- Joined
- Mar 6, 2005
- Messages
- 7,536
- Reaction score
- 429
- Location
- Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010920-8.htmlOur war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated.....[snip]
Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes. Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen. It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success. We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. (Applause.) From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.....[snip]
These measures are essential. But the only way to defeat terrorism as a threat to our way of life is to stop it, eliminate it, and destroy it where it grows.
Why did Bush stop going after our enemy and instead attack Iraq?
There are terrorists in Iraq because we started a war and brought them to Iraq. They were NOT there before we invaded. It's a debacle! Helping the Iraqis is very noble, but I strongly believe we need to protect ourselves from our real enemies before we "help" the people of Iraq!Messerschmitt said:There are terrorists in Iraq. Those are the people US soldiers are fighting in Iraq. We are trying to help the people of Iraq to gain control of their own country.
Sorry, not true, at least in reality. Saddam was in power, the insurgents were part of that power. There weren't ANY terrorists. Saddam was a dictator, and like all dictators he needed to exert absolute control meaning that he wouldn't allow terrorists in his country, he controlled everything, including terrorists.Messerschmitt said:Thats what the war is about stopping terrorists and yes there are terrorists in Iraq, who have been there since Saddam's rule. The people who attack US soldiers in Iraq aren't Iraqis they are insurgence, and they were there before we got there.
I do not dispute your facts at all. What I'm saying is that we stopped our attack on Al Quaeda to go after Saddam, and to me that's been a very fatal mistake. Vague, please tell me that you believe that Al Quaeda has been a zillion times greater threat to US than Saddam? Let's look at the scoreboard since, say 1998? Al Quaeda killed = 3000+. Saddam killed = 0 (outside of Iraq, I have no idea how many, if any Iraqis he killed after 1998).vauge said:Champ, seems like you are forgetting that Saddam paid Palestinian suicide bombers. It also seems like you are forgetting how he came into power. It also seems like you are forgetting the law the Clinton singed that would eventually relieve Saddam of that power and how we would be the ones to do it.
I respectfully disagree. The NeoCons had an agenda that was actually facilitated by 9-11. Democrats had no such agenda and would not have had the passion for war that Bush and his cronies have.vauge said:I personally believe that even if Gore was Prez (thank heaven he is not), that we would have went back to Iraq.
Agreed! Trouble is that we're so occupied (literally) with/in Iraq that we've let our guard down against our true enemies!vauge said:I do not believe that terrorism is in one place. London's bombing proved that today. It's all over the world. The most strategic move was to change Iraq into a democracy.
Albeit somewhat differently than some folks seem to think.vauge said:It also seems like you are forgetting the law the Clinton singed that would eventually relieve Saddam of that power and how we would be the ones to do it.
We didn't stop any attack on Al Quaida, we simply do not know where they are. Sorry, hard to imagine but some Al Quaida may live down the road from you or Canada or Mexico. Not all of them are from or in Afganistan.26 X World Champs said:I do not dispute your facts at all. What I'm saying is that we stopped our attack on Al Quaeda to go after Saddam, and to me that's been a very fatal mistake.
Unknown about true threat to the US, not sure it could be supplied even if it were true do to Intelligence reasons. As regular Joes we simply do not know all the facts and must trust (at least an itty bitty amount) in our President.Vague, please tell me that you believe that Al Quaeda has been a zillion times greater threat to US than Saddam? Let's look at the scoreboard since, say 1998? Al Quaeda killed = 3000+. Saddam killed = 0 (outside of Iraq, I have no idea how many, if any Iraqis he killed after 1998).
Ok, tell me where Al Quaeda is? Please pin point on a map. The dialy raids here in the US; we are benign to. We hear about them, but somehow it doesn't sink in that we are fighting an invisible enemy. The truth of the matter is that darn near ALL the countries in the world are fighting Al Quaida- we are not alone in this war to fight terrorism.Agreed! Trouble is that we're so occupied (literally) with/in Iraq that we've let our guard down against our true enemies!
Do you think that any Iraqis had anything to do with what happened in London today? Do you think Al Quaeda did? If you think it's Al Quaeda don't you have to ask yourself why we're not fighting them instead of Iraq?
I have never said that, but I understand your position.Some of you on this board accuse Dems of being against ALL wars. The truth is that we are against WRONG wars and are very much in favor of RIGHT wars. You see what I mean?
26 X World Champs said:Why did Bush stop going after our enemy and instead attack Iraq? WHY DAMN-IT!
Maybe it's better to know where they are and what they're doing. Kill or capture all of them and they will be replaced by those you don't know. How many known spies do you think we left in place during the cold war just so we could see who their contacts were. What the chain of command was. He leads you to other unknown spies. You use known spies as channels of disinformation. You feed them information and see where it ends up. Don't think our leaders think small, petty revenge. They are smart long term thinkers like me. It's how I would do it. It's how it is done. We had lot's of practice with the reds.
I'd be surprised if London's attack was done by Al Quedda.
teacher said:Surprise! Then you would be wrong, again.I'd be surprised if London's attack was done by Al Quedda.
I agree with you again. However, had we invested our resources into finding them rather than invading Iraq I believe we would be much safer than we are today. That is my point.vauge said:We didn't stop any attack on Al Quaida, we simply do not know where they are. Sorry, hard to imagine but some Al Quaida may live down the road from you or Canada or Mexico. Not all of them are from or in Afganistan.
I did trust him after 9-11 until I came to realize the scam that became Iraq. He lost my trust from there on. I absolutely supported him when we invaded Afghanistan. Iraq is another matter, a really bad, bad decision.vauge said:Unknown about true threat to the US, not sure it could be supplied even if it were true do to Intelligence reasons. As regular Joes we simply do not know all the facts and must trust (at least an itty bitty amount) in our President.
Of course, and I agree. Sadly, however, before we can be humanitarians shouldn't we protect ourselves? I live in NYC and believe me I do not feel safe or protected. I want my kids and my wife to be safe. Living outside of the "war" zones eliminates the fear that one feels personally, and without that real fear people are OK with being a humanitarian first. I want to be protected first and I want our resources spent on fighting our enemies not being a humanitarian, especially at a cost of more than $5 billion PER MONTH.vauge said:As simple humanitarians, why is it so bad to oust a BRUTAL dictator? Which has killed hundreds of thousands of Iraq people. We are simply not the bad guys.
I think if we spent $5 billion per month we'd have accomplished a lot more by now....we've done a shitty job on this, and our guard, again, is down. Anyone can get into this country for God's sake!vauge said:Ok, tell me where Al Quaeda is? Please pin point on a map. The dialy raids here in the US; we are benign to. We hear about them, but somehow it doesn't sink in that we are fighting an invisible enemy. The truth of the matter is that darn near ALL the countries in the world are fighting Al Quaida- we are not alone in this war to fight terrorism.
26 X World Champs said:teacher said:Surprise! Then you would be wrong, again.
Aren't you giddy. Notice I said "be surprised" not "they didn't". (Sound of nice try buzzer). Seriously, I haven't heard, did they claim responsibility? Or have we found out they did it? Consider after some attacks sometimes multiple groups claim responsibility. Proving at least sometimes some of those claiming responsibility are wrong. I said before I'd be surprised if they launched an attack on American soil, not other nations soil. If it is an Al Quedda attack on the UK it would be (I think) an attempt to break the will of the Brits. It worked in Spain. I don't think it will work in Brittan. The opposite I would think. The whole stiff upper lip thing. Remember the monkey :monkey fiasco? Got to get up earlier than that to burn ol teacher.
26 X World Champs said:teacher said:Surprise! Then you would be wrong, again.
Looks like the jury's not in on that one yet. Let's pretend. Oh, damn, I'm done for. To the basement. Maybe a Top Ten on how stupid I am.
anomaly said:The problem is that the Bush administration is simply picking and choosing which countries are on the 'axis of evil' and are therefore evil. For example, we begin this grand war in Afghanistan. For the record, I support the Afghan war. It was a legitimate war, we set out to fight terrorists, and so we went to a country that supported terrorists. But then, we decide that Saddam is just a bad fellow. How many terrorists were in Iraq before the war? A few, maybe. How many are there now? Well, now it seems Iraq is being used as justification for heinous terrorist attacks like the one we saw today in London. Have we really done more good than bad in Iraq? In my humble opinion, the only thing we have done, from a US perspective, is fan the flames of terrorism.
So let's go over this. We invade Afghanistan, because they harbored terrorists. We invade Iraq because (conservatives usually fill in some bullshit there...). We do not touch our friends the Saudis, even though we know they harbor terrorists. Is there any logic in Mr. Bush's plan for war? I'm with Champ here, Bush's logic makes no sense. Why did he simply stop attacking the enemy, and instead engaged a dictator who hated Islamic Fundamentalism?
robin said:world champ.. yes the fundies have escalated this thing. We can thank those **uck wit Rumsfeld Bush & Blair for the London bombs becuase they have fought the war on terror in the wrong way & in the wrong place !
To be fair, the only people really responsible for the London bombings is Al Quaeda.robin said:world champ.. yes the fundies have escalated this thing. We can thank those **uck wit Rumsfeld Bush & Blair for the London bombs becuase they have fought the war on terror in the wrong way & in the wrong place !
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/08/international/europe/08intel.html?Since Sept. 11, 2001, senior police officials have warned that a large-scale terror attack in Britain was not a matter of if but when, a prediction repeated by a senior police official late last month.
26 X World Champs said:Hey champs, I fail to see the humor you posted on me in the Top Ten thread. Not cool man.
Stop the bullshit I've never wasted a moment of my time in that thread, nor will i ever....I also don't want to waste my time on you in general.teacher said:Hey champs, I fail to see the humor you posted on me in the Top Ten thread. Not cool man.
26 X World Champs said:Stop the bullshit I've never wasted a moment of my time in that thread, nor will i ever....I also don't want to waste my time on you in general.
I do not like people who have bigoted views of the world, I find them to be lowlifes.
26 X World Champs said:Stop the bullshit
Oh father, your the very one who taught me I can type
bullshit.
bullshit
bullshit
bullshit
Oh thank you daddy. I love you.
When you were a kid, did you have to wear hockey equipment, but you weren't on a team?It's my heart all a titter.
I believe I feel the vapors coming on.
Billo_Really said:When you were a kid, did you have to wear hockey equipment, but you weren't on a team?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?