What losing this war will mean

[Ralph 123]

Re: What losing this war will mean

Hey David, your hatred and vitriol is badly misplaced. Save it for the people who intentionally slaughter the innocent including intentionally targeting CHILDREN. Your theory of this war conveniently ignores all that happened before Iraq. It conveniently ignores what people like Friedman learned through first hand investigation about what is driving this war. Unfortunately, it's going to take a lot more than what has happened thus far to wake America up. I just hope we it doesn't take the loss of a few cities. And if you don't think that is a very real possibility you haven't done your homework.<br /><br />After 911 I set out to learn as much as I could for myself. I read and listened to just about everything I could get my hands on. I wanted to understand what it was all about. What I learned shocked me and scared me and I am not one easily frightened. <br /><br />As for Iraq, all you have to do is read the UN report of what WMDs were known to exist when the inspectors were kicked out to believe Saddam still had quite an arsenal. ALl we had was Saddam's word that he unilaterally destroyed them and didn't bother to document it to get the sanctions lifted. The country was in the middle of an Anthrax scare. We knew people like Zarqawi fled there from Afghanistan. Anser al Islam had bases there (remember what the troops found at those basis?). The leadership of this country looked at the best information they had, and they voted. Now, its done and we better win or the Islamo-fascists will have unlimited resources to launch attacks upon the US and Western World. That's the bottom line. Letting your hatred of one man blind you from the true enemy is dangerous.

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: What losing this war will mean

David, you didn't answer the question.<br />The facts were as I gave them. Hans Blix only concluded he couldn't find them, yet also concluded based on common assumption throughout the worlds intellengent community, Saddam had them.<br />And again; And as late as 2003 the legislative branch voted to take action in Iraq based on the same information that was given to them back in the late '90's and post 911. As well as the same info that was available to the President at the time! <br /><br />Again still waiting for an simple answer. My question doesn't have anything to do with Al Qaeda, Iran, the light of day or your sour disposition.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: What losing this war will mean

Somebody please help me understand what makes people have more hatred for Bush than for terrorists. What makes them have more concern for detainees than innocent free people targeted by religious fanatics bent on destroying the modern world? What makes them think the terrorism is a result of Iraq even though it had been happening long before? What makes them think that US policy in the ME is to blame even though the French, Brits, Russians, etc. were involved to a much larger degree for a heck of a lot longer? What makes these people blame their own country first? Would they have blamed the Nazis on the French and Brits? After all, they came to power in large part playing on the harsh peace terms of WWI. What makes these people tick?

 

[POINTER94]

Re: What losing this war will mean

David,<br /><br />Having been put in jail erroneously for the ego trip of a local judge who carried a grudge against my father I am very concerned about those who are in Gitmo. I am very concerned about making sure that those who are held are participating in terror in whatever form and not part of a random roundup. <br /><br />But the democrats have used the prison as a political football without regard for the impact on the American soldiers and our citizenry. Every person in there has been scrutinized by our military, the UN, **** Durbin, Nancy Pelosi, Amnesty International (joke), and the world media. Wouldn't Lil' Nancy and Turbin Durbins time been better utilized working for better equipment for our troops, securing funds for the intellegence community, pushing for boarder control, even helping the families of the victims of 911? No, they felt dropping a Koran in the toilet and trying to embarrass our military who protects their pathitic little keesters in the press is something the world turns on. And then claim they are being patriotic - it makes me physically sick. They actually had the gall to compare our troops to Nazi's, Pol Pot, and Stalin. And nothing was brought against them and then ran around defending the statements for weeks. These are our leaders. It's defeat by politics and political correctness. They DID cause the loss of lives with their statements. If there is a man held for no reason I feel for him deeply. But this IS war and it isn't always fair. No prison, air conditioned or not has not recieved the same scruitiny that Gitmo has. Religious, political, or national wars are still wars. The fact they don't wear a uniform or occupy a body of land doesn't change the constructs of a war. This is a new twist on war and we are struggling to adapt an institution quickly from a standing army to this new form of intellegence based infiltration of the enemy. <br /><br />I personally loath the tactics that will need to be implemented and rest assured racial profiling will be implemented with the next major American attack. Our open boarder has to be a thing of the past. But lives are in the balance. The enemy has no ethics and adhere to no rules of war, and we will eventually need some way to identify the enemy and in an open society this is impossible. Heck the London bombers were poster children for upstanding Islamic English citizens. They weren't. People died.<br /><br />Things are going to get brutal and ugly. Very ugly and more innocents will die. Homicide bombers have killed over 100 people in the past 24hrs and we are concerned about the handling of the Koran? Talk about not keeping your eye on the ball. Misplaced priorities and personal agendas will cost lives not just dollars as was the case in the past.<br /><br />Thanks for making time to understand my point.

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: What losing this war will mean

People who think terrorism is basically America's own fault or all of this will end if we just mind our own business are just very badly misinformed. There is nothing we can do to end this short of winning this war everywhere.

Yeah Ralph I intentionally seperated what we do regarding the current "war on terrorism" and foreign policy that causes it.<br />All bets are off in the battlefield. I was addressing the foreign policy mistakes that create enemys.<br />In most of the African countrys previously mentioned have very minor to no involvement in Islamic terrorism.<br />Yet we still dabble to suit our needs.<br />And in all respect and fairness, people who ignore or fail to consider our very real and substantial contributions to our enemys causes are misinformed also.<br /><br />Like The Bible, The Constitution and the original intentions of their creators, I'm not inclined to beleive in some parts while ignoring others. It's the whole content that make the rules of play. It's the whole content that balance the whole concept.<br />I'm sorry I have to be "locked-in" to the concept that the founders intended US to be completely* neutral in regards to foreign affairs. And Constitutionally our military is purely intended to be a defensive one. <br />As in, not a police force for the world.<br />Again remember, personally I lean close to a nuclear option when engaged in actual war. <br /> * except in cases of vital national security. Then it is to be clearly defined and accurate with full disclosure and debate. Constitutionally, a declaration must be made. National security shouldn't coincidentally arise out of meddleing in internal affairs of foreign governments. <br /><br />As for Pat Buchanan, the media and the both political power machines have done tremendous damage to Pat's message and idealology.<br />I seriously embrace the concept of being true to ourselves, our culture, our Constitution to be major players economically throughout the world, without meddleing and back stabbing.<br />

What makes them think that US policy in the ME is to blame even though the French, Brits, Russians, etc. were involved to a much larger degree for a heck of a lot longer?

It didn't do them any good either. They made enemys, had hundreds years worth of dieing sons on desert sands and sadly had no positive returns for their involvemnt.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: What losing this war will mean

OK Skinny, please explain it to me again, what exact foreign policy, and what exact deeds of ours causes people to blow themselves up in crowds of children, fly planes into building, etc., etc.? And, given our rather benign behavior compared to others in the ME, why is this just against us and the Jews? When Saddam was slaughtering millions how come they weren't doing it in the street of Baghdad? These are the same people aren't they? Clearly Saddam did much more harm to them than we ever did. So why just us and the Jews? The secular Syrians slaughtered a whole town and bulldozed it and took people to see it as a warning, so why weren't they flying planes into buildings in Damascus or Moscow (they were a Soviet client state).<br /><br />This isn't about foreign policy. They don't hate us because we are friendly with the Saudi Royal family or the Jews. They hate us because we are infidels that threaten their fundamental religious beliefs. They hate us because they can no longer isolate themselves from our culture due to technology, not troop presence. They hate us because we are diametrically opposed to nearly every one of their fundamental beliefs. The clerics hate us because their people can see another way of life that does not provide them with complete control over the lives of Muslims. That's not my take, that's right from horses mouth and is well documented by many people like Friedman.<br /><br />I have listened to Pat a great deal on MSNBC so my take on him is based on his own words and I have read some of his articles. Pat does not fully understand how the world has changed and how it has become completely impossible to isolate yourself from the rest of the world and expect to be left alone. How well did completely leaving Afghanistan alone after the Soviets pulled out work out for us? Funny the Pakistanis said it was our own fault for disengaging after the Soviets left.. He also has no idea what's driving this war. He seems to think it's our support of Israel. Al Qaeda hardly ever even mentioned that. They aren't asking us to stop supporting Israel. They are asking us to show them our neck so they slice it.

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: What losing this war will mean

what exact foreign policy, and what exact deeds of ours causes people to blow themselves up in crowds of children, fly planes into building, etc., etc.?

The masses of Islamics only dislike and distrust US Ralph. The extremists have developed a brutal warfare tactic.<br />Your premise that domestic terrorism is the direct result of envy, jealousy, or insecurity is flawed. The United States was not attacked because we are free. Bin Laden was not attacking the Bill of Rights. We were attacked because the United States' military and political presence is massive over there. Bin Laden in his fatwah, his statement of declaration of war on the United States, said the infidels were standing on the sacred soil of Saudi Arabia. They want us out of the Middle East. They don't care whether we have a separation of church and state.<br />What part of our Foreign policy that supported repressive dictatorships like the Shah of Iran, The Saudi family, Saddam Hussien and countless others like them don't you understand?<br />The terrorist movement didn't happen during the '90's, it built up through decades of our meddleing. Notice...I contend, 8 months of GW had nothing to do with it. He as well as US were the victims of decades of not minding our own business. Like the British, the French, the Soviets before us.<br /><br />I suppose The Constitution and the founders intent are unrealistic if your desire is to support our meddleing and impose our idealology on soveriegn nations.<br />The last great crusade for democracy was Woodrow Wilson going across the sea with an army to make the world safer. We brought down all the monarchs and we got instead Lenin and Stalin and Mussolini and Hitler.<br /><br />You definately make a strong case to genuinely fear the "neo-con" view of America's future role in this world. Better make plenty of babys folks, this is gonna be a long war.

 

[dogsdad]

Re: What losing this war will mean

Originally posted by Skinnywater:<br /> The masses of Islamics only dislike and distrust US Ralph. The extremists have developed a brutal warfare tactic.<br />Your premise that domestic terrorism is the direct result of envy, jealousy, or insecurity is flawed. The United States was not attacked because we are free. Bin Laden was not attacking the Bill of Rights. We were attacked because the United States' military and political presence is massive over there. Bin Laden in his fatwah, his statement of declaration of war on the United States, said the infidels were standing on the sacred soil of Saudi Arabia. They want us out of the Middle East. They don't care whether we have a separation of church and state.<br />What part of our Foreign policy that supported repressive dictatorships like the Shah of Iran, The Saudi family, Saddam Hussien and countless others like them don't you understand?<br />The terrorist movement didn't happen during the '90's, it built up through decades of our meddleing. Notice...I contend, 8 months of GW had nothing to do with it. He as well as US were the victims of decades of not minding our own business. Like the British, the French, the Soviets before us.<br /><br /><br />

Not true.<br /><br />It is precisely because of our Constitution and our ideals that they want to eliminate us.<br /><br />Because of our success, we will be emulated throughout the world---amd that means our values,our laws, and our culture will be emulated, and that means that those who would have the world dancing (willingly or not) to their own tune see us as an obstacle to their achievement of their goal. You can't establish a dictatorship over a world of free people, can you?<br /><br />America could exist on the moon, in total isolation from the world, but as long as people on earth knew about America, they would want their countries to be like America. Dictators would want America destroyed regardless of where it exists...and even if it existed only in the minds of the people they would dominate.<br /><br />And THAT is the way it is.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: What losing this war will mean

The masses of Islamics only dislike and distrust US Ralph. The extremists have developed a brutal warfare tactic. Your premise that domestic terrorism is the direct result of envy, jealousy, or insecurity is flawed. The United States was not attacked because we are free. Bin Laden was not attacking the Bill of Rights. We were attacked because the United States' military and political presence is massive over there. Bin Laden in his fatwa, his statement of declaration of war on the United States, said the infidels were standing on the sacred soil of Saudi Arabia. They want us out of the Middle East. They don't care whether we have a separation of church and state.

It's not my premise and it's not a few nut jobs. It's what they (Muslim Arabs in every country) tell anyone who asks. There are plenty of books out there that document it written by credible sources. This has nothing to do with the few troops the US had out in the desert protecting SA from Iraq. This started long before that SW, long before, and it goes a lot deeper than mistrust and it extends to non-Arab countries like the Philippines and Indonesia. This isn't about the ME it is about the Non-Muslim world Vs the Muslim world.<br /><br />

They want us out of the Middle East

They want us off the planet SW. If we didn't have a single person in the ME we are still there every day electronically perverting their sacred religion. These are religious fanatics who think it's every Muslims duty to kill infidels.<br /><br />

What part of our Foreign policy that supported repressive dictatorships like the Shah of Iran, The Saudi family, Saddam Hussien and countless others like them don't you understand?<br />

Supported them? What about every other country that "supported" them? What about the Russians who sold them most of their arms? Who supplied the Egyptian military? Who supplied the Iraqi Military? Who supplied the Syrian military? So using your premise, the Russians, the French, the Germans,the Brits and even the Chinese should all have been attacked before the US since they were directly involved in arming these governments. Blaming these governments on the US is a sad joke. What would you have had us do? Depose them? Ignore them? What exactly? <br /><br />Using your premise, since we want to install democracies they should behind us right? They should be supporting self determination and freedom right? Gee I wonder why that's not the case if the cause is as you postulate?<br /><br />You sure don't agree with Pat on the cause. Pat would have simply said it's due to support of Israel and you didn't even mention that. Interesting.<br /><br />

You definitely make a strong case to genuinely fear the "neo-con" view of America's future role in this world. Better make plenty of babys folks, this is gonna be a long war.<br />

It's bout defeating virulent ideology that seeks to kill off all those not of the right faith regardless of methodology or outcome. They have no problem living in caves so long as they win. Now, we can kill them all or we can be judicious and change the game and see if that changes the majority.<br /><br />If you think we can simply act like turtles, pull our heads in our shells and kowtow and that will satisfy them I think you're dreaming. If they get their hands on WMDs they will use them and then our only option will be to "go Roman." If we help them gain their freedom like in Afghanistan, Iraq, now Lebanon, Bahrain and even SA, we have a shot that the clerics will begin to lose control. Right now it is easy for them to recruit and brainwash people with no hope for the future.<br /><br />There is nothing "new - neo" about conservatives who want to face America's enemies and defeat them as early as possible. If we hadn't been aggressive and global about our approach to the Communist (Soviets) we would have had WWIV when the threat became too big to ignore and the options too limited. It's like Cancer; the earlier you catch it and treat the more options you have and the better the outcome.<br /><br />By the way, Pat's definition of "neo-con" seems to be synonymous with Jew.<br /><br />You really don't consider terrorism simply a brutal warfare tactic do you SW?<br /><br />

I suppose The Constitution and the founders intent are unrealistic if your desire is to support our meddleing and impose our idealology on soveriegn nations.

Wait a minute now I am really confused. I thought we brought this on ourselves by "supporting" the governments in the region and not imposing our ideology upon them but taking them as we found them? So which is it? Our williness to do business with them and not support freedom or our supporting freedom in opposition to their governments? Oh I know. It's our very existence no matter what we do that's the real problem!

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: What losing this war will mean

It's not my premise and it's not a few nut jobs. It's what they (Muslim Arabs in every country) tell anyone who asks....... and it goes a lot deeper than mistrust and it extends to non-Arab countries like the Philippines and Indonesia. This isn't about the ME it is about the Non-Muslim world Vs the Muslim world.

That's pure nonsense. What ever happend to the premise that "all people want to be free?" MOST of the Muslim population is just trying to FEED itself. The next segment in that population could care less! We'll make room for the segment that "want to be free" here. The next segment is in the government/military and benefits from corruption and repression. I'm worried about the people in these catagories that are inflamed by our meddleing. <br />You were talking about handful of fanatics while I was talking foreign policy and our meddleing into whole governments. And yes that involves even non-Arab countrys.<br />

They want us off the planet SW. If we didn't have a single person in the ME we are still there every day electronically perverting their sacred religion. These are religious fanatics who think it's every Muslims duty to kill infidels.

Then why in all the universe Ralph would you want to make them rich and powerful? Why would you even consider buying a drop of oil from them? Why be so dependent on our enemy?<br />See we go round and round, I'm talking causes and cures, you talk of more intervention. Intervention isn't a cure.<br />

...What about the Russians who sold them most of their arms? Who supplied the Egyptian military? Who supplied the Iraqi Military? Who supplied the Syrian military? So using your premise, the Russians, the French, the Germans,the Brits and even the Chinese should all have been attacked before the US since they were directly involved in arming these governments. Blaming these governments on the US is a sad joke. What would you have had us do? Depose them? Ignore them? What exactly?

The Russians are BEAT Ralph! Their own brand of foreign policy beat them. The French occupied and were sent packing. Their brand of Foreign policy beat them. The Germans, Brits, Chinese all failures when it came to occupying and meddleing. You advocate the same road!<br />

Using your premise, since we want to install democracies they should behind us right? They should be supporting self determination and freedom right? Gee I wonder why that's not the case if the cause is as you <br />postulate?

The Shah, the Saudi family and Saddam weren't democracys. Where did you get that premise? My premise is you can only impose a dictatorship. And freedom is the ripest fruit on the highest branches. If the hunger for it is great enough, the climb will be made. No matter how difficult. That struggle makes it valuable. <br />I as an American have a duty to only be an example. I'd be doing them a favor by not to make it cheap and easy.<br />

You sure don't agree with Pat on the cause. .<br />By the way, Pat's definition of "neo-con" seems to be synonymous with Jew.

That's funny because I'm a Jew and I don't see the connection. And you said you haven't read his books. So what seems to be synonymous to you is irrelavant. <br />Now don't be so eager to put me in a contemporary catagory Ralph. I'm warning you, I do think for myself.<br />

If they get their hands on WMDs they will use them and then our only option will be to "go Roman."

I want to "go Roman" on them now Ralph. <br />But then what, buy more oil from the repressive regimes in Africa? After we make those dictators filthy rich and arm them against their enemys we can "go Roman" on the ones that resent us for it....again?<br />

There is nothing "new - neo" about conservatives who want to face America's enemies and defeat them as early as possible.

What is new is "pretend conservatives" that ignore original intent and The Constitution. They are too PC to be strong on the battlefield and are incapable of being Statesmen or Warriors. They are in power only by the hair of their chinny-chin-chin.<br />

If we hadn't been aggressive and global about our approach to the Communist (Soviets) we would have had WWIV when the threat became too big to ignore and the options too limited. It's like Cancer; the earlier you catch it and treat the more options you have and the better the outcome.

So then you waste decades of men, money and effort defeating countrys that were destin to fail on their own. Countrys that wouldn't stand a chance against the free and armed anyhow.<br /> Only then end up doing MASSIVE amounts of trade with the largest, most powerful Communist country of them all? We wine them, dine them, sell them military secrets and even run a trade deficits with them. That's strange Cancer therapy.<br />

<br />Wait a minute now I am really confused. I thought we brought this one ourselves by "supporting" the governments in the region and not imposing our ideology upon them but taking them as we found them? So which is it? Our williness to do business with them and not support freedom or our supporting freedom in opposition to their governments? Oh I know. It's our very existence no matter what we do that's the real <br />problem!

You wait a minute Ralph. You're free to disengage with me at any time. You asking me a question just to answer it for me? Do you really want to make the case that if I don't agree with you I'm an idiot? You trying to go "David L. Moore" on me? <br />I prefer to not do ANY business with my enemy. I prefer to not do any business with a repressive Government. I prefer to not do any business with a dictatorship, or the devil.<br />It is only your OPINION that we have to micro-manage the world to do business in it. It is only your OPINION that our economy needs involvement in all the worlds economy to prosper.<br />It's my OPINION that we rely less on the worlds economy and our enemy will be more exposed and vulnerable.<br />It will likely shrivel up and die.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: What losing this war will mean

You were talking about handful of fanatics while I was talking foreign policy and our meddleing into whole governments. And yes that involves even non-Arab countrys.

Prove it. Little old Al Qaeda trained 60,000 in a short time in Afghanistan. 100 or maybe even 1,000 times that number have been through the Madrasses. Many times that number have been radicalized through Wahhabism which has been proselytizing for 200 years and is backed by billions in funding. I hope you are right and it's just a small number but the evidence so far is otherwise. There are 300 Al Qaeda suspects under active surveillance in the UK alone.<br /><br /><br />

Then why in all the universe Ralph would you want to make them rich and powerful? Why would you even consider buying a drop of oil from them? Why be so dependent on our enemy?<br />See we go round and round, I'm talking causes and cures, you talk of more intervention. Intervention isn't a cure.

Are you kidding or what? Are you old enough to remember the embargo? Don't you work for a Mercedes dealer? Cutting oil consumption by 30% would make the great depression look like the roaring 20s. Maybe we can just stop breathing too? You understand all the ways oil is used right? You understand what oil tripling in price would do to the economy right?<br /><br />Hey I agree we should be diversifying away from oil. But until we do we have to deal with the way things are, not the way we wish they were. We should never have stopped building nuclear plants but the left made it impossible to build any more. They are trying to build a wind farm off Nantucket but the beautiful people like Kerry and Cronkite, etc. have managed to put a stop to that too. It's natural for people to want to ignore problems until they reach a crisis state.<br /><br />

I'm worried about the people in these categories that are inflamed by our meddling. <br />

Again, I am really unclear on what meddling you're talking about that inflamed the average man on the street that brought about 911. These people who you claim just want to feed themselves and could care less couldn't have been that angry over a few troops in the desert that helped save the region for Saddam can they? Is that what you think it really comes down to? One little air base in the middle of the dessert? Or, maybe it is far more complex having to do with the US being made the scapegoat for all their problems by the State controlled press and clerics? Their major inferiority complex in a region where pride is everything? No, it's much more satisfying to embrace the simple answer which has a very simple solution - it's our own fault.<br /><br />

The Russians are BEAT Ralph! Their own brand of foreign policy beat them. The French occupied and were sent packing. Their brand of Foreign policy beat them. The Germans, Brits, Chinese all failures when it came to occupying and meddling. You advocate the same road!

Really? I guess you missed all those French made arms with recent date codes we found in Iraq. I guess you missed the whole oil for food scandal where the French and Germans engaged in one of the largest corruption scandals in the history of the world and was directly responsible for a lack of food and medicine reaching starving people in Iraq?<br /><br />

The Shah, the Saudi family and Saddam weren't democracys. Where did you get that premise?

I'm talking about now. I am talking about Iraq. I am talking about 80,000 people who braved violence to come out and vote and mark themselves with indelible ink to leave no doubt of their participation. These people you say are just mad because we supported repressive regimes must be support this move towards freedom and democracy right?<br /><br />

That's funny because I'm a Jew and I don't see the connection.

Then you haven;t listened to Pat or read any of his Op-eds. Pat makes it clear the root of our problems in the ME is our support of Israel. He's said it many, many times. How could you not see the connection? Pat even said we went into Iraq because the Jews pushed us into it and the real purpose was to remove a threat to Israel.<br /><br />

So then you waste decades of men, money and effort defeating countrys that were destin to fail on their own.

Really and you know that how? Seems to me they only fail when challenged at every turn; when they are actively opposed.<br /><br />As for China, there has already been massive reform as a result of trade. They have all but abandoned the communist economic system. Now, with the people tasting prosperity it won't be too long before the political system begins to change as well. That's a lot better than waiting around until things get so bad all out war is the only option. It's not my nature to wait around until problems become too big to ignore and your options are limited to radical solutions. That's like ignoring a grounding noise coming from you sterndrive until the boat dies in the water.<br /><br />

Do you really want to make the case that if I don't agree with you I'm an idiot?

Not at all just trying to point out I'm having a hard time understanding your argument which has internal inconstancies. I'm not sure if you think we are hated beaus we didn't meddle enough by not opposing their governments or because we are meddling too much now by supporting democracy. I think you're a smart guy with a very black or white world model.<br /><br />

I prefer to not do ANY business with my enemy. I prefer to not do any business with a repressive Government.

That's just unrealistic. We need to buy oil to stay healthy. We have no choice. Even if we did somehow manage to simply act like ostriches and put our hands in the sand, they won't simply leave us out of it. We will be dragged into it one way or the other. The governments and clerics will use us as scapegoats no matter what. We will be targeted no matter what.<br /><br />

It is only your OPINION that our economy needs involvement in all the worlds economy to prosper.

Ask India how being economically and politically isolationist worked out for them. Ask China too. Maybe you'd be happy living like them with that massive poverty but I think most of your fellow Americans would not. America was founded on trade. It has always been tied to our prosperity ever since the first load of good were shipped back home England.

 

[PW2]

Re: What losing this war will mean

Ok,<br /><br />Let's get back to the original question.<br /><br />That is <br />1. How do we win this war?<br />2. What is a win?<br />3. What is an acceptable outcome in Iraq?

 

[txswinner]

Re: What losing this war will mean

I did the Viet Nam thing as USMC, am not a left wing liberal, not a commie, just redblooded American raised in the 60's and 70's and did all the things that we were supposed to do including serving country college etc. But the invasion of Iraq was bs and anyone who says otherwise has blinders on. You will stamp out terrorist just like you will stamp out fireants. They will never be gone just hope to control them and STAY OUT OF THEIR BEDS!!!

 

[mikeandronda]

Re: What losing this war will mean

Txswinner, alhough I completely disagree with you I can respect your opinion much more than many of those who share your opinion.You have served your country and for that I comend you and respect you and will entertian your thoughts even though i disagree. You sir have every right to feel the way you do and I for one think your comparisions to fire ants is spot on but, I will never allow fire ants in my yard and if that means going into my next door niehbors yard because he refuses to get rid of them I will. You see the way i see it I am above pests like that....the same way we Americans are above the terrorists. We need to exterminate them as a pest control company would do the same for insect pests....... I agree we need to stay out of their beds but then if they so much as threaten us we should obliderate s/p? them......and that would include any counrty that harbors and trains and provides them with arms......hmmmmmmm sounds a bit like Iraq and afganistan.<br /><br />PW2 heres some ideas.<br />1 how do we win? quite worring about being pc and kick there cave livin rears in.<br />2. What is a win? To put them in there place and exterminate as many enimies as possable. To protect our country and make it hurt way too much for them to attack us.<br />3. What is an acceptable outcome in Iraq? to be honest for me it would be to turn that ces-pit of human garbage into a parking lot......though I know Im out of line and prolly am disapointing God in my non grace giving thoughts but I am tierd of them crying that we are so terrable for putting underwear on their heads after we capture them and boo hooing about us mean ole' americans but when it comes to them its just war when they behead civilans( men and woman) blow up civilians and kill their own people to prove a point.... quite frankly deserve to die painful drawn out deaths. <br /><br />PW, The world would be a better place if every one of these extreem muslums were dead......can you deny that???????

 

[txswinner]

Re: What losing this war will mean

Mike, Your point is well taken, but why are we there. To control oil and get rid of Saddam. Saddam did not give one iota about Muslem's terriorist or controlling the world. He believed in the old "I hate Jews" ideology but I felt he did not want any part of a fight with the USA. I never felt he had WMD and if he had we would have got a taste of them in Desert Storm. I would be 100% behind Bush if he had spent all the money and manpower going after Bin Laden but no "ole bin" is still on the run and we are killing Iraqi's and building a whole new generation of terrorist. Imagine the 8 to 14 year olds seeing their Dads or Uncles being killed. They do not know terrorist they just know the bad guys with the flag on their shoulder hitted dad or unc.

 

[alden135]

Re: What losing this war will mean

The bottom line in this discussion is the total breakdown of the moral fiber of America. Roughly half of this country is either to stupid, or to selfish to recognize that all our troubles stem from the assault on the traditional family unit. If we can't learn to keep the family together, how can we expect to keep the country intact. Screwed up kids produced from screwed up families grow up into what? Yes, screwed up adults! Todays polital environment is mearly the result of the last 50 years of "progressivness". Selfish self serving polititans, judges and other public officials with no sense of duty other than to themselves. We better start electing men and women who will take a stand on the issues for the good of the country. I'm eternally hopeful that we can get our act together for our common good and defense.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: What losing this war will mean

Saddam did not give one iota about Muslem's terriorist or controlling the world

No he didn't want to control the world just Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, maybe then Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon... you get the picture.<br /><br />

felt he did not want any part of a fight with the USA

Right he didn't want a fight with the US. That's why he pulled right out of Kuwait as soon as we put boots on the ground and told him, "get out or else..." Oh, you mean the second time when we said, "cooperate and prove you destroyed this stuff or else..." DO you mean that time?<br /><br />

never felt he had WMD and if he had we would have got a taste of them in Desert Storm

No WMDs? Well the UN disagrees with you and so did the rest of the world. Just go read the final inspection report. We know what he had when he kicked the inspectors out the during the Clinton Admin and you have to believe he unilaterally destroyed what the inspectors KNEW he had, (it had been tagged), didn't bother telling anyone he destroyed it, didn't document it and didn't bother asking the UN to lift sanctions because he had complied with the terms of the cease fire agreement.<br /><br />Don't you know about all the WMDs that were destroyed by the UN inspectors after the war? Don't you know about the US troops who are now sick because they were exposed during Desert Storm either because Saddam did release agents or accidentally after the US bombed some depots (they still aren't sure which).<br /><br />

we are killing Iraqi's and building a whole new generation of terrorist

Just in case you haven't had a chance to watch the news in say the last year or so, it's the terrorists killing innocent Iraqis, not the US... The Iraqis know who's killing them and who's helping them but obviously the same cannot be said for many Americans...

 

[txswinner]

Re: What losing this war will mean

Hey Ralph, You probably think the Vietnamese new we were the good guys while Brown & Root was on cost plus 100% contracts. My man wars are fought by this country with the poor and young who have no say so the older and wealthy can retain their status. 9/11 go after Bin Laden full force and don't you are anyone else try to tell me that taking over Iraqi had anything to do with that *******. Many Bush go kick Iraq supporters are what was described by the vietnam piece symbol, the CHICKENHAWKS all for someone else getting killed but try to put their *** on the line and watch them scatter. If you believe in the war in Iraq, I challenge you to go sign up to go and take your young male relatives with you. Til then you have no right to argue this point!! By the way my son is in the USMC as I was in 69 to 71 so I feel pretty comfortable on my stance. I begged him not to join.

 

[txswinner]

Re: What losing this war will mean

Ralph, We are killing Iraqi's everyday. Maybe you should pull your head out. They may be the bad guys and most are but the children do not recognize that and for this reason we are not getting rid of terrorist but giving the future generation of Iraq more to hate us for.

 

[txswinner]

Re: What losing this war will mean

Ralph, Explain to me why gasoline is going out of sight. Exxon and the other oil guys are making a ton off this war. When a hurricane hits the President and governors put the hurt on those who try to jack up prices because of the catastrophe why not now. Bush is the President and I give him respect for that but his war and the generals have no clue about this war or how to get their rear out except as another great loss for AMERICANS everywhere. This includes Gen. Chong or whoever.