I pretty much agree with you on this one, Tom. It has become part of the anti-Bush mantra to totally deny any link whatsoever between AQ and Saddam…but I think if there was one it was indirect and tenuous. But like all things of this nature, we will never know. Regardless, I do think that it was politically expedient (and wrong) for Bush to retreat to 9/11 as support for the war started to fade.
It’s unpopular, and it’s kind of hard to say…
I recognize that 911 was an important historic event. I recognize that it is something that is still very resonent in people’s lifetimes. I recognize that in many important ways it is a big deal. Obviously the damage to familes and friends of people killed is great.
But I do not feel a personal connection to it. No tears shed. No sense of security rocked. Nothing. It happened far away from me, to people I don’t know and don’t have much in common with. I recognize that it’s very painful for many people, but I don’t feel that pain personally. Not, at least, any more than I feel pain for any given bad thing on this earth. It just registers as more people dead, more frusterating crimes…
There was, a while back, a very interseting article on Salon.com with people admitting their inappropriate reactions and first thoughts after 9-11. It stirred up a lot of controversy. I think a lot of people with my reaction are afraid to admit it because they will be called un-American or worse.
Might I be so bold as to point out that the above post is in direct contradiction to your prior one? Because it is.
I would pit you and your spectacular ignorance, gonzomax, but I haven(apostrophe)t the time to waste.
How, Red? The only reason I brought Iraq up is because some war opponents are trying to blame Islamic terror attacks on our presence there alone, rather than nearly thirty years of indoctrination. It is intellectually dishonest to point to a terror attack and say “See! Now that wouldn’t have happened if Bush hadn’t invaded Iraq!”
I would say that just as it’s dishonest to blame Islamic terror attacks on our presence there alone, it is equally dishonest to say that that cannot possibly play any part in such attacks. Certainly I wouldn’t stand up and claim that any attacks are solely the cause of the Iraq invasion, we’d all be best of pals if not for that. But I also wouldn’t stand up and say that there is 0% chance that our actions there have ever possibly increased the amount of, motivation for, or support of more terrorist attacks.
Calling out one extreme as intellectually dishonest whilst firmly planting oneself at another seems somewhat hypocritical.
I’m not denying that our presence inspires Islamist violence. It gives them the excuse they need to call us “crusaders”, etc. But the attacks would still be going on if Saddam were still in power today.
Nice dodge. I didn’t dispute that there would still be attacks. I’m pretty sure there would be. I’m disputing the amount of attacks - your thought that to say any attack might not have happened because of the invasion is intellectually dishonest suggests that the exact number and severity of attacks would be unchanged had we not invaded; that the events in Iraq have caused or resulted in not *one single * attack that would not have happened anyway. According to you, it’s not even disputable; to argue so suggests bad faith on the part of the person who suggests it. You’ve just gone from one extreme to another, and gone one further in suggesting thoughts to the contrary are automatically invalid. Balls to that.
Bush called it a Crusade. He makes it easy.
Non-answer. So I’ll make another surely futile attempt to bring my query back to the forefront:
This is what you originally stated:
– my highlights
That’s all well and fine, but yet once again, WTF did Saddam’s Iraq have to do with 9/11? Certainly you’re aware that Saddam’s Iraq was nowhere close to a haven for “Islamic Terrorist,” knowing as we all should, that your average Iraqi, hated them (Shiite religious extremist, mainly funded by your "bestest friend, SA, and, obviously, Saddam’s own Baath Party) were direct enemies of “secular” Iraq. “We will never know” reeks of anything but Democracy or a direct response. This isn’t – yet – The Warren commission. But the facts are out there for all to see.
Thus your answer makes absolutely no sense to the question asked. Especially so, because of what you posted immediately afterwards in response to Tom’s deconstruction of your fallacies regarding “the left.”
To wit:
Americans woke-up and started sniffing the lies. Mind you, a day late and too many billions of dollars wasted/mishandled/or flat-out stolen.
But in theThis event provided the justification for military action and woke up many more people to the issue of islamic terrorism. interest of answering your question directly, this “…I do think that it was politically expedient (and wrong) for Bush to retreat to 9/11 as support for the war started to fade…”, directly contradicts what you wrote just prior to.
Moreover, do you really believe that your soldiers are cannon fodder and not human beings and also a big part of their families? If so, the easy retort, “we’re fighting them there, so they won’t fight us over here,” simply means that you value your lives way above some front line 18 year old grunt who hasn’t much of a clue as to what is going on. Might as well be playing Playstation instead.
And you know what? All for naught. Because if you don’t find a political/diplomatic solution to this bloody mess, that is all it will continue to be.
Not only that, but you’ve made both the world and your own nation much more likely to get attacked yet again.
If you don’t believe me, I have plenty of cites – many of them coming from your own intelligence agencies and ex high ranking military.
Might want to rethink that one. If you need any help, holler.
Disclaimer – might take a bit as I am rather busy in RL and have several threads that I am involved with. But I promise I won’t leave you hanging if you make a coherent effort in stating your case to – although if I see fit, my response might very well be along the lines of Saddam’s trial. Not that I mourn that the SOB is gone, but I prefer justice…even if that meant a free-spoken trial which might have brought to light a lot of dirty American laundry. No big. Usually happens when two people/countries sleep together. Divorces,m in general are rather nasty affairs…and I speak from experience.
In closing, surely Iraqis’ are proud to have become The World’s #2 failed state.
Bet the reason for that was the mixture of Shock & Awe and flowers and candy you were welcomed with…and it appears that there’s enough of both to keep you busy for a decade or two.
Well done. And I don’t mean my rib eye steak.
Have a great late night, early A.M.
Non-answer. So I’ll make another surely futile attempt to bring my query back to the forefront:
This is what you originally stated:
– my highlights
That’s all well and fine, but yet once again, WTF did Saddam’s Iraq have to do with 9/11? Certainly you’re aware that Saddam’s Iraq was nowhere close to a haven for “Islamic Terrorist,” knowing as we all should, that your average Iraqi, hated them. Shiites – excluding religious extremist, mainly funded by your "bestest friend, SA – and, obviously Saddam’s own Baath Party and most other Sunni tribes, as they were/are direct enemies of the former “secular” Iraq. “We will never know” reeks of anything but Democracy or a direct response. This isn’t – yet – The Warren commission. But the facts are out there for all to see.
Thus your answer makes absolutely no sense to the question asked. Especially so, because of what you posted immediately afterwards in response to Tom’s deconstruction of your fallacies regarding “the left.”
To wit:
Americans woke-up and started sniffing the lies. Mind you, a day late and too many billions of dollars wasted/mishandled/or flat-out stolen.
But in theThis event provided the justification for military action and woke up many more people to the issue of Islamic terrorism. interest of answering your question directly, this “…I do think that it was politically expedient (and wrong) for Bush to retreat to 9/11 as support for the war started to fade…”, directly contradicts what you wrote just prior to.
Moreover, do you really believe that your soldiers are cannon fodder and not human beings and also a big part of their families? If so, the easy retort, “we’re fighting them there, so they won’t fight us over here,” simply means that you value your lives way above some front line 18 year old grunt who hasn’t much of a clue as to what is going on. Might as well be playing Playstation instead.
And you know what? All for naught. Because if you don’t find a political/diplomatic solution to this bloody mess, that is all it will continue to be.
Not only that, but you’ve made both the world and your own nation much more likely to get attacked yet again.
If you don’t believe me, I have plenty of cites – many of them coming from your own intelligence agencies and ex high ranking military.
Might want to rethink that one. If you need any help, holler.
Disclaimer – might take a bit as I am rather busy in RL and have several threads that I am involved with. But I promise I won’t leave you hanging if you make a coherent effort in stating your case to – although if I see fit, my response might very well be along the lines of Saddam’s trial. Not that I mourn that the SOB is gone, but I prefer justice…even if that meant a free-spoken trial which might have brought to light a lot of dirty American laundry. No big. Usually happens when two people/countries sleep together. Divorces,m in general are rather nasty affairs…and I speak from experience.
In closing, surely Iraqis’ are proud to have become The World’s #2 failed state.
Bet the reason for that was the mixture of Shock & Awe and flowers and candy you were welcomed with…and it appears that there’s enough of both to keep you busy for a decade or two.
Well done. And I don’t mean my rib eye steak.
Have a great late night, early A.M.
Non-answer. So I’ll make another surely futile attempt to bring my query back to the forefront:
This is what you originally stated:
– my highlights
That’s all well and fine, but yet once again, WTF did Saddam’s Iraq have to do with 9/11? Certainly you’re aware that Saddam’s Iraq was nowhere close to a haven for “Islamic Terrorist,” knowing as we all should, that your average Iraqi, hated them. Shiites – excluding religious extremist, mainly funded by your "bestest friend, SA – and, obviously Saddam’s own Baath Party and most other Sunni tribes, as they were/are direct enemies of the former “secular” Iraq. “We will never know” reeks of anything but Democracy or a direct response. This isn’t – yet – The Warren commission. But the facts are out there for all to see.
Thus your answer makes absolutely no sense to the question asked. Especially so, because of what you posted immediately afterwards in response to Tom’s deconstruction of your fallacies regarding “the left.”
To wit:
Semantic wrangling aside, you clearly man they started to see through all the Bushit – as pols show. Nothing more, nothing less. So why not come out and say so yourself?
Americans finally woke-up and started sniffing the lies. mind you, a day late and too many billions of dollars wasted/mishandled/or flat-out stolen, short.
, directly contradicts what you wrote just prior to. (highlights mine.)
Moreover, do you really believe that your soldiers are cannon fodder and not human beings and also a big part of their families? If so, the easy retort, “we’re fighting them there, so they won’t fight us over here,” simply means that you value your lives way above some front line 18 year old grunt who hasn’t much of a clue as to what is going on. Might as well be playing Playstation instead.
And you know what? All for naught. Because if you don’t find a political/diplomatic solution to this bloody mess, that is all it will continue to be.
Not only that, but you’ve made both the world and your own nation much more likely to get attacked yet again.
If you don’t believe me, I have plenty of cites – many of them coming from your own intelligence agencies and ex high ranking military.
Might want to rethink that one. If you need any help, holler.
Disclaimer – might take a bit as I am rather busy in RL and have several threads that I am involved with. But I promise I won’t leave you hanging if you make a coherent effort in stating your case to – although if I see fit, my response might very well be along the lines of Saddam’s trial. Not that I mourn that the SOB is gone, but I prefer justice…even if that meant a free-spoken trial which might have brought to light a lot of dirty American laundry. No big. Usually happens when two people/countries sleep together. Divorces,m in general are rather nasty affairs…and I speak from experience.
In closing, surely Iraqis’ are proud to have become The World’s #2 failed state.
Bet the reason for that was the mixture of Shock & Awe and flowers and candy you were welcomed with…and it appears that there’s enough of both to keep you busy for a decade or two.
Well done. And I don’t mean my rib eye steak.
Have a great late night, early A.M.