Democrats were willing dupes...again

[billcoe]

McDermott's trip was not sanctioned by anyone. Not even his House of Representatives. Not even his party. He was there to make a statement. The fact that he was "unaware" of who his financiers were should make his duplicity all the more embarrassing.

 

I don't see how you read that into the story FW, maybe theres a second page I missed.

 

Pretty old and insignificant and unimportant news IMO either case. Your results may and did vary however:-)

 

 

Take care

 

Here's some current news: Link

[Hugh Conway]

I don't see how you read that into the story FW, maybe theres a second page I missed.

 

Pretty old and insignificant and unimportant news IMO either case.

 

He's focusing on the important issues man. THIS IS A BIG DEAL DON'T YOU SEE

 

now would one of these wonderful Republicans remind me how we are going to raise the TRILLIONS needed to pay for this worthless war?

[Doug]

Doug, could you please cite your clandestine credentials, assuming they are declassified, that would make you a SME on covert weapons shipments?

 

Just kidding, don't feel like you have to come up with some sharp comeback.

 

I can not confirm nor deny the the level of information that I may or may not have access to. However, I don't suppose the revenue from all of the crack and heroin sold on the corner make up any part of the GNP, do they?

[tvashtarkatena]

Woah. Who bothered to brush the dust off of this one? Must be a slow news day.

 

 

Yawn.

Edited March 27, 2008 by tvashtarkatena

[billcoe]

He's focusing on the important issues man. THIS IS A BIG DEAL DON'T YOU SEE

 

now would one of these wonderful Republicans remind me how we are going to raise the TRILLIONS needed to pay for this worthless war?

 

Here's some real interesting news: Full link of Iranian attack on the US "

Iran 'behind Green Zone attack'

"General Petraeus The most senior US general in Iraq has said he has evidence that Iran was behind Sunday's bombardment of Baghdad's heavily fortified Green Zone.

 

Gen David Petraeus told the BBC he thought Tehran had trained, equipped and funded insurgents who fired the barrage of mortars and rockets.

 

He said Iran was adding what he described as "lethal accelerants" to a very combustible mix. "

 

Todays news.

[Fairweather]

Don't know what to make of that. On one hand, I find it hard to believe that Iranians could teach battle-hardened Iraqi insurgents much of anything re tactics or strategy. On the other hand, Patreus hasn't really been a mouthpiece for the administration.

[tvashtarkatena]

So show us the evidence already, General.

 

It's deja vu all over again.

[Doug]

The war was started mainly for several reasons.

 

1. We were in a defensive stance as a result of Al Qaeda's first strike initiative.

 

2. Terrorist organizations by their nature are decentralized, and are not a streamlined target such as a country, or a large conventional military is.

 

3. Iraq had strategic position.

 

4. It gave the bad guys a place to come kill us (and vice-versa), instead of waiting to see where/what they would hit next.

 

5. There were no good options. Turn the other cheek, and let's hope the bad guys go away is not a strategy. Look at Spain, they pulled out due to the terrorist threats, and Islamic factions continue to target them regardless.

 

Let's not forget, that all this played into a broader geo-political strategy.

 

Believe what you will.

 

I asked a question on this site a few months ago (I reiterate it was a question not a claim or accusation) that the a reason or the reason for invading Iraq was to set up a Forward Operating Base for the war on terror. I believe that the response was nil, other than to labeled a left wing tug job. Your reason number 4 seems to lend some credibility to my earlier proposition.

 

I'm not saying, I'm just saying.......

[Crux]

Reason #4 is a war crime, and its advocates are criminal.

[billcoe]

Reason #4 is a war crime, and its advocates are criminal.

 

NOT!

 

Care to have a link with facts backing that up? Otherwise it's just an opinion. and as they say: opinions are like a assholes, everyone has one and they all stink.

 

That was an opinion, got any facts? How about doing some research and post a link on what a war crime REALLY is.

 

 

[Serenity]

The very nature of terrorism is often a decentralized decision making process (just think it up and do it). AQ was one of the 1st to 'go corporate' and get organized to the point where it was as much as entity as an ideology. Initially Al Qaeda was nothing more than a well funded grassroots movement, linked by a shared ideology, and tracing it's foundations back to the Soviet Jihad. By the time of 9/11 it was a series of compartmentalized cells able to conduct operations independently, but beholden to one brain. OBL.

 

In the build up prior to 9/11 we had found ourselves coming up short in the HUMINT sector. We could eavesdrop, and run satellite passes, but very little of that was useful in itself. This was a problem not easily solvable, as it involved sovereign rights of nations, and jurisdiction.

 

By focusing operations in Iraq we sent the Jihadists a message, and they came in droves, the same way they did in Afghanistan against the Soviets. This tactic has been working, and Al Qaeda in Iraq has been virtually destroyed.

 

However, note that recently there has been a surge in attacks outside the sphere of Iraq. North Africa has recently seen a surge of related incidents. search Mauritania. Of late they have merged with several other groups to form a decentralized conglomerate, returning to their pre 9/11 strategy (Gamaah al-Islamiyah (GAI) & Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC) ). Their aim is still to produce a spectacular follow on assault to 9/11. There was a thwarted airliner attack in 2006, but the Jihadist also suffered several setbacks in the period of 1993-2001 leading up to the successful assaults on the World Trade Center, and other targets.

 

you'll hear the war referred to as the "Long War" for a reason.

[Serenity]

Don't know what to make of that. On one hand, I find it hard to believe that Iranians could teach battle-hardened Iraqi insurgents much of anything re tactics or strategy. On the other hand, Patreus hasn't really been a mouthpiece for the administration.

 

Kind of like our 2001 SF wunderkinder teaching battle hardened Northern Alliance troops how to fight? No, they just want weaponry, and the know how to use it. They'll do the rest. Iran is fighting a war with us, we tried to take it down a notch, by sending out that bogus NIE report, but they decided to go down another path. I believe you are about to see another phase in the war in Iraq. Possibly the most bloody yet.

[Serenity]

Reason #4 is a war crime, and its advocates are criminal.

 

Well I don't know how creating a battle space is criminal. Our other option was to what?

 

1. Fortify the shores of the US with coastal gun batteries?

2. Provide in depth search and seizure of every unlicensed illegal alien?

3. Storm into 130+ foreign countries unannounced capture, and deport known terrorists?

4. Swirl our crystal ball and try to figure out how many western hating crazed jihadist there might be out there?

 

Seriously, do you believe the proven enemies of America, your sovereign country, were content with the attack of 9/11? It was a failure in the sense that they weren't able to follow it up. If they had hit a port, and perhaps another sensitive target related to energy production in the CONUS sphere, that would have been their goal.

 

I think we're slowly getting a grasp on how to deal with things, but about the time you get it figured out, the whole game changes again.

[Hugh Conway]

I think we're slowly getting a grasp on how to deal with things

 

By flushing our money down the shitter?

[Serenity]

Seriously man, I'm not an economic strategist, and that's not the level I'm trying to engage in. Feel free to debate that with someone else.

[Hugh Conway]

Seriously man, I'm not an economic strategist, and that's not the level I'm trying to engage in. Feel free to debate that with someone else.

 

War is economic strategy.

 

The great strategy to 'win the war on terror' cost us our future

[Serenity]

Economics certainly plays into it, no doubt, but IMHO your fatalism/defeatism is not a solution.

[Hugh Conway]

Economics certainly plays into it, no doubt, but IMHO your fatalism/defeatism is hardly worth taking note of.

 

than pan islamic jihad or whatever is hardly worth taking note of when compared to the power of a non-democratic, totalitarian, expansionist China

 

Your fatalist approach to the conflict in Iraq is fundamentally flawed. The forces there are not our only enemy; conflict there not the only option.

[Serenity]

The majority of US force structure is still aligned in the Pacific Rim, the air superiority, and naval assets of the United States are still paramount the last I checked.

 

China has about 300 billion problems of their own to deal with.

[kevbone]

I ask for substantiation of outrageous claims, and you respond with mock humor.

 

 

I ask for substantiation to your outrageous claims. Where do you get your information from? I will tell you…..the same place I get mine.

 

TV, New Paper, and Internet word of mouth…….in the end we all choose to believe what we want to believe. Doesn’t mean it happened.

 

 

FW….did you vote for Bush? Because if you did….you are part of the problem. Over 1 million innocent people are dead because YOU VOTED FOR HIM!

 

Do you sleep well at night knowing you caused this?

 

[Serenity]

Have you lost a lot of sleep there Kevbone?

[kevbone]

Have you lost a lot of sleep there Kevbone?

 

I have a 17 month old in my house. I have not slept well in over 17 months....

[tvashtarkatena]

Serenity's "creating a battlespace" theory has all the complexity and reality of a video game. Some points that seem to have been left out:

 

1) Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia has been responsible for only a fraction of the bombings and attacks in Iraq. The majority of the violence has been brought on by rival groups within the country. It's a turf war, not a terrorist war. Prior to our invasion, these groups coexisted; it was our invasion and the destabilization that it caused, accelerated by the the sudden unemployment of 200,000 armed soldiers and an early tolerance of thugs like M.Sadr that created the violent rivalries we see today.

 

2) By what measure have we cleaned Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia out of Iraq? With our previously stated HUMINT deficit, how could we even know this? The violence levels certainly wouldn't indicate any such positive trend.

 

3) Terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda did not move wholesale into Iraq to be destroyed by Captain America's mighty shield. They recruited in country from an ample supply of disgruntled Iraqis. They have spread and grown around the world, and are now operating, very effectively, in many countries, in part spurred on by their publicized successes against U.S. forces in Iraq. One previous comparison is worthy of repetition, however; As what happened to the Soviets in Afghanistan, we've had our asses handed to us by failing in nearly every single one of our conflict objectives, all the while losing 3 trillion dollars worth of our economic empire, creating a more dangerous and less stable East Asia, and flushing our international credibility, respect for human rights, and cooperative relationships down the toilette.

 

We are a poorer, weaker, less moral, and more vulnerable country after the invasion of Iraq.

 

 

[Hugh Conway]

We are a poorer, weaker, less moral, and more vulnerable country after the invasion of Iraq.

 

Serenity would have invaded Kamchatka - it was always the key in RISK

[Bug]

Serenity's "creating a battlespace" theory has all the complexity and reality of a video game. Some points that seem to have been left out:

 

1) Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia has been responsible for only a fraction of the bombings and attacks in Iraq. The majority of the violence has been brought on by rival groups within the country. It's a turf war, not a terrorist war. Prior to our invasion, these groups coexisted; it was our invasion and the destabilization that it caused, accelerated by the the sudden unemployment of 200,000 armed soldiers and an early tolerance of thugs like M.Sadr that created the violent rivalries we see today.

 

2) By what measure have we cleaned Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia out of Iraq? With our previously stated HUMINT deficit, how could we even know this? The violence levels certainly wouldn't indicate any such positive trend.

 

3) Terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda did not move wholesale into Iraq to be destroyed by Captain America's mighty shield. They recruited in country from an ample supply of disgruntled Iraqis. They have spread and grown around the world, and are now operating, very effectively, in many countries, in part spurred on by their publicized successes against U.S. forces in Iraq. One previous comparison is worthy of repetition, however; As what happened to the Soviets in Afghanistan, we've had our asses handed to us by failing in nearly every single one of our conflict objectives, all the while losing 3 trillion dollars worth of our economic empire, creating a more dangerous and less stable East Asia, and flushing our international credibility, respect for human rights, and cooperative relationships down the toilette.

 

We are a poorer, weaker, less moral, and more vulnerable country after the invasion of Iraq.