Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mrnoodle
Sorry you didn't get the first part of that. It was a bit sloppy, I'm distracted from my post writing by actual work  . Here are the Cliff notes:
1) Terrorists from other countries are operating in Iraq. They're not "new", implying that Iraqis are rebelling against our occupation by becoming terrorists. They already existed, and are being dispatched by
2) their leaders, who are the only ones operating under any sort of political agenda. The bombers themselves are religiously motivated, tricked by their handlers, or paid. |
I have read on the various military forums that our soldiers are discovering members of other mid-east nations among those fighting the US troops in Iraq. Some of these inviduals may qualify for the label "terrorist." Some may be no different from any soldier who joins to fight in a cause he believes in. My friend who is Canadian who joined the US army and fought in desert storm - was he dispatched by the Canadian leadership? The French came to our assistance in the War for Independence. The French were politically motivated to do this because they were on the outs with Great Britain at the time. I'm not sure of your point here. The peoples of the Muslim world believe what they believe, just as we do. I agree with you assessment of the bomber's motives, but I think your list is rather short. I suggest that there are other motivating factors.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mrnoodle
3) The left wants our international policy to fail. That's because they hate Bush. They hate Bush because he "stole" 2 elections from them. Since they can't beat him at the ballot box, they want to make sure his presidency is nullified in the history books. Meaning, any successes are to be undermined and any failures are to be inflated in importance. This serves another purpose, however. By constantly harping on Bush and trying to make his effort in Iraq fail (for partisan politics' sake), they are -- perhaps unwittingly, perhaps not -- working for the same goal as the terrorists. This makes them de facto allies. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. I will spend my lunch hour digging up the actual US news reports that are used by Arab leaders as anti-American propoganda. asshole, I was going to eat instead.
|
You are deliberately mis-interpreteting the stance of those to the left of the political spectrum. I do not presume to be the spokesperson for such a large group of people, but nowhere have I come across any statement from a democrat or someone of a liberal persuasion who says, "I want the US to fail." My feeling is that given the current situation the US is DOOMED to fail. This thought brings me no joy, as you seem to believe. I would rather that my country succeeded, thank you very much. I don't see how it can. Just become some Islamic terrorist bombs the London subways or commits some other act of atrocity, does not mean that I consider this individual to be my new best friend. I do, however, look at cause and effect, and I see how US foreign policy has created a reason for the terrorist to act as he did - a reason is not an excuse, by the way. There is no excuse for the slaughter of innocent civilians. Just because I feel Bush's actions are wrong, does mean that I rejoice in the death of children at the hands of an Islamic fundamentalist, nor does any other member of "the left." If I cannot speak out against the actions of my government which I feel are wrong without being accused of giving aid and comfort to the enemy, then I might as well go live in North Korea or some other totalitarian regime.
No one is forcing you to give up your lunch hour. You feel strongly enough that you decided to make that choice, so don't try to guilt trip us over your own free decision of what to do with your lunch break.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mrnoodle
4) Pullout. Yes we should leave eventually. Why not start now, you ask. Because if we leave before we have empowered the Iraqis to run their own antiterrorism operations, we have wasted our time. We are not only rebuilding their country, we are protecting their own citizens from the many scattered terrorist groups who all would vie for power in our absence. Iraq wants us out, but it does not want us out *now*, not if it intends to ever be free from terrorism.
|
The Iraqui's must have the WILL to run their own anti-terrorism programs. So far, I have seen the US do nothing that will fill a significant number of Iraqui's with this desire. As it currently stands, with current policy, hell will freeze over first.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mrnoodle
To make it clear that I am now moving on to a different thought, I will implement "white space."
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mrnoodle
I don't care if they like us or not. The endgame here is to make it unprofitable for terrorists to operate in the middle east, and therefore eliminate their ability to operate internationally on any significant scale. Iraq is an important piece of that puzzle. Get the fuck over the fact that you lost the damn election, and try backing your COUNTRY for a change instead of indulging in an eight year whining rant that doesn't advance your cause, but DOES embolden the enemy.
|
See above. What different thought?