Everybody has their opinions....But some, with either view, are very disillusioned, IMO.

Capt. how can you say "launch a full scale attack" when terriorists, by their very doctrine, do not do this.....i.e., the first 2 attacks to the World Trade Center (which a lot of people are forgetting) the Marine barracks, the Cole, the last Twin Towers. None of these were "full scale attacks". Terrorists just do not operate in "full scale attacks".

Also, while you did not use the word "conspiracy", how could the media and Bush be jointly responsible by "spinning" propagada to support this issue. Captain...in case you haven't noticed, the media is no friend of the Bush administration. Why would they unite on a common front. The media would destroy him, if they could (which, IMO, they are relatively successful with on other issues).

Now, conversely, others who support the war for "Hitler" kinds of reasoning are also, "slipping over the edge". Doing a war, totally, for humantarian reasons is without merit. Should we be involved in the internal struggles of a country? My god, we have that kind of trouble here. Should Russia, China, Germany, invade or prescribe military action in the US? If assistance is requested, YES. But, only if requested from reliable factions.

While I believe, Bush thought he had valid reasons for going into Iraq (possible wmd's....remember, intelligence came from 5 different foreign sources indicating WMD's , possible training ground for terrorist activity, SOME human rights violations, taking the fight to 2, maybe 3 countries abroad in an effort to preserve the US, something like 144 violations of "peace" agreement), I do not agree with the method employed.

Frankly, IMO, we should have "kicked ass and taken names" right from the beginning. Collateral damage....you bet. As a very famous man once told the news media, "I know of no way to win a war without kiling people". The US would have, immediately, taken a storm of International scoldings and criticisms. But, the war and the criticisms would be over by now. Instead, we are allowing the Iraq war issue divide us as a country, become a political decision maker, purge finances from internal issues, cause international hardships, etc. Afterall, this is part of the world that has, historically, be governed by force or violence.

To sum it up.....was it necessary, maybe. Did I support it, yes..if our leaders believed it was necessary. Do I support it now.....questionable....I still believe it is "winable" if it is returned to a military action, in place of a political action. Will we eliminate terrorism...no, not in the near future (even if we nuke em'), but we sure can minimize the activity and create the fear of severe retaliation.

Next.....

 

I didn't say terrorist, I said Iraq. There is no way Iraq could invade the US so "bring it to them before they bring it to us" is pointless.

I'm not linking the Bush administration to the media (other than maybe Fox ). But they are both just as guilty as each other when it comes to clouding the public’s minds on the war.

 

Needs to be a third option: "Abstain." While I was in support of it initially, I am now of the opinion that we've been there too long. I'll support our fighting men who are there, all right, but I would much rather see them on home turf than in the middle of a bloody sectarian civil war. Our troops deserve better than their Vietnam predecessors got - a quick resolution, not an ongoing bloodbath.

 

So you wish to make fun of my posts with your little smiley faces, huh? Well, it is very clear to me that you, my friend, do not wish to read views that are contrary to yours. You know full well that we are not at war WITH Iraq, we are at war with muslim extremists and Iraq just happens to be where they are now centered. As a matter of fact, the Iraq military is fighting WITH us, not against us. And unless you head is completely in the sand...you know that too! In WWII the US fought in France, Belgium, Guam and Africa, just to name a few, and if you apply your same logic you would have us believe that we were at war with the citizens of those countries too. Well, we were not. The US has fought wars all over the world and in most cases we were not AT WAR with the people of the country where the war took place, rather we were fighting to SUPPORT the people of those countries. So stop twisting words to suit your argument.
As a New Yorker I would think that you would have a better understanding of just what it means to keep the war off of our soil. Or, did you already forget about September 11, 2001? And no, it was not Iraq citizens that took part in that attact, it was muslim extremists. The same animals we are fighting in Iraq and the same animals that wish to bring more harm to the US, on US soil. Do you just think that the current administration just woke up one moring and decided that we have to invade Iraq? No, actually they inherited that plan from the previous administration. The US had been sitting by for years watching our troops and citizens being slaughtered by muslim extremists, all over the world. The present administration decided that a response was necessary. Has it worked? Only history will tell! Like I said previously, where do you want this fight to take place? It is not going away. Where do you want to fight it? I support our troops and those fighting the battle. I do not support a bunch of politicans that try and micro-manage the troops and the battle plan!

Pat

 

I didn't mean to make fun of you but I see "bring it to them before they bring it to us" as illogical. I'm rational enough to realize that 9/11 or other terrorist attacks over recent years has nothing to do with the current war in Iraq, that Iraq is no eminent threat to the US, that Iraq can't "bring it to us", that there are many ulterior motives behind this war that the public is unaware of, that we are just wasting lives and resources on a pointless idiotic war, and that history is repeating itself to the point of this current war becoming a second Vietnam. Like I said before we can nuke Iraq along with the whole Middle East and it won't end terrorism. There is no end or solution to terrorism. As long as there are opposing thoughts and extremest willing to kill and die for their cause there will always be terrorism. You can't blame the Middle East for terrorism. Everyone seems to forget the deadliest terrorist attack on US soil before 9/11 was committed by fellow American Timothy McVeigh. What about all the other American terrorist? I can count at least 30 major terrorist that were breed right here in the good old US of A and several organizations that were also breed here. Does that mean someone should invade us over some stupid war on terror? I'll say it until the end......OUR CURRENT WAR ON TERROR IS COMPLETE PROPAGANDA BS! I really wanted to see what the other side that support the wars responses in a hope for better understanding but now they are getting too Rambo or just plain ridiculous. It's like I'm listening to Rush Limbaugh or having a discussion with my hardcore right wing republican buddy Scott that backs every single decision Bush makes like it's the word of god. Once again like I said before Americans have lost objectivity of the war in Iraq.

 

 

 

If all you wanted was a soapbox, why did you actually ask other people what they thought? You didn't even read what I posted. You don't want to read other views, your's is the only view. Yeah, yeah, yeah, don't confuse me with facts, my mind is made up. I suppose you also believe in the Trilateral Commission, the vast Right Wing Conspiracy and all the other goofball left wing fairy tales. Stick a nail in this baby...close it up.

Pat

 

What..... there is no Trilateral Commission??? where the hell is all my dues going????? No Right Wing Conspiracy????....what the hell are all the smoke filled back room meetings I'm attending????



Tongue in cheek, guys...tongue in cheek....