Question for the Pro-Iraq War Folks

[smurphy]

I assume that Underbar does not want to take part in that "Send a Pizza to a Soldier" program for Israel.

I don't understand the big deal about Iran. Pakistan has nukes, but are not a concern for some reason. This whole non-proliferation thing is fatally flawed and impossible to control forever. Iran's #1 goal is to preserve their empire. Attacking Israel or America would assure their destruction - they know this. We don't officially deal with them economically anymore - otherwise there's no way we'd be threatening hostility. As for them getting involved in Iraq....well WTF did we expect? We are going down such a stupid strategic road right now....attacking Iran would seal the deal on the dumbest administration of all time.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

"What terrorists are you referring to?"
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I am referring to any elements that AQ's 1 & 2- UBL---ZarqAyman al-Zawahiri and deceased- prior #1AQ operative in Iraq al-Zarqawi--have been trying to rally wityh continuous tapes--as their greatest goal and cause since start of war started--

oh excuse me--I forgot-this war has nothing to do with AQ--maybe someone should tell them

 

[WhatsHisNuts]

"What terrorists are you referring to?"
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I am referring to any elements that AQ's 1 & 2- UBL---ZarqAyman al-Zawahiri and deceased- prior #1AQ operative in Iraq al-Zarqawi--have been trying to rally wityh continuous tapes--as their greatest goal and cause since start of war started--

oh excuse me--I forgot-this war has nothing to do with AQ--maybe someone should tell them

So, the war in Iraq is with AQ? If AQ is miraculously wiped out, does the terrorist threats stop? Nope.

 

[RAYMOND]

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9362/

 

[RAYMOND]

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/target/etc/modern.html

 

[RAYMOND]

http://www.israelnewsagency.com/terrorismisraelsyriapalestinians6870226.html

 

[RAYMOND]

http://www.thinkandask.com/news/iranterror.html

http://www.israelnewsagency.com/israelterrorismhaderairan661026.html

http://www.jihadwatch.org/


http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2005/64337.htm

 

[Chadman]

Hmm, going to have to think some on your victory assessment, Wayne. Props for taking a stand on it, regardless.

Think it will be very difficult if the measure of winning is somehow preventing terra-rists from claiming a victory. As we have seen for many years now, pretty difficult to change behaviors that have existed for hundreds/thousands of years, who have a completely different victory system than we have.

 

[The Sponge]

This whole deal with Iran is a load of crap and you are all buying it just like buying the first war. I mean would this administration lie? I think that has been answered many times. Iran asked us if we wanted help back in 2003 and Cheney said no because this prick thought they would sweep right thru like nothing. Iran aint doing shit. You can't blame them if some weapons are getting out thru the black marker. Half the shit we are fighting is our own stuff. Why not check out Saudi Arabia. Im sure they are stocking up the Sunni's. But we can't mess with them since Cheney and King Oilman love each other. Why no problem when we were rushing arms to Isreal in the recent conflict with Lebanon? We got those weapons over there faster than we could get bottle water over in New Orleans. Who came up with this Idea about Iran anyway? Bill Orielly? Its a crock of shit.

 

[gardenweasel]

well,the dems voted for the authorization to remove saddam(quote after quote...they`ve been provided in this forum before)....
...and rightly so....but, of course,when it gets tough,they want to quit.....what else is new?....this is what they do....


my questions:...

1)why do you think al qaeda(zawahiri et al),iran and islamists in general have dedicated so much effort in defeating our efforts to establish some sort of representative gov`t in iraq?....if a positive outcome is unimportant,why was zarqawi himself fighting there...why does zawahiri go out of his way to comment on our intended troop reinforcement?...

if it`s meaningless and a waste of time,as democratic leaders would lead us to believe,why do they fight so hard?...why not just attack us in america?...

if we are depleting our forces trying for a positive outcome,what do you think al qaeda`s doing?....

any correlation between al qaeda`s resources being used in iraq and our being safe post 9/11?....

and why do you think theres been a ratcheting up of violence in the lead up to the reinforcements being sent in?....maybe to try and spur their friends on the left to cry until the dems in congress can gather the nerve to cut funding?.....before we can send in the reinforcements?....


i`ll even supply the answer to the above questions........because i know you guys don`t get it....the liberation of iraq and in particular the removal of saddam was/is a noble cause...and as the dems knew and attested to(before things got tough)the removal of a dictator like saddam was the RIGHT thing to do......

and as zawahiri knows ...as does iran.... that bringing freedom or some semblance of self determination to the middle east is his/their greatest threat.....


we may not like the way the war has gone since the fall of baghdad, but we all need to remember what the mid-east region was like before we arrived, what the toothless u.n. was covering up, what our allies like france and (pre-merkel)germany were doing behind our backs, what saddam was actually able to do with the oil-for-food $$, what libya and pakistan were doing with nuclear weapons programs (a.q. kahn), what the taliban was doing in afganistan, and what the jewish state was/is going through on a daily basis........



and please...just ONE idea on how we withdraw without ababdoning those that have risked their lives to establish some sort of representative gov`t in iraq.....to inevitable slaughter....ala viet nam...

what country would ever want to be our ally after viet nam and now another abandonment in iraq?....

our grandfathers are turning over in their graves....having spawned a bunch of metrosexual quitters...anybody think that if we flee from iraq that the islamist`s WAR AGAINST US willll be over?...SERIOUSLY?

btw, i can`t leave this train-wreck of a thread without some media goodies....i`ll leave you with my favorite quote from zawahiri`s latest rant:

""I also thank my brothers working in Islamic Jihadi media(and the american media...lol) for their blessed efforts which have deprived the Crusaders, Zionists and their aides of sleep....And I ask Allah to protect our brothers in media, take care of them and guide them, and to give victory through them to His religion, Book and believing slaves.""

well, he does know who his friends are, don`t he?

it`s not surprising that the positions of al-qaeda and the far left can be differentiated on only one point:

islamists want to kill gays.....lol


the islamic/leftist convergence.....the siamese twins of political ideology...

 

[StevieD]

well,the dems voted for the authorization to remove saddam(quote after quote...they`ve been provided in this forum before)....
...and rightly so....but, of course,when it gets tough,they want to quit.....what else is new?....this is what they do....


my questions:...

1)why do you think al qaeda(zawahiri et al),iran and islamists in general have dedicated so much effort in defeating our efforts to establish some sort of representative gov`t in iraq?....if a positive outcome is unimportant,why was zarqawi himself fighting there...why does zawahiri go out of his way to comment on our intended troop reinforcement?...

if it`s meaningless and a waste of time,as democratic leaders would lead us to believe,why do they fight so hard?...why not just attack us in america?...

...

For the same reason we supported the Haliban against The Soviet Union. This war is putting us in so much debt we may never recover. They love the fact that we are there and will do everything they can to keep us spending all our resouirces there.

Here's one for you Weasel.

Why do you think they have not simply walked on a subway with a suitcase full of explosives? Not too hard to do considering there aren't any checks.
And imagine how bad it would of made Bush look.

 

[gardenweasel]

Here's one for you Weasel.

Why do you think they have not simply walked on a subway with a suitcase full of explosives? Not too hard to do considering there aren't any checks.
And imagine how bad it would of made Bush look.

stevie...that`s why they`re so dangerous...they`re patient......and as they well know,we have the attention span and resolve of a high school cheerleader.....

an easy 2 part answer,my friend....

1)we know that the administration has ratcheted up security..they`ve actually done a very good job at preemptive security with the patriot act and different types of surveillance.....it`s definitely had an effect.....but,i agree,it`s really not comprehensive enough..

2)think about it from a terrorist`s perspective...what would a few relatively small attacks accomplish?....it would definitely shine the spotlight on the cells that now sit and wait in country...and it would help bush institute even tighter security......turn public opinion....

the dems are fighting to help the terrorists and their objectives....

to pull our troops out of iraq....that`s a terrorist objective

to rein in effective security policy like the patriot act and domsetic surveilance....that would be great for the terrorists....

another attck would probably put pressure on the media...the media that continues,at every opportunity,to expose covert security policy......

would probably place increased scrutiny on mosques and muslim organozations that are probably helping fund terrorist organizations and causes....

after 5 years,the public has pretty much fallen back into their stupor regarding the terrorist threat.....

public sentiment,thanks to the continued pounding from the msm,is helping the extremists accomplish their goals in iraq....and they`re winning the p.r. war here in the states....

it`s going their way....we`re following europe`s model....


why take a small bite of the apple and perhaps pay a large price in the long run...when you have an effective 5th column in country(cair,the democrats,the msm,academia)doing your dirty work so effectively?....

better to wait..the longer they wait,the easier it will be.....wait until you can strike a potentially crippling blow in the near future?....

they prefer the dems....only because the dems will make it easier for them....

but,make no mistake,they`d kill a democrat as soon as kill a republican.....we`re all infidels to them......

 

[RAYMOND]

history will tell it all:SIB

 

[Chadman]

We definitely gotta put a stop to "The Haliban."

Isn't that the place in Germany where you drive really fast, tho?

 

[smurphy]

history will tell it all:SIB

You think?

I still want details on your war plan, amigo. You say "take out", but I don't know what that means. Feel free to use emoticons to help explain. I might go for it if the strategy is sound.

 

[WhatsHisNuts]

well,the dems voted for the authorization to remove saddam(quote after quote...they`ve been provided in this forum before)....
...and rightly so....but, of course,when it gets tough,they want to quit.....what else is new?....this is what they do....

Okay. You're saying the Dems voted for the authorization to remove Saddam. Last time I checked, he was removed and executed. That said, what sense does the rest of your comment make? "when it gets tough, they want to quit". How about, after they removed Saddam, they want to get the hell out of that hell hole?

 

[Chadman]

Right, and they voted based on manipulated intelligence reports that hid anything bad that would prevent them from voting against it. They always ignore that part of the story, tho. And for good measure, in an election season, they were warned they would be unpatriotic, if they didn't get along to go along, too. Hard to stand up to that kind of situation, would have been tough for anyone, really, all things considered.

 

[AR182]

chad...

do you really think that the dems had no idea what was going on ?

 

[Chadman]

AR, not sure I understand your question. I think they knew what was going on, to a point, yes. Do I think they would have voted to go to war without the political heat being put on them, and with all of the intelligence that only the select few had to work with? I honestly don't think so. And, I do think there is a distinction between authorizing the use of force with the reasons and (lack of) intelligence they were given, and what the situation really was. I really do think that.

Again, which one of the typically named heavyweights said that we should attack Iraq and occupy it? Anyone? And, didn't they think - as we were all told, that it would be paid for by the proceeds of Iraqi oil reserves? Anyone?

It's just not fair to whitewash this, as is typically done around here. I know why it's done, because it's really the only thing that can be said as some kind of "defense" for what has happened.

 

[AR182]

chad..

i'm not defending the actions of the war. i was for the war but not the way it's been fought & i believe bush deserves all of the criticism that he is getting.but i also think some of the dems knew what was going on....but that's just my opinion.