er: "similarly inclined"
Similarly inclined to do what? What did Sadaam do to the US that
others might be "similarly inclined" to do?
You used the words "fight back". What did Sadaam do that we were
"fighting back" against?
He had our oil?
It has never been the policy of the United States to kill or capture Osama
ben Laden. If either happens, it's a bonus, but actively pursuing either has
never been a strategic - or even tactical - goal of the United States in the
War on Terror.
Since immediately after 9-11, the single strategic goal of the United States
has been to prevent another attack on the country or civilian U.S. interests
abroad. To accomplish this goal, tactical efforts have been directed toward
disrupting terrorist communications, financing, recruiting, training, and
the harboring of terrorists by rogue states as well as strengthening
defenses both at home and abroad.
In the decade of the 90's, there have been one or two attacks on U.S.
interests, either here or overseas, per year. WTC 1, the USS Cole, embassy
bombings, kidnappings of diplomats, etc. Since the aforementioned policy was
adopted, there has not been one single attack - successful or otherwise - in
the United States or against civilian US interests abroad.
To "capture" or "kill" ben Laden as a goal is to harken to the criminal
justice model. Ben Laden is NOT a criminal - he is an unlawful enemy
combatant, same as any other guerrilla, saboteur, spy, or fifth-columnist.
The criminal justice methodology is not the technique to use on him.
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Feith, and others understand this. Obama, Biden,
Pelosi, Carter, and others of the left do not.
To a large degree, I agree. On the plus side, Iraq can be considered as a
"flypaper tactic." Many of the wannabe terrorists flocked to Iraq where we
killed them at a prodigious rate. We killed them by the thousands. As for
Afghanistan, who cares?
Some ancient worthy said "The penis is mightier than the sword." By that he
meant that your enemies can breed faster than you can kill them - and that's
probably true. But it takes a generation to grow new goblins and who knows
how things can change in fifteen or twenty years.
For example, evolution may take over in that we've removed a goodly portion
of the 'stupid gene' (i.e., attacking an Abrams tank with a pickup-mounted
.50 caliber machine gun) from circulation.
Oh, yes, if I want examples of functional, intelligent foreign policy,
I'm going to turn to people like Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld.
Couldn't you come up with some examples of people who have not been
Sure. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Feith. Actually, anybody who claims to be
I guess it depends on your definition of success. In my definition,
foreigners don't get a vote and success depends entirely on what's in the
best interests of the United States. I am indifferent in the extreme whether
the French have their feelings hurt or the Minoans are miffed. I measure
success by how many enemies of this great republic, their wives, children,
and goats die a horrible death (preceded, if possible, by piteous
lamentations), not the readings on some imaginary "Love Meter."
To paraphrase Admiral Halsey: "Kill terrorists. Kill terrorists. Kill more
But, being fair, I can see how to those who value - nay, depend - on the
approbation of others will have a different metric (to use a Rumsfeld word)
in measuring "success."
What metric do you use to describe the neocons' "success?"
I can't think of a single one that works.
They certainly have been responsible for the deaths of some terrorists
and potential terrorists. they have also been responsible for the
deaths of many of our young men and women, and those of our allies,
and destabilizing an already volatile country. they have also been
responsible for the creation of many more terrorists. they have also
bankrupted our country and destroyed our moral standing in the
If that's success, I want less of it. I find it hard to even speak
the word "neoconservative" without using the same tone of voice that
they use when speaking the term "liberal." More than anything else
they have destroyed the conservative movement or at least gravely
wounded it and have assured a Democratic victory in the upcoming
except the ones killing them by the "100's of thousands" were their so-
called Islamic "friends".
Many Iraqi's have now realized that and have switched sides.
Too bad the hateful DemocRATs will not recognize it.
Iraqis celebrated when Saddam was deposed.Maybe you missed the video on TV
news? Then there was the "purple ink" showing that Iraqis risked their
lives to vote in a new government.But the willfully blind ignores that
I am saying that they don't want us gone. Gone as you have implied
means now. If left to your reasoning we would of already been gone.
Of course the Iraqi people want an autonomous country, and that would
require that we leave, but they realize that they are not ready for us
"to be gone".
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.