![](/boards/images/icons/default/book.gif) Re: OT: Politics
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,951
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,951 |
More opinions:
I think people who deny that there is no terrorist threat are seriously in error. I think that people who feel the threat will go away if we do nothing are also in error.
That we will be hit again seems inevitable. Maybe not in the next couple years, maybe not in twenty or thirty, but when whole races of people - whole continents - are being whipped into a frenzy of hate towards the US, how else do you expect that to end?
If I had to predict another attack, I would say shortly after this election, regardless of who wins.
Maybe we could get the French, Russians, and Chinese to put in a good word for us and the bastards will attack somebody else?
I think we're better off dealing with this now than leaving it for future generations - when the enemy will likely be much stronger, more sophisticated and with more dangerous weapons. Judging by Arab tactics in the past 50 years, negotiated intervals of peace are really only lulls that allow them to re-arm, re-group, and re-position for the next attack.
BTW, in one of those debates Bush said unequivocally that Iran WILL NOT have nuclear weapons. Kerry talked about building coalitions when asked the same question. I think there is little doubt who the Iranian leadership endorses.
|
|
|
![](/boards/images/icons/default/book.gif) Re: OT: Politics
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,756 Likes: 39
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,756 Likes: 39 |
The short answer, Jorge, is Saddam had to go. The Ba'athist Nazi regime in Iraq was a "pre-existing condition" made intolerable after 9/11. Regimes like that cannot be tolerated anymore. The world is too small, such regimes, are simply too dangerous. Deulfer's report made it pretty clear that Hussein could have cranked up his WMD programs any time he wished, but certainly would have after the sanctions regime failed and the oil revenues started to roll in again. In case you forgot, the EU wanted to end sanctions so they could sell Hussein more weapons and dual purpose technology - France's only reservation about ending the sanctions was the Oil for Palaces scam they, the UN, the Russians, and Chinese were running on the world.
If you prefer Europe's foreign policy to ours, just see what good work they've done in Iran. They can be proud when Iran detonates its first nuke. France must still be smarting that the weapons grade fissile material reactor France sold to Saddam Hussein was destroyed by Israel in a preemptive air strike. France seems to be working with the Mullahs in Iran to make sure that they decentralize their nuclear efforts so they are not so vulnerable to such a strike.
Anyone surprised that France would not join us in Iraq? Anyone doubt that there is a war being waged against us?
Enjoy the Music. Trust your ears. Laugh at Folks Who Claim to Know it All.
|
|
|
![](/boards/images/icons/default/book.gif) Re: OT: Politics
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,441
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,441 |
In reply to:
but when whole races of people - whole continents - are being whipped into a frenzy of hate towards the US
... It would be extremely difficult to argue that this is happening without any connection to the situation in Iraq.
|
|
|
![](/boards/images/icons/default/book.gif) Re: OT: Politics
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 249
local
|
local
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 249 |
2X6, I don't think you get much argument from anyone that Saddam had to go. My problem with the war is that huge missteps and mistakes have been made. For example,against the advice of his military advisors, the Iraqi Army was abolished, now viewed by many (Bremer, Franks, et al) as a crucial error. Do you really view the war effort as succeeding or even advancing? We're occupying Iraq and struggling to hold our own.
We can't rid the world of all the "bad guys" like Saddam alone. If our foreign policy is going to be one of preemptive strikes-get ready for the draft. North Korea, Iran, name your "evil_doer", how do we cover them all? Bush should have got the job done in Afghanistan-got bin Laden and then moved on. His idea that Saddam was an "imminent threat" has been proved wrong-we're in Iraq because Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice thought it would be another short military exercise of shock and awe. Destroy a country from 20,000 feet then go in and mop up. Now we occupy a country without the troop numbers to adequately do the job. Bush's shortcomings as a commander in chief are apparent - whether it's Kerry or Bush, Bush has put us in a no-win position.
M22's, VP150, QS4's, HK 630, HSU VTF3-MKII
|
|
|
![](/boards/images/icons/default/book.gif) Re: OT: Politics
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,441
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,441 |
Our country is in a state of intellectual retreat into the dark ages. How else can you explain the recent rise of faith-based agendas (e.g. sexual 'education', creationism, intelligent design)?
Don't you all worry your pretty little about anything. The King will take care of everything.
And now they're trying to pass the Constitution Restoration Act of 2004, which does the following, and I quote:
"Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an element of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official personal capacity), by reason of that element's or officer's acknowledgement of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.'."
So, if a policy is cited as having God as its source or inspiration, it'll be uncontestable.
WTF is happening to our country?! So now, the US Gov't is suddenly the final authority on God's word?
Theocracy, here we come.
Last edited by pmbuko; 10/21/04 06:04 PM.
|
|
|
![](/boards/images/icons/default/book.gif) Re: OT: Politics
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,441
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,441 |
More on the Constitution Restoration Act here. Nice use of oxymoron. Restoration my ass.
|
|
|
![](/boards/images/icons/default/book.gif) Re: OT: Politics
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,756 Likes: 39
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,756 Likes: 39 |
Jorge, I don't agree that the war has been mishandled, we could not have won it faster. I think the post-war situation has been mishandled, but I don't think the problem was not paying off Saddam's army, but more like failing to secure weapons caches and by tolerating Iraqis walking around with weapons. I think we should have made an order that anyone carrying a weapon will be shot on sight, and then shoot them. Gotta go now, more later
Enjoy the Music. Trust your ears. Laugh at Folks Who Claim to Know it All.
|
|
|
![](/boards/images/icons/default/book.gif) Re: OT: Politics
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 639
aficionado
|
aficionado
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 639 |
Jesus that's scary, Peter.
|
|
|
![](/boards/images/icons/default/book.gif) Re: OT: Politics
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,951
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,951 |
"In reply to:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
but when whole races of people - whole continents - are being whipped into a frenzy of hate towards the US
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
... It would be extremely difficult to argue that this is happening without any connection to the situation in Iraq."
Oh c'mon. They've been teaching hate for the US over there for a LONG time.
|
|
|
![](/boards/images/icons/default/book.gif) Re: OT: Politics
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,951
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,951 |
jorge016, no offense, but you sound just like that Terry McCauliffe (sp?) guy from the DNC. Since you are so well informed - could you please answer the question I had earlier: What is there to like about John Kerry? What has he done since his return from Vietnam that would make me think he would be a good President?
About Iraq:
"His idea that Saddam was an "imminent threat" has been proved wrong-we're in Iraq because Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice thought it would be another short military exercise of shock and awe. Destroy a country from 20,000 feet then go in and mop up. Now we occupy a country without the troop numbers to adequately do the job. Bush's shortcomings as a commander in chief are apparent - whether it's Kerry or Bush, Bush has put us in a no-win position."
If indeed Saddam did not posess the WMD stockpiles then he probably was not an IMMEDIATE threat to the US. Eventually, he would have been - and at that time he would have been stronger and more dangerous. If you have termites in your house is there any reason to wait?
It was a short and impressive campaign, despite all the attempts by the media and analysts to convince us otherwise (supply lines, not securing ground on the push to Baghdad, etc...). How many troops would it take to secure a nation of 28 million by force? An extra 25,000? Please. The Iraqis have to assume the reins regardless of the number of our troops on the ground.
You know, the party line stuff is unnecessary here (do it all you want though ![](/boards/images/icons/smile.gif) ). The election won't be won or lost on the Axiom forum - I think we all know how we're voting already.
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics24,954
Posts442,549
Members15,626
|
Most Online2,699 Aug 8th, 2024
|
|
1 members (yacariw),
2,068
guests, and
2
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|