Log in or Sign up

Today, George Bush lays out his new "strategy for victory in Iraq"

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by Rex, Nov 30, 2005.

Page 3 of 4

LsuCraig Founding Member

Joined:

Dec 17, 2004

Messages:

1,607

Likes Received:

55

CalcoTiger said:

Well i live in an area that honestly believes that they represent America's views.

The San Francisco area is so out of touch with the way most of the heartland feels.

If you want unbiased newsmedia then you better not come here.

These people are so warped in their views that Bush could save someone from drowning and the news media here would say that his road improvement policies are to blame for the person needing saving in the first place.

Accuse him of staging the event for political reasons and try to prosecute him for scratching the person a little while saving them.

The thing of it is the Conservatives in this area have just come to accept the fact that they dont get a voice here. I cant watch the local news anymore. I get so pissed off that my blood pressure skyrockets.

Bush has made some mistakes but you really dont have to be smart to understand we better have a presence in the middle east so we can take the war on terrorism to them when it is neccesary.

Right now alot of these people that would be around the world planning harmfull acts are in Iraq getting killed trying to get us out.

The problem is some Americans dont have the guts and intestinal fortitude to do the right thing. The easy way of withdrawing in the short term costs many more than 2100 lives in the long term.

We lost over 5000 on 9-11 in the kind of acts that we can expect in a terror driven world.

Yet you hear all the bleeding hearts talking about the cost of this war.

The thing that most of us understand that is if we dont pay this cost now then the cost in the future is going to be much greater and it will be paid on our soil.

No one likes seeing any of our military come home hurt or dead. It hurts all of us to watch the families that have paid this sacrafice. But people have died defending this country since its beginning and the job of our military is to defend this country wherever and whenever it is needed.

I am 44 years old and have diabetes and if the military said we need every person available to fight somewhere i would be there . I love this country and when a country runs out of people to defend it and be willing to die for the freedom it provides then i dont want to live here anymore.

Freedom has a price. It has been paid by all generations of Americans throughout our history. We owe their memories and the legacy left to us to make sure that our country goes on.

Our children and grandchildren deserve a world that is free of terror bombs and people driving airplanes into buildings. I dont care whether Iraq had WMD i would have gone over their anyway.

I always revert back to the words of John F. Kennedy.

"Peace at the expense of freedom. Is neither peace or freedom."
Click to expand...

I agree with you. I heard some pundit ask the question: Is the path we took with Iraq or the path we have taken with N. Korea or Iran more likely to make us more safe as a country?

Iraq was working on nuke's and had nuke material to give terrorists to use on us on our soil. Now they do not. Iran and N. Korea, we have tried to negotiate, wait for the UN and the world community to step up to disarm them, and they still have radical, unpredictable tyrants as leaders. People would negotiate with them until the bombs are launched just like WWII.

Can't wait for those people to save the world.

LsuCraig, Dec 1, 2005

#21
red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

Joined:

Oct 21, 2002

Messages:

45,195

Likes Received:

8,736

SabanFan said:

He is doing what he believes to be the right thing and that is to stay the course and not leave the Iraqis in the lurch.
Click to expand...

Damned if I can understand why you love these ragheads so much, amigo. They didn't rise up and overthrow Saddam, they are rising up and fighting us. They hate us and want us gone. They have nothing we need. They are killing our soldiers and bankrupting our budget. There ain't any of them that are worth Americans dying for. Especially since they are the ones trying to kill us.

Saddam is gone and the WMDs are too. Al Qaida is only there because we are there. Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds have been fighting there for millenia! It ain't our fight. Leave it to them.

I'm quite sure it is in the best interests of the Iraqis for us to stay there for years, pouring in money, being the bogeyman and scapegoat for all of their problems, and giving them no incentive to step up and take control themselves. But it ain't in the best interests of the United States of America and everybody knows it.

This is why the president has to make a plan for withdrawal and stick to it. Force the damned Iraqis to get their act together and govern because we will be turning over the job province by province and agency by agency and they will have to either sink or swim.

I know you read George Will. Listen to his criticism of the Iraq war policy. It makes good sense. The military has done all that it can do there. It won the war in 21 days and has been misused since that time in a fruitless guerilla war that is getting worse. It is time for diplomacy to deal with the situation. Send them some friggin' French politicians.

Just like welfare families, welfare countries just get more dependent if you don't force them to take responsibility. When the US reformed welfare and put limits on the government sugar tit, the welfare recipients adapted to it and we are all better off.

An endless commitment gives the Iraqis no incentive and no good reason to make the hard decisions and compromises that must be made in such a volatile land. Democracy and liberty is cleariy impossible if the people themselves are not independent. When we are gone, the Iraqis will adapt.

red55, Dec 1, 2005

#22
LsuCraig Founding Member

Joined:

Dec 17, 2004

Messages:

1,607

Likes Received:

55

red55 said:

Saddam is gone and the WMDs are too. Al Qaida is only there because we are there. Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds have been fighting there for millenia! It ain't our fight. Leave it to them.

So you think if we leave, the terrorists....I'm talking about the ultra-terrorists which were using Afghanistan as a Taliban haven, will just up, leave and go to Bali?

Did you see the intercepted letter between these homos? They want Iraq as their new haven. Their new Afghanistan. Just like in Somalia, I didn't much care for the Somali's themselves, but you gotta stay and finish the job for the people who have been killed....our people.

And finishing the job is making sure the Iraqi's have the forces to defend themselves from these people. If they can't do that, Iraq falls to these Taliban-like forces and then they are prodding us again.....just like nothing ever happened.

Launching attacks against our ships, our buildings just like they did before. They had a haven.....a place to relax, coordinate. They'll get that again in Iraq and then we truely have lost 2100 troops for nothing. Just like the 19 who died in Somalia for nothing. Clinton cut and run. We can't do that here.
Click to expand...

Click to expand...

LsuCraig, Dec 1, 2005

#23
NoLimitMD Founding Member

Joined:

Dec 15, 2004

Messages:

7,551

Likes Received:

366

The fact that rational people can't discuss a topic like Iraq in any meaningful detail without name calling is one of the biggest problems we face today. The Dems and Republicans are both so inept, and so rooted in their own agendas that they make veritable enemies out of people that simply have different points of view.

Red makes excellent points on here about our current approach to Iraq, and the best thing that is offered is "well then the terrorists win." Well hell, how do you define win? Are they winning by making us spends billions a day pushing a rope?

And as best as I can tell, Red's not even pushing for immediate withdrawal, but one iota of defined leadership. He can wait for years on that, because Bush is NEVER going to give such a vision. And it's because he doesn't have one. And apparently he doesn't need one. Look at FightinTiger's post. Sure, it's inflammatory, but it's right about more things than it should be, IMO.

And I kinda like Bush as a person. And I like him a helluva lot better than anybody the Dems had to offer. But that's not saying a whole lot.

NoLimitMD, Dec 1, 2005

#24
kcal Founding Member

Joined:

Dec 20, 2004

Messages:

10,961

Likes Received:

7,880

NoLimitMD said:

...And I kinda like Bush as a person. And I like him a helluva lot better than anybody the Dems had to offer. But that's not saying a whole lot.
Click to expand...

Getting warmer!

kcal, Dec 1, 2005

#25
Frogleg Registered Best

Joined:

Dec 23, 2004

Messages:

3,268

Likes Received:

1,973

is it so terrible that we would rule the world?

Let's never leave. Let's beat all those against us to dust.

I think the best course of action right now is to set up a giant military complex in IRAQ, and then let the ragheads "govern" themselves.

Frogleg, Dec 1, 2005

#26
NoLimitMD Founding Member

Joined:

Dec 15, 2004

Messages:

7,551

Likes Received:

366

kcal said:

Getting warmer!
Click to expand...

I have a friend with two first names. I like him as a person, and enjoy having a beer or two with him. I also tend to think he's a good guy. But deep down, underneath his corporate civility, I know he's a dope. Not his fault, of course, it's more a function of breeding. But let's not confuse things, he's a dope.

I would not want him to be President. That's not to say that I think my other friend nicknamed Soup Can should be President. In fact, I would take the guy with two first names first. But I wouldn't be happy about it.

NoLimitMD, Dec 2, 2005

#27
NoLimitMD Founding Member

Joined:

Dec 15, 2004

Messages:

7,551

Likes Received:

366

LsuCraig said:

So you think if we leave, the terrorists....I'm talking about the ultra-terrorists which were using Afghanistan as a Taliban haven, will just up, leave and go to Bali?
Click to expand...

I am not trying to be a smartass here, but do you honestly think that if we can get Iraq under control, these murderers will just give up because they don't have an easy country to operate from? Their ideology, as misinformed as it is, will just allow for a 180 change of heart based on geography?? Seriously, is that what you think??

NoLimitMD, Dec 2, 2005

#28
martin Banned Forever

Joined:

Oct 20, 2003

Messages:

19,026

Likes Received:

934

maybe not, but it cant hurt to spread democracy in the area.

have any better ideas? its not like we can just ask religious lunatics to stop being lunatics. we might as well show them that a rational free society runs better. even murderous crusading christians will mostly stop killing if they live in a free democracy.

we have a problem, islamic dudes are crazy and they loves a'killin folk. what are our options? let them spread like apparently europe is doing?

martin, Dec 2, 2005

#29
LsuCraig Founding Member

Joined:

Dec 17, 2004

Messages:

1,607

Likes Received:

55

NoLimitMD said:

I am not trying to be a smartass here, but do you honestly think that if we can get Iraq under control, these murderers will just give up because they don't have an easy country to operate from? Their ideology, as misinformed as it is, will just allow for a 180 change of heart based on geography?? Seriously, is that what you think??
Click to expand...

You're not a smartass. You're asking a question. I'll ask the same question back to you. Do you honestly think that if we pull every troop from Iraq that it will stop the bombings in Iraq and the terrorists will just up and leave?

Do you think if we pull out our country will be safer and a repeat of 9-11 will never happen again? Honestly?

LsuCraig, Dec 2, 2005

#30

(You must log in or sign up to reply here.)

Page 3 of 4

Share This Page