Iraq na Phobia

[Swimmer]

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?

[Bronko]

Originally Posted by Swimmer

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?

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. You can't make this stuff up. Forget Bin Laden, let focus on Princess Di.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Swimmer

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.

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.

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?

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