How Bush's Metaphorical War Became Real

[Marc and Olga 0]

Wa-hey! It's the "Liberals" again! In 3rd person no less! Don't you play any other tune?

It is not necessary for one to attack the other soley on their spelling, as this is a 'foum'. A place where words and ideas are thrown around. It is not a thesis document..

I hope history will let the truth prevail. That people years from now won't even entertain the notion that Saddam was connected in anyway to 9/11. That we had a President who declared war on an emotional state that in effect can never be won or ever end.

Really funny coming from someone who pretends to have sympathy for the people who died yet trashes everyone who dares do anything to protect the country.

What is evn more funny is how your partner is from the Phili, a country which has had problems with muslim extremists for some time now. Why don't you ask her how they deal with it there?

PS My friends dad has quite a high position in the military there and has described how these scumbags are dealt with. There ain't no ACLU or liberal cause to pussyfoot around thats for sure.

I HAVE to answer this from YOU, would you like us to handle the islamic extremist as, say Russia did or do you not remember the outcry in the US (and abroad, EVEN in Russia) from Putins response to them taking hostages in Chechneya?

[Heracles 417]

I HAVE to answer this from YOU, would you like us to handle the islamic extremist as, say Russia did or do you not remember the outcry in the US (and abroad, EVEN in Russia) from Putins response to them taking hostages in Chechneya?

At least the Russians don't Pussyfoot around. They get the job done and don't have to worry about amendments or being PC. It's dirty and extremely dangerous work. Therefore the country needs a Dirty Harry to get the job done.

All I hear from the other side is cheap shots and stating the obvious but and no real world solutions, like 'war is bad' (no sh#t).

[Marc and Olga 0]

I HAVE to answer this from YOU, would you like us to handle the islamic extremist as, say Russia did or do you not remember the outcry in the US (and abroad, EVEN in Russia) from Putins response to them taking hostages in Chechneya?

At least the Russians don't Pussyfoot around. They get the job done and don't have to worry about amendments or being PC. It's dirty and extremely dangerous work. Therefore the country needs a Dirty Harry to get the job done.

All I hear from the other side is cheap shots and stating the obvious but and no real world solutions, like 'war is bad' (no sh#t).

OOPSIE, Iraq wasn't about Islamic extremist.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Those two yahoos (Infantile and Type2Negative) are nothing but instigators. It's a complete waste of time to even respond to their outrageously idiotic posts. Don't feed their craving for attention.

Why don't you answer the previous questions about the Philippines dumbass??

PS. Instead of chanting rubbish and hiding your identity in these forums why don't you tell us about yourself.

edited

Edited September 12, 2006 by Steven_and_Jinky

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

I HAVE to answer this from YOU, would you like us to handle the islamic extremist as, say Russia did or do you not remember the outcry in the US (and abroad, EVEN in Russia) from Putins response to them taking hostages in Chechneya?

At least the Russians don't Pussyfoot around. They get the job done and don't have to worry about amendments or being PC. It's dirty and extremely dangerous work. Therefore the country needs a Dirty Harry to get the job done.

All I hear from the other side is cheap shots and stating the obvious but and no real world solutions, like 'war is bad' (no sh#t).

I would ask that we all keep calm and maintain perspective. No person or country is perfect. The US makes mistakes. Russia makes the same mistakes (Russia had their time in Afganistan too), other countries make mistakes as well. People are not perfect but what is important is that over time we all strive to improve the bonds of friendship and brotherhood. This can only happen when we all open our minds and listen to what we are each saying. Closing your mind to other possibilities is never a good thing. Every culture has something good to add that can compliment your way of thinking. Change is slow and advances only when people are willing to consider that they may not always be correct and the best at everything.

[Heracles 417]

Couldn't agree more.

OOPSIE, Iraq wasn't about Islamic extremist.

The mistake George W made is by saying it was solely about WMD and Saddam. Islamic extremism is a much bigger problem than WMD and Saddam. If left alone it will grow bigger and more unmanageable.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Couldn't agree more.

OOPSIE, Iraq wasn't about Islamic extremist.

The mistake George W made is by saying it was solely about WMD and Saddam. Islamic extremism is a much bigger problem than WMD and Saddam. If left alone it will grow bigger and more unmanageable.

But then what did Saddam have to do with Islamic extremism?

Seems there is more extremism post-Saddam than before. Of course that might be because his military dictatorship kept those "internal" elements under control. Still - since unsecured borders opened the floodgates to more of these people from neighbouring countries, it makes you wonder what strategy is on display here.

[rasmussen 0]

Couldn't agree more.

OOPSIE, Iraq wasn't about Islamic extremist.

The mistake George W made is by saying it was solely about WMD and Saddam. Islamic extremism is a much bigger problem than WMD and Saddam. If left alone it will grow bigger and more unmanageable.

But then what did Saddam have to do with Islamic extremism?

Seems there is more extremism post-Saddam than before. Of course that might be because his military dictatorship kept those "internal" elements under control. Still - since unsecured borders opened the floodgates to more of these people from neighbouring countries, it makes you wonder what strategy is on display here.

That would require giving the man more executive power-which you don't appear to agree with either. It is like parting the waters to get anything done in Washington.

[PlatyPius 5]

Sorry - you'd have to finish school first and learn to read and write like a normal human being.

Posting on an internet message board whilst at the same time being unable to spell, punctuate or use the rules of grammar, is rather like that race of aliens in Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy who invent the aerosol deodorant before the wheel.

Just curious, but why is it perfectly acceptable to post something like this, but if I post something similar, I get mobbed by the "It's OK to be Mediocre" Brigade?

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...st&p=435586

Is it ok to make fun of someone's spelling ability if most of VJ finds the person annoying? Is that the difference? If so, then shouldn't that be in the TOS? "Do not correct or comment on anyone's spelling and grammar, or use of Chatspeak. Unless that person is a chopf##k; then it's ok."

Just wondering....

Take it up with Ewok. I don't make the rules.

It was a rhetorical question, really. I don't disagree with your assessment, I was just posing a question to the public about why you didn't get jumped on for posting this, whereas I got called names and other fun stuff.

Doesn't really matter. It brought out my old alter-ego, which I've missed quite a bit. I was getting tired of posting helpful things anyway.

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

It was a rhetorical question, really. I don't disagree with your assessment, I was just posing a question to the public about why you didn't get jumped on for posting this, whereas I got called names and other fun stuff.

Doesn't really matter. It brought out my old alter-ego, which I've missed quite a bit. I was getting tired of posting helpful things anyway.

still good to see you back

[pedroh 21]

Those two yahoos (Infantile and Type2Negative) are nothing but instigators. It's a complete waste of time to even respond to their outrageously idiotic posts. Don't feed their craving for attention.

Why don't you answer the previous questions about the Philippines dumbass??

PS. Instead of chanting rubbish and hiding your identity in these forums why don't you tell us about yourself.

dude, #######, u believe that iraq had something to do with 9/11... lol, dont bite ur tongue when calling someone a dumbass..

pwned

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Couldn't agree more.

OOPSIE, Iraq wasn't about Islamic extremist.

The mistake George W made is by saying it was solely about WMD and Saddam. Islamic extremism is a much bigger problem than WMD and Saddam. If left alone it will grow bigger and more unmanageable.

But then what did Saddam have to do with Islamic extremism?

Seems there is more extremism post-Saddam than before. Of course that might be because his military dictatorship kept those "internal" elements under control. Still - since unsecured borders opened the floodgates to more of these people from neighbouring countries, it makes you wonder what strategy is on display here.

That would require giving the man more executive power-which you don't appear to agree with either. It is like parting the waters to get anything done in Washington.

Hardly - They got the budget (as well as tens of millions in additional funds) and support for their 'sandbox war' didn't they?

Point is - before Iraq - evil dictator, no terrorists.

After Iraq - no dictator, political vaccuum filled with terrorists and tribal warlords.

How did this happen? Because after Somalia the government didn't want to commit to a full scale ground war because of the negative PR consequences resulting from mass US casualties (as it is flag-draped coffins cause an uproar - and as we have seen the govt has tried to prevent such pictures finding their way into the public domain) - so Rumsfeld against the advice of many senior military officials opted for "shock and awe", which he figured would justify using fewer troops. Unfortunately the side effect of that was that while there were enough troops to topple the regime, they had none to spare to secure the borders or secure towns and villages on their way to the major cities. Hence after the end of hostilities - there was a massive insurgency in all parts of the country, which was exacerbated by the US military disbanding the Iraqi army. That in itself has become a major criticism of the handling of the war - though the its not the US military who are to blame (given the limited number of troops levels there was little choice but to do that), but with the politicians who fought the war (regardless of the justifications for it) primarily as a '#####-footed' political and PR exercise.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

That would require giving the man more executive power-which you don't appear to agree with either. It is like parting the waters to get anything done in Washington.

Hardly - They got the budget (as well as tens of millions in additional funds) and support for their 'sandbox war' didn't they?

Point is - before Iraq - evil dictator, no terrorists.

After Iraq - no dictator, political vaccuum filled with terrorists and tribal warlords.

How did this happen? Because after Somalia the government didn't want to commit to a full scale ground war because of the negative PR consequences resulting from mass US casualties (as it is flag-draped coffins cause an uproar - and as we have seen the govt has tried to prevent such pictures finding their way into the public domain) - so Rumsfeld against the advice of many senior military officials opted for "shock and awe", which he figured would justify using fewer troops. Unfortunately the side effect of that was that while there were enough troops to topple the regime, they had none to spare to secure the borders or secure towns and villages on their way to the major cities. Hence after the end of hostilities - there was a massive insurgency in all parts of the country, which was exacerbated by the US military disbanding the Iraqi army. That in itself has become a major criticism of the handling of the war - though the its not the US military who are to blame (given the limited number of troops levels there was little choice but to do that), but with the politicians who fought the war (regardless of the justifications for it) primarily as a '#####-footed' political and PR exercise.

...that and I also think they really believed they would be able to go in and knock out Saddam quickly and then leave. Who were the Middle East experts debriefing the Bush Administration as to possible outcome of removing Saddam? Chalabi?

[almaty 19]

Wa-hey! It's the "Liberals" again! In 3rd person no less! Don't you play any other tune?

It is not necessary for one to attack the other soley on their spelling, as this is a 'foum'. A place where words and ideas are thrown around. It is not a thesis document..

I hope history will let the truth prevail. That people years from now won't even entertain the notion that Saddam was connected in anyway to 9/11. That we had a President who declared war on an emotional state that in effect can never be won or ever end.

Really funny coming from someone who pretends to have sympathy for the people who died yet trashes everyone who dares do anything to protect the country.

What is evn more funny is how your partner is from the Phili, a country which has had problems with muslim extremists for some time now. Why don't you ask her how they deal with it there?

PS My friends dad has quite a high position in the military there and has described how these scumbags are dealt with. There ain't no ACLU or liberal cause to pussyfoot around thats for sure.

I HAVE to answer this from YOU, would you like us to handle the islamic extremist as, say Russia did or do you not remember the outcry in the US (and abroad, EVEN in Russia) from Putins response to them taking hostages in Chechneya?

killing civilians also..just hardens the people against the russians even those against what the rebels stand for,.

k

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Wa-hey! It's the "Liberals" again! In 3rd person no less! Don't you play any other tune?

It is not necessary for one to attack the other soley on their spelling, as this is a 'foum'. A place where words and ideas are thrown around. It is not a thesis document..

I hope history will let the truth prevail. That people years from now won't even entertain the notion that Saddam was connected in anyway to 9/11. That we had a President who declared war on an emotional state that in effect can never be won or ever end.

Really funny coming from someone who pretends to have sympathy for the people who died yet trashes everyone who dares do anything to protect the country.

What is evn more funny is how your partner is from the Phili, a country which has had problems with muslim extremists for some time now. Why don't you ask her how they deal with it there?

PS My friends dad has quite a high position in the military there and has described how these scumbags are dealt with. There ain't no ACLU or liberal cause to pussyfoot around thats for sure.

I HAVE to answer this from YOU, would you like us to handle the islamic extremist as, say Russia did or do you not remember the outcry in the US (and abroad, EVEN in Russia) from Putins response to them taking hostages in Chechneya?

killing civilians also..just hardens the people against the russians even those against what the rebels stand for,.

k

I don't think I would follow the Russian example for anything military or political - not only was Afghanistan a massive disaster (on the Vietnam scale) but they created their current terrorist problem by not letting Chechnya secede with the other ex-soviet republics. Their reasons for doing so were entirely economic rather than political or constitutional.

So hats off to Putin and the Russian military - they have smashed the Chechen state to dust, wonderful.

Meanwhile if a newspaper publishes anything remotely critical of the government it gets shut down and the editor and reporter get thrown in jail, just like the oil barons - jailed on trumped-up, falsified charges so that the government can seize their assets.

It certainly proves that adage about a security coming at the expense of liberty. Authoritarianism might seem to offer a solution short-term, but as history shows it creates its own distasteful set of unique problems.

A fact not well known to many tourists, but the famous Red Square has been cordoned off to the public (at least up until 2004) because they're afraid of suicide bombers setting off charges in a crowded public space.