Terrorists Trying to Influence the Election. Why?

[Annie]

Hang on for what?

Give me a break, for whatever I may think of you, stupid is not amongst them.

 

[jillian]

Give me a break, for whatever I may think of you, stupid is not amongst them.

Well.. thank you for that.

It's just I've yet to hear an argument made for what we win *if* we stay. The "insurgents" are there because we're there. And we've already ceded a full third of the country to Al Queda in Iraq. The Shi'ites and Sunni hate each other and can't come to an agreement because of oil money. So... if we stay, what changes? If we leave, what changes?

I heard Joe Biden say the other day that we should tell them to come to a political settlement within a certain amount of time or they're gonna be on their own. It's not worth our money or our troops' blood to keep it going indefinitely.

 

[insein]

Well.. thank you for that.

It's just I've yet to hear an argument made for what we win *if* we stay. The "insurgents" are there because we're there. And we've already ceded a full third of the country to Al Queda in Iraq. The Shi'ites and Sunni hate each other and can't come to an agreement because of oil money. So... if we stay, what changes? If we leave, what changes?

I heard Joe Biden say the other day that we should tell them to come to a political settlement within a certain amount of time or they're gonna be on their own. It's not worth our money or our troops' blood to keep it going indefinitely.

If we stay, we keep the pressure on Al Queda to keep producing soldiers to fight in their backyard. If we leave, it frees them up to continue training camps and recruitment without opposition. This then allows them to resume planning major attacks against the US and its allies. This is something that has been successfully impeded over the past 5 years in the United states thanks to our efforts in taking the fight to the enemy. Most importantly from their vantage point is that they will be able to claim that they repelled the American Army from the Middle East. That is the ultimate recruitment tool that they could ever gain.

 

[jillian]

If we stay, we keep the pressure on Al Queda to keep producing soldiers to fight in their backyard. If we leave, it frees them up to continue training camps and recruitment without opposition. This then allows them to resume planning major attacks against the US and its allies. This is something that has been successfully impeded over the past 5 years in the United states thanks to our efforts in taking the fight to the enemy. Most importantly from their vantage point is that they will be able to claim that they repelled the American Army from the Middle East. That is the ultimate recruitment tool that they could ever gain.

The greatest recruitment tool they have is our presence in Iraq. It is absurd to think anything else. By asserting that their activities there prevent them from acting here, you seem to forget their numbers are not limited. They keep making more. And every death in Iraq, every act of torture, gives them more opportunity to say "see, we were right... come fight with us".

 

[Annie]

The greatest recruitment tool they have is our presence in Iraq. It is absurd to think anything else. By asserting that their activities there prevent them from acting here, you seem to forget their numbers are not limited. They keep making more. And every death in Iraq, every act of torture, gives them more opportunity to say "see, we were right... come fight with us".

Ok Jillian, let's play the game. Nov. 8th. Both houses are dems. What happens now?

My take: The admin. is forced to set the timetable of withdrawal. With that done, the real fun starts, Conyers calls for impeachment. My guess, there will be no conviction, but the dems will bring charges.

What will our world look like in 2007, in your opinion?

 

[jillian]

Ok Jillian, let's play the game. Nov. 8th. Both houses are dems. What happens now?

My take: The admin. is forced to set the timetable of withdrawal. With that done, the real fun starts, Conyers calls for impeachment. My guess, there will be no conviction, but the dems will bring charges.

What will our world look like in 2007, in your opinion?

First, I don't think it will be both houses. I think you'll keep the Senate. I'm ok with that. I like checks and balances. I agree as far as a timetable for withdrawal is concerned. Conyers will yell... but I don't think impeachment will be an issue. Unlike the rabid right during the Clinton years, I think they'll have to focus on policy and not retribution. Do I think there are things that should be investigated? Yes. And some of that might happen, but I think it will be on a small scale and with a couple of well-chosen issues... maybe. But if the Senate stays Repub as I think it will, Articles of Impeachment would be futile anyway.

And this isn't a game, IMO. It's our future...and for the last six years it's been messed with horribly.

 

[Annie]

First, I don't think it will be both houses. I think you'll keep the Senate. I'm ok with that. I like checks and balances. I agree as far as a timetable for withdrawal is concerned. Conyers will yell... but I don't think impeachment will be an issue. Unlike the rabid right during the Clinton years, I think they'll have to focus on policy and not retribution. Do I think there are things that should be investigated? Yes. And some of that might happen, but I think it will be on a small scale and with a couple of well-chosen issues... maybe. But if the Senate stays Repub as I think it will, Articles of Impeachment would be futile anyway.

And this isn't a game, IMO. It's our future...and for the last six years it's been messed with horribly.

I think that it's likely that it will be one house, I'm hoping not, but I do think likely. Possibly both. It's not about checks and balances, really it's not.

Bush has not had a rubber stamp, probably for the reason that he's not as conservative as many in Congress. He really is a 'compassionate conservative' which is where we get the spending and immigration problems.

If the dems gain control of the House, we'll still be seeing investigation after investigation. Way to keep the costs down.

Really though, what do you think will happen to this 'phony war?' With withdrawal of troops, will we get 'peace?' What message will Iran, Syria have received? Will that all be 'Bush's fault too?'

 

[insein]

The greatest recruitment tool they have is our presence in Iraq. It is absurd to think anything else. By asserting that their activities there prevent them from acting here, you seem to forget their numbers are not limited. They keep making more. And every death in Iraq, every act of torture, gives them more opportunity to say "see, we were right... come fight with us".

They are saying come fight with us because you'll never get another chance to if we're all dead.

Tell me, Did terrorists exist before we invaded IRaq? Did they exist before 9/11? Did they hate America? Did they have trouble recruiting in the 90's to blow up the WTC in 93, the US embassies in Africa, the USS Cole in the Persian Gulf? Did they have trouble finding people to kill Israelis, Brits, Spainairds, Frenchmen, Russians, Germans, Indians, Asians, Africans, and any other enemy of Islam in the past 40 years? I don't think so. So how is us going and finally putting an end to their unimpeded training in the Middle East going to create more terrorists then there has been for 40 years?

For extra Credit, how will an American Retreat be a bad thing for Terror groups in recruitment?

 

[glockmail]

The greatest recruitment tool they have is our presence in Iraq. It is absurd to think anything else. .....

What part of "we will cut off your children's heads" do you not understand?

Look, you can legitimately argue that of strategy might be a little different over ther, but to think that the US will be safe is we leave Iraq is absurd. This is the real world Jill, and you don't wait for the enemy to come to your house and try to kill you. You go to his house and kill him first.

How can you pretend to know their recruitment motives but ignore their stated goals?

 

[roadhouse158]

what I see is the Dems are against this war regardless. Anyone remember what this war is about? Terror right? Not Iraq. Everyone step back and look at a map. You have Iran in the middle. Saudi Arabi to the South, Afghanastan to the East, and Iraq to the west. Saudi is our ally. Afghan and Iraq are on either side of Iran. Doesn't it appear we are just trying to surrond Iran? I mean it looks like that to me. I think the Dems know it, and if they were to win, they would act like that was the real enemy, and Iraq was wrong...Oh yeah...They are now...Anyways...Doesn't it make since to SURROUND your enemy? I mean we couldn't have bases in Iraq before. Or Afghanastan. Now we can. So we're losing the war on terror huh? Looks like we are positioning ourselves just fine. Ok..I guess no one looks at the big picture. The Dems don't want you to put it together. They want REVENGE for Clintons impeachment. Even Clinton knew this should be done. Ever heard of the Iraqi Liberation Act signed by Clinton? http://www.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/libera.htm

This isn't Bush' War. That is utterly ridiculous. This is a war for the world. The Middle East for too long has been left alone to brainwash people into thinking killing is OK. Nothing wrong with it. Hate America, Hate The West, Hate Israel. Kill, Kill, Kill....Something had to be done. Stop being blind because your party isn't in the damn White House. One more thing...Some will ask why did Bush lie then? Why didn't he just say he was surrounding Iran? Well..That answer should be a no brainer. Why tell them what you are doing? Wouldn't this kinda spoil the strategy???? Just my opinion

 

[insein]

what I see is the Dems are against this war regardless. Anyone remember what this war is about? Terror right? Not Iraq. Everyone step back and look at a map. You have Iran in the middle. Saudi Arabi to the South, Afghanastan to the East, and Iraq to the west. Saudi is our ally. Afghan and Iraq are on either side of Iran. Doesn't it appear we are just trying to surrond Iran? I mean it looks like that to me. I think the Dems know it, and if they were to win, they would act like that was the real enemy, and Iraq was wrong...Oh yeah...They are now...Anyways...Doesn't it make since to SURROUND your enemy? I mean we couldn't have bases in Iraq before. Or Afghanastan. Now we can. So we're losing the war on terror huh? Looks like we are positioning ourselves just fine. Ok..I guess no one looks at the big picture. The Dems don't want you to put it together. They want REVENGE for Clintons impeachment. Even Clinton knew this should be done. Ever heard of the Iraqi Liberation Act signed by Clinton? http://www.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/libera.htm

This isn't Bush' War. That is utterly ridiculous. This is a war for the world. The Middle East for too long has been left alone to brainwash people into thinking killing is OK. Nothing wrong with it. Hate America, Hate The West, Hate Israel. Kill, Kill, Kill....Something had to be done. Stop being blind because your party isn't in the damn White House. One more thing...Some will ask why did Bush lie then? Why didn't he just say he was surrounding Iran? Well..That answer should be a no brainer. Why tell them what you are doing? Wouldn't this kinda spoil the strategy???? Just my opinion

Well Bush did spell it out before we went that Iraq and Afghanistan are "fronts" in the war and that Iran, NK and Syria are other members in the Axis of Evil that we face. So for those with a brain, we knew what the plan was from the begining. Establish in the region democratic nations to disrupt the dictatorships and knock on Iran and Syria's door. In a strictly war sense, this is an excellent strategy.

 

[Gunny]

Well Bush did spell it out before we went that Iraq and Afghanistan are "fronts" in the war and that Iran, NK and Syria are other members in the Axis of Evil that we face. So for those with a brain, we knew what the plan was from the begining. Establish in the region democratic nations to disrupt the dictatorships and knock on Iran and Syria's door. In a strictly war sense, this is an excellent strategy.

The thing is, the Dems have everything to lose if we achieve success, and everything to gain if we are unsuccessful. And their bid for political power here in the US, trumps anything like doing the right thing globally or for the future of mankind in general.

 

[Annie]

The thing is, the Dems have everything to lose if we achieve success, and everything to gain if we are unsuccessful. And their bid for political power here in the US, trumps anything like doing the right thing globally or for the future of mankind in general.

Yep, they wish us to 'lose'. They do not consider that unpatriotic, rather the opposit, since 'Chimpy sucks.'

 

[jillian]

Yep, they wish us to 'lose'. They do not consider that unpatriotic, rather the opposit, since 'Chimpy sucks.'

"They" are 2/3 of the country who think Bush is an incompetent President. And "they" want no such thing as failure. "They" just want policies and leadership that aren't failures.

 

[Gunny]

"They" are 2/3 of the country who think Bush is an incompetent President. And "they" want no such thing as failure. "They" just want policies and leadership that aren't failures.

Your numbers/percentage is BS, cut-n-dried. Less than one half of the American public thinks Bush is incompetent -- that would the less than one half that didn't vote for him.

THIS is a perfect illustration of why more conservatives haven't criticized President Bush sooner. Because we KNEW you lefties would turn dissatisfaction with some of his policies/decisions into "incompetence," complete with fabricated numbers.

 

[Annie]

"They" are 2/3 of the country who think Bush is an incompetent President. And "they" want no such thing as failure. "They" just want policies and leadership that aren't failures.

Well that is cool. Care to share the poll of 66% agree on Bush's incompetency?

 

[Gunny]

Well that is cool. Care to share the poll of 66% agree on Bush's incompetency?

I think it's 100% at DU; which, is indicative of absolutely nothing. This is just Jillian's usual penchant for political exaggeration coming to the fore.

 

[Annie]

I think it's 100% at DU; which, is indicative of absolutely nothing. This is just Jillian's usual penchant for political exaggeration coming to the fore.

Actually, I think Jillian really cares whether or not she has credance. She knows when she post something like this, she needs to put up or say she was exaggerating.

 

[Gunny]

Actually, I think Jillian really cares whether or not she has credance. She knows when she post something like this, she needs to put up or say she was exaggerating.

I think she does too, but she lets her radical lefty side slip out every so often. Watch ... she'll call me an extremist in response. How she operates.

 

[roadhouse158]

Why does everyone point to these polls? Also where are these polls taken. I haven't been asked my opinion. And ususally the only people to respond to polls are ones that feel strongly, IE, angry about something. This is why all the polls say "America" is against the war....I bet you that if I went to the right place in San Francisco and took a poll...We would find out that 2/3 of America is gay too.