More than 180 million former

[Nbadan]

If I have to watch our guys dying in the process of fighting for this country and liberating their countr,y so they can turn on us in 50 years like Europe has.... you can damn sure bet I am willing to watch some of their civillians die in the process...

By supporting this immoral war (not my words the Pope's words), not only are you supporting the cold-blooded murder of innocent civilians. You support torture, humiliation, and degradation of prisoners. Many of whom have subsequently been released without ever being charged.

[Nbadan]

If anything caused it it was the UN, Britain and France forming Israel, while having probmised all that land to the Arabs. This problem existed prior to 2001...and the terrorists have no right to dicate which countries we support..if they are going to declare war on us...the countries that protect them will either cooperate with us...or they are going to feel the efffects of this war as well.

The Palestinian problem has nothing to do with our illegal war in Iraq. If anything, the U.S. has set up its own little Gaza strip and West Bank in Iraq,

[Nbadan]

Exactly. Funny how the Islamic terrorists had no recruiting problems throughout the 1990s. Remember Somalia? The US turned tail and ran once the battle began. Bin Laden has been reported again and again as being emboldened by that response.

It couldn't have anything to do with the West providing support for repressive regimes in those respective countries, right? What did you want us to do in Somolia, nuke it?

[Marcus Bryant]

You mean like when the US led a coalition to extricate Hussein from Kuwait and reduce his threat to the Saudis? When it provided aid to bin Laden and mujhadeen to fight the Soviets in the 80s?

The hatred for the West comes from what those regimes spew more than anything else.

Again, the United States did not respond to multiple terrorist attacks in the 1990s, just as it hadn't in the decades prior. Successful attacks bred more recruits and that rather spectacular attack 3 years ago certainly didn't hurt them.

It's not a matter of being too strong, it's a matter of being perceived as weak. That's the message the withdrawal from Somalia sent.

[Nbadan]

You mean like when the US led a coalition to extricate Hussein from Kuwait and reduce his threat to the Saudis? When it provided aid to bin Laden and mujhadeen to fight the Soviets in the 80s?

The U.S. wasn't supporting the Saudi people, they were supporting the Saudi royalty and the oil. America was serving its own interests in the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan.

[Nbadan]

The hatred for the West comes from what those regimes spew more than anything else.

So why do we keep handing them petro dollars that they in turn hand to terrorists supporters? Its a never-ending cycle of terrorism support we got going here. Get rid of these repressive regimes.

[Marcus Bryant]

The U.S. wasn't supporting the Saudi people, they were supporting the Saudi royalty and the oil. America was serving its own interests in the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan.

The complaint from 'the people' about the Saudi Royals is that they aren't repressive enough.

As for the US did I say that we were not pursuing our own interests? How does that change the fact that we were supporting the efforts to resist a repressive regime's invasion of Afghanistan?

So why do we keep handing them petro dollars that they in turn hand to terrorists supporters?

Gee, why do we have a demand for oil? Aw shucks it would be so easy to change that.

Its a never-ending cycle of terrorism support we got going here.

Terrorism was not created by those governments. It is sponsored by some, certainly. So what do we do? Do we sit back and wait to be attacked again and again? Perhaps with something a little greater than 4 hijacked planes? Come on.

You know what feeds that cycle of terrorism? Islamic fundamentalism. To the extent that there is an impact on regimes over there, it is a push for Islamic fascism. Now we can turn a blind eye to it and hope it goes away, or perhaps we can actually deal with it.

Get rid of these repressive regimes.

Is that not what the US has done in Iraq and Afghanistan? Oh wait, a Republican is in the White House, so it's bad.

[Yonivore]

"Just wait till the U.S. has to pull out of Iraq and the nation turns into one big Al-Queda recruitment ground, and then we'll ask the families about the sacrafice of their loved ones."

Wow, nice rosy outlook there, Nbadanallah. I think I'll advise you to just wait until Iraq has free and fair elections, no longer under the thumb of a ruthless dictator and his torture chambers.

What I don't understand is that nearly everyone agrees the war should be fought to a conclusion...that we can't afford to lose...that we shouldn't pull out, yet, there are people like you that keep predicting the worst and that never give the hopeful outcome the light of day.

Over 75,000 Americans died in the final days of World War II --- just before VE Day, including such killing fields as the Battle of the Bulge. If you'd been around then, you'd of been whining about how they were dying for nothing.

Then, for over a year after VE Day, there were Americans dying at the hands of "insurgent" Germans in the streets of Dresden, Berlin, etc...in greater numbers than are now being experienced in Iraq. Again, if you'd been around then, you'd of been whining about how we were losing the peace in the Quagmire of Europe.

"Yeah, and none of the 911 perpatrators were from Iraq. Using your logic, maybe France should be next on W's wish list instead of Iran and North Korea?"

None of them were from Afghanistan, either. And, I'm not opposed to leveling France. They've been useless surrender monkeys for as long as anyone can remember anyway.

"What the are you smoking? Abu Gharib was the poster-child for Al-Queda recruiting. Al-Queda and Osama Bin Laden are still planning and plotting attacks against the West and the U.S. has zero troops to do anything about it thanks to the Iraq cluster- ."

I believe September 11 was a much better recruitment tool for al Qaeda's enemies than Abu Ghraib was for it's cause. I still recall the interview with the Iraqi citizen, when the Abu Ghraib story was at its peak, who glibly recalled the atrocities of Saddam Hussein and shrugged off the "humiliation" of Abu Ghraib as nonsense.

And, if it recruits terrorists, so be it; we'll just kill them too.

"The U.S. has lost the moral-authority to rebuild Iraq. The sooner you realize this the better for all of us. It is your kind of thinking why the U.S. had to lose 50,000 troops in Vietman before the U.S. pulled out, and what was gonna happened there inevitably happened anyway."

Just out of curiosity -- and for entertainment purposes only -- how would now proceed on the Iraq question if you were the President, Nbadanallah?

"Everytime we kill civilians the snowball effect takes hold in Iraq and we inflame even more moderate Muslims. This is what contributes to more road-side bombs and suicide bombings, and more coalition troops dieing."

Where are the Japanese and German terrorists created during WWII? We killed exponentially more civilians in those two theaters than in Iraq.

"By supporting this immoral war (not my words the Pope's words), not only are you supporting the cold-blooded murder of innocent civilians. You support torture, humiliation, and degradation of prisoners. Many of whom have subsequently been released without ever being charged."

Sorry, the Pope lost his moral authority at the end of a few hundred priest's penises. And, we are prosecuting the abuses of Abu Ghraib. Four soldiers are now facing murder charges for killing an Iraqi officer. I doubt due process was ever a concern of the prior regime.

"The Palestinian problem has nothing to do with our illegal war in Iraq. If anything, the U.S. has set up its own little Gaza strip and West Bank in Iraq,"

Other than in the context of the former Ba'athist regime providing financial support to "Palestinian" terrorists, I agree to a great extent. However, I'd like to focus on the word "illegal."

Under what body of law are our actions illegal?

And you resigning yourself to a grim outcome is really short-sighted considering this conflict is less than 10 years old and the "Palestinian"-Israeli conflict is nearly a century in the making. We ousted the dictatorial Ba'athist regime in 21 days..."Palestinians" have had no such success with the Israeli government. We've been battling "insurgents" in Iraq just over a year...and you're ready to throw in the towel.

If that reflects the Kerry mentality, who needs him as President? Not me.

Nbadanallah, you're a ing idiot.

[exstatic]

What I don't understand is that nearly everyone agrees the war should be fought to a conclusion...that we can't afford to lose...that we shouldn't pull out, yet, there are people like you that keep predicting the worst and that never give the hopeful outcome the light of day.

Just curious, Yoni. At what point is the war fought "to a conclusion"?

[Yonivore]

Just curious, Yoni. At what point is the war fought "to a conclusion"?

In Iraq?

When the Iraqi government is able to provide for its own security.

[Yonivore]

Just curious, Yoni. At what point is the war fought "to a conclusion"?

I'll ask you the same question I asked Nbadanallah. If you were President, how would resolve the Iraq issue?

[Marcus Bryant]

Here's a better question: if you were president, how would you resolve the 'crazy er Islamist terrorists who want to kill us' issue?

[SpursWoman]

And, I'm not opposed to leveling France.

Sorry, ungrateful bas s....

[whottt]

The U.S. wasn't supporting the Saudi people, they were supporting the Saudi royalty and the oil. America was serving its own interests in the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan.

How so? What interests were we serving other than to stop the spread of communism, a flawed, corrupt form of government?

Ditto Viet Nam, ditto Korea.

You know you really don't give a about those people over there...you could care less what ty life they are born into over there...it's their fault for being born there right Dan? em.

Viet Nam was doomed to fail...so we should just say em...even if it eventually migth have affected us...

Hey we finally did that in Afghanistan, we finally stopped meddling in other countries affairs and forcing our fascist form of freedom on countries...it worked so well we started using that practice in South America as well...why did we do this? Because it got the ing antiwar protesters to shut the up...well not really...then they started ing about how we propped up dictators...

So basically we heads no matter what we do, especially republicans...inspite the fact that a democrat was in office in every major war of the 20th century...


We should just sit back, and let every group of assholes that want to impose their ed up will upon us do so...right Dan?

Because then we'll really have a justified reason to .

[exstatic]

Hold the elections and then declare victory and GTFO. There are too many factions, and eventually, it will crumble into civil war anyway. Why spend more American lives propping up a regime that will fall? Let them get back to killing each other instead of Americans.

Alternatively, split Iraq into three extremely semi-autonomous regions: Sunni, Shi'ite, and Kurd. They'll still fight each other, but maybe not on a daily basis.

We're fighting not only the insurgents, but almost 1500 years of Middle Eastern culture and history, none of which deals with freedom or democracy. It's not going to happen in a day, a year, or a decade, folks. How much do you want to pay, in terms of lives and capital?

[Yonivore]

Hold the elections and then declare victory and GTFO. There are too many factions, and eventually, it will crumble into civil war anyway. Why spend more American lives propping up a regime that will fall? Let them get back to killing each other instead of Americans.

Alternatively, split Iraq into three extremely semi-autonomous regions: Sunni, Shi'ite, and Kurd. They'll still fight each other, but maybe not on a daily basis.

We're fighting not only the insurgents, but almost 1500 years of Middle Eastern culture and history, none of which deals with freedom or democracy. It's not going to happen in a day, a year, or a decade, folks. How much do you want to pay, in terms of lives and capital?

You're cut from the same cloth as those who said Japan would never be democratized or, that Germany would never be peaceful.

So, you favor just "calling" the peace and leaving.

Nice tribute to the already fallen.

[Marcus Bryant]

We're fighting not only the insurgents, but almost 1500 years of Middle Eastern culture and history, none of which deals with freedom or democracy. It's not going to happen in a day, a year, or a decade, folks. How much do you want to pay, in terms of lives and capital?

So we're back to ignoring the threat and wishing it away.

[whottt]

Hold the elections and then declare victory and GTFO. There are too many factions, and eventually, it will crumble into civil war anyway. Why spend more American lives propping up a regime that will fall? Let them get back to killing each other instead of Americans.

Alternatively, split Iraq into three extremely semi-autonomous regions: Sunni, Shi'ite, and Kurd. They'll still fight each other, but maybe not on a daily basis.

We're fighting not only the insurgents, but almost 1500 years of Middle Eastern culture and history, none of which deals with freedom or democracy. It's not going to happen in a day, a year, or a decade, folks. How much do you want to pay, in terms of lives and capital?

Congrats, that's the exact same philosophy that the last architects of the middle east used...

They are too ing savage to ever be civilized...that is what Europe said...That is what Great Britan and France said...and they fully expected the equally undesirable Jews of Israel to be exterminated.

So who is truly more cynical here...the one who thinks these people can't join the modern era and we shouldn't even try(anti war POV)...or the one who thinks they can(Greedy asshole George Bush)..

The truth is...no one has ever tried because no one has ever stood up to their brutal methods and culture and challenged it.

One beheading was enough for Great Britain to say...let's get the out of here...I don't give a what we promised the jews..did you see what those Arabs just did to that guy?

80 years later a terrorist act was enough for Spain to say...let's the get the out of here and capitulate.

The simple fact is...that in your view...you think you are better than the people born in the middle east, I agree we are, our society is, our way of life is......but the difference is...you don't think they're capable of joining modern civilization, just like Europe has always thought...and why should we die trying to make them...

I know we're better but I am willing to give them a fighting chance, even if some of them have to die to do it, before my second choice of nuking them off the planet.


911 is why. Because when we leave this country to a bunch of opressive s, they have a nasty habit of blaming the suffering they inflict on their people, on us...which results in individuals that hate our freedom and civilization so much..that they are willing to commit suicide if it hurts us.


What you advocate is apathy...What's the expression? Hate isn't opposite of love..it's apathy...

Well we can try to forget about them, but 911 shows they have ways of getting our attention and letting us know they are still there suffering in the living that is that portion of the world.

We can no longer forget about them...either they get modernized or they become extinct.

No one has ever had the guts or for ude to show them how badly their culture is failing...once it fails them, they'll either change it, or they will pass into history to more advanced cultures and society.

An unspoken aspect of this war is that the most terroristic people in that part of the world are now fighting and dying against our millitary. That's natural selection at work right there...let the violent ones come to fight the USA...they won't live to pass on their genes.

[exstatic]

How much do you want to pay, in terms of lives and capital?

No one addressed this one. How much?

And whottt...folks have been trying for the best part of this century to westernize the ME. It hasn't happened, and is showing no signs OF happening. Do we stay for 100 years in Iraq?

Yes, I think the ME is ed up, and undemocratizable in our lifetime. The mistake that most make is thinking of them as "mostly like us". They're not. The culture is violently Patriarchal and misogynistic. There is no place for differing opinions. They don't care if they die for their beliefs, in fact preferring to do so. To combat that kind of fanaticism, you have to become as oppressive as Saddam. If you don't, you're seen as weak and ineffective, leading to increased fanaticism and aQ recruiting. If you do, you're the Christian Crusader oppressor and it leads to increased fanaticism and aQ recruiting. It's a no win scenario.

[Marcus Bryant]

Ergo, we should adopt the Claytie Williams approach?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Dan-

Go read Osama's writings. He's got a lengthy wax exstatic on how Clitton turning tale and running Somalia gave his cause streed cred, and how he felt the US would never fight them toe to toe due for fear of bloodshed. It's the whole "boots on the ground" thing that Bush talked about back in the day.

that's the exact same philosophy that the last architects of the middle east used...

Actually the last architects, England and France, carved it up hoping to set up some rather weak nations that they could take advantage of for *gasp* favorable oil interests.

I tend to come down on ex's side of things, the best way to deal with Iraq would be to split it up according to religious affiliation. Tribalism is rampant in that part of the world, why not just admit it and get it over with...

People talk about how we can't break up Iraq like it's been around for two thousand years or something stupid like that. Fact is present day Iraq's borders were drawn in the aftermath of WWI by Britain and France, vis a vis the League of Nations.

I don't even know if breaking up Iraq will work, as we'd probably see Turkey make a grab for the Kurdish lands in the north, Syria for the Sunni lands in the west, and Iran for the Shi'ite lands in the east.

Savagery and tribalism has been the hallmark of the Middle East, don't see it changing anytime soon.

[exstatic]

Ergo, we should adopt the Claytie Williams approach?

Nope. The war on terrorism has no chance to be won over there. It has to be won over here. Those 19 hijackers didn't board planes in the ME, they boarded in Portland Maine.

"Boots on the ground" obviously isn't working. I think you identify hostile and potentially hostile regimes, and allow them their wish to live in the 6th century. Bomb the crap out of anything that looks like WMD infrastructure, and keep doing it. Keep vigilant at home.

[Marcus Bryant]

But what if you aren't certain it is "WMD infrastructure"?

[exstatic]

Bomb it anyway. No more invasions or nation-building, though. Let them have their 6th century Caliphate, but they can't join the big kids club for now.

[Marcus Bryant]

What's gotten into you? You seem to be feeling rather preemptive this afternoon.