F.................en
 

Beyond all the slam dunking and pointed wit here on this issue..... its a hell hole over there.....and its not Dems and Retropubs..... its us....America..... over policing and sickenly trying to insert DEMONOCRACY into countries and peoples who do not desire so.



You should all watch Catch 22 again and again.

GWBUSH:

And I reject those ideas," he said. "Ideas such as leaving before the job is done. Ideas such as not helping this (Iraqi) government take the necessary and hard steps to be able to do its job."

Our Iraqi Government...not the the Iraqi peoples choice but our version....

Puhleeeesssseee.... you must have stock in munitions?

This really is the problem.

It seems clear the single biggest mistake Bush made was to insert Paul Bremer to dictate just exactly how the Iraqi's were going to run their country.

The arrogance of this is beyond words. It literally is hegemony and it's exactly what Bin Laden told the Islamic world we would do.

Combined with the fact that Bush seems to have cared little of the regional social and religious structure...oh, and they didn't bother to secure the tons and tons of munitions and arms left in the open after Saddams fall...

The stupidity of this is beyond words. I don't know about you, but I expect more expertise from my government and accountability for those who led us here in this manner.

Instead Bush gives them civilian medals and high ranking jobs.

The obscenity of this is beyond words.

Skitterpop, I think some are just afraid to look.

-spence

I think some people just understand that they can't dial in the Way-Back Machine and un-insert Paul Bremer into Iraq. Some people probably also think that conceding defeat in Iraq as a form of punishment to Bush is not the right to do for the country. But on the other hand some people probably think that conceding defeat as a form of punishment to Bush is critical to their cause at any cost.

Demonocracy..........Interesting.

Is that all you've got?

Yes, Americans by and large want us to loose. What a crock...

-spence

By and large? Nope, I dont think so. Only those who think charging a sitting President with war Crimes in the midst of a war.

Wonder what made him opt for his fourth deployment.

So in a time of war all accountability should be suspended?

For a war that we know won't have an end?

This makes no sense.

Bush's duty is to defend the US Constitution...He's not King.

-spence

War crimes .... they do it and its a crime .... we do it in the name of God and Democracy and its not? .... this lack of self observance with objective honesty has always puzzled me about America.

Fortunately the guys I know in Iraq past and present don't consider themselves part of your "we".

I beg to differ. The military could win on thier own if they didn't have to stay out of the mosques. If they could enter and destroy what is inside the war would end.

And what is so confusing about the simple fact that they, the fanatical muslims, who are nothing but thugs subverting a religon, declared war on us. And the declaration took place many years before 09/11/2001.

Enter the mosques and shoot SADR and the others who are formenting and perpetuating the war for thier own benefit.

Dialogue, dialogue, dialogue...............dialogue got us 09/11/2001. Dialogue got us 444 days of captivity for the embassy hostages. Dialogue allows the enemy to resupply most of the time.

I watched those planes hit the towers, one after the fact, one live. I said in the barber shop where I was we are at war as I paid my bill and started to leave. We just need to figure out who to shoot at. I firmly believe because of his rheotoric and his undying support of anti-american diatribe Hussein, deserved to be the first to go. Doing what Bush did was to pro-active for many Amercians, and in that regard unpalatable, but sometimes when all else seems to be gone, or is gone, one has to save face. And saving face before the world is extremely important. Bin Laden and all the rest wanted war and they got it. But like most terrorists (cowards) after the fact they are hiding well-away from the shooting.

I have asked this question before and I'll ask it again of the anti-Bush group. What would you have done different after 9/11 than what Bush and most of Congress did?

Pick up a book on the Holocaust if you wanna see war crimes and crimes against humanity. Read up on the Bataan death march and what the Japs did to Americans. You'll see real war crimes there, not you're silly make believe war crimes.

I don't think GWB is out looking to round up and slaughter random civilians. Please show me the proof of where GWB ORDERED the murder and exececution of innocent people? And innocents killed during battle is not a war crime you know. I want you to show me proof of when GWB ordered the murder and slaughter of random innocents just becasue he could.

The 7 people who voted to charge Bush with war crimes in this stupid poll are freakin idiots. You guys are clueless! Read some history and you'll see what war crimes truly are.

Rest assured there was an element in WWII and every other war in History that was determined that we were unable to win. Vietnam is a good example of what happens when you listen to them.

If the prior administration had taken terrorism seriously we may not even be in the current situation. But instead, Slick Willy had the NSA eavesdropping on the hottest female dignitary in the world. :rotf2: You can't make this stuff up. Forget Bin Laden, let focus on Princess Di.

In all honesty I've never heard a single military or terrorisim expert assert such a thing. I don't believe it for a moment.
Who's anti-Bush? I'm anti bad policy :)

Quite simply, we should have recognized 9/11 for what it was...not an offensive strike against our freedom by crazy terrorists, but rather the result of a global Islamic insurgency that feeds from many sources.

This is the problem with the entire notion of the "terrorist". If you either are a terrorist or you are not then logic would dictate we could sinply target and kill terrorists to be successfull. This is the rational I hear repeatedly in these pages by many of you...

But the reality is we're fighting insurgents...it's a groundswell of rage against the entire world. We're target number one not because we're free, but because the USA is known as the world leader and our economy is the underpinning of the global economy.

This rage is present in every nation on earth. Some of it is perhaps justified and much of it is not.

But the US Military can't kill everyone we say is a terrorist when there's a stream of rage that's rooted in over a billion people, most of whom don't have the freedom or means to express any difference of opinion.

I could go on...but this is the fundamental problem with our post 9/11 policy.

-spence

Bizzaro Logic:
Given the fact that combatting violence against American citizens with military force isn't an option, perhaps rather than attacking the Training infrastructure for Al Queda post 9/11 we could have provided some group therapy for those poor individuals who cannot control their rage and maybe a mass apology from the American people would have helped soothe their animosity towards us. 9/12/01 should've been the time for some serious introspection to determine the things that the victims of the WTC, the Pentagon and the American people in general were guilty of to provoke such an attack. After the root cause analysis was completed we could've then sent a delegation of Jesse Jackson and Jimmy Carter to Afghanistan to engage the Taliban in some engaging dialog. What the Hell do those Terrorism experts know anyways.

Dont forget: When we kill a Terrorist who is a sworn enemy of America we are handing Bin Laden a Victory. Yep he gets great satisfaction when the top leaders in his organization are exterminated.

What's Bizaro is you're interpretation. I've never stated that violence isn't an option or that killing terrorists is a win for al Qaeda.

Violence with weak justification that seems to needlessly kill civilians though is a completely different matter.

Perception does count, this is a rebellion.

Your perception of what I believe seems to be quite different from what I really believe. It's as if you don't read my words, but just respond with the same tired black and white mantra.

-spence

You are the wings beneath my wings....anti anything....you make me sing.
You should be in Iraq :spin: fighting for what you believe....go get em Sniper :btu:

I am pro killing the bastards con lying about Iraq and there involvment with Bin Laden. I am also sick of Bush acting like a King and Rumsfield the top courtier. Real kids got killed and maimed over there. We have inflamed not only the Middle East but a lot of the 3rd world against us. And I am certian that we come off looking like 3rd grade bullies over the whole thing. Did I metioned American kids getting killed!!! Thats a shame, a shame. 3000 empty spots at the Christmass dinner table this season FOR WHAT!!!

Killing Terrorists is bad but killing conservatives is good?
Yeah okay.
:whackin:

How about Shock and Awe Skip..... get your head out of Patriotic Drivel and look around... you never suprise me with your deeply slanted perspective.... wake up kid.

Maybe these statements were misinterpreted.

On the topic of Bin Ladens victory you claim we have handed him:

Originally Posted by stripersnipr
Bin Laden punches America in the face and then predicts America will punch back. That is validation?

It's a bit more nuanced than that...but you did just articulate his point!

As far as the use of Miltary Force against Terrorism
your statement was:

There's no military only end game...
Sorry I missed the only.

But having said that; We can assume you support (in conjunction with Military action) the Governments non-military efforts such as the wiretapping of Terrorists and the programs to investigate, trace and freeze Terrorists financial resources?

Any objection to the NY Times exposure of those efforts just prior to an FBI raid on a Terrorist funding Islamic charity?

All this from a guy who refers to Democracy as Demonocracy.

Wow you must be privy to some real secret stuff because this is the first time I've heard of civilians being targeted by America in Iraq including the shock and awe campaign which targeted strictly Government and Military Targets. That probably bums you out huh?

Certainly if done within the law, and I think there a high probability that Bush has abused his authority in this regard in some cases. Simply because he has good intentions isn't good enough for me. History has proven that proper oversight is prudent to protect the liberties of US citizens.

I felt that specific instance was a bad editorial decision.

But that's not to say that the media should abuse censorship of its own content. There's a line between breaking a scoop to sell papers and providing information the public ought to know.

For all the allegations I hear about a "liberal media" subverting the US government there's little discussion about the political idiology of the leakers themselves!

-spence

All I can say to you spence, Get a rifle and walk the post!

Skipper, you don't have to murder or execute innovent people to have commited a war crime. There is a lot of International Law regarding war that the US is party to...and we've clearly violated a lot of it, which I'd guess most wars do. While I wouldn't burden Bush with all of this, he certainly bears a lot of responsibility seeing as he is the Commander in Chief.

Additionally I'd be willing to wager some good money that Bush has indeed approved exemptions to the Geneva Conventions which are probably illegal.

At the very least he's clearly misled the American people or outright lied about our behavior in this regard.

-spence

What color is a rifle?

I need to select some coordinating shoes, and perhaps a contrasting linen pocket square :)

-spence

YELLOW to match your body color!!!!!

:jester: :jester: :jester:

-spence

Only when we try to force feed it into a country that has no interest in it.

If you believe that because we targeted only military sites that no civilians were killed in the massive bombings then good for you but you are wrong.

Well, I think we've killed on the low end many tens of thousands to on the high end several hundred thousand innocent Iraqi's.

Any way you cut it it's a lot of death.

If I remember correctly, International law does provide for a "reasonable" number of civilian deaths as acceptable in times of war.

But considering the context...

The the ratio of civilians to hostiles isn't very productive.

That most of the world (including America) doesn't buy the justification.

That it's clear the war was planned and executed at the top in a most incompetent manner.

So given all of that, it's really not all that difficult for a Muslim in some far off country to think the local Imam might just be preaching the truth when he calls for Jihad against the West who's waging a crusade aginst Islam.

Please think :think:

Bing! because in that time another few young men or women joined the dark side.

Get it?

-spence

I would not consider war crimes just or practical. Certainly to the military - just doesn't fly for me. I wouldn't mind seeing some investigations at the very top...


Interesting read from Iraq - I'm about 1/2 way through but my eyes are burnt out...

http://www.brookings.edu/comm/events/20061026.pdf

You make it sound like Terrorism was born as a result of the Iraq invasion.......It simply isn't true.

Not at all, I only cited recent examples that are having tremendous impact. There's plenty to pick from in the past half century. Granted you or I might not agree with an alternate assessment, but that simply is the way it is...

-spence

You say Toma toe they say Tahmahto :scatter:

No one ever stated that no civilians were killed during shock and awe, they certainly werent targeted though, we have the most precise bombs ever known to man, but civilians will always be killed by accident. We went after military targets of importance, but civilians were killed because they were around those targets, but they werent the intended targets. You know this, quit playing your stupid war crimes bull %$%$%$%$. But you seem to believe that any civilian killed by accident means that Bush is Guilty of a war crime. Thats just insane! If he was ordering bombs dropped on civilians to kill them, then i'd be outraged too! But we both know this is NOT the case. I know you'd like to believe we are targeting civilians, but it aint the case buddy!

Wake up, and stop with this Bush is going out of his way to kill civilians bull %$%$%$%$. Of course civilians were killed during shock and awe, but they were NOT the intended targets. God you need to get a clue

In Skitterpops mind, every member of a US Bomber crew that flew flights over Germany during WWII should be charged with war crimes. I mean, how many tens of thousands of civilians were killed during those bombings!? FDR and IKE should've been charged with war crimes and murder also. After all, they ordered the attacks that killed those civilians! In Skitterpops mind, they must be war criminals too.

Just needed to put into perspective how insane his logic is.