I wasn’t just talking for talking’s sake here. How many more people have to die until we get it? America was struck in the heart of it’s biggest city, and its capital. Bali was bombed, an attack on Australia. Madrid’s subway was bombed. And now, London, one of the oldest and most pivotal cities on the globe has been bombed.
Al Qaeda and their affiliated groups have declared war on our civilization, and we’ve responded by being feckless and distracted. Why, 4 years after 9/11, and just hours after 7/7, are we continuing to allow Pakistan’s borders to likely harbor Bin Laden - we allow the Saudis to finance terror.
How many more innocent human beings have to die because our leaders refuse to hunt down these killers and end them?
Because Americans who live in the United States are hubristic and proud.
Because Americans who live in the United States can’t understand anything except through the soft glow of flickering motion pictures.
Because to confuse and antagonize advanced civilizations has been the pastime of every hillbilly and troglodyte since the beginning of time…
Yes, you were just talking for talking’s sake. Despite repeatedly hoping to find a reasoned discussion on here in regards to any political topic, all one finds is the blogger and his minions trying to score cheap political points, calling names, etc …
Everything is political. The failures and lies of Bush and Blair is political and it should be used to bring them down. There is no moral problem pointing out how the lies and failures of Bush and Blair illegal war in Iraq has hastened and caused innocent blood to be spilled in the UK and Iraq.
Do you think those right wing fascist bastards are not going to be trying to milk this? Remembered how they tried to smear 9/11 on Clinton and Kerry?
I will call out the blood spilled on this day is on the hands of Bush and Blair as much as the psychopaths that set the timers and pushed the buttons.
Do you really think that the American people would support war against Pakistan or Saudi Arabia? Would you?
I would, because that would be killing Al Qaeda (aka the people who are trying to kill us)
Mark: If going to a war with a country is chosen because they seem to be an easy target… well, that’s just dumb.
1. I’ve never called him a smirking chimp
2. It’s his job as the President of this damn country to defend us all, not just his suck-ups and campaign contributors. If he can’t take criticism he should have done a better job of reading the job description. I’ve wanted Bush to go after terrorists full tilt since 9/11, it’s a testament to his inability to lead that he hasn’t done so, and a stunning condemnation of his supporters that they simply don’t care.
I’m not sure if there are words to adequately describe this, but let me try:
You have been criticizing Bush’s every move since before he was even elected, and certainly have given him no slack since September 12, 2001. Now you expect that, after calling him a stupid “smirking chimp”, and, worse, a killer of innocents, that he will suddenly listen to you, as a representative of, shall we say, “proactive” Democrats”, and pursue a course of action which will make him the victim of even more criticism from MoveOn, DU, Kos, the Hollywood crew, and most of the MSM.
I’m sure the President is not as petty as I am, but you know what I’m thinking? “You busted my chops on a regular basis, up until the other day. Now you want me to go after the terrorists, full tilt, and do things your way? What if I don’t? What are you going to do, criticize me?”
I think I have found a simple way to say it: He can do what he wants, because his supporters will follow him wherever he goes, or he can listen to people who will never support him.
What would you do?
Oliver,
Mark’s criticism is based in the fact that AlQaida is in Iraq RIGHT NOW. And your position is that we should leave.
Most likely AQ’s presence in Iraq is a token force at best. A smart leader for the terrorists would send his most inept, useless people along with a few decent sub-leaders and allow them to create a visible front, while the REAL operations (such as London) are still being planned and executed.
The whole world is distracted by Iraq, I’d say AQ has been pretty successful there, eh?
And Frank, after being a complete and total failure on the war on terrorism, you would think that at least the military leaders would stop listening to him and start making real plans and moving the US in a more progressive direction to restart the war on terrorism.
Iraq is just creating terrorists and insurgents for our troops to battle. The real war on terrorism is around the globe, free from borders, colors, races and religion.
As usual out come the strawmen from the Chimpy McBush Show.
I for one was RAGEING when 9/11 happened I know of only 1 person who was Happy about it and he was a money grubbing, selfish pig of a man and that was because as he saw it well now I have a chance to make some REAL money in NYC. Do I say HE is a model of what all the right are like? Nope I chalked it up to him being an ass. Can the Left get the same treatment from the right?
Nope.
I get some asspile telling me that if I don’t want murder, death, destruction, hell on earth, the enrichment of a few and the chaining of my children to the coast for life, and the loss of my civil rights I’m unpatriotic (Not in his view, because opinions are like assholes we all have one and some peoples stink, but in fact.). So save your strawmen for people who say, want to make money off of the death of others. Don’t defend them condemn them. THAT is why People on the Left think that the right is full of salivating, blathering ass wipes that care nothing for the truth. Only defending the undefinable, apologizing for the unforgivable to lining their pockets with with greenbacks soaked in blood. Admit that there were no WMD’s in Iraq when we invaded that country. Facts prove it out. There is NO DENYING it. No excusing it or Wishing it away . ADMIT that the Chimpy McBush Show is full of incompetents, lairs, power hungry ideologues and spoiled brats. Facts prove it out. Then we work as one nation to fix the problem and all the other problems that we have in this country.
I wanted to attack the people responsible for it as did most of the world. But what did we get? A perfect example of what NOT to do in war. Fight on 2 fronts If we had finished the job in Afghanistan stabilized the country we wouldn’t be in the Hell we are in now. In Iraq we are being cut to pieces and killing people in droves. For WMD… No, no for WMD programs….. Wait it’s for freedom…… Um… for regime change (which by my understanding is illegal under arms in international law). If I child spoke that way we would either pat them on the head and smile at the simplicity or wash their mouth out for out right lying. Stop defending the very people that make your school of thought the joke it is. Defend your principals fine THAT is whats important isn’t it? Not the man but the mission. The man (In this case the Chimpy McBush Show) is incompetent. No competent War monger makes the step by step exact movements to fuck up a war like this one did.
Better to fight them there than here
Well this time the here is full of people that have White skin and Speak right . Instead of Those darn Mexicans . We should Kill them all and let God sort them out! (Meaning all Arabs and Muslims). Now before you start in on me these are QUOTES that have filtered into my ears. Where was all this anger when Spain was bombed?
No place.
Why? Is it really because they have darker skin? (I doubt that is the case in most people in the US but then again I seem to have lost my country somewhere along the way.)
You can not fight an kill an idea. You can not arrest the criminal urge in people. You can not stop terror with more. All you can do is protect yourself and THAT is what The left wants. Protect the borders of this country, defend chemical, and nuclear plants. Don’t make us the enemy, we the people of this nation deserve better than the Chimpy McBush Show, you as Neo-cons, Evangelicals, Conservatives or right-wing polictos deserve better.
You want to debate ideas fine as long as no one gets killed we can do that all day. But when people are dieing because of some incompetent hack lets work together and stop it.
We all agree we want to be safe from harm not just us in the US but world over. (Do yourself a favor see a movie called Osama (sp?). We all agree that at this time we need to do more here in this country. We all agree that we need to find a better way in Iraq besides breeding a generation of Wild eyed terrorists by the bucket loads. Stop calling me a Leftie and I’ll stop calling you a right-wing wack job . And lets figure this shit out.
A man (in my view) insulted me. I responded. He responded to my insult and we almost got into a flame war. I stopped and reached out to him. He much to my surprise responded in kind. I can respect that, that in my view is being a man (an adult). I, for one, would like to build on that. Catch me up in my thinking and I’ll admit it. Respect that. I catch you up you do the same. And I will also.
Even if we can make utopia here on the net, between us all, it will not translate to the world. But at least IMHO we have proved it can be done. Defend your position, that is what I would do but at least stop trying to defend the undependable. The Chimpy McBush Show is fucked up admit it. And lets move on. Lets fight together to fight the wars were in. Not the one we seem to be making with each other.
Shorter Frank: I have no argument.
SaveFarris: AQ is in Iraq because we’re there and its easy for them to kill Americans.
Hey, Frank!
!=
Ya dig?
Pakistan is a sovereign nation. Are you saying we should invade Pakistan?
Here is your basic problem. You are all about deriding Bush and the Rs - attributing to them the basest of motives. Yet neither you nor the opposition has one single, solid idea as to what should be done as an alternative. When there hasn’t been a recent T act, the criticism comes hot, heavy and vulgar about how we are persecuting poor Muslims, defiling the Koran, trampling civil liberties, etc. But come an attack, its: why aren’t you doing more? Why don’t you just go arrest those Ts?
Its like the listening to fussing kids in the back seat of a car on vacation. Nevr satisfied. The adults need to be patient and keep their hands on the wheel and eyes on the road.
I don’t particularly support Iraq, but I’m not sure I am right and the London attack - with the message that we need to get out of Iraq and Afghan. - weakens my doubts,. This is truly a worldwide war on terroism and we have to act and think strategically. That might well mean closing down Iraq as a place to either shelter or sustain Ts. Also a place to send a clear message to other T enabler countries. Maybe the Neocons had this figured right, after all.
Dugger
Sorry I meant BAD idea
Get Serious
Oliver Willis thinks its is time we get serious about terrorism.
Dugger
“I do not need the Key to McDonnalds to know that eating a pile of shit is a good idea”
Oliver sez:
I would, because that would be killing Al Qaeda (aka the people who are trying to kill us)
Does your anger toward the current administration blind you to common sense?
As Dugger said, above, Pakistan is a sovereign nation. So is Saudi Arabia.
Military action against Pakistan could very likely lead to a nuclear confrontation between Pakistan and India.
Saudi Arabia is the location of the holiest site in Islam. Military action against Saudi Arabia would likely result in blowback exponentially surpassing what happened in London yesterday.
Doing either would be far more reckless than what you accuse the current administration of doing in Iraq.
Iraq was a sovereign nation as well.
So…how about this:
I thought that we did need to take it to the terrorists…I watched shock and awe…I pledged allegiance…
The problem a lot of us have is:
They lied about going to war -
They have not built a succesful campaign
They pulled out of Afghan too soon -
We should have stayed there until it was done and then made the next move…
The current administration is truly the gang that could not shoot straight.
Is that just hating or is that just an assesment of data?
Guess what, geniuses, Iraq and Afghanistan were “sovereign” too. All of a sudden y’all are against going into sovereign nations when it points out Dear Leader’s achilles heel.
After 9/11 the duty of the president of the United States is to end the terrorist threat. An international border should be no obstacle to that goal, and anything otherwise is an offense to our nation.
Straight from the horses mouth - I love it!
“I think I have found a simple way to say it: He can do what he wants, because his supporters will follow him wherever he goes, or he can listen to people who will never support him.”
Blind leading the blind…
This is good - you are on the right path…
Uh Dugger it is Porter Goss, you know the head of the CIA who was handpicked by Bush who says he knows where OBL is.
BinkyBoy,
‘Sovereign’ according to who, their self-installed dictator?!?
Binky,
True re Iraq sovreignty, but agree with it or not, the idea behind Iraq was to overthrow the Baathist regime. Change the country. Take away the sovreignty of the regime. As I understand Oliver’’s position, it isn’t that we should should invade Pakistan and topple their gov., but go in and (magically, somehow) extract OBL (Oliver knows where he is, evidently) - irrespective of Pakistani wishes. I sense he really doesn’t mean this but is struggling for a way to make Bush look bad - from a non-leftish perspective.
Dugger
Dugger
“Guess what, geniuses, Iraq and Afghanistan were sovereign too. All of a sudden y all are against going into sovereign nations when it points out Dear Leader s achilles heel.”
Why do the left always throw around the word “sovereign” as if it had any bearing on the waging of war? Every nation we have ever gone to war with was sovereign (by definition). Germany was a soverign nation, as was Japan, etc., etc.
The difference between invading Afghanistan and Iraq and storming into Pakistan or Saudi Arabia is that in the first two cases we had a legitimate casus belli (the Taliban was known to be sheltering terrorists who had struck the American mainland, and Saddam had violated the Gulf-War cease-fire provisions).
The governments of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are currently our nominal allies; at any rate, they have not provided us with an iron-clad casus belli, so we can’t just send in the Marines.
“After 9/11 the duty of the president of the United States is to end the terrorist threat. An international border should be no obstacle to that goal, and anything otherwise is an offense to our nation.”
Agreed, but having the moral right to send in the Marines does not automatically make it the smartest move if your long-term goal is victory in the greater War on Terror. Patience is a virtue.
Uh, ewk,
Oliver is saying we are allowing Pakistan’s borders to likely harbor OBL. Where his OBL intelligence data is comng from: me nots know.
Also how do we “allow” the borders of Pakistan to harbor OBL? By not invading? Did we give them a special “OBL Harbor Pass”.
I think whats being recommended hre is to invade Pakistan, a country with WMDs, just in case OBl is there. And that is supposedly a smarter thing to do than invading Iraq?
Dugger
Guess what, geniuses, Iraq and Afghanistan were sovereign too. All of a sudden y all are against going into sovereign nations when it points out Dear Leader s achilles heel.
You may have had the good sense to notice that I pointed out the fact that Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are soverign and then pointed out why attacking these sovereign nations was not in our strategic interests.
So, if you’re goint to criticize leaders you don’t like for attacking soverign nations, to maintain your credibility you’re going to have to justify you own foreign policy pronnouncements from a strategic point of view.
So, what’s the strategy behind the suggestion that President Bush commence attacks on Pakistan and Saudi Arabia?
Scot,
we instigated the violation of the cease-fire agreement.
Just a reminder.
Binky,
From your own link;
“This weekend the Liberal Democrat peer Lord Goodhart, vice-president of the International Commission of Jurists and a world authority on international law, said the intensified raids were illegal —if— they were meant to pressurise the regime.”
IF. Funny how the journalist ignored that big IF when he wrote the headline. At any rate, it is immaterial as Saddams breaches of the cease-fire agreement had been documented in 6 UN resolutions - which relate to his lackof cooperation with the inspection regime and have nothing to do with allied bombing of air defense sites which were firing on coalition aircraft.
It is really pathetic how members of the Left, which used to stand against Facism and for the common man, have turned into apologists, cheerleaders and rules lawyers for one of the most vile, warmongering Tyrants in recent history.
How proud you must be of Ramsay Clark.
Scott - serisouly…
What a dumb ass statement…
It is really pathetic how members of the Left, which used to stand against Facism and for the common man, have turned into apologists, cheerleaders and rules lawyers for one of the most vile, warmongering Tyrants in recent history.
The same could be said of the right and their blind support for Bush.
Tool.