Hold Up Vikman i appreciate your philosophy but the reason Obama is sending troops to Afghanistan is because thats were Alqiada is located

and the bush plan did not suceed considering their was only loss and no gain



War is a form of Diplomacy even though it is preferred by idiots

Wrong again, Zero.

You do not favor it, and you are certainly an idiot.

Zero, we gained a lot by fighting Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Iraq. We killed a lot of Al Qaeda who flocked to Iraq to fight our troops and more significantly the Sunnis, who were initially against the US, changed sides and helped our forces hunt down and kill Al Qaeda. Our show of strength in Iraq won some valuable allies in that fight.

Iraqi neighbours rise up against al-Qa'eda
"Awakening" movements across Iraq are helping to rid Sunni neighbourhoods of extremist influence
Link

Al-Qaeda leaders admit: 'We are in crisis. There is panic and fear'
Al-Qaeda in Iraq faces an “extraordinary crisis”. Last year's mass defection of ordinary Sunnis from al-Qaeda to the US military “created panic, fear and the unwillingness to fight”.
Link

In addition, destroying Saddam's regime put an end to the repeated attacks on our soil. Our government MUST fight back when we are attacked. Clinton's failure to do so only made the Islamists more bold and aggressive. Bush took the fight to them and demonstrated the truth of that saying, "better to fight them over there than over here".

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED

Vikman you are an idealistic person you have no idea how many nations in the world hates us

The problem with your theory that "the iraq war weakened Al-Qa'eda" is wrong, What did we gain from doing this; was it only to find a nut job dictator who had no WMD what so ever. or was it to spread democracy to a nation that doesn't want it, only until they establish freedome of religion is when they will get Democracy, for democracy is nothing you can force upon people " you can lead a horse to water but you can not force it to drink."

Also the reason why Clinton didn't fight back was because we didn't know who 2 fight , what makes Al Qaeda a good opponent is because they aren't just in 1 country , Iraq did not even touch us it was Alqaeda ( Osama )

quote:

you have no idea how many nations in the world hates us

I am GLAD so many nations hate us. If we were as awful as they are, winning their love, we would have lost the foundations of Americanism - liberty, justice and individual Rights.

The nations that love us have common ideals with us.

quote:

The problem with your theory that "the iraq war weakened Al-Qa'eda" is wrong

Well, Al Qaeda has admitted it is having serious problems. When I watched their leaders being rounded up or blown up, I saw a turning point in their war against the USA (and so many other nations around the world). No longer were they getting away with it untouched.

quote:

Also the reason why Clinton didn't fight back was because we didn't know who 2 fight

Wrong. Clinton went so far as to launch a couple of cruise missiles at the Al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan. He knew who the bad guys were - he just lacked the balls to get the job done right.

And Clinton's statements on Iraq were clear enough - diplomacy came to an end in 1998 and our nation was committed to use of force to exterminate Saddam's regime.

quote:

or was it to spread democracy to a nation that doesn't want it

You use the term "a nation" too broadly. The people of Iraq seemed might happy to show their ink-stained fingers demonstrating they had actually voted for their government. Same for the Afghans. They now have a say in their governments and they have expressed tremendous gratitude to the Americans who gave them that chance. The ones who are ANGRY about it are the BAD GUYS who want to impose vicious Islamist rule over those people. If they want to fight about it, kill them.

Even the Sunnis, originally opposed to deposing Saddam, joined the US fight against Al Qaeda. Apparently they prefer to have a choice in their own future rather than have Al Qaeda force something on them. They prefer their freedom and they have America to thank for it.

Zero is aptly named.
It is the sum of his I.Q.
Quel moron!

quote:

Originally posted by vikman:

quote:

you have no idea how many nations in the world hates us

I am GLAD so many nations hate us. If we were as awful as they are, winning their love, we would have lost the foundations of Americanism - liberty, justice and individual Rights.

The nations that love us have common ideals with us.

quote:

The problem with your theory that "the iraq war weakened Al-Qa'eda" is wrong

Well, Al Qaeda has admitted it is having serious problems. When I watched their leaders being rounded up or blown up, I saw a turning point in their war against the USA (and so many other nations around the world). No longer were they getting away with it untouched.

quote:

Also the reason why Clinton didn't fight back was because we didn't know who 2 fight

Wrong. Clinton went so far as to launch a couple of cruise missiles at the Al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan. He knew who the bad guys were - he just lacked the balls to get the job done right.

And Clinton's statements on Iraq were clear enough - diplomacy came to an end in 1998 and our nation was committed to use of force to exterminate Saddam's regime.

quote:

or was it to spread democracy to a nation that doesn't want it

You use the term "a nation" too broadly. The people of Iraq seemed might happy to show their ink-stained fingers demonstrating they had actually voted for their government. Same for the Afghans. They now have a say in their governments and they have expressed tremendous gratitude to the Americans who gave them that chance. The ones who are ANGRY about it are the BAD GUYS who want to impose vicious Islamist rule over those people. If they want to fight about it, kill them.

Even the Sunnis, originally opposed to deposing Saddam, joined the US fight against Al Qaeda. Apparently they prefer to have a choice in their own future rather than have Al Qaeda force something on them. They prefer their freedom and they have America to thank for it.

In fact Iraqis voted at a higher level than America has done as a percentage of eligible voters risking death squads to do so. America since its inception has never had such vigorous turnout for electing a government. But ZERO says democracy was forced upon them? wow...now that is some creative logic to say the very least...

A bit of perspective from Australia...


T. B. Bechtel, a City Councillor from Newcastle , Australia , was asked on a local live radio talk show, just what he thought about the allegations of torture of suspected terrorists.

His reply prompted his ejection from the studio, but to thunderous applause from the audience.

HIS STATEMENT:

'If hooking up one raghead terrorist prisoner's testicles to a car battery to get the truth out of the lying little camelshagger will save just one

Australian life, then I have only three things to say,'

'Red is positive,

Black is negative, and

Make sure his nuts are wet.'

quote:

Originally posted by Speak2Truth:
Zero, we gained a lot by fighting Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Iraq. We killed a lot of Al Qaeda who flocked to Iraq to fight our troops and more significantly the Sunnis, who were initially against the US, changed sides and helped our forces hunt down and kill Al Qaeda. Our show of strength in Iraq won some valuable allies in that fight.

Iraqi neighbours rise up against al-Qa'eda
"Awakening" movements across Iraq are helping to rid Sunni neighbourhoods of extremist influence
Link

Al-Qaeda leaders admit: 'We are in crisis. There is panic and fear'
Al-Qaeda in Iraq faces an “extraordinary crisis”. Last year's mass defection of ordinary Sunnis from al-Qaeda to the US military “created panic, fear and the unwillingness to fight”.
Link

In addition, destroying Saddam's regime put an end to the repeated attacks on our soil. Our government MUST fight back when we are attacked. Clinton's failure to do so only made the Islamists more bold and aggressive. Bush took the fight to them and demonstrated the truth of that saying, "better to fight them over there than over here".

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED

your using that 1 guy and his nieghborhood as evidense that we helped Iraq, he is only 1 guy.

Washington Post even says Al- Qaeda is stronger.

Read the washington post

Sorry don't know how to make links

quote:

your using that 1 guy and his nieghborhood as evidense that we helped Iraq, he is only 1 guy.

I have no idea what you are talking about. Is it the Sunnis who chose to join sides with the US against the Islamists? Seriously - there's a lot more than 1 of them.

quote:

Washington Post even says Al- Qaeda is stronger.

It's an interesting perspective.

When we did not fight them during the 1990s, they took credit for attacks on the US and that led to massive recruiting. They set up a formal terrorist training college that churned out 20,000 highly trained terror cell leaders before Bush got into office and smashed it.

When we don't fight them, they get stronger.

When we do fight them, killing their leaders, seizing their assets, killing their people... maybe their recruiting continues (as it has all along) but we are clearly hurting them.

We know for a fact that not fighting them only makes them stronger without causing them any pain - and they get more and more aggressive. 9/11 was a result of years of Clinton not fighting back.

Washington Post might claim they are "stronger" but President Bush did his job - stopped the enemy from attacking on US soil, took the fight to them and killed them by the thousands, including many of their top leaders.

Either way, Islam will continue its fight against us but if we fight back we at least have a chance of beating them.

quote:

Originally posted by Speak2Truth:

quote:

your using that 1 guy and his nieghborhood as evidense that we helped Iraq, he is only 1 guy.

I have no idea what you are talking about. Is it the Sunnis who chose to join sides with the US against the Islamists? Seriously - there's a lot more than 1 of them.

quote:

Washington Post even says Al- Qaeda is stronger.

It's an interesting perspective.

When we did not fight them during the 1990s, they took credit for attacks on the US and that led to massive recruiting. They set up a formal terrorist training college that churned out 20,000 highly trained terror cell leaders before Bush got into office and smashed it.

When we don't fight them, they get stronger.

When we do fight them, killing their leaders, seizing their assets, killing their people... maybe their recruiting continues (as it has all along) but we are clearly hurting them.

We know for a fact that not fighting them only makes them stronger without causing them any pain - and they get more and more aggressive. 9/11 was a result of years of Clinton not fighting back.

Washington Post might claim they are "stronger" but President Bush did his job - stopped the enemy from attacking on US soil, took the fight to them and killed them by the thousands, including many of their top leaders.

Either way, Islam will continue its fight against us but if we fight back we at least have a chance of beating them.

i'm not saying don't fight back i'm saying maybe Iraq wasn't the best place to start out with the destruction of Al-qaeda considering the main base of operation was in pakistan, Iran.
yes you are correct doing nothing makes them stronger but attacking in a place that hardly had any connections with Al-qaeda than attacking the main base of operations will make them stronger also.

when you say we found WMD's in Iraq were you talking about the Mustard gas we found?

quote:

i'm not saying don't fight back i'm saying maybe Iraq wasn't the best place to start out with the destruction of Al-qaeda

But Bush started the war to take down Al Qaeda at their formal training center in Afghanistan. That place had churned out 20,000 graduates during the Clinton Administration's policy of treating AQ as a "law enforcement" matter. Bush put an end to that.

I have no idea why you claim Iraq was the starting point of the war against Al Qaeda.

quote:

when you say we found WMD's in Iraq were you talking about the Mustard gas we found?

The chemical artillery shells were some of the WMD that the UN inspectors searched for but could not find. Yeah, the chemicals inside were old but it is easy to refill them so Saddam was ordered to hand them over but instead hid them.

Also, there was the Uranium Enrichment centrifuge master copy that Saddam had ordered to be hidden. That was damning.

CIA Statement on Recently Acquired Iraqi Centrifuge Equipment
Link

Nuke program parts unearthed in Baghdad back yard
Link

Hundreds of Chemical Weapons Found in Iraq Since 2003, U.S. Intelligence Report Says
Link


But here is where it gets really interesting. France worked to hold off the attack through the UN. Jacques Chirac was an old friend of Saddam's and France had been promised massive oil contracts by Saddam, so they tried everything they could to keep Saddam in power. They bought Saddam six months of extra time to move stuff out of Iraq into Syria and elsewhere for safe-keeping, according to Saddam's General, Georges Sada. Some speculate the idea was to embarrass the US and keep Saddam in power.

Syria apparently handed Saddam's chemical weapons over to Al Qaeda to prepare a massive attack - that was stopped. Maybe that was Saddam's actual intent?

Jordan WMD Plotter Confesses to Iraqi Involvement
Link

King Abdullah: Al-Qaida WMDs Came From Syria (Plot foiled for massive attack in Saudi Arabia)
Link

But let's not forget, despite all the talk about WMD, the real purpose was to remove Saddam's regime. Bill Clinton committed the US to forceful removal of Saddam's regime in 1998 because, during the temporary cease-fire Saddam was granted, he had demonstrated his INTENT. Lots of nations have WMD. But Saddam's ACTIONS were his downfall.

Pushing down the shoe ads.

quote:

Originally posted by Zer0:
Vikman you are an idealistic person you have no idea how many nations in the world hates us

I have been around the world, more than once over the last ten years. I find this to be mostly un-true, the people that are like you say are a small yet vocal minority. In most countries I have visited, most places we are welcomed quite warmly.


And then you said this :

"your using that 1 guy and his nieghborhood as evidense that we helped Iraq, he is only 1 guy."


And I postulate that you are using the same method to come up with your above claim of America being hated...Since no whole countries have ever been polled.

Again my PERSONAL been there done that experience, is quite the opposite.

It will be interesting to see if I notice a different attitude in Europe this summer now that GWB is gone.

(Just pushing the shoe ads down)

Now that the leftist Administration is drumming up Timothy McVeigh as an excuse to consider the 'right wing' terrorists, pushing for disarmament of the American People, here is a fellow who is not afraid to remind those Democrat Dunces of what they have willfully forgotten:

Feds' 'McVeigh excuse' prompts response - Janet Napolitano, like Janet Reno, pointing finger at wrong people to mislead public
David Schippers contends Oklahoma City bomber part of Islamic, not 'right-wing,' plot
Link