Do You Believe We're Not Going to Fight Them Here?

[disneydude]

yeah....that's one of my favorite Bush Apologists talking points. And they love to say that Bush has been successful because we haven't been attacked since. However, they fail to recognize how few times the United States has been "attacked" in the last 5 decades.

The "politics of fear" is about the only card that these neo-cons have left to play.

So far its worked. we have not had another attack on this country since 9/11/01 in spite of all the democractic obstruction tactics.........

Its been almost 5 years since we have been attacked but I am afraid we will be attacked sooner or later and if the democrats take over and do away with the PA it will be sooner...........

I rest my case.

 

[MSgt]

OK...let's speak about this propaganda that the Bushies like to spit out at us:

"We're fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here."

Do you really believe that the war in Iraq is stopping terrorists from planning attacks against us on US soil???

Comments please....

What an absolutely stupid question. Anyone that thinks or pretends to think that the war in Iraq is supposed to make some mass immediate difference in terrorism has got to be one of the clueless individuals walking the face of the earth. Anyone that would try to use such erroneous information to parade on a false stage of wisdom is equally as clueless. You might as well claim that fighting the Tali-Ban or Israel's assault into Hezbollah's territory is supposed to "end terrorism."

It has never been declared that taking out Saddam would mean a complete halting of terrorist activity. It has never been a sentiment that Muslims in "Palestine," Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt, Pakistan, and all the other locales where Radical Islam is common place in the streets, would fix their perverted religion because Saddam is no longer a thorn in our sides. Anyone that parades this falsity around is just as bad as the individual who tries to use such a rediculous notion that he has been told this.


Try to follow along:

Our true enemies in the "War on Terror" is the House of Saud - our friends. Until we address the true lords of terror, that spend billions around the globe building and maintaining fundamental Islamic schools, we will prolong this generational struggle. However, as long as this country (and the world) needs that damn oil, this is a long time off (if it happens at all). In the mean time, we are in react mode and killing terrorists as we find them or as they come to us (though, recognizing a terrorist organization like Hezbollah seems to be much easier for the world than actually doing something about it). We can also try to be helpful by removing the worst tyrannical regime in the region and providing opportunity for the region to move forward. As you said...."stopping terrorists from planning attacks against us on US soil" starts with addressing what makes them into terrorists in the first place.

What makes them into terrorists in the first place is their environment and religion. The more perverse and set in concrete that Islam is in the Arab heartland, the more failed the environment. As the environment worsens, Muslims will withdraw deeper into their religion and encourage more perversion. It's a desperate cycle of the worse type of fanaticism. One that Saddam, Ahmenadejad, Hezbollah, and so many of the religious right and their millions and millions of Radical followers find very comforting. It is within this comfort and Radical sea, we see the emergence of the Islamic terrorist as he blames his culture's self-prescribed failures on our world, especially America for our "support" of the Saudi Regime (of which the Saudi Regime is more than happy to blame their evil on us to their uneducated and religiously susceptable masses). Educated and wealthy men like Osama Bin Ladden are merely uniting the desperation and hate to serve his own selfish inadequacies. Militant and brutal men like Saddam Hussein are merely taking advantage of the situation and oppressing for power. Organizations like Hezbollah merely exist to destroy civilization and seek salvation through their violent deeds "with Allah's blessing." These are examples of the symptoms of a much larger disease.

Our only guidance as to what is happening today is to recognize what occured with Christianity in Europe during the 16th century (The invention of the mobile printing press and ther German Peasant's Revolt had a lot to do with it). However, recognizing what occurred is all we can do. There was no grand fix except for what naturally occurred amongst men who became so tired of their failed world that they rolled up their sleeves and excepted that their path to "salvation" is not the only path and that ruling people through a religion is a recipe for failure. Unfortunately, with the speed of the information age in the nuclear age today allows us no luxury to wait for the Arab world to correct it's issues. We will never see an end to general "terrorism," but we can play a larger role in destroying it down to a tolerable nuisance. This will take some bruising, because Islam's most dedicated adherents are clinging to the past with the greatest spirit of Tyranosaurus Rex. But bruising today is better than gambling with mass American corpses tomorrow.

So, you speak of "propaganda of the Bushies" while spewing a little of your own. The individuals who cling to every word vomited forth by a politician is just a useless as the individual who shuts his eyes, closes his ears, and screams "nu-uh." It's easy to sit back and criticize every step along this very dangerous and uncharted road as you do so very often. It's something else to sit back and try to understand this issue. It's only after you have started to understand this issue that you will be able to criticize intelligently on where the real problems are and where we truley are making the mistakes. Do you actually have a practical plan that will see us through to the end of this madness? Any wisdom beyond the constant useless criticisms? Any profound insight on how to change the mind of a religious fanatic that see's a "non-believer" as the enemy of his "God" and is willing to murder over it?

 

[Iriemon]

Originally Posted by Navy Pride
is your life more important then losing a few civil liberties........

No, my life isnt more important than our civil liberties.

I salute you sir: a true patriot.

"Give me liberty or give me death."

:usflag2:

 

[Iriemon]

... I am afraid we will be attacked sooner or later ...........

Another person terrorized by the terrorists ... and another victory for bin Laden.

 

[Iriemon]

... As the environment worsens, Muslims will withdraw deeper into their religion and encourage more perversion. It's a desperate cycle of the worse type of fanaticism. One that Saddam, Ahmenadejad, Hezbollah, and so many of the religious right and their millions and millions of Radical followers find very comforting.

I appreciate you admit you are no expert in these matters.

That way it is more excusable when you make absolutely erroneous contentions, like that Saddam was associated with Islamic fanaticism the religions right and radicalism. That is just wrong. Focus your studies on Hussein, and you will learn that he was in fact leading a secular government; his top advisor and foreign minister was a Christian.

It is within this comfort and Radical sea, we see the emergence of the Islamic terrorist as he blames his culture's self-prescribed failures on our world, especially America for our "support" of the Saudi Regime (of which the Saudi Regime is more than happy to blame their evil on us to their uneducated and religiously susceptable masses). Educated and wealthy men like Osama Bin Ladden are merely uniting the desperation and hate to serve his own selfish inadequacies. Militant and brutal men like Saddam Hussein are merely taking advantage of the situation and oppressing for power. Organizations like Hezbollah merely exist to destroy civilization and seek salvation through their violent deeds "with Allah's blessing." These are examples of the symptoms of a much larger disease.

So which is the source of the danger to the US? Radical Islamism or militant and brutual men. If the danger comes primarily from the former what strategic purpose is being achieved by focuses our resources primarily on the latter?

Our only guidance as to what is happening today is to recognize what occured with Christianity in Europe during the 16th century (The invention of the mobile printing press and ther German Peasant's Revolt had a lot to do with it). However, recognizing what occurred is all we can do. There was no grand fix except for what naturally occurred amongst men who became so tired of their failed world that they rolled up their sleeves and excepted that their path to "salvation" is not the only path and that ruling people through a religion is a recipe for failure. Unfortunately, with the speed of the information age in the nuclear age today allows us no luxury to wait for the Arab world to correct it's issues. We will never see an end to general "terrorism," but we can play a larger role in destroying it down to a tolerable nuisance. This will take some bruising, because Islam's most dedicated adherents are clinging to the past with the greatest spirit of Tyranosaurus Rex. But bruising today is better than gambling with mass American corpses tomorrow.

You think just "bruising" is going to do it? I know you don't mean going over and punching them. What it is the real meaning of the "bruising" term you are now using? What is "bruising"?

And how can we we "play a larger role in destroying it down to a tolerable nuisance"? And if we do that aren't we further creating a threat to them, which by your own logic drive more to radicalism and terrorism?

So, you speak of "propaganda of the Bushies" while spewing a little of your own. The individuals who cling to every word vomited forth by a politician is just a useless as the individual who shuts his eyes, closes his ears, and screams "nu-uh." It's easy to sit back and criticize every step along this very dangerous and uncharted road as you do so very often. It's something else to sit back and try to understand this issue. It's only after you have started to understand this issue that you will be able to criticize intelligently on where the real problems are and where we truley are making the mistakes.

Do you actually have a practical plan that will see us through to the end of this madness? Any wisdom beyond the constant useless criticisms? Any profound insight on how to change the mind of a religious fanatic that see's a "non-believer" as the enemy of his "God" and is willing to murder over it?

Do you? Your plan is essentially to "stay the course."

 

[MSgt]

I appreciate you admit you are no expert in these matters.

That way it is more excusable when you make absolutely erroneous contentions, like that Saddam was associated with Islamic fanaticism the religions right and radicalism. That is just wrong. Focus your studies on Hussein, and you will learn that he was in fact leading a secular government; his top advisor and foreign minister was a Christian.

And as always..you flaunt your own embarrassment. Saddam was very secular. I made no comment that said otherwise. Merely mentioning a fact that Hezbollah, the House of Saud, Ahmenedejad, the religious right, and Saddam are very comfortable in this fanatical environment in no way implies that they are unified in their means or beliefs. Clearly, I stated later in the same post...."Militant and brutal men like Saddam Hussein are merely taking advantage of the situation and oppressing for power."

Try less looking for ways to trip me up and more being constructive towards discussion.

So which is the source of the danger to the US? Radical Islamism or militant and brutual men. If the danger comes primarily from the former what strategic purpose is being achieved by focuses our resources primarily on the latter?

They are both symptoms and they are both a danger. Killing the obvious danger is simple. Dealing with the disease that creates the fanaticism is generational.

You think just "bruising" is going to do it? I know you don't mean going over and punching them. What it is the real meaning of the "bruising" term you are now using? What is "bruising"?

And how can we we "play a larger role in destroying it down to a tolerable nuisance"? And if we do that aren't we further creating a threat to them, which by your own logic drive more to radicalism and terrorism?

Why do you always need the simplest things explained to you? I am so tired of entertaining your nonesense. Stick to Dr. Seuss. "Bruising" is the difference between thousands of dead American troops from Islamic bullets and IEDs today....and millions of dead American civilians under a mushroom clouds tomorrow.

 

[Navy Pride]

No, my life isnt more important than our civil liberties.

Its easy for you to say that since your life is not one the line.......If it was you would give up every civil liberty you had to save it.........So would we all my ACLU friend.....

 

[MSgt]

Do you? Your plan is essentially to "stay the course."

Is it? Is this my essential plan? Or is this a never ending attempt from you trip me up? Aside from "roll back," which I'm sure you are clueless about, but I will explain this too if you want in another post...here is a plan.

1) Root Cause - The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in 1928 by Hassan al Banna and the vast majority of terrorists are members, however most Radicals are not. The majority of Islamic Radicals are "the sea from which the terrorists swim" and are revered. The cancer of Radical Islam grows where socio-economic conditions are poor; governments are repressive and unable to provide essential social services, such as providing adequate oversight of their educational system….or have allowed / sanctioned Radical Islamic curricula. Islamic fundamentalism has given an aim and form to the otherwise aimless and formless resentment and anger of the Muslim masses at the forces that have devalued their traditional values and loyalties and, in the final analysis, robbed them of their beliefs, their aspirations, their dignity, and to an increasing extent even their livelihood. Frustrated by the complete inability to exert any discernible degree of control over their immediate circumstances, frustrated adherents of Radical Islam, goaded by Radical Islamic Clerics, will resort to terrorism as the only avenue to effect religious, social, political, and economic change.

2) Short Term Solution - Radical Islam is a precursor to terrorism. It lays the ideological and religious foundation for Islamic-inspired violence and, as such, represents a long-term threat to the national security of the United States of America. The ongoing Global War on Terrorism targets the current generation of terrorists; however, unless the ideology that spawned them is also countered the long-term threat to the U.S. will exponentially grow with time.

3) Long Term Solution - Thus, when dealing with a culture in which only faith and family matter to our enemies, we insist on making war on governments and negotiating with political organizations that are no more than mobs with diplomatic representation. When doing this, we are punching thin air. Note...Some of these are active operations and some are general sentiments of the intel community.

a - Acknowledge the threat posed by Radical Islam.

b - We are not targeting Islam, just the Radical Islamists – we better say so.

c - Support the moderate voices (indirectly).

d - Focus our efforts on the long term enemy = the creation of more Radical Islamists.

e - Garner worldwide support for this effort…..and at least engage in the IO war more aggressively. Counter Al Jazeera and like Radical Islamic media….without appearing to do so.

f - Designate DOS (Department of State) as lead agency against countering Radical Islam.

g - Following recognition of the threat – fund the programs necessary to counter it.

h - Reorganize foreign assistance funding and efforts creating DOS “Regional Directors” that actually control assets = Reorganize DOS along Geographical vice Functional Lines (much like DoD Combatant CDRs).

i - Review Current Foreign Policy Focusing on Taking the Political Ammunition Away From the Radical Extremists.

j - Resolve Israeli / Palestinian and Indian / Pakistani disputes.

k - We must succeed in both Afghanistan and Iraq….and ensure these are perceived as successes in the Muslim world.

l - Counter Radical Islamic Media = Counter Al Jazeera and like Radical Islamic media….without appearing to do so.

m - Reestablish funding for cultural outreach programs cut following end of "Cold War."

n - Give voice to moderate Islamic leaders (indirectly).

o - Support Programs Dedicated to Providing Educational Reform in Threatened Countries. (The official Saudi newspaper, Ain Al-Yaqeen, described royal expenditures on “education” as “astronomical.” (Mar 2002) They built 1500 mosques, 202 colleges, and 2000 Muslim schools. These were established throughout non-Islamic countries in Europe, North and South America, Australia, and Asia. None in the Middle East.)

p - Governments with strong governmental oversight over the education of their young must be rewarded; likewise those that do not provide such oversight must be punished.

q - AT HOME = Constitutional / Legal Review of activities surrounding fundamentalist religions that pose a domestic threat, – we face a new threat and our legal system is ill equipped to handle it. (Many Americans would rather recognize their freedom to preach hate a spit venom above protecting their own asses from the repercussions of it.)


More problems in the MENA Region....

- The populations within the next 25 years…
Egypt’s population will increase by 38%
Jordan’s by 67%
Syria’s by 58%
Saudi Arabia’s by 94%
Pakistan’s by 69%, and
Israel’s by 39%

- Decreasing Fresh Water Supplies: MENA region faces precipitous decrease in per capita fresh water supply.

- Economic doldrums / disaster: Regional unemployment for ages 15-35 = 40%…and growing. ….mostly males….who can’t afford to get married……...

- No known solutions to these problems, save one = Jihad.

Only democracies have shown agility to deal with such problems. In the absence of answers victims will look for scapegoats. Radical Islamic clerics provide the scapegoat for the problems facing the Arab/Islamic world. "Their problems are the fault of the West, specifically the US." Either we find a way to support the affected countries in finding their own solutions to these problems or our sons and daughters will be fighting another, protracted fight.


Any insights Iriemon or are you merely prepared to criticize?

 

[Navy Pride]

I rest my case.

I back Bush in the war on terror and some social issues...........

I might back the democrats but they have no plan except to attack the president........

 

[Iriemon]

And as always..you flaunt your own embarrassment. Saddam was very secular. I made no comment that said otherwise. Merely mentioning a fact that Hezbollah, the House of Saud, Ahmenedejad, the religious right, and Saddam are very comfortable in this fanatical environment in no way implies that they are unified in their means or beliefs. Clearly, I stated later in the same post...."Militant and brutal men like Saddam Hussein are merely taking advantage of the situation and oppressing for power."

Try less looking for ways to trip me up and more being constructive towards discussion.

I'll try -- I get confused when you throw Hussein in with the same pot as when you are talking about bin Laden, Hezzbollah, and radical ismlamism, as if he was one of them, and then admit he is not a radical islamic at all.

Originally Posted by Iriemon
You think just "bruising" is going to do it? I know you don't mean going over and punching them. What it is the real meaning of the "bruising" term you are now using? What is "bruising"?

And how can we we "play a larger role in destroying it down to a tolerable nuisance"? And if we do that aren't we further creating a threat to them, which by your own logic drive more to radicalism and terrorism?

Why do you always need the simplest things explained to you? I am so tired of entertaining your nonesense. Stick to Dr. Seuss. "Bruising" is the difference between thousands of dead American troops from Islamic bullets and IEDs today....and millions of dead American civilians under a mushroom clouds tomorrow.

"Bruising"? "Bruising"? You're going to go over and whack them with a stick?

Why are you using synonyms? Why are you dodging the question? Why are you using vague and soft sounding words like "bruising" for what you really mean? What do you really mean? Are you afraid to state what you really mean?

 

[southern_liberal]

So far its worked. we have not had another attack on this country since 9/11/01 in spite of all the democractic obstruction tactics.........

There can be many reasons why the terrorist haven't attacked; and I doubt they have anything to do with our government.

First and foremost, terrorist organizations don't operate on their enemies time; they operate on their own time. There was an eight year stretch between the first world center attack and the second one. Time is the biggest advantage they have over us. People who are willing to blow themselves up have nothing to loose, including time. So as long as we are running around frantic, half their job is done. Thus, they have the time to carefully plan their next attack. 9/11 wasn't thrown together with spit and tape, it was a calculated event that took time to put together and pull off.

Second, we have seen with Katrina how effective our "homeland Security" department is. enough said on that.


And finally, our ports and boarders are so wide open, a terrorist would have no problem at all getting into this country with a dirty bomb, biological or chemical agent to release in an urban area.

In essence, our government isn't doing a thing to stop Al-queda; It is highly probable they just aren't planning an attack 5 years after their first. Because with our open borders and ports,the demonstration of how inept our Homeland Security department is during Katrina, they know they have the time they need to plan another massive attack.

 

[Iriemon]

Is it? Is this my essential plan? Or is this a never ending attempt from you trip me up? Aside from "roll back," which I'm sure you are clueless about, but I will explain this too if you want in another post...here is a plan.

1) Root Cause - The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in 1928 by Hassan al Banna and the vast majority of terrorists are members, however most Radicals are not. The majority of Islamic Radicals are "the sea from which the terrorists swim" and are revered. The cancer of Radical Islam grows where socio-economic conditions are poor; governments are repressive and unable to provide essential social services, such as providing adequate oversight of their educational system….or have allowed / sanctioned Radical Islamic curricula. Islamic fundamentalism has given an aim and form to the otherwise aimless and formless resentment and anger of the Muslim masses at the forces that have devalued their traditional values and loyalties and, in the final analysis, robbed them of their beliefs, their aspirations, their dignity, and to an increasing extent even their livelihood. Frustrated by the complete inability to exert any discernible degree of control over their immediate circumstances, frustrated adherents of Radical Islam, goaded by Radical Islamic Clerics, will resort to terrorism as the only avenue to effect religious, social, political, and economic change.

2) Short Term Solution - Radical Islam is a precursor to terrorism. It lays the ideological and religious foundation for Islamic-inspired violence and, as such, represents a long-term threat to the national security of the United States of America. The ongoing Global War on Terrorism targets the current generation of terrorists; however, unless the ideology that spawned them is also countered the long-term threat to the U.S. will exponentially grow with time.

3) Long Term Solution - Thus, when dealing with a culture in which only faith and family matter to our enemies, we insist on making war on governments and negotiating with political organizations that are no more than mobs with diplomatic representation. When doing this, we are punching thin air. Note...Some of these are active operations and some are general sentiments of the intel community.

a - Acknowledge the threat posed by Radical Islam.

b - We are not targeting Islam, just the Radical Islamists – we better say so.

c - Support the moderate voices (indirectly).

d - Focus our efforts on the long term enemy = the creation of more Radical Islamists.

e - Garner worldwide support for this effort…..and at least engage in the IO war more aggressively. Counter Al Jazeera and like Radical Islamic media….without appearing to do so.

f - Designate DOS (Department of State) as lead agency against countering Radical Islam.

g - Following recognition of the threat – fund the programs necessary to counter it.

h - Reorganize foreign assistance funding and efforts creating DOS “Regional Directors” that actually control assets = Reorganize DOS along Geographical vice Functional Lines (much like DoD Combatant CDRs).

i - Review Current Foreign Policy Focusing on Taking the Political Ammunition Away From the Radical Extremists.

j - Resolve Israeli / Palestinian and Indian / Pakistani disputes.

k - We must succeed in both Afghanistan and Iraq….and ensure these are perceived as successes in the Muslim world.

l - Counter Radical Islamic Media = Counter Al Jazeera and like Radical Islamic media….without appearing to do so.

m - Reestablish funding for cultural outreach programs cut following end of "Cold War."

n - Give voice to moderate Islamic leaders (indirectly).

o - Support Programs Dedicated to Providing Educational Reform in Threatened Countries. (The official Saudi newspaper, Ain Al-Yaqeen, described royal expenditures on “education” as “astronomical.” (Mar 2002) They built 1500 mosques, 202 colleges, and 2000 Muslim schools. These were established throughout non-Islamic countries in Europe, North and South America, Australia, and Asia. None in the Middle East.)

p - Governments with strong governmental oversight over the education of their young must be rewarded; likewise those that do not provide such oversight must be punished.

q - AT HOME = Constitutional / Legal Review of activities surrounding fundamentalist religions that pose a domestic threat, – we face a new threat and our legal system is ill equipped to handle it. (Many Americans would rather recognize their freedom to preach hate a spit venom above protecting their own asses from the repercussions of it.)


More problems in the MENA Region....

- The populations within the next 25 years…
Egypt’s population will increase by 38%
Jordan’s by 67%
Syria’s by 58%
Saudi Arabia’s by 94%
Pakistan’s by 69%, and
Israel’s by 39%

- Decreasing Fresh Water Supplies: MENA region faces precipitous decrease in per capita fresh water supply.

- Economic doldrums / disaster: Regional unemployment for ages 15-35 = 40%…and growing. ….mostly males….who can’t afford to get married……...

- No known solutions to these problems, save one = Jihad.

Only democracies have shown agility to deal with such problems. In the absence of answers victims will look for scapegoats. Radical Islamic clerics provide the scapegoat for the problems facing the Arab/Islamic world. "Their problems are the fault of the West, specifically the US." Either we find a way to support the affected countries in finding their own solutions to these problems or our sons and daughters will be fighting another, protracted fight.

Any insights Iriemon or are you merely prepared to criticize?

"k - We must succeed in both Afghanistan and Iraq….and ensure these are perceived as successes in the Muslim world."

I.e. stay the course.

We all agree that reducing fundamental radical and increasing moderates in the ME is the goal.

Long term continuation of occupaiton of Iraq and involvement in a civil war based on what is an acknoweldge mistake does not further that goal but negates it, IMO.

 

[MSgt]

"Bruising"? "Bruising"? You're going to go over and whack them with a stick?

Why are you using synonyms? Why are you dodging the question? Why are you using vague and soft sounding words like "bruising" for what you really mean? What do you really mean? Are you afraid to state what you really mean?

You had no question. You merely wish to argue over nothing, because you do not posses the intellect to reamain in a discussion without being bewildered. Like I said...if you can't read a post without looking for the literal meaning for each and every word..."stick to Dr. Seuss."

I think the question here is "what do you want me to mean." The word "bruising" was a simple word to trivialize what is occurring today as compared to what will occur in the future.

Any more senseless questions? Anymore personal needs to make yourself feel better? You seem to really need someone to state that they want to completely obliterate every Muslim man, woman, and child don't you? What is this pathetic need of yours? You can't stand by your principles without an equally moronic opposite view point to grab strength from?

 

[MSgt]

"k - We must succeed in both Afghanistan and Iraq….and ensure these are perceived as successes in the Muslim world."

I.e. stay the course.

We all agree that reducing fundamental radical and increasing moderates in the ME is the goal.

Long term continuation of occupaiton of Iraq and involvement in a civil war based on what is an acknoweldge mistake does not further that goal but negates it, IMO.

Soooo...."ensuring that Iraq and Afghnaistan is perceived as a success to the Muslim world" means "stay the course" to you. You assume from this simplest of sentences that ensuring a perceived victory means an absolute unaltered strategy.

Hmmm...so pretty much as I stated....you have absolutely nothing to contribute. Only criticisms. Only a pathetic need to pick apart and look for the uncrossed "t" for the sake of pathetic arguing.

 

[Navy Pride]

There can be many reasons why the terrorist haven't attacked; and I doubt they have anything to do with our government.

First and foremost, terrorist organizations don't operate on their enemies time; they operate on their own time. There was an eight year stretch between the first world center attack and the second one. Time is the biggest advantage they have over us. People who are willing to blow themselves up have nothing to loose, including time. So as long as we are running around frantic, half their job is done. Thus, they have the time to carefully plan their next attack. 9/11 wasn't thrown together with spit and tape, it was a calculated event that took time to put together and pull off.

Second, we have seen with Katrina how effective our "homeland Security" department is. enough said on that.


And finally, our ports and boarders are so wide open, a terrorist would have no problem at all getting into this country with a dirty bomb, biological or chemical agent to release in an urban area.

In essence, our government isn't doing a thing to stop Al-queda; It is highly probable they just aren't planning an attack 5 years after their first. Because with our open borders and ports,the demonstration of how inept our Homeland Security department is during Katrina, they know they have the time they need to plan another massive attack.

Lets face the fact that Liberals like you would not give this administration credit for anything least of all for keeping us safe for 5 years........

Bottom line the main reasons we have not been attacked is Homeland Security and the PA in spite of all the obstructionist tactics of the left who believe the war on terror is a police action and who want to handle it in a kind and sensitive way as Kerry has stated..........

What you liberals fail to grasp is Radical Islam hates us.............They don't want to kiss and make up.........They want to kill us.........

 

[Iriemon]

You had no question. You merely wish to argue over nothing, because you do not posses the intellect to reamain in a discussion without being bewildered. Like I said...if you can't read a post without looking for the literal meaning for each and every word..."stick to Dr. Seuss."

I think the question here is "what do you want me to mean." The word "bruising" was a simple word to trivialize what is occurring today as compared to what will occur in the future.

You wrote:

We will never see an end to general "terrorism," but we can play a larger role in destroying it down to a tolerable nuisance. This will take some bruising, because Islam's most dedicated adherents are clinging to the past with the greatest spirit of Tyranosaurus Rex. But bruising today is better than gambling with mass American corpses tomorrow.

That sure sounds to me like you were describing what you think we need to be doing today, not describing what you think will occur in the future.

So yes, I do have a question, even if you don't want to answer it. Who needs to be "bruising" today? I assume when you said "bruising today" will be better than gambling, you were talking about American strategy or tactics. What is "bruising?"

Any more senseless questions? Anymore personal needs to make yourself feel better? You seem to really need someone to state that they want to completely obliterate every Muslim man, woman, and child don't you? What is this pathetic need of yours? You can't stand by your principles without an equally moronic opposite view point to grab strength from?

No, I appreciate that your desire hide behind innocuous sounding words, and to avoid my question and explain yourself, and that you don't have the guts to say what you really mean because many find mass murder, sorry, mass "bruising" objectionable.

 

[Spartacus FPV]

Its easy for you to say that since your life is not one the line.......If it was you would give up every civil liberty you had to save it.........So would we all my ACLU friend.....

Dont assume I am like you, or that I agree lock-step with the ACLU. My life isnt on the line yet, because my liberties arent. Believe me what I say your last post tells me just how little you actually value freedom, when it would come at the cost of security. I would never be so cowardly as to betray my country or my countrymen, or the constitution.

9/11 changed nothing. They didnt scare me into hiding behind hawks. Its business as usual for libertarians, we're going to keep on being free until someone gives us cause for rebellion, and if my freedom makes me a target for an attack that would cost me my life, I pay it gladly. Im sure all that is "easier said than done" to you, but I think its quite obvious that you dont understand my values, nor care to.

 

[Navy Pride]

Dont assume I am like you, or that I agree lock-step with the ACLU. My life isnt on the line yet, because my liberties arent. Believe me what I say your last post tells me just how little you actually value freedom, when it would come at the cost of security. I would never be so cowardly.

Your right your not like me.........You are more worried about the loss of a few minor civil liberites then you are your life............

I would rather live..........

 

[southern_liberal]

Lets face the fact that Liberals like you would not give this administration credit for anything least of all for keeping us safe for 5 years........

Bottom line the main reasons we have not been attacked is Homeland Security and the PA in spite of all the obstructionist tactics of the left who believe the war on terror is a police action and who want to handle it in a kind and sensitive way as Kerry has stated..........

What you liberals fail to grasp is Radical Islam hates us.............They don't want to kiss and make up.........They want to kill us.........

The only thing I "fail to grasp" is your resort to partisan nonsense. Can you negate what I said with something logical or reasonable?

Can you explain just how this government have protected us. Until you do, I will stick by my assertion, unless you can tell me something I don't know.

 

[MSgt]

You wrote:

We will never see an end to general "terrorism," but we can play a larger role in destroying it down to a tolerable nuisance. This will take some bruising, because Islam's most dedicated adherents are clinging to the past with the greatest spirit of Tyranosaurus Rex. But bruising today is better than gambling with mass American corpses tomorrow.

That sure sounds to me like you were describing what you think we need to be doing today, not describing what you think will occur in the future.

So yes, I do have a question, even if you don't want to answer it. Who needs to be "bruising" today? I assume when you said "bruising today" will be better than gambling, you were talking about American strategy or tactics. What is "bruising?"

And once again, you show us all how obtuse you can be. Now you are complaining over the use of the word "today." I am actually confused on whether I should be frustrated at your replies or simply laugh at them. I will state again..."bruising today is better than mass American corpses tomorrow."

This simply means that we are to take the lumps today in order to secure a safer tomorrow. This means that we are to suffer a broken arm today in order to keep from the heart attack tomorrow. This means that we are to face the IED's today so that we don't have to face the nukes of tomorrow. This means that we need to accept that people (Americans and Middle Easterners) are going to die today in order to keep the millions (Americans and Middle Easterners) that might die tomorrow alive. This means that our current lives will be one of war in order to get to a better tomorrow.

Do you understand what "bruising" meant now? Has it been broken down enough for you? Are you able to move into a meaningful discussion yet?

No, I appreciate that your desire hide behind innocuous sounding words, and to avoid my question and explain yourself, and that you don't have the guts to say what you really mean because many find mass murder, sorry, mass "bruising" objectionable.

So you want "bruising" to mean "mass murder?" Am I the only one reading this rediculous post? You accuse me of having "no guts," because I won't write what you want my words to mean on an Internet site? How petty are you? The only "mass murder" you will see will be in the future if we have to fight Radical Islam with nuclear missiles. Of all my thousands of posts, in which all have read, you are the only one that keeps badgering me to distort the meanings into what you want to read. It all goes back to the time you couldn't fathom "take the gloves off" with regards to obvious offenders. I believe you needed that explained to you as well.

You obviously have yet to contribute at all since post 1, except for the sarcastic criticism of other peoples thoughts and writings (as you run around and pretend to be on some hieghtened platform of morality while the rest of us get dirty in the real world). Like I said..."stick to Dr. Seuss."

 

[Navy Pride]

The only thing I "fail to grasp" is your resort to partisan nonsense. Can you negate what I said with something logical or reasonable?

Can you explain just how this government have protected us. Until you do, I will stick by my assertion, unless you can tell me something I don't know.

You call me the partisan.........Liberals have no plan..all they do is criticize the president........The American People are to smart to swallow liberal bullshit........

I credit Homeland Security and the PA as the main reason for keeping us safe.....After 9/11/01 I would not have given a plug nickel that we would be safe.......I expected suicide Bombings and terrorist attacks every other week.......

It didn't happen..............

Thank you President Bush for keeping us safe.........

 

[MSgt]

The only thing I "fail to grasp" is your resort to partisan nonsense.

Yet....his name isn't "Navy Pride_conservative."

What is yours? "Southern_liberal?"

Partisan slavery is alive and well on both sides and one doesn't have to hail from a Party to spew it. Both sides are our problem.

 

[jfuh]

No, my life isnt more important than our civil liberties.

Well said, very well said.

 

[southern_liberal]

You call me the partisan.........Liberals have no plan..all they do is criticize the president........The American People are to smart to swallow liberal bullshit........

I credit Homeland Security and the PA as the main reason for keeping us safe.....After 9/11/01 I would not have given a plug nickel that we would be safe.......I expected suicide Bombings and terrorist attacks every other week.......

It didn't happen..............

Thank you President Bush for keeping us safe.........

Okay. Yet again you dodged my questions. How did your knight in shinning armor, Bush, save us from another terror attack and can you negate anything I said in my original respose to you. If you can't give me specifics, you are just another Bush apologist, who lets narrow minded conservative radio talk show hosts do your thinking for you. Please, Please, pretty please, answer my questions and negate my original response. If you can of course.

 

[MSgt]

Okay. Yet again you dodged my questions. How did your knight in shinning armor, Bush, save us from another terror attack and can you negate anything I said in my original respose to you. If you can't give me specifics, you are just another Bush apologist, who lets narrow minded conservative radio talk show hosts do your thinking for you. Please, Please, pretty please, answer my questions and negate my original response. If you can of course.

What are you doing? What is the purpose of this?

There is no way to prove what is happening behind closed doors. There is no way to prove what our international spy network is doing aside from the very little that has been released. There is no way to prove what intel we have received from the Muslim world that has actively allowed us to chase down terrorists aside from what little has been released. There is no way to prove what U.S. Marines and soldiers are doing inside Bosnia and what CIA agents are doing in Pakistan. There is no way to prove what wire tapping has done to help us capture or chase down terrorists and their suporters aside from what little has been released.

If such information were of public knowledge it would make it that much more difficult to track down and neutralize these individiauls who have the will to destroy for their god. And even if said information was released to the public (and our enemies), people like you would look for the negative spin on it. Some people's only strength is to over dramatize and cry that their rights are being violated, because they can't know every single detail that protects their ungreatful little lives. Some could care less about their securities, because clinging to the outside prospect that their phone calls are being listened to by from Republican sponsership and not Democratic when President Clinton did it, is more important.

If you are going to call someone a "Bush apologist" then you have to acknowledge that you are simply a "Bush hater" and are acting just as narrow minded. The truth is that Bush has done a good job considering that he has no opposition to keep him balanced and that 9/11 slapped this government in the face (despite two decades of warnings). The Democrats can't complain about everything that comes out of the White House without producing practical plans and expect their favorable turnout. Criticism without alternatives is not constructive...it's damaging.