58% wish the Bush presidency was simply over

[GaryC 7]

Not all wars are lost on the battlefield.

You might have noticed, but this war wasn't started on the battlefield...

It's a fictitious war, fighting a fictitious enemy as Reynaldo pointed out poignantly, earlier in the thread. It's like declaring war on crime in your neighborhood. Rey - that was awesome BTW!

I had to laugh when the phrase "war on terror" became popular usage - grammatic inaccuracies aside I had a sudden vision that Stephen King might have wanted to go into hiding

Its unfortunate that the focus has moved away from a specific, identifiable enemy (as far as a terrorist organisation can be considered identifiable and specific) and became a broad morass of "middle-eastern types" most of whom follow differing religious ideologies and sectarian loyalties. Its even more unfortunate that people, unable to distinguish between those groups in what is a complex and disparate situation choose to lump them all together. It creates this bizarre illusion that there is something to be won and an enemy to be conquered. In this case, the "enemy" seems to be the entire country...

With all the 'conservative' type think tanks that have effectively learned the power of emotion based words, it's no surprise as to the deliberate ambiguity of the phrase, "War on Terror." Prior to 9/11 and Bush's "War on Terror", I recall that we had no collective answer to the seemingly growing threat of terrorist acts throughout the world, except better intelligence. In the aftermath of 9/11, intelligence was regarded as a failure and a weak way to address terrorism. So here comes a rootin-tootin, gunslinger from Texas who follows the motto, "shoot first, and ask questions later." And people ate it up...or at least the spineless media did and we all got the wool pulled over our eyes.

So we got our military over in Iraq to squash an enemy that has no name - no leader. Who's the leader? Osama Bin Laden? How many deputies do you have to kill before the whole lot of the bandits are dead? Hmmm...too many questions...better start shootin' and leave the questionin afterwards.

That's my two cents...

My God your serious. Words cannot describe the total disbelief I have that any sane human can think this way. There is no "War on Terror" in your eyes. 9/11 was some big misunderstanding to you. A one off, never to be repeated misunderstanding. This country is in big trouble if there are many more like you.

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

Not all wars are lost on the battlefield.

You might have noticed, but this war wasn't started on the battlefield...

It's a fictitious war, fighting a fictitious enemy as Reynaldo pointed out poignantly, earlier in the thread. It's like declaring war on crime in your neighborhood. Rey - that was awesome BTW!

I had to laugh when the phrase "war on terror" became popular usage - grammatic inaccuracies aside I had a sudden vision that Stephen King might have wanted to go into hiding

Its unfortunate that the focus has moved away from a specific, identifiable enemy (as far as a terrorist organisation can be considered identifiable and specific) and became a broad morass of "middle-eastern types" most of whom follow differing religious ideologies and sectarian loyalties. Its even more unfortunate that people, unable to distinguish between those groups in what is a complex and disparate situation choose to lump them all together. It creates this bizarre illusion that there is something to be won and an enemy to be conquered. In this case, the "enemy" seems to be the entire country...

With all the 'conservative' type think tanks that have effectively learned the power of emotion based words, it's no surprise as to the deliberate ambiguity of the phrase, "War on Terror." Prior to 9/11 and Bush's "War on Terror", I recall that we had no collective answer to the seemingly growing threat of terrorist acts throughout the world, except better intelligence. In the aftermath of 9/11, intelligence was regarded as a failure and a weak way to address terrorism. So here comes a rootin-tootin, gunslinger from Texas who follows the motto, "shoot first, and ask questions later." And people ate it up...or at least the spineless media did and we all got the wool pulled over our eyes.

So we got our military over in Iraq to squash an enemy that has no name - no leader. Who's the leader? Osama Bin Laden? How many deputies do you have to kill before the whole lot of the bandits are dead? Hmmm...too many questions...better start shootin' and leave the questionin afterwards.

That's my two cents...

My God your serious. Words cannot describe the total disbelief I have that any sane human can think this way. There is no "War on Terror" in your eyes. 9/11 was some big misunderstanding to you. A one off, never to be repeated misunderstanding. This country is in big trouble if there are many more like you.

History will show otherwise.

[GaryC 7]

History will show otherwise.

Ok friend. You are so wrong. The destruction and death that is coming if people of your thinking get their way will be unimaginable. I really hope you wake up before it's to late.

[keltic 1]

why is it that if we, as a country, need to fight the war on terror, does it have to based in iraq? where are the ties that show iraq was the country behind 9/11? they dont exist...

we shouldnt be in iraq just so we can be blowing ppl up to show we mean our war on terror... if we mean it, we need to actually be trying to find the terrorists, who do not live together as a country, but are spread out and hiding like cowards... throwing more troops into iraq wont eliminate the real threat to our country and its ppl

[DeadPoolX 9]

I know I'll regret getting involved, but what I'm seeing is analogous to a child being beaten up by a bully, and then that tormented child standing up for himself, and being reprimanded for that action. To break it down, the United States is "that child" and the "bullies" are the Muslim extremists. When a bully picks on you, what do you do? Do you ignore them, hide and hope he goes away? Of course not! Bullies never do! This is from first-hand experience! The only way to get a bully off your back (and to teach them a lesson they'll never forget) is to stand up to them and fight back.

The Muslim extremists picked a fight with America. We didn't go out of our way to "get at them." While Iraq and Saddam Hussein may have not been responsible for 9/11, Muslim extremists were -- and that is who we are fighting. We're aren't shooting up women and children, or destroying businesses. We're doing the best we can, in a very inhospitable environment, to defeat hostile forces while defending those that refuse to defend themselves.

I, for one, would be very happy to get out of Iraq. Unfortunately, we can't do that until the Iraqis themselves are ready and fully prepared to take on the job. If we just "picked up and left," we'd leave the Iraqi people in a terrible situation and they'd be extremely vulnerable to outside enemy forces. Once the Iraqis can take care of themselves, then we can leave and watch the countries that I truly believe are the real threat: North Korea and Iran.

Anyway, that's about all I'll write for now. I could post more, but I have a feeling that if I did that, no one would bother to read it. As it is, I honestly wonder if anyone will read this far.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So your saying because there is no specific country or government to fight that we should just ignore them? What kind of nonsense is this?

Your argument is a little like the boy who put his finger in the dike. Its like trying to count the grains of sand on a beach.

So your also saying that we should do nothing? #######? Do you really think that if we ignore them they will go away? Or we should just retract our country into it's shell and hide from the world? Or are you one of those that thinks we can negotiate (kiss a$$ ) with the radical fundamentalist Muslims?

Which is exactly what I was saying - you rant about the power and influence radical fundamentalist muslims but seem unable to comprehend that those elements didn't have a very strong power base in that country until we deposed Saddam Hussein and created a huge power vacuum. The secular Baathists running Iraq prior to the war had little in common with the religious fanatics who carried out 9/11. And if they didn't before, they certainly do now...

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

History will show otherwise.

Ok friend. You are so wrong. The destruction and death that is coming if people of your thinking get their way will be unimaginable. I really hope you wake up before it's to late.

The world is a lot more complicated place than a bunch of good guys vs. bad guys, Gary. That's how I see things.

And just so you didn't get lost on me. Here's what I'd be doing to deal with terrorist acts if I were Prez of the US. I'd focus on intelligence. Doesn't it bother you that we are supporting Pakistan when most probably, Bin Laden is in that region? Or that Saudi money is being spent on these schools in Pakistan that promote terrorism? If in your mind the war in Iraq is part of a larger war on terror and that is where our focus in dealing with global terrorism should be, I've got some real estate on the moon to sell you.

...I'd have Bin Laden's head on a platter for sure.

Edited January 31, 2007 by Steven_and_Jinky

[GaryC 7]

Which is exactly what I was saying - you rant about the power and influence radical fundamentalist muslims but seem unable to comprehend that those elements didn't have a very strong power base in that country until we deposed Saddam Hussein and created a huge power vacuum. The secular Baathists running Iraq prior to the war had little in common with the religious fanatics who carried out 9/11. And if they didn't before, they certainly do now...

So where did 9/11 come from? The radical Muslims. Where were they before we went into Iraq? Spread out all over the mid east where we couldn't get to them. Where are they now? IRAQ!!!! We can fight them now. Before we couldn't. And please don't give me that line about us creating terrorists. If they didn't change to terrorism in Iraq they would have become terrorists somewhere else.

But they WILL NOT just go away if we retreat to our borders. They did 9/11 before the Iraq war remember. They didn't attack us because of GWB's tactics. They did it because they want us dead. If we get out of Iraq they will still want us dead. At least right now we know where they are and can do something.

[garya505 2]

Not all wars are lost on the battlefield.

You might have noticed, but this war wasn't started on the battlefield...

It's a fictitious war, fighting a fictitious enemy as Reynaldo pointed out poignantly, earlier in the thread. It's like declaring war on crime in your neighborhood. Rey - that was awesome BTW!

I had to laugh when the phrase "war on terror" became popular usage - grammatic inaccuracies aside I had a sudden vision that Stephen King might have wanted to go into hiding

Its unfortunate that the focus has moved away from a specific, identifiable enemy (as far as a terrorist organisation can be considered identifiable and specific) and became a broad morass of "middle-eastern types" most of whom follow differing religious ideologies and sectarian loyalties. Its even more unfortunate that people, unable to distinguish between those groups in what is a complex and disparate situation choose to lump them all together. It creates this bizarre illusion that there is something to be won and an enemy to be conquered. In this case, the "enemy" seems to be the entire country...

With all the 'conservative' type think tanks that have effectively learned the power of emotion based words, it's no surprise as to the deliberate ambiguity of the phrase, "War on Terror." Prior to 9/11 and Bush's "War on Terror", I recall that we had no collective answer to the seemingly growing threat of terrorist acts throughout the world, except better intelligence. In the aftermath of 9/11, intelligence was regarded as a failure and a weak way to address terrorism. So here comes a rootin-tootin, gunslinger from Texas who follows the motto, "shoot first, and ask questions later." And people ate it up...or at least the spineless media did and we all got the wool pulled over our eyes.

So we got our military over in Iraq to squash an enemy that has no name - no leader. Who's the leader? Osama Bin Laden? How many deputies do you have to kill before the whole lot of the bandits are dead? Hmmm...too many questions...better start shootin' and leave the questionin afterwards.

That's my two cents...

My God your serious. Words cannot describe the total disbelief I have that any sane human can think this way. There is no "War on Terror" in your eyes. 9/11 was some big misunderstanding to you. A one off, never to be repeated misunderstanding. This country is in big trouble if there are many more like you.

You're right, they have no clue. When the next attack comes they will just blame Bush for that too.

[Sinergy 3]

This is way out of context but today i was coming home from the doctor (i tore my neck mucsle bla), and i saw a bumper sticker that said

" You can not be both Christian and Pro-Choice" and had a pic of bush and saying "vote bush!!

it was an old lady, im sure she hardly knew what she was parading around town. I was very offended by it tho.

and thats my 2 cents, im off back to bed with my heating pad to my neck and i cant spell bc of the vicodin

Edited January 31, 2007 by Ionescu

[peezey 0]

So your saying because there is no specific country or government to fight that we should just ignore them? What kind of nonsense is this?

Your argument is a little like the boy who put his finger in the dike. Its like trying to count the grains of sand on a beach.

So your also saying that we should do nothing? #######? Do you really think that if we ignore them they will go away? Or we should just retract our country into it's shell and hide from the world? Or are you one of those that thinks we can negotiate (kiss a$$ ) with the radical fundamentalist Muslims?

Well, let's see. Going after them has only had the effect of intensifying and worsening the problem, so how can the opposite be any worse?

[peezey 0]

Which is exactly what I was saying - you rant about the power and influence radical fundamentalist muslims but seem unable to comprehend that those elements didn't have a very strong power base in that country until we deposed Saddam Hussein and created a huge power vacuum. The secular Baathists running Iraq prior to the war had little in common with the religious fanatics who carried out 9/11. And if they didn't before, they certainly do now...

So where did 9/11 come from? The radical Muslims. Where were they before we went into Iraq? Spread out all over the mid east where we couldn't get to them. Where are they now? IRAQ!!!! We can fight them now. Before we couldn't. And please don't give me that line about us creating terrorists. If they didn't change to terrorism in Iraq they would have become terrorists somewhere else.

But they WILL NOT just go away if we retreat to our borders. They did 9/11 before the Iraq war remember. They didn't attack us because of GWB's tactics. They did it because they want us dead. If we get out of Iraq they will still want us dead. At least right now we know where they are and can do something.

If you think the "radical muslims" just moved into Iraq, you are sorely mistaken. This war has radicalized men who were not before. Do some reading. Moderate muslims are aghast at this phenomenon. This is unprecedented and has everything to do wtih our unwarranted, ignorant actions in Iraq, and the continuation of such, and probably escalation some time in the near future in the region.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Which is exactly what I was saying - you rant about the power and influence radical fundamentalist muslims but seem unable to comprehend that those elements didn't have a very strong power base in that country until we deposed Saddam Hussein and created a huge power vacuum. The secular Baathists running Iraq prior to the war had little in common with the religious fanatics who carried out 9/11. And if they didn't before, they certainly do now...

So where did 9/11 come from? The radical Muslims. Where were they before we went into Iraq? Spread out all over the mid east where we couldn't get to them. Where are they now? IRAQ!!!! We can fight them now. Before we couldn't. And please don't give me that line about us creating terrorists. If they didn't change to terrorism in Iraq they would have become terrorists somewhere else.

But they WILL NOT just go away if we retreat to our borders. They did 9/11 before the Iraq war remember. They didn't attack us because of GWB's tactics. They did it because they want us dead. If we get out of Iraq they will still want us dead. At least right now we know where they are and can do something.

As I said, you continue to associate every militant group in Iraq with radical Islam. That is an (arguably racist) distortion of an extremely complex political situation.

There were certainly religious fanatics in Iraq prior to Saddam being deposed, and certainly prior to 9/11. The point is those elements were more or less under control under a despot like Saddam whose outlook and secular ideology was at odds with the extremist Shia clerics like Moqtada Al Sadr, and the well known (Sunni) Boogeyman Osama Bin Laden. Then you have those people as Peezey says who were radicalised by the increasing power base of the existing extremists. Face it - its a mess. I know next time I want to get rid of a hornets nest in my garage, I'll go in there and smash it up with a stick... Exactly the same as what we've done in Iraq - and yes, Bush broke it he (and by extension) the entire country is now paying for it.

Edited January 31, 2007 by erekose

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Not all wars are lost on the battlefield.

You might have noticed, but this war wasn't started on the battlefield...

It's a fictitious war, fighting a fictitious enemy as Reynaldo pointed out poignantly, earlier in the thread. It's like declaring war on crime in your neighborhood. Rey - that was awesome BTW!

Sorry Steve. You really don't have a clue. There is a very real enemy. They have publicly declared war on us. They fired the first shots and killed 3000 people. They may or may not have been in Iraq at the start of the war but one thing is for sure, they are there now. If we don't deal with them in Iraq we will be dealing with them here. I really don't understand how you can't understand that simple concept. The dems will get their way. And a LOT of our people will be killed because of their cowardice. I only hope for your sake your not in the next city to be attacked.

A lot of innocent people are getting killed that had absolutely nothing to do with this until one George W Bush decided to make their backyard his playground to live out his juvenile wet dreams. This action in and by itself is helping that enemy of ours recruit and grow stronger much more so than we'll ever be able to weed them out. George W Bush is the exact madman that Osama and his ilk have been praying for. He's the best proof of the case (however flawed and wrong it might be) that they've been making for decades and he's the one that singlehandedy lifted Osama to the level of a prophet.

That silly catch-phrase of "if we don't deal with them in Iraq, we'll deal with them here" is the most ridiculous nonsense ever put forth. They weren't in Iraq but in Afghanistan. Why didn't we deal with them there? Why not in neighboring Pakistan where they're hiding out today? Oh, that's right, Pakistan is nuclear. Why drag them to a place where they have not been at all? Why add insult to injury for the Iraqi people - the real victims in all of this. Bush's victims, to be sure. We're never going to succeed in Iraq as long as arrogant Americans repeat that arrogant ####### of fighting them there rather than here. Go to Baghdad and declare this rationale for our destruction of their country publicly. See how the Iraqis who's lives we let this reckless bunch at 1600 Penn Ave wreck feel about your arrogance.

[garya505 2]

So your saying because there is no specific country or government to fight that we should just ignore them? What kind of nonsense is this?

Your argument is a little like the boy who put his finger in the dike. Its like trying to count the grains of sand on a beach.

So your also saying that we should do nothing? #######? Do you really think that if we ignore them they will go away? Or we should just retract our country into it's shell and hide from the world? Or are you one of those that thinks we can negotiate (kiss a$$ ) with the radical fundamentalist Muslims?

Well, let's see. Going after them has only had the effect of intensifying and worsening the problem, so how can the opposite be any worse?

No it just brought them to the fight. Better there than here.