Democrats & Liberals: Archives

I believe we could all call it by the name you gave, “the war on terror”. It is not criminal acts; it is a war. It is not President Bush’s war, or the republican’s war. It is a war against free countries & humanity. If our own politicians & other countries could come to this conclusion, we would be on our way to isolating these terrorists & beating them. They do not understand diplomacy & talk will accomplish nothing. They blow up their own children for taking candy from American troops & you think you can negotiate with this vermin. They have no respect for life & their goal is world domination. But, this will never happen because too many hate Bush more than the enemy.

Perplexed

William~

Hope you have a wonderful time “Big Ben kids”(sorry I love the national lampoon vation movies)!

I enjoyed reading your post, until the last paragraph where you had to throw some “bait” in, to make sure you got some negative responses.

Wow proof-reading could go a long way…

that should have said “vacation”!!!!

Perplexed:

If you ever bothered to listen to Blair’s speech which I did. You will see that he talks about Terrorism as a LAW ENFORCEMENT PROBLEM. This is the difference between the English way and the Republican way. The English don’t treat this like a religious war. They certainly don’t suffer from this ridiculous negative perception the US has in the entire planet.

Aldous:

I hesitate to answer you because I have read some of your posts & I don’t particularly want to correspond with you. I believe you have some real issues.

That being said, I was quoting William Cohen when I spoke of the “war on terror”. I don’t really care what Blair calls the war. He may have supported President Bush, but he is still a liberal. The problem with the English is that they have so many terrorists’ cells operating in GB that they are afraid to call a spade a spade.

I said nothing about a religious war. Do you just make things up?

Perplexed

Perplexed:

Considering the non-existent Border Security, the US probably has just as many “Terrorist Cells” as England.

I did not say you mentioned a Religious War but the Right sure sounds like Crusaders to me.

BTW. The Conservative Tory Party is also treating this as a Law Enforcement problem so its not just the “Liberals” as you said.

Why don’t you enlighten us on how the US would be safer with all the Troops in Iraq being Flypaper for Terrorists?

William,

Enjoy your vacation. I hope you and your family have a wonderful time, and the “business” parts of your stay are productive.

Hoist a pint for me and our Brit friends.

William:

When you get back, can you write about the English perception of America and Terrorism? It would be nice to hear a real account unfiltered by Fox News.

To end the war on terror? Play with our whole team, not just the quarterback, not just the offense.

There will always be uncertainty and secrecy enough in the world to allow terrorists their occasional attack. That’s not the war on terror we can win, or at least throw up bulwarks to hold back What we can defend our selves against is the ease of their attack, their infiltration, and above all, their ease of persuading their fellow Arabs and Muslims to fight against us.

I can use all the metaphors in the world to describe this (e.g., fire on all cylinders, fire on all guns, play with a full orchestra, etc.) But what it all comes down to is not become fixated on one asset as the panacea for the entire problem. We will win some victories in the war on terror by wars and military actions (not by invading the wrong country, though) but we should and we must win by other means. Does it diminish the military victories if we arrest and convict terrorists, if we use our law enforcement agencies and police departments to find and interrupt the terrorist plots?

Does it hurt us if our diplomacy and our good relations with other countries are used to make things more difficult for our terrorist enemies?

Finally, does it hurt us not to appear like the imperialist, dominating, religiously motivated heavy in the region, but instead to defy their stereotypes and outmanuever their propaganda?

We win the war on terror by not fighting it bound and gagged.

William,

Have a good trip and a safe trip. Please go to a football game in the U.K. and pull for my favorite side, Blackburn Rovers.

Stephen Daugherty wrote:

We win the war on terror by not fighting it bound and gagged.

Very nicely put. IMHO, winning the diplomatic war and the “war of ideas” is more important in the long-run than the military victories. Which is not to question the importance of appropriate military force (which, of course, is critical) — but no amount of military action will suffice if we lose badly in these other areas.

I think we should’ve invaded Iraq with McDonalds and Disney — that’s what sells the American way of life to others. I don’t have studies to prove this, but I’m guessing that people who grow up having at least one birthday with Mickey or Chip & Dale do not grow up to be suicide bombers.

I’m not sure why we feel that the military is the way to sell democracy to other countries. You encourage people by showing them the good things we have to offer - if all we can show is the bottom of our boots, well you can see why no one right now trusts our way of life. As some point you have to stop bombing people long enough to see if they have any issues we can help them with…

I think we should call it the war against Al Qaeda, or the war against OBL. That would have taken place in Afghanistan, right? Then we have the war against Sadaam and the Iraqi people.

Having a war on terror makes about as much sense as having a war on infantry. How can you have a war on a military tactic? It’s amazing that the party who wants to be tough on crime doesn’t realize that although we may chase down those who are responsible for terrorism, we can’t fight a war here(which we must do) without using law enforcement tactics.

And who wants to negotiate with the people who blew up the kids in Bagdad? Nobody I know. Those are Rove and Cheney’s words.

http://www..com/story/0,2933,162583,00.html

insert F O X N E W S between the .. in the abouve

i guess its another banned word

I’m not sure what jk’s link has to do with this thread, but…

To help us better wage the war on terror, we need to better understand the “enemy.” Figure out who our enemies really are and who they really aren’t. Lots of Islamic people cheered when we “freed” Afghanistan. Yet, I doubt those same people would cheer us now. How much of that is because of the mistakes we’ve made and how much of that is the enemy’s propaganda? Until we know who our friends are, or at least our potential friends, how can we be sure who our enemies are without waiting for them to attack?

Send over non-partisan, loyal-American (or loyal-Brittish, ect.) Islamic sympathizers who understand the language and culture. I realize such people are rare, but they do exist. I know one such person who refuses to get involved because he doesn’t want to be part of a military operation that hurts innocent Muslims. He worries about continuing his efforts to learn to speak truly fluent Arabic, because he might get sucked into the military. While that may not be a realistic consequence of speaking fluent Arabic, such things may not be so far off.

Clearly it was necessary to put boots on the ground to deal with the fascist regime in Afghanistan, a regime recognised by only two countries in the World, Pakistan, and America’s ally, Saudi Arabia. It was necessary because the regime provided safe haven and safe passage for UBL and his nazi associates. Once that regime was toppled, and other countries were put on notice that if they harboured or assisted such people they would be “serviced” by the Eagle, the natural focus for the fightback should have been intellingence gathering, small scale covert operations against terror cells, and primarily policing actions. All of the former done in co-operation with the governments of the international community. When you go to all out military action, you can win all of the battles, and end up losing the war. This is one we cannot afford to lose, but if we alienate 1 billion of the worlds population, we risk ensuring a never ending war.

William,
Good for you. While our military fights the War on Terror the way the were trained, we can fight it by letting the terrorist know that they DONOT terrorize us.
The best way is to carry on with our plans and lives like they don’t count.
Have a nice trip.

Enjoy your trip.

But as for your question about terrorism, I have a sad and realistic answer. It will never end. Prehaps it would not be talked about much as it is right now, but it will always happen.

Terrorism - The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

That definition can be used to describe alot of things and not just sucide bombers. For example China’s threats of attacking Taiwan to ensure Taiwan doesn’t claim independence or sanctions by the US on a country that doesn’t comply with its every wish. So yes, our grandkids would probably not have terrorism staring at them 24 hours a day through news networks, but terrorism will always exist.

1 billion of the world’s population is already alienated. They do not think or believe the same way we do. An example is the 4 suicide bombers in England. They were British citizens & yet they had no allegiance to Britton. As far as cooperation with other countries, there are some countries that would never have the intestinal fortitude for a military action. That has been seen already. Most of the people in these muslim nations are illiterate & they only know what some mullah has preached to them. I believe some people are inherently hostile & no amount of money, food, talk, or even compassion will change them. I can’t help but come back to the thought of a suicide bomber blowing himself up & taking 24 children of his own nationality simply because they were gathered together for American candy. That is the mind of our enemy!

“I think we should call it the war against Al Qaeda, or the war against OBL. That would have taken place in Afghanistan, right? Then we have the war against Sadaam and the Iraqi people.”

We are not fighting a war against the Iraqi people. Who said it was a war against the Iraqi people? From what I understand, we are fight for the freedom of the Iraqi people. Are you saying our military is fighting against & killing innocent Iraqi people? Whatever country we are in, the fighting will draw the enemy to our troops. Whether it is Afghanistan or Iraq.
Would you rather fight on their soil or on ours?

I am perplexed that your talk all comes down to hating a president. Have you forgotten 3000+ people who died at the hand of these fanatics? Are you so ignorant or blind that you can’t see a connection between these different terrorist groups? What is the ideological difference between Al Qaeda, OBL, or even Sadam?

Perplexed

Perplexed

If you are still wondering why no one sees the connection between 9/11 and Saddam… well, there is none. That’s been out for a while… a long while. The justifications for attacking Iraq… same.

Preplexed,

Quick question, why can’t we go after everyone that we don’t like? I mean we don’t like Iran too much or those damn N.Koreans.

“Fanatics” remember that word because if the US keeps rushing to fight every bully we see the fanatics will multiply exponentially.

Oh, I have not forgotten 9/11. Stop using those 3000+ as an escuse for your lust for revenge. If you want justice for the victims catch Osama Bin Ladin.

Bravo William and I completely agree. Just as Edmund Burke said (according to usm.edu), “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil or injustice is that good men do
nothing.”

The best way to fight terror is to show no fear.

Brian -

The worst way to fight terrorism is to show no brains.

There’s only one way to oppose religious terrorism and that is to oppose theocracy in all of its manifesations.

If we were to renounce all of our alliances of convenience with religious governments, such as Israel, Saudia Arabia and Egypt, we could go a long way to proving to the moderate Moslem world that our fight is not against any particular religion, but against every official religion.

One of the fundamental principles upon which this country is predicated is that religion and government don’t mix. Until we walk the walk, those who are sympathetic to al-Qaeda’s goals and question our motives aren’t going to believe us if we merely talk the talk.

Chuck - nice post. I agree completely… Religion and it’s intolerance has found a way to excuse atrocity in the name of a GOD. Anyone who thinks that I’m - of course - omitting Christianity, sorry, it’s been one of the worst culprits in recent history.

Don’t get me wrong, every person in the world should practice or not practice the religion of their choice. It’s when people become fanatics - when symbols and books and words become more important than reality… when they become things worth dying or killing for.

Terrorism and religion will almost always be tied closely together…

Are you saying our military is fighting against & killing innocent Iraqi people?

Yes to both. The innocent Iraqis who have died in this war on their soil are not enjoying the freedom our military and KBR are bringing to them. And is anyone seriously suggesting that there were 180,000+ terrorists in Iraq? And how many Iraqis are fighting us simply because they don’t like being occupied?

We want to call Iraq a war against terrorist - but think of it this way. If they were on our soil, would you be in the streets fighting them? If they put up a goverment here of their choosing, would you attack it?

That’s our American history. Who are we to call them wrong? They’re fighting for their homes.

Good on ya’, William - I’m right there with you in spirit on the Tube.

Yet the majority of Iraqis are NOT fighting us. They’re being caught in the crossfire. Remember the children above. Did they ask to be blown up by their own people? Were they fighting American soldiers for their homes? Not all Iraqis are part of the insurgency. Not even the majority.

No - most of the Iraqis are not fighting us. Really, all they want to open their stores again, care for their wounded and have access to water and electricity. They want what we all want - to make the best out of life, care for our families.

If there was an army here, would I choose to fight in the street, or would I spend every waking moment trying to safeguard my daughters. The later, I’m pretty sure. But I do know that even though I was not out on the streets fighting for my country, I would forever resent the invading army and it’s country.

Right now we are breading generational hate for the US… Violence might feel like the best reaction at the time… but you never end a family feud by hitting back harder.

Innocent Iraqis die in 3 Ways in Iraq:

1. They are caught between the American Troops and Insurgents. That bomb that killed the children was aimed at a convoy. Similarly, those children killed by the Marines were thought to be Insurgents.

2. They are caught in sectarian violence. Iraq now has the start of a Civil War. The Iraqi Government is now using Torture against people. Old fueds are now coming back.

3. They were victims of a crime. There is virtually no Law Enforcement in Iraq. A woman needs at least 2 bodyguards and even then can still be kidnapped and raped. Sleeping pills and other drugs are being addicted to by nearly all. All is obtained thru the Black Market.

William, welcome to Britain! If you are staying in London, I have two pieces of advice for you. Firstly, get the bus as much as possible, and sit on the top deck. Secondly, find a hill around London. My favourite, because of where I live, is Parliament Hill. Stand there looking down on London at 5 or 6 in the morning and you won’t worry about those fools anymore.

The worst thing you have to worry about is the bad food. I can’t really help you with this…

Sorry, a little bit unfair, we have good food here, just not in the tourist areas. People will rip you off around central London, but if you’re feeling brave go out a bit and get a kebab or a curry. Multiculturalism is here.

Clearly it was necessary to put boots on the ground to deal with the fascist regime in Afghanistan, a regime recognised by only two countries in the World, Pakistan, and America’s ally, Saudi Arabia.

C’mon, Paul! Pakistan is our ally too. In fact, they just proudly and freely voted to make women property and organize Islamic morality police. Expect our other ally, Iraq, to do the same in their new constitution. It’s a fun-fun-fundamentalist world.

William, have fun in the UK. Frankly, I always feel a bit safer outside the US. I don’t know if it’s the conservative media, or Cheney telling us that terrorists are going to invade Missouri and cut off all our heads, but the rest of the civilized world doesn’t have the climate of fear and xenophobia that permeates the US right now.

Are you scared AP?

Ah, England.

Home of the trifecta.

Bad food, bad beer, bad weather.

Have a great time William.

As you say AP, Pakistan is your countrys’ ally. What I was perhaps poorly trying to express was that Saudi has been traditionally a much more important ally to the US than Pakistan. Of course there is a link with both of them, in that Saudi has been massively funding madrassas spewing out Wahabi hatred in Pakistan for many years. The current regime in Pakistan appears to be making determined and effective attacks on the extremist element of Pakistani Islamism. But traditional Paki policy was closely allied to them, indeed made it possible for the Taliban to attain power in Afghanistan, and then to maintain it. This goes a long way back, at least as far as Zia Ul Haq, who imposed sharia law on Pakistan, tho he was a great ally of the US, particularly during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. As you sow, shall you real America.

William, hope you and your family have a terrific time!

Paul
“The worst thing you have to worry about is the bad food. I can’t really help you with this…”

Well, he can do as I often have, and go with a nice pot of tea and and some yummy currant scones for breakfast, then for lunch, go to a shop and pick up bread, good English cheese and some fruit, and for dinner…

“if you’re feeling brave go out a bit and get a kebab or a curry.”

Yes. My thoughts exactly! Or, if you’re not feeling brave, some of the fish and chip shops can be very good.

Rocky:
“Bad food, bad beer, bad weather.”

The food can sometimes be iffy, I agree, but I think that most of the beer in Scotland, Ireland and England is great, and personally, I enjoy the weather.

Adrienne, the weather here in Ireland is baking at the moment. Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh global warming, BRING IT OOOOOONNNNNNN! with apologies to GW

Aldous

You are too generous to the terrorists in you “how Iraqis get killed” section.

Most of the civilians they kill are not caught between them and soldiers. The terrorists specially target civilians even when no Americans are nearby. There is every indication that the children killed were the target and not collateral damage.

Watch how this incident will be used by the terrorists and their dupes among us. First they say that they didn’t do it. Then they say that such things are inevitable. Then they say it is the fault of the U.S. for even talking to or trying to help the kids. Soon the terrorist dupes in the U.S. pick up the chorus. These are people who hate Bush more than they love humanity, but that is how it often is.

The insurgents in Iraq are not freedom fighters and they are not fighting for Iraq. If America was invaded, I would fight the invaders. But I would not kill dozens of my own country’s children, ever. Nobody whose motivations were actually patriotic would do such a thing.

Paul,

“Adrienne, the weather here in Ireland is baking at the moment. Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh global warming, BRING IT OOOOOONNNNNNN! with apologies to GW”

Gee it’s only 113F here in Phoenix today. Buck up son.

Adrienne,

I prefer Irish beer to English, and when you talk about Scotland all I can thnk about is a bit of delwhinnie.

Paul:
“Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh global warming,

:^) Don’t forget yer sunscreen, a mhuirnin! There are few things more irritated than a Gael well-toasted.

“BRING IT OOOOOONNNNNNN! with apologies to GW”

Ah yes… that great “Champion of the Environment”! :^/

Rocky:
“I prefer Irish beer to English,”

Me too, actually.
Mmmm, Guinness, please! :^)
England makes several fine beers though — and some very good cider, too.

“and when you talk about Scotland all I can thnk about is a bit of delwhinnie.”

Yes. Excellent choice, Rocky! The Glenmorangie is nice also. But my absolute favorite has to be The Balvenie - 15 or more years old. To me, that’s a dram of true perfection!
As for Scottish beer, I really like McEwan’s Ale, but only the real stuff, not the “Export Scotch Ale” version, which for some strange reason, doesn’t taste nearly as good.

Are you scared AP?

Hell no. I just got back to Singapore. ;)