[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Wrong again. Denying that this is a war makes you look sillier than usual.
Was Korea a war? Was Vietnam a war? Was the first Gulf War a war?
No one declares war anymore. It does not change the fact that it is a war.
[/quote]
Technically it ain’t.
As a side note, how many “wars” have you been involved in the past decades? You sure beat the hell out of any other country in that regard.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Wrong again. Denying that this is a war makes you look sillier than usual.
Was Korea a war? Was Vietnam a war? Was the first Gulf War a war?
No one declares war anymore. It does not change the fact that it is a war.
Technically it ain’t.
As a side note, how many “wars” have you been involved in the past decades? You sure beat the hell out of any other country in that regard.[/quote]
We certainly are the defenders of freedom aren’t we?
We saved South Korea from an invading North. I think that worked out pretty well for the people in the south. unfortunately for the people in the north China stuck their nose in and doomed them to decades at the hands of evil dictators.
We tried to save SE Asia from the evils of communism but unfortunately we were not able to. After looking at the horrors perpetrated by the communists after we left SE Asia there is no question they would have been better off if the US would have stayed.
Remind me again why you oppose the US fighting terrorists and dictators?
[quote]Chewie wrote:
lixy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Dumping Generals is very common in war time until you finally can get one to do his job.
Let me guess, “his job” would be to execute the orders without asking questions.
And for heaven’s sake, quit saying that you’re at war. You wrecked a country and are now occupying it. Pay some attention: Nobody declared war!
So, instead of being at a war with terror, what do you call it?
[/quote]
I’m sorry but whenever I hear someone touting that we are at war with terror it makes me laugh and then feel sad that the individual actually buys a line like that. It’s like a war on drugs. It is a war that has no end and no real way to win. So let’s be honest an call it the Iraqi War, the U.S.- Middle East Expansion War, or just a police action to dispose a dictator.
[quote]Chewie wrote:
What would you tell your grandchild when he ask you what you did in the war on terror?
It is beginning to seem like you would say:
“I supported the enemy.”
[/quote]
I would have to say that while I was no longer in the service, Grandson, I did what everyone should do in a non- war situation. I lived my life and tried to improve the society in which I lived. Also I sat dumbfounded as my fellow Americans allowed our constitutional principles crumble to feel safer about the threat of “terror”
[quote]storey420 wrote:
Also I sat dumbfounded as my fellow Americans allowed our constitutional principles crumble to feel safer about the threat of “terror”[/quote]
Times change and situations change. Our Constitutional Rights are going to be just fine. Things get ammended, but we evolve as needed.
While you are sitting watching at this point, you still don’t believe there is a threat. It will take some more attacks on our own soil or maybe in your own hood for you to feel the “threat” and acknowledge something needs to be done…right?
Stay in the perfect concept of your own la la land…safe…sleepy nappy time.
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
Times change and situations change. Our Constitutional Rights are going to be just fine. Things get ammended, but we evolve as needed.
[/quote]
This applies just as well to the idea of whether or not people should be panicking at this point. Knowing that terrorists are out there and taking threats seriously does not mean one has to panick or overreact.
As times change people will amend their lifestyles, if it becomes necessary. They will also support bigger intrusions on their freedoms, if it becomes necessary. There is no need to grab wildly for power and control at this point in time.
[quote]doogie wrote:
Bringing them out of hiding and giving us a front to fight them on. [/quote]
You created a safe haven where they could proliferate without thinking one tiny bit about the way it affects lives of the Iraqi people.
[quote]storey420 wrote:
Chewie wrote:
What would you tell your grandchild when he ask you what you did in the war on terror?
It is beginning to seem like you would say:
“I supported the enemy.”
I would have to say that while I was no longer in the service, Grandson, I did what everyone should do in a non- war situation. I lived my life and tried to improve the society in which I lived. Also I sat dumbfounded as my fellow Americans allowed our constitutional principles crumble to feel safer about the threat of “terror”[/quote]
Yet when there was a terror attack on our own soil, everyone was all for action. Now, that the realization of war has been exposed. All the hippies come out and act as if we are bad for defending ourselves.
Where would we be if we had done nothing?
[quote]storey420 wrote:
Chewie wrote:
lixy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Dumping Generals is very common in war time until you finally can get one to do his job.
Let me guess, “his job” would be to execute the orders without asking questions.
And for heaven’s sake, quit saying that you’re at war. You wrecked a country and are now occupying it. Pay some attention: Nobody declared war!
So, instead of being at a war with terror, what do you call it?
I’m sorry but whenever I hear someone touting that we are at war with terror it makes me laugh and then feel sad that the individual actually buys a line like that. It’s like a war on drugs. It is a war that has no end and no real way to win. So let’s be honest an call it the Iraqi War, the U.S.- Middle East Expansion War, or just a police action to dispose a dictator. [/quote]
I already said that imperialism was a necessary evil.
It is also worth noting that since we have been overseas and at war, there has not been another major attack on US soil.
Are you saying that no terrorists have been fought in Iraq?
If you think that, it makes me laugh.
[quote]lixy wrote:
doogie wrote:
Bringing them out of hiding and giving us a front to fight them on.
You created a safe haven where they could proliferate without thinking one tiny bit about the way it affects lives of the Iraqi people.[/quote]
Too bad our troops are supporting the Iraqi Army. Yeah, we haven’t helped them one bit.
So, you think an Iraqi’s life was Utopian before our arrival? Please explain.
[quote]doogie wrote:
lixy wrote:
Saddam gone, Jihadists and terrorists from all across the globe converge to Iraq.
Bringing them out of hiding and giving us a front to fight them on. [/quote]
The old “flypaper theory.” That might make sense, if it weren’t for the fact that close to 90% of Al Qaeda in Iraq, let alone the rest of the Sunni insurgency, are Iraqis. So we are creating new enemies, for the most part.
And plenty of smart people, especially in the military, have said that Iraq is a training ground for militants, they try and perfect techniques and weapons (IED anyone?) there, which spread to other theaters of war. John Robb has called Iraq the “Spanish Civil War” of our time. Take a look at the use of suicide attacks in Afghanistan, which were almost unknown until after the invasion of Iraq.
[quote]Chewie wrote:
How have you failed to see that I am supporting your argument about imperialism? The only difference is that you think we should go around hugging people and I see imperialism as a necessary evil. [/quote]
I noticed that alright. Now how about telling the “we just wanted to help the poor Iraqis” crowd to get a clue?
[quote]What would you tell your grandchild when he ask you what you did in the war on terror?
It is beginning to seem like you would say:
“I supported the enemy.”[/quote]
Let’s break it down. Feel free to interrupt if you disagree with any point…
Most of the people shooting at you in Iraq have nothing to do with Al-Qaeda. The bulk of the insurgency are Shi’ite followers of Al-Sadr (who wouldn’t be caught dead being associated with a Sunni group) and secular Ba’athists. That said, members of Al-Qaeda in Iraq still represent a genuine threat for the welfare of Iraqis as illustrated by the daily carnage. With those people, talk is useless. They should be liquidated because they represent an immediate danger (not for you across the pond, but for Iraqis trying to get on with their lives). With me so far? I thought so…
Trouble begins when you use the military to eradicate a problem that can be solved with the police. When going around invading countries, you actually foster those radical groups. In fact, I bet that at some point they were turning down people because they had too many applicants. But that you probably knew as well. What I try to do, is educated people and try to cut the root of the problem by advocating a non-interventionist West as well as tempering radicals from both sides.
The “enemy” is elusive. It may be your next door neighbor, so going around in tanks shooting at everyone is evidently not a solution. The only way out is to understand the causes and make sure you cut the steady flow of recruits they seem to have been enjoying. Then, police work will (slowly but surely) get rid of the already indoctrinated ones. Just because you have a hammer, you start thinking everything’s a nail. And God knows you managed to build the mighty huge hammer that is the US military force.
I’m not saying sit down and relax. I’m saying what any terrorism expert would tell you: You can’t beat them with military power. They feed on that stuff. Intelligence combined with local police efforts will do a lot more to stop terrorist attacks than any battalion ever could.
Grandson, I took the time to understand the problem, acknowledged the fatality component of it, then resisted a fear-triggered emotional half-assed response that would only exacerbate the problem. Sadly, it seems humans behave wisely only after exhausting every other mean possible. In short, I tried to spread a peace message.
Now, watch as Chewie and his friends turn this into “if you’re not with us, you’re with the terrorists” crap…
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
We invaded under the guise that this dude already invaded killed and raped Kuwait and was dveloping and had WMD…and he absolutely did and was a crazy SOB in an unstable world. [/quote]
How exactly do you kill and rape a country? They took the babies out of teh incubators, right?
And quit the WMD craze. Top members of your administration said that he had none, so shush!
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/19/powell.un/
Vice President Cheney repeatedly said that Saddam Hussein “had long-established ties with al Qaeda” and that the evidence was “overwhelming”. I am no propaganda expert, but when you lose 3000 people because of Al-Qaeda, I consider such assertions by your VP to be a theme of its own. How else do you wanna convince people that you’re gonna spend their tax money waging war in a far away land? Revenge and fear of WMD proliferation was the prime motives.
[quote]We suspected maybe, but it was NOT the underling reason. People forget the Gulf War and our MISTAKE of not ridding Sadam then.
[/quote]
Geez…Cheney said the evidence was overwhelming. Bush said there was extensive ties between Hussein and Ben Laden. What part of that did you miss? It wasn’t sold as suspicion. It was sold as solid facts!
[quote]Chewie wrote:
Yet when there was a terror attack on our own soil, everyone was all for action. Now, that the realization of war has been exposed. All the hippies come out and act as if we are bad for defending ourselves. [/quote]
Defend yourselves? Did the Iraqis carry an attack on American soil that I missed? Get real.
[quote]lixy wrote:
I’m not saying sit down and relax. I’m saying what any terrorism expert would tell you: You can’t beat them with military power. They feed on that stuff. Intelligence combined with local police efforts will do a lot more to stop terrorist attacks than any battalion ever could.
[/quote]
Hunt them down one by one doesn’t work nor does it make any sense. We now have a strategic point for fighting terrorists.
[quote]
Grandson, I took the time to understand the problem, acknowledged the fatality component of it, then resisted a fear-triggered emotional half-assed response that would only exacerbate the problem. Sadly, it seems humans behave wisely only after exhausting every other mean possible. In short, I tried to spread a peace message.
Now, watch as Chewie and his friends turn this into “if you’re not with us, you’re with the terrorists” crap…[/quote]
Well, I respect the fact you answered a direct question, unlike most people. I, too, would like to spread the peace message. That is, unfortunately, impossible at this time. Whether invading was a mistake or not (I see it as imperialism and occupying a a zone as a strategic military base), we are left in a difficult situation. What now? We can’t leave. It will be like the first time all over again. What would you recommend?
PS: I don’t think you would use a phrase like “half-assed” when speaking to your grandson.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Chewie wrote:
Yet when there was a terror attack on our own soil, everyone was all for action. Now, that the realization of war has been exposed. All the hippies come out and act as if we are bad for defending ourselves.
Defend yourselves? Did the Iraqis carry an attack on American soil that I missed? Get real.[/quote]
So, you are saying there are absolutely no terrorists in Iraq?
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
storey420 wrote:
Also I sat dumbfounded as my fellow Americans allowed our constitutional principles crumble to feel safer about the threat of “terror”
Times change and situations change. Our Constitutional Rights are going to be just fine. Things get ammended, but we evolve as needed.
While you are sitting watching at this point, you still don’t believe there is a threat. It will take some more attacks on our own soil or maybe in your own hood for you to feel the “threat” and acknowledge something needs to be done…right?
Stay in the perfect concept of your own la la land…safe…sleepy nappy time.
[/quote]
What a brilliant reply. Of course there is a level of threat. There always has been and always will be. People think that if they concede all of their rights to privacy that it will make the country uber safe.
There will always be terror as long as there is tyranny—know that. You do realize that your rights have dramatically changed under this adminstration don’t you? Or is it going to take an example on your won soil, in your own hood to shake you from la-la land?
[quote]Chewie wrote:
storey420 wrote:
Chewie wrote:
What would you tell your grandchild when he ask you what you did in the war on terror?
It is beginning to seem like you would say:
“I supported the enemy.”
I would have to say that while I was no longer in the service, Grandson, I did what everyone should do in a non- war situation. I lived my life and tried to improve the society in which I lived. Also I sat dumbfounded as my fellow Americans allowed our constitutional principles crumble to feel safer about the threat of “terror”
Yet when there was a terror attack on our own soil, everyone was all for action. Now, that the realization of war has been exposed. All the hippies come out and act as if we are bad for defending ourselves.
Where would we be if we had done nothing? [/quote]
I never advocated not do I currently suggest “doing nothing.” I do however, suggest that we should have kept the fight where it belonged, in Afghanistan. What country were those guys that attacked us from anyways? What do you mean not Iraq?
If you understand that attacking Iraq is not defending ourselves, you may be on your way to havig some undertanding of the issue. If attacking Iraq is defending ourselves, then I hope you and all your kin are ready for the upcoming defense strategy against Iran and then N Korea, and then…
[quote]Chewie wrote:
storey420 wrote:
Chewie wrote:
lixy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Dumping Generals is very common in war time until you finally can get one to do his job.
Let me guess, “his job” would be to execute the orders without asking questions.
And for heaven’s sake, quit saying that you’re at war. You wrecked a country and are now occupying it. Pay some attention: Nobody declared war!
So, instead of being at a war with terror, what do you call it?
I’m sorry but whenever I hear someone touting that we are at war with terror it makes me laugh and then feel sad that the individual actually buys a line like that. It’s like a war on drugs. It is a war that has no end and no real way to win. So let’s be honest an call it the Iraqi War, the U.S.- Middle East Expansion War, or just a police action to dispose a dictator.
I already said that imperialism was a necessary evil.
It is also worth noting that since we have been overseas and at war, there has not been another major attack on US soil.
Are you saying that no terrorists have been fought in Iraq?
If you think that, it makes me laugh.
[/quote]
Wow that is amazing logic. There has been no attack since 911, so we must be doing things right. So when we get attacked again, after Bush has left office, is it the new guy’s fault or the policy of the last four years? Why would I possibly think that no terrorists have been fought?
[quote]Chewie wrote:
lixy wrote:
Chewie wrote:
Yet when there was a terror attack on our own soil, everyone was all for action. Now, that the realization of war has been exposed. All the hippies come out and act as if we are bad for defending ourselves.
Defend yourselves? Did the Iraqis carry an attack on American soil that I missed? Get real.
So, you are saying there are absolutely no terrorists in Iraq?
[/quote]
I have good intelligence that there are terrorists is Saudi Arabia. load up the humvees. Time to kick some terrorist ass! Oh wait…