I just realized Iraq IS vital in the War on Terror.

[Ready4Change]

You can't fight a WAR against a few wackos here and there. Wars are fought against huge, nation scale groups. So, in order to fight a true war against terror, the Bush administration set out to create one. And that's exactly what we've done in Iraq.

Mission Accomplished.

[IronLionZion]

1. But we are still fighting against an emotion

Bush makes people feel terror, let's get him!

The only real way to combat terror is to medicate everyone to stop feeling it.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[GodHelpUsAll2]

6. In W's own words.............

"Countries that aid terrorists" are also the enemy. Thus his justification for invading and bombing the hell out of Iraq, When should we expect France, Germany, Russia etc. to invade America? After all, it was America that put Sadam in power and funded him and it was America that funded and trained Al Queda. (I can never spell that correctly) Is anyone picking up on the fact that in essence, he is clearly making the case and justification for other countries to invade and "liberate" America?


edits for spelling. Obviouly I can't spell at all this morning.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Crunchy Frog]

24. Except to Cuba..

well, not suicide bombers, but bombers anyway, or as you might say, "homicide bombers". Of course, that doesn't really count because Castro is baaad, so it's okay to bomb innocent civilians in his country.

And we only blow up little children using helicopter gunships. Much cleaner that way.

Funny how we always seem to support the "lesser of two evils" and it always comes back to bite us in the butt. Do you suppose there may be a lesson to be learned in there somewhere?

By the way, that's a really interesting user name you've picked.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Crunchy Frog]

44. Why am I always the one

who gets responded to by you people? Am I really that provocative of a poster. It is kind of flattering, I mean, I really enjoy being able to get your people's goat, I just didn't realize I did it so well.

There's tons of other responses to your post. Why me?

Oh, and you didn't answer my question about the U.S. harboring terrorists who do deliberately target civilians in Cuba. I guess you can't answer that one, except to say that Castro is baaad.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mandate My Ass]

49. You're back huh?

Risen from the dead of banned posters and with the same misogynistic name.

Don't worry, we have stakes around here too. :evilgrin:

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mandate My Ass]

53. You're about as nuanced

as a lead ingot, and about as sharp too.

[Crunchy Frog]

60. I think you probably know what I mean

by "you people". Let's just leave it at that.

And no, I'm not referring to the Bay of Pigs. Again, why don't you read a little history. I'm not going to do it for you.

Oops, looks like I'm talking to a corpse.

[GodHelpUsAll2]

25. You are correct

We don' send suicide bombers to blow up little children. We send our entire military to bomb little children.

I fully expected to get the "you are absurd" America is a shinning example to the world and no where like these thugs responses.

I believe that is because people tend to want to believe the best. My point I am trying to make is this. And before the flame wars start (and I know they will) let's look at this from start to finish. All I am looking for is discussion on the topic not full blown hatefulness.

America did fund and put Saddam in power that is fact, America did train and fund Al Qaeda, that also is a fact. So now, these very people we backed and practically created when they were useful to us turned on us that is also a fact. Example: 9/11
We (meaning our government officials, granted they are a bunch of nut jobs right now but nonetheless they are, in the eyes of the world the voice of America) jump up and declare the "war on terror" (mind you terrorists have been out there for quite a while now this is not a brand new thing) and go balls to the wall, no expense spared and I mean NO expense to wipe them off the face of the earth. Example, Afghanistan and Iraq. Was I all for bombing Afghanistan off the face of the earth completely? After 9-11, you bet I was. At the time I was upset that the bombing didn't begin on 9-12. But it didn't. And that gave me time to do a little research and think about it all. Where I still get upset at the events of 9-11 and probably will for the rest of my life and acknowledge it was one of the most horrible horrible events ever. And I also am still of the belief that we should have finished the job there. But,when all the public announcements of "You are with us or against us" and our new policy of pre-emptive war, you don't have to actually DO anything to us we just have to think you might to justify us tearing your country to bits came into play. I had to ask myself, by doing this, did we not just open the door for other countries out there to start thinking America MIGHT become a threat so we better attack them before they can? Did we not also by declaring pre-emptive strikes are perfectly OK if you THINK a particular country MIGHT be a threat to you in some subliminal way give ANYONE with balls enough to strike this country justification in doing so? America has had its own share of the blame for atrocities committed, we do not have clean hands on that one. What's to stop the rest of the world in deciding that America seems to have a pattern of creating evil groups that do send suicide bombers to blow up little children then in turn America sends it's military to blow up more little children in an effort to contain the evil they created. It's a vicious circle. My fear, our owns words and actions will eventually come back to bite us. And when they do, they will bite hard.

[Pax Argent]

34. No, we use B1's at 30,000 feet or depleted uranium over years

and bask in the sanctimonious belief that the innocents who die are incidental to stopping the "evil doers" and that we are morally superior for believing that this is somehow better.

One of my primary problems with Right-Wing "real world" arguments is that they have a tendency of being in denial about acts of evil by our side while screaming of the evil of the other side. I'll grant that I am simple, but to me evil is evil, regardless of the perpetrator.

By the way, welcome to DU. There are a lot of wise people here and they have a lot to teach.

[antigone382]

38. Look up the MEK

We're supporting a terrorist group that is terrorizing Iran...but once again, that's OK because Iran is bad, right?

As a matter of fact, we had a deal going with Iran, in which we would have rescinded our support for the MEK, and they would have given us three high-level Al Quaeda Operatives, including bin Laden's brother and the infamous Zarqawi. The Neo-Cons didn't want that though, because it didn't fit in with their neat little plan to invade Iran.

We have also been accused by Russia of supporting the Chechen terrorists, though I can't personally verify those claims.

[dpibel]

58. Get yer sliding scales here!

You concede that Saddam and bin Laden were evil. It's just that they were lesser evils.

So it's OK to support terrorists, as long as they're lesser terrorists?

Do you really believe that training and equipping bin Laden and gang was a lesser evil than letting Afghanistan fall into the sphere of influence of a crumbling Soviet Union?

And you really should address how you cope with Central America, where the US rather assiduously supported the lesser of one evil. Unless, of course, you believed the insane maunderings of St. Ronnie, and believed that the Nicaraguans were about to pour across the borders.

The point you are carefully missing is this: The Staunch and Gutty Fierce Warrior Chieftain has declared that all countries supporting terror (note the lack of relative merits of terrorists) are terrorists.

It is, however, charming that you are willing to help the Little Fella out by supplying him with that all-important moral relativism.

"Sokay as long as they're pretty good terrists. Evil, perhaps, but at least a lesser evil."

[leesa]

14. That is so idiotic. You are willing to carpet bomb tens of thousands

of people who have not one thing to do with terrorism in order to MAYBE catch one or two of them?? Does that make any sense??

The ONLY way to stop terrorism is to stop messing with countries and stop trying to steal their resources.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[unfrigginreal]

21. We stopped responding to the 9-11 attacks

when we invaded Iraq.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Crunchy Frog]

27. Nice strawman arguement.

Going after the Taliban and Al Queada, and catching bin Laden was the appropriate response to 9/11. Not abandoning Afghanistan, letting bin Laden go and invading a country that had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. And especially not completely tying down our military resources in a quagmire so that we are practically unable to respond to real threats to our security.

Why, what's your plan for combatting terrorists?

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[antigone382]

45. You aren't making any sense

You respond to posts that criticize the war in Iraq by saying that to win the war on terrorism, we need to invade countries that support terrorists. When someone points out that Iraq didn't really aid terrorists and wasn't a threat to us, you say that you don't necessarily mean Iraq.

:wtf:

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[antigone382]

55. The point is that it wasn't one of them

At least not to a point that justified invading it while we still hadn't finished the job in Afghanistan. The fact is that our invading Iraq has led to a whole lot more people becoming terrorists, not only in Iraq, but also in the rest of the Middle East.

Meanwhile, the Taliban is making a resurgency in Afghanistan, but because our forces are preoccupied in Iraq, we are unable to effectively combat the insurgency in that forgotten war.

You have to be very careful before you invade a country that supposedly "supports terrorism," or, as we have seen happen in Iraq, you're only going to help create more of them.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TahitiNut]

18. Like Ireland, huh?

:eyes: Or Saudi Arabia? Or Pakistan?


The human mind is an awesome thing. It can call an individual suicide bomber a 'terrorist' but regard a stealth bomber dropping 5,000 lb. bombs from 30,000 feet a 'tactical strike.'

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TahitiNut]

28. Well, the candidate country is the USA.

Terrorists were (and are) "harbored" and trained in the US. Indeed, the 19 hijackers received far more support in the US than Iraq ... by orders of magnitude.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

19. Right. When do we start launching attacks on targets in the U. S.?

[Crunchy Frog]

29. When do we start bombing

whatever state was harboring Timothy McVeigh?

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Crunchy Frog]

48. Just a little humor.

you might enjoy your stay here more if you lighten up a little, "Bleeding Woman".:)

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mandate My Ass]

51. You trotted out that tired line before

and it didn't work then either.:eyes:

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ravenseye]

3. How Can You...

...fight a true war on terror when you're fighting a group of people who haven't had anything to do with it?

Bush might as well have invaded Peru, there are terrorist groups there with about as tenuous connection to Al Qaeda as Iraq.

Also the people we're fighting now had nothing to do with it. Saddam paid some families of Palestinians money after they destroyed themselves along with innocent people. He had nothing to do with the attacks on OUR country. The poeple in Iraq were living under a brutal dicatorial regime, and I have family members who suffered from it. Still thats no reason for Americans to lose THEIR soldiers lives just to remove him. AS we're seeing that's something the Iraqi people have to take care of themselves.

I figure you're joking, but if so and it was funny I may not have had enough coffee this morning. I'm a bit jumpy.

[lastliberalintexas]

4. I think the original poster meant

that there weren't enough terrorists in the Middle East for a WWII type offensive in the area, since most of the terrorist attacks have been carried out by a relatively small group of people- who are scattered all over the world at that.

Now, thanks to our bombings/killings of their people, we have created at least 2 entire generations of people who will likely be seeking revenge- people we will call terrorists. The neo-cons now have the sizable population against which an all out offensive can be "justified."

[Ravenseye]

9. Gotcha

no real enemy to fight so make one.

Why does that now strike me as something done in the past...something from history. Large historical power....no enemy's to attack or blame....creates/manufactures their own enemy....

Doesn't the enemy they create normally win in those historical scenarios?

[Ready4Change]

26. Lastliberalintexas got my meaning, I think.

The Bush administrations actions have turned Iraq into a terrorist generating nation, when it wasn't one before. They have created their own enemy, and in the process undermined precisely what they claim they are trying to achieve.

[Ready4Change]

30. Not so much joking as pointing out an absurdity.

(And I'm working on my coffee too. :) )

The attack against Afghanistan was, imo, a step forward. Attacking Iraq, and before Afghanistan is completed, was leaps and bounds backwards. The reasons for that are too many to cover in a single post, and would be preaching to most of the choir here on DU.

However, while Iraq was not a hotbed of terrorism before we attacked, it sure is set to become one now. Thanks to the Bush administrations actions everything terrorism needs to florish now exists in Iraq. A chaotic regime with weak control. A highly agitated populace steeped in a couple generations worth of anti-USA and anti-West propoganda, and no end of access across porous borders to weapons and like minded folk to teach them how to use them.

[GodHelpUsAll2]

35. self deleted

Responded to wrong post. My apologies and I promise to drink more coffee and become clearer before I respond again. lol

[Ready4Change]

36. Me too. Me too.

:hangover:

This will all teach me for posting before I'm completely awake.

[GodHelpUsAll2]

37. For what's it worth

I got what you were saying in your original post. And I got it the first time. That shocks me since I hadn't even finished my first cup yet. LOL

[kayell]

5. It isn't a War on Terror

It is a War OF Terror on the people of the US and the world.

It is the war of FEARTM that makes the the raiding of the US treasury and the destruction of democracy possible.

[unfrigginreal]

7. We already knew your opinion on this Mr. Wolfowitz

but thanks for sharing it again.

[mmonk]

8. Right now

it appears both Iraq and Afghanistan are closer to being lost than won. In fact, in many ways we have lost. The policy is stupid. You can't beat terrorism by breeding them through your actions. Read "Imperial Hubris" by annonymous.

[mmonk]

10. and yes,

if you stay the course, it KEEPS the war on terror going.

[sadiesworld]

11. Methinks some DUers are misreading your post.

[GodHelpUsAll2]

13. It ALWAYS happens

There is always someone that just glances over the topic and doesn't really READ it and jumps in with their 2 cents. It's human nature I guess.

[mmonk]

16. Iraq IS vital

for without it, bush's war is over. No more conquests for geopolitical and economic hegomonic reasons. It all might be relegated to protecting security at home. We won't be creating more terrorists abroad.

[Ready4Change]

32. Bingo.

.

[unfrigginreal]

17. It's the old "flypaper theory"

I only see one "DUer" supporting it in the replies. The OP probably doesn't but that's not clear.

[Ready4Change]

31. Fraid so.

:shrug:

It IS interesting to see a few with very few posts coming out of the woodwork to agree with the misreading. Hehheh.

Anyway, to all who've misread it, sorry I wasn't more clear in my original post. Hope some good comes out of the messy discussion.

[Mr_Spock]

15. Bush is the head terrorist. He promotes fear, he kills innocents, he lies

I totally believe that Dumbya is the single biggest threat to the planet. The chief terrorist.

[DemonFighterLives]

33. Yeah, it felt good to blame Afghanistan for 911

But here is my opinion how to fight terrorism:
W should never allowed the peace process between Israel and Palestine to lapse.
After 911, we should have investigated what really happened. For instance,
1. check the steel for other explosives
2. find out why our military stood down on that particular day
3. investigate the put options (who was gambling on the fiasco)
4. investigate the Saudi and other ties to the entire debacle

We can't go off in the world like a loose canon.
No heads have rolled other than innocents in 2 countries and our own troops
The new whitewash (911 commission) took a page from the Warren commission.
See you in 40 years to see if anything changes.
I hate being lied to. .. .... :argh:

[GodHelpUsAll2]

39. Me too

Which means I hate it every time I hear ANYTHING out the mouth of any elected official.

[Deja Q]

57. He has to create more terrorists...

Al-Quaeda was a rogue entity. Going in to plunder Iraq so haphazardly in true dilettante fashion would only CREATE people who'd hate us.

And I'm not talking the enraged citizens of Iraq. Note how 1st world countries are not liking as much these days either.

Al-Envangelica is proving to be just as much of a threat as this laughably called "Axis of Evil".

[knowbody0]

59. terrorists

kan anyone tell me why britain never bombed the f out of ireland for all the terrorist attacks? just wonderin