEADERS ARE SQUANDERING VICTORY. <br />No doubt that that Marine Colonel who said he'd be kickin' Alsadr tail in a matter of hours knew what he was talking about.<br />There's also no doubt some civilian blue suits called or warriors back time and again.<br /><br />And again, if we ain't in this to thoroughly and decisively crush our enemy. Get us the he11 out!<br />Play politics and class president in times of peace. In a time of war we need a clear leader and someone who will walk the talk.<br />No you won't find it in Kerry. But honestly, not since he landed on that carrier and declared victory, I've not seen it in Bush either.<br /><br />As evidenced, the finest fighting machine in the world. And just this past weekend Alsadr says "I'll not recognise any government in Iraq backed by the US."<br />Go ahead, back your beloved President. But when we allow wormdirt to defy us on the battlefield like this Alsadr has, we're loosing this whole dang war.<br />You can blame the media, the libs, plywoody and the Arabians all you want. <br />But it gets all so rediculous when you realize Alsadr doesn't have a single tank, gunship or tomahawk. <br /><br />I'm sorry fellas, this (Alsadr)and the fact that Aljazzera hasn't been bombed. The fact that we let our conquered enemy retain RPGs and AK47s. The fact that nowhere near what was said was in Iraq has been located. Plus all that we've yet to learn and experience in the next few months points to considerable incompetence.

 

[PW2]

Re: 60 Minutes

While I understand your position re Sadr, and even to some degree sympathize with it, the (latest) stated goal of the entire operation is to liberate the people of Iraq, and bring democracy to the region. That is going to be a tough sell when or if we start obliterating political opponents.<br /><br />If the military goal was to conquer Iraq, I would agree whole heartedly with you. But it is not, and this nation building excersise, and winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people, is tricky difficult business.<br /><br />Now I fully admit I don't have a simple answer for this, and I agree with the administration in involving the UN (somewhat belatedly), but I am pretty sure what you propose won't get us there.

 

[samagee]

Re: 60 Minutes

Nailing this AlSadr character is going to be hard, because they hide behind women and children. They also hide in their holy buildings, which the Iraqis have said we can't even scratch. I think it is toltal BS myself, but we are tiptoeing right now because of other country leader's crooked agendas.<br /><br />I personally feel that we need to start exercising these stealth tactics we have been practicing. Send in a boat load of special tactics operations to take these clowns out. I do not think the U.S. needs to be labeling AlSadr as a political person. That label alone puts the hand cuffs on them, on how they can treat him. They need to continue labeling him as an enemy combatant, of the U.S. and Iraq.

 

[SCO]

Re: 60 Minutes

I share your doubts Skinnywater, PW, but, the only thing that counts now is the take of the new Republic. Maybe sadr is essentially powerless unless martyred, at least that's what I am hoping they are thinking. <br />I disagree PW that it(liberation) is the latest goal...I always understood it to be the goal and said so here years ago. <br />My analogy wrt Normandy has nothing to do with justification(thats another topic), just the practicality of what you need to do to defeat an enemy. They(zealot alqeda types) want to capture the middle east, we want to prevent that.<br />Whether or not there is an occupation in Kosovo is some of the minuta I was talking about.<br />The part I like about PW's and samagee's ideas for covert action is that the press is our biggest enemy. Agreed that more flying under the radar is in order...Then again, the press gleefully searches to expose such plans and discredit this effort.

 

[SoulWinner]

Re: 60 Minutes

How come the liberals say that the war was planned before 9/11 on the one hand, and then say the war was a hastily thrown together without necessary planning on the other?

 

[12Footer]

Re: 60 Minutes

It doesn't change my point....fear is a tool.

Yes, of course, fear is a tool. And sarin is a WMD, found in an artillray shell in Iraq..Niether will throw my country's resolve off-course.

 

[PW2]

Re: 60 Minutes

SW--Because it was planned for a long time--It was just poorly planned, not so much the military aspect of it, but the occupying and reconstruction of the country.<br /><br />Length of time in planning does not necessarily equate to quality of planning.

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: 60 Minutes

Niether will throw my country's resolve off-course.<br />

Engageing in a politically correct war has and is throwing this countrys resolve and mission off-course.

 

[12Footer]

Re: 60 Minutes

What is correct about it, SW? It's war, and war is never correct. But I would rather not see my country loose it.<br />Nobody I know of, regardless of thier political ideogoy wants this war,outside of seeing it thru to victory.<br /> <br />But I hear or read of at LEAST one person every day, who would have us capitulate to these mutant bands of self-rightious thugs. I do not understand this logic and never will. It's why I keep replying to these worn-out posts ,long after I have made my opinion on it's subject clear, SW.<br />This entire subject has been whipped to death, but I can't help but declare my rights to having my country's military protect my family, with a large degree of success. I'm too old to re-up. I'm also too stuburn to follow orders any more, so that's probably a good thing. But I can at very least support those who (some younger than my own kids) place themselves in harm's way on my behalf. The worn-out addage, "I support the troops, but not the war", is as old as warfare itself, I'm sure. But it sickens me nonetheless,every time someone states it in it's miriad of syntax.<br />Such oximorons are truely the propaganda of morons, and I'll speak-out every time I see it, and expose it for the BarbaraStriesand it is.<br />I only hope that those in the services who read this, do so with the knowlege that the vast majority of thier countrymen, are out here doing what we are able to do, in our own small ways, to secure victory.<br /><br />It's bad when the media giants in one's own country, controlled by such viscous, self-serving ,sour elitists, spread fictional, incomplete or spun "reporting" to thier greedy ends. It has allways been up to you and I to call them out at every turn, lest they be actually LISTENED-to as they were durring my tour, in Walter Cronkite's era....To think-back on those days, and to realize that JOHN KERRY actually "fought" for the same country I did, is very disturbing and telling. But then, America is a very unique country,isn't it?<br /><br />"We won't be fooled again", if I have anything to do with it!

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: 60 Minutes

Beautifully said 12'.<br />And I'm quite sure we stand on the same corner.<br /><br /><br />

"What is correct about it, SW? It's war, and war is never correct. But I would rather not see my country loose it.<br />Nobody I know of, regardless of thier political ideogoy wants this war,outside of seeing it thru to victory."

In the same spirit of speaking out. Even when my particular views are in a minority. Certain details of fact should weigh into the discussion.<br />I'm sure though some here would agree that events such as 9/11 qualify as a very correct war.<br />History has illuminated others as correct and others as mistakes.<br /><br />History shows that it's usually the political wars that have resulted as incomplete, rooftop retreats or simply as blunders.<br />The problem is a war with victory should be black and white. Wars heavy in political involvement introduce gray. In instances where black and white are mandatory, gray is a manipulation of truth.<br />My President and his team did a fine job of convincing me that this was a war. And they did it in purely black and white terms and meaning.<br />The gray introduced by the media, the liberals and other self interests would mean very little, had not the administration introduced their own version of gray.<br />I'm wary of to much gray. To much gray is where we see troops hastily leaving a "war" from the last rooftop on the last chopper. Or at the very least, having troops sit on a line in the dirt for decades.<br /><br />As for people who wouldn't want to win a war?<br />I think it's very evident there are institutions, candidates, people, countrys, and idealologys that will do anything to hold, regain, acquire and keep power.<br /><br />Thanks again 12'. I like the thought of two old scowls standing on the corner waving the flag.

 

[PW2]

Re: 60 Minutes

Ok, so now I am curious. What constitutes a victory in this war with Iraq? <br /> And the only time it was ever "black and white" was just after Bush landed on the aircraft carrier under the mission accomplished banner. Which was pretty much specifically what Zinni was complaining about. It has always been gray. That fact was not very well recognized, I am afraid, nor planned for, by the civilian leadership in the military, or the administration.<br /><br />And what has the press reported in error? Or would you prefer the press just report what the government wants them to report, like the good 'ol Soviet Union used to be like. I hope not.<br />Blaming the press for policy failings is pretty ridiculous.<br /><br />Now I understand that you want all to be the good little lemmings, and unquestioningly follow their leaders no matter where it leads. I am pleased that there are not a majority who share that opinion, or we are likely to suffer the same fate as the real lemmings.

 

[ob]

Re: 60 Minutes

Ok, so now I am curious. What constitutes a victory in this war with Iraq? <br /><br />Well,one victory that comes to mind is the removal of Sadam from power.Anyone who thinks that this guy and his sons didn't pose an inevitable threat to the regions stability and the US? If the US waits until one of our adversaries is an imminent threat,it may be too late to react after the fact.That's why we maintain military presence around the world.Japan,Cuba to name just a couple.<br /><br />The US plan as I understand it is to remain until the new Iraq goverment is in place and at their discretion remain if asked to assist in the <br />eradication of non goverment terrorist organizations.We're all watching the same reports aren't we?