bin Laden truce

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Danr, Jan 19, 2006.

  1. Midas

    Midas New Member

    I am glad that our troops are 10 minutes from these animals instead of 10 days away. I am also glad we are fighting islamic radicals in their backyard instead of ours.

    Make no mistake, you can take them on now...over there...or wait until they hit us here. They will attack again. They will attack somewhere at sometime. We all know it is impossible to defend every mall, hotel, airport, and port. The fact of the matter is there are a number of islamic cells HERE in this country! I am sure they are screaming the loudest about wire taps and our counter terrorism effots.

    Now we could stick our hand in the sand and ask them, "pretty please, please don't attack" or we could hit them first before their finger touches the trigger.

    I know what I would do. It is the world we live in and these 1.2 billion muslims not just going to sit quiet and be peaceful toward other religions. Their actions have PROVED to quite differant, wouldn't you say?
  2. Cloudsweeper99

    Cloudsweeper99 New Member

    Okay, let's review. The post I was referring to used 9/11 and Iraq on the same line. I can't be sure if there was an intent to deceive or just ignorance. I'll leave it up to you, but I thought it required clarification because the Rove strategy has been to link the two through repetitive use together.

    It's been shown by others that Iraq did not possess the means to attack the US, but many people are comfortable believing otherwise. They probably would have if they could have, but didn't and couldn't.

    The idea that the USA has been invaded and occupied sounds like middle school hyperbole. But I will grant you that Bush has spent more time on [potentially] illegal wiretapping than he has actually enforcing the laws on the books meant to secure our borders. So you are partially correct about that point. There was a huge policy failure by the administration.

    The USA has military bases in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Pakistan, Tatikistan, Uzbekistan, and Kyrgyzstan. These are the known bases. None of this is difficult to verify for anyone who tries or has relatives in the military. There are probably troops stationed in additional countries, but I can't offer any evidence of it. You are probably correct about Yeman, Israel, Syria and the African nations you listed. I don't consider Africa part of the Middle East. So maybe I overstated my case, maybe not. I didn't consult a map before posting, but maybe I should have. I'll leave it to the reader to decide.

    I didn't think anyone responding to my post would bother reading Washington; but the greatness of the man is evident in the thoughts he left to the country that he loved. It's easier to dismiss a counterpoint than to actually read it respond to it. Politicians do it all the time. You might as well follow their example because it apparently works most of the time.

    Anyway, I've posted enough here to make the point I wanted to get across. I don't expect to change any closed minds, so this is plenty about this topic and it's time to move on. But on the outside chance there is still an open one out there, I wanted to give them a good start at examining the other side of things from the original post, which I considered typically misleading.

    I again encourage everyone to read or reread Washington's farewell address, slowly and carefully because the writing style is not the modern English we are used to, and a lot can slip by you if you try to skim it. You will get a glimpse of the heart and soul of a true American; and this will provide you with something to compare to what comes out of Washington, DC today.
  3. OldDan

    OldDan New Member

    O.K. so what is your point?:confused:
  4. De Orc

    De Orc Well-Known Member

    I have said this before I believe that the removal of Sadam came way to late should have happend during the 1st Gulf War, but as we did not then it would have been better to have kept him in powerwith us whispering in his ear LOL
    Look at it logicaly he detested the clerics and all they stood for and they were scared of him, we could have used this quite well to our advantage, instead we depose him and open the way for another Iran to be created:(
    OK so I thought the war was fought for the wrong reasons, having said that we need to move on and establish a stable regiem, if we do not wish to hand Iraq over to the religious fanatics!! so lets stop pussy footing around and put more of Sadams old chohorts back into power reintroduce the secret police and give the Kurds Autonomy.

    De Orc :D
  5. Danr

    Danr New Member

    He was accused of helping AlQueda by the wacko right (Bush included). As a matter of fact Powell (for whom I have some respect) brought this crock in front of the UN.

    That is the whole "he lied to get us into a war" thing.
    Lately Bush has flip flopped again and he says his personal faith is the reason we got into this war (what a wack-o).
  6. Midas

    Midas New Member

    Anybody that takes the fight directly to "wacko" islamic terrorists is alright in my book. Your statements just show that you really don't have a clue about the danger islamic animals pose to our freedom and our western civilization.

    Another reason why today's liberals have no clue how to protect and defend this country...NONE AT ALL. Go ahead and reach out to your muslim freinds because the first chance they get, they will remember what their false prophet mohammad said to them:

    Koran 9:73 Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their Home: an evil fate.

    Koran 4:144 Believers, do not choose the unbelievers rather than the faithful as your friends. Would you give Allah a clear proof against yourselves?

    Koran 47:4 When you meet the unbelievers in the Jihad strike off their heads and, when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly. Then grant them their freedom or take ransom from them, until War shall lay down her burdens.

    Go ahead and call the president all the names you wish. The more of these animals that he kills for us, the better for the rest of the world.

  7. De Orc

    De Orc Well-Known Member

    How about this for a reason for going to war :D Sadam refuses to take US $$ for the small amount of oil he is allowed to sell on the open market instead asks for Euros and invites other oil producers to follow suite :D Now we dont have a Terrorist attack but it is a Econimic one and a very seriouse threat at that.
    Your views Please :D

    De Orc :thumb:
  8. quick dog

    quick dog New Member

    I think there is a strong case for removing people like Saddam Hussein from the planet for humanitarian reasons alone. He was responsible for the deaths of 20,000 to 30,000 people for every year that he was in power. Although smaller, he was not much different than Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot, Edde Amin, or Mao Tse Tung, at least in bahavior. I think Saddam cared even less about his own people than some of these others. For Saddam, it was power and wealth for the sake of power and wealth.

    The western world is so comfortable that many are content to stand by and ignore the killings and suffering of captive peoples around the world. Of course, there is lip service from the Left, but very little action. I suppose that if Iraq had no oil, Saddam would likely still be in power, still torturing and murdering Kurds, Shia, and Iranians. Given that reality, I believe that there is no moral grounds for condeming the United States in it's effort to eliminate Saddam and create a republic in Iraq.

    I think that it is almost criminal behavior to politically hinder the timely closure of the conflict, or confound efforts of the Administration and the military to protect the citizens of the United States. Accusations that George Bush is the true problem in this situation are preposterous and really amount to little more than hypocritical lip service from hardcore socialists and those who simply hate American conservatives.

    The alternative to the second conflict and the on-going insurgency in Iraq may have been comfortable for many European and American socialists, but ignoring Saddam and the growing Mahdi army of radical Muslims in the Middle East would have been the wrong decision, both economically and morally. In the long run, the comfortable track would have cost the United States more.

    As Wilfred Bremely used to say, "You do it because it's the right thing to do."

  9. Midas

    Midas New Member

    Gee..that is interesting because when they found Sadamm, he was hiding with a bunch of American cash.

    Iraq has enough oil reserves to supply our needs. We need to take it from them for the cost of liberating this least we should getting it at a nice discount.

    I have been saying for years to drill in Alaska and off of the Florida gulf coast, but noooooooooooooooooooooo, every liberal screams at those ideas. China is the biggest reason why gas has gone up. All of those people riding bicycles for years now are looking at and buying cars.

    Only so much oil to go around, more people needing it makes prices go up.

    You can either address the supply issue, but would you really trust any of the muslim nations and OPEC?? Would you?? can drill for your OWN oil. But all liberals are against that. Even the democratic governor in Alaska wants to drill, but NOOOOOOOOOO, we can't do that. can offer a $10 billion prize from the government to come up with a hydrogen or water powered car that would sell for less than $30,000 so we can get off of oil altogther...and let the muslims then starve to death. I like this idea, but it is years away from reality.
  10. OldDan

    OldDan New Member

    Aa do I and for the same reasons. Well said dog, every word is the truth!:thumb:
  11. quick dog

    quick dog New Member

    Maybe I ought to run for dog catcher? Oh wait, the PC term is "Animal Control Officer". With that fancy title, they get to pick up snakes and the odd possum. I guess all possums are odd? Is that possums or possi?
  12. OldDan

    OldDan New Member

    I was told that his defense lawyers were claiming that was only his coin collection! And you know how people are with their collections, won't give them up no matter what!:kewl:
  13. OldDan

    OldDan New Member

    You better hope that is the spelling, otherwise you are using words on the site that aren't allowed. (And you even misspelled that one!):whistle:
  14. Cloudsweeper99

    Cloudsweeper99 New Member

    Dan - I just wanted to point out a few errors and remind folks where they can obtain a more thoughtful observation than what Bush's professional speechwriters put together. I am fully aware that in all probability, nobody here cares.
  15. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Well I agree with Cloudsweeper that Iraq was not our major terrorist threat, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Syria are. I can understand the rational of removing the largest arab military power in the region but without going into Syria right away when our army was on a roll befounded me for Syria had the strongest arab military power and that was where Hussian's gold was going and most likely his weapons of mass destruction.

    The reason why I think we never dared to go into Saudi land after 911 was not so much the response of the muslim world, they hate us anyway for just not being muslim, but because the Saudi's own so much of America in terms of Treasury Bills, Majority stock shares in American businesses as well as media and both the Bush Family and the Clinton's have received tons of Saudi and kuwait money over the years and that is just what is known on the public record.

    Now for the record Iraq has been involved with terrorism against the United States and plans as well as blue prints of schools in Miami and Ft. Meyers have been found in Iraq terrorist cells during the begining of the Iraq war. It is just in the entire scope of things, they were perhaps fifth on the list of arab muslim entities in terms of the damage they have done against the United States.
  16. Danr

    Danr New Member

    Pakistan? (nukes and big time anti USA)

Share This Page