Political signs

Page 9 of 11  

wrote:

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?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
HeyBub wrote:

On the flip side, Osama, who actually attacked the US, is still at large.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

but not able to really DO anything;he has to spend his energies dodging and hiding.Even though he's found refuge in Pakistan. (a nuclear-armed Islamic state)
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I agree. He's a big piece of the puzzle but killing him wouldn't solve the problem. But you know, nothing would please Bush more.
olddog
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
olddog wrote:

If you want to send a message, there's no more powerful message than swift, accurate justice. Unfortunately that window closed a while ago.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nate Nagel wrote:

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.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Iraq is nothing more than a terrorist recruitment and training ground. The techniques developed there are now being used in Afganistan (by the terrorists).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob F wrote:

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.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

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 dismal failures?
nate
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
N8N wrote:

Sure. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Feith. Actually, anybody who claims to be a neoconservative.
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 terrorists!"
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."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

that would be a "flip-flop" and you can't have that.
It's your pride that is fouling your logic Cowboy.
olddog
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

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 international community.
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 Presidential election.
nate
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Unfortunately, we are creating way more terrorists than we are killing by our actions. People get mad when the are invaded, occupied, and killed by the hundreds of thousands.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob F wrote:

They'll get over it.
As for creating more terrorists than we've killed, where are they?
Please let us know so we can go kill them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
HeyBub wrote:

You are no better than they.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

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 stuff.

More "moral equivalence". Pure garbage.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jim Yanik wrote:

They still hate *us* in case you haven't noticed. They want us gone.

One extremist advotating genocide is equivalent to another.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

They may hate us but they,the majority, do not want us gone. At least not yet.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@mucks.net wrote:

Are you then saying that the democratically elected government of Iraq does not reflect the will of the people? If so then we have failed even more than I knew.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

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".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    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.