if i give you a rope, will you do the most respectful thing you possibly could for this country? im sure many will help you with the "initial" movement.

 

wittom, you bring sense, reason and class to the conservative cause rarely seen, especially on this forum. Kudos to you.

 

Well it is a commercial for John Mccain. He has a right to say what he wants and people have a right to disagree

Well it does matter when we invade a country that didn't attack. Im all for killing anyone who did this but it was islamic fundamentalist not a country. We would need to invade countries all over the world to kill them all.

Moving target...first it was because they harbor terrorist and weapons of mass destruction, now it's liberation?

Terrorist with worst 911 mentality were always in Afghanistan, Pakistan.
We broke Iraq, killed tens of thousands of innocent bystanders.
Most of the people we claim to be liberating see us as Christian/American invaders.

Actually we physically joined into WW2 after they attacked Pearl Harbor[/QUOTE]Vietnam is a better comparison to Iraq.
We went to help liberate, we misunderstand the enemy...

 

OK Red, thanks. First discussion forum, still navigating. See you around the site.
Shep

 

Maybe it's your perception that has changed. I've been alerted to this perception thing, and maybe it is an explanation for a lot of things.

There is information supporting your "perception" of the situation. However there is information that could change ones perception of the situation.

The Weekly Standard-Saddam's Terror Training Camps

National Review Online-Iraq & al Qaeda

American Thinker-Saddam and al-Qaeda

You can question the sources if you like. There is so much information available these days you should question every source.

 

I'm not trying to make a connection between 9-11-01 and Saddam, you are. I'm saying that these articles bring about information that could change someones position, or perception of the situation. Are you denying that the information does in fact highlight a link between al Qaeda and Iaq? Oh, right. You're not a fan of hypocracy and double standards. It's dissent, right?

 

And I am saying, SO WHAT if we drew the bad guys to Iraq? It served a purpose and we got the job done. We still killed the bad guys. We didn't have to hunt them out. They came to us. How is that a bad thing? I am still scratching my head on this one.



OK old dogg. Iraq didn't invade us. But they did break the united nations laws how many times over the years? That is the big reason we went there. The WMD argument is way over stated. We went there mainly because they wouldn't comply with the UN resolutions. Period. We did the right thing. We won the war quickly. We have been in a policing action for a few years now. It is going very well, now that the changes have been implemented. Some will argue that we should never have been there. I strongly disagree. They broke international law. Saddam needed to be punished in the most severe way. We won.

 

To say we "created" more bad guys is deceptive and dishonest. They had the penchant for that anyways. So we pushed them over the edge of hate? So what? They are dead anyways. Mission accomplished. I just don't understand your point. I see no negatives. How many UN resolutions has the USA skipped out on? Who cares. We are right. Name them if you think they are any... And I will answer what I think.

 

not nearly enough

 

see here is one problem with your argument, you assume that ANYTHING the un says means boo didley squat to me, they are far more corrupt than our government, and as far as I'm concerned the entire un can go pound sand and rot in their collective glory holes

 

one seriously stupid set of *****'s

 

If you read the article that I posted links to, you'll see that terrorist networks have been growing long before we entered Iraq. In fact they'd been growing before you were born. We didn't create them. There were people out there looking for an excuse to wreak havoc. There are people out there looking to preserve the methods of terrorism. We've interupted their plan to terrorize enough people so that they could have control of something. That's the way that I see it anyhow. That's my perception. That's the position that I'm taking given the information available at this time.


I know you're surprized but I'm going to have to dissagree with you here. We aren't instigating the fight. Terrorists brought the fight to us. Read the article that I posted a link to. There are terrorist networks. It might be convenient to say that the enemy is bin Laden, or al Qaeda. Maybe you think it's the Taliban or Afganistan. The enemy isn't one person. It isn't one countries military. It isn't one group. It's a network of people who use violence an intimidation to subvert thoes who dissagree with their ideology. To show them why we're good we just need to show the freedom, we Americans currently take for granted, that we have. It's the reasons that we are good that **** them off.

Again, my perception of the situation.

 

please explain to me, how diplomacy will take away the fundamentalist terrorists resolve to kill all infidels. (pssst that means you and me)

 

Now that thar is funny.. I don't care who you are.... Ok.. diplomacy... "hey dude... we are just like you!! Lets get along!! Want a toke? I got some good cali gold!! Yeah man!! lets get stoned and lets get along!! righteous!!!"

 

LMAO ... What in the world are you smoking? I need some of that !!!