I don’t know how much longer the right is going to keep on pretending that Americans and American interests don’t continue to be under major threat from Al Qaeda affiliated terrorists every day
Suicide bombers on Wednesday attacked three hotels frequented by Westerners, and at least 18 people were killed and 120 wounded, police said.
Maj. Bashir al-Da aja said officials believe all three blasts were carried out by suicide bombers. The explosions indicated the involvement of al-Qaida, which has launched coordinated attacks on high-profile, Western targets in the past, a police official said.
Clarify please, OW. Your lead-in seems to contradict the article you cite.
Just who on the “right” is pretending we aren’t?
Possibly you misspoke (what you would call a “lie” if VP Cheney did it).
Besides your implied point is wrong. We are under major threat and that is why we call it the War on terror and are still fighting it. It is precisely why, this “war”, we cannot afford a namby-pamby, understand the root causes kind of presidential focus at this point and time. Pres. Bush can take credit for the fact that we are under that threat and have had no major T attacks on the homeland since 9-11.
Dugger
We are under threat from Al Qeada and others - for the long term. The war in iraq is helping to defeat ‘terrorist’ - except that the way it is being fought (not to mention the way it came about) is also helping to create terrorist and sympathy (notwithstanding the non-musical one-way religion world we would live in [switch to?] were we to be… [unthinkable])
Only good policies, greater defense of US Constitutional and human rights values, and a war on uni-culturalism [i.e., making everyone subject to capitalistic/euro-centric/anti-evironment-pro-pollution… etc narrowminded lifestyle] will help win the hearts and minds away from the desparate [and really zelot] ‘terrorists’…
think of how many people would help ‘out’ or ‘isolate’ or ‘difuse’ ‘terrorist’ - if they weren’t living in rubble (thanks to Americans), living in polluted barren land (thanks to Americans [oil companies, diamond co.. etc], living as pochers, thieves, and tyrants (thanks to America’s effect on the environment, eco-system, and political systems all around the world): don’t get me wrong - cars, boats, planes, diamonds, oil, etc. cities, churches, industry… all good stuff - to an extent. But to the extent that it affects the extinction rate of plants and animals - and non-eurocentric culture and dark skinned people… it could be looked upon as ‘high-tech’ terrorism - to those who don’t benefit from it… and that’s alot of people…
We need to chage our culture and effect upon the world now, help the iraqis help themselves, apologize (by our actions at least) for our past indiscretions…. and lead the world to a place where people don’t feel like blowing themselves up for a hero’s life in the afterworld (even though you know they know in the back of their minds that there may not be one).
We change for the better, they change for the better
treat people with equal respect without them having to be like us
we’re not borg are we?
I’m not sure what you mean here Oliver. Americans and American interests are under threat from Al Qeada. I don’t know, however, how long the Right can go on pretending that our war in Iraq has done anything to reduce or eliminate that threat. We’ve been in Iraq for two years now and terrorist attacks against Western targets have continued apace around the world. The right wants to argue that as long as there are no attacks on US soil, we’re winning. The rest of the world, I guess, can go to hell in a handbasket.
Dugger, if we don’t understand the root causes of Islamic radicalism’s allure and spread, how are we supposed to know if we aren’t just exacerbating the problem? How are we supposed to know if our policies are effective? How are we even supposed to know if we’ve won? A lack of attacks on US soil proves, signifies nothing if Al-Qeada is still free to bomb and kill at will all over the world. Or are you so narrow-minded and short-sighted that you don’t care about what happens to the world beyond our borders? I thought this was a global war on terror? Well, globally, terrorism has gotten much, much worse since our invasion of Iraq. You, of course, would never let this fact get in the way of arguing that Iraq is “drainging the swamp” of terrorists.
What’s so ridiculous about the argument that we have to kill terrorists to win is the fact that the terrorists are willing to kill themselves! They’re called suicide bombers for a reason, you know. We’re killing terrorists, the terrorists are killing themselves, and yet there always seem to be more terrorist attacks. Maybe, just maybe, if we bothered to fix our policies to root causes and not fake intelligence we might be getting somewhere. In the face of this latest bombing, tell me you think we’ve made progress in the fight against Al Aqaeda. The facts are against you.
I corrected the entry, I meant to say: “I don t know how much longer the right is going to keep on pretending that Americans and American interests don t continue to be under major threat from Al Qaeda affiliated terrorists every day”.
OK, the 9-11 reference I understand, but the other two have me puzzled.
The massacre of Russian school children at Beslan and the beheadings of three school girls (by yet unknown assailants) mean that “we” are in fight back mode? Who are “we” and how are these events attacks that “we” need to fight back against?
The ongoing conflict between the Russian government and Cechnya has been a long-running, intractable conflict. How do you see that impinging on the interests of a group that includes your undefined “we”? The beheading of teenaged school girls in a remote region of Indonesia is, likewise, an event in a long-simmering feud between local factions. Why is it something you interpret as an attack against “we”?
Just curious, Dug.
Dugger can you find any major Democrat opposed to killing terrorists, and not just an obscure college professor loved by Cons?
“Understand the root causes till the cows come home, but fight and kill terrorists why you are doing it.”
But that’s exaclty it Dugs. The problem is that killing is all we seem to be doing. Hell, we’ve only barely attempted to understand the root causes of internal Iraqi ethnic tensions and politics and we’re supposed to be setting up a democracy there. It’s just been kill, kill, kill and where has it got us? You just keep ignoring the fact that global terrorism has increased since 9-11. Your vengeance now policy has accomplished nothing for the people of Jordan, has it? Nothing at all. And yes, the American people will decide. We saw the tide start to turn yesterday as the veil of lies has started to be pulled back, as the evidence continues to mount that we are not safer, that the world is not safer, since 9-11.
And folks, I have come to believe that my personal position on fighting terror is sort of third-way, though it is part of the Democratic tradition of foreign policy. I believe in crushing our enemies, but also in supporting democracy economically and socially.
frame,
Understand the root causes till the cows come home, but fight and kill terrorists why you are doing it. And if you don’t like that, support a candidate who feels there is an alternative to using deadly force re terrorists. And there is a time to ponder and reflect and negotiate, and a time to pick up a gun and shoot SOBs who want to murder you and your family because they consider them infidels or ‘little Eichmann’s.” My vote, after 9-11, after the Russian school children massacre, after the beheading of Christian school girls, etc etc is that we are in the fight back mode. As I say, feel free to disagree and influence your party the other way and then take that to the American people. They’ll decide.
Dugger
Pres. Bush can take credit for the fact that we are under that threat and have had no major T attacks on the homeland since 9-11.
Since 9/11? Didn’t his term start 8 months prior to that?
Ah that makes more sense and of course fits Dugger to a T: “We’re safer now” he says as the rest of the world goes up in flames.
Jay C. lingers under the impression the goal of Al Qaeda is to conquer the US.
However, educated folks understand AQ could really care less what happens in the US so long as they achieve AQ’s aims. AQ’s goal is to create a fundamentalist Islamic hegemony in the Middle East. They could care less what we do so long as we don’t interfere with that goal.
As it is, AWOL George’s great misadventure in Iraq has given OBL and AQ virtually everything OBL wants. AWOL George has transformed a secular ME nation into an Islamic theocracy that grows more distrustful of the West. And AWOL George could not have done morefor AQ’s recruiting efforts unless he offered them bonuses. And, let’s face it, AWOL George has basically allowed AQ to operate freely since AWOL George decided pursuit of AQ should be called off in order to invade a country which was completely contained.
So, we’ve moved the goalposts again. Now, whenever, wherever, there is a terrorist attack, that is evidence that we’re not doing a good job fighting terrorism.
Should we enter Bali without permission? Invade Jordan? Bomb Iran and Syria? You won’t hear me complain.
Hunt down individual terrorist cells, and instantly kill everyone involved? Fine by me.
Capture terrorists, ask our former POW’s what the North Vietnamese did to them, and then do it to whoever we capture until they start talking? Sure thing.
Stop me whenever you have either:
Become nauseated
Run afoul of a dozen liberal Congressional resolutions.
Violated Federal Law, or
Pissed off MovOn.org, OR
all of the above
Because I can keep on going.
Hey, Frank, we wouldn’t even have to go into your psyche if we did the right thing: kill terrorists. Instead we’re propping up “democracy” in Iraq.
A lack of attacks on US soil proves, signifies nothing if Al-Qeada is still free to bomb and kill at will all over the world.
Huh? The number one priority of our government is to protect the people within our borders and the installations (embassies for example) we have around the world. To that end, they have. No terrorist attacks in 4 years.
These other countries have a responsibility to their citizens, and thus far too many countries have decided that inner soul searching as to the “root causes” of this terrorism is more important than actually preventing attacks. Australia understands what is going on and that’s why they were able to thwart a major attack. Great Britain? Tony Blair gets it, but the rest of those twits don’t as they voted down reasonable legislation that would allow terrorist suspects to be detained for 90 days instead of the current 28.
Ah that makes more sense and of course fits Dugger to a T: We re safer now he says as the rest of the world goes up in flames.
Again with that. Since when is the United States responsible for the security of other nations? Again, look at where these attacks and what do you see? Nations that wink and nod at terrorism while publicly denouncing it. Nations that think because they oppose the Iraq war that they’re safe.
And I sorry Frame. I don’t give a shit what root cause makes some maniac want to strap explosives on himself to blow up innocent people, including women and children. If they happen to be caught before they can do it, line them up and let them see a muzzle flash before they spend eternity in hell with Allah.
Jay C. lingers under the impression the goal of Al Qaeda is to conquer the US.
Lying again, as usual. Where did I say they wanted to ‘conquer’ the United States? Clearly, they see the United States as a threat. Or were the multiple attacks against us in our country, against our military and our embassies abroad just AQ doing it for kicks?
AQ s goal is to create a fundamentalist Islamic hegemony in the Middle East.
Yes, and in order to achieve that goal they must drive Americans and American influence out of all Muslim nations, especially Saudi Arabia. They must also destroy Israel and they must topple pro-Western dictatorships around the Middle East.
They could care less what we do so long as we don t interfere with that goal.
An American in Saudi Arabia to them is ‘interference’ with that goal, which is why they attack us. Educated people understand that.
AWOL George has transformed a secular ME nation into an Islamic theocracy that grows more distrustful of the West.
Oh that is too funny. A “secular ME nation.” JG writes this as though it were just some other nation. Instead, it was a ’secular’ nation ruled by a dictator that happily financed the very terrorism that seeks to achieve AQ’s goals.
And AWOL George could not have done morefor AQ s recruiting efforts unless he offered them bonuses.
Why the ignorance? Why are people continually harping on the war in Iraq, saying it has emboldened AQ, yet continue to support operations in Afghanistan that would have to bring about the same results (ie, increased recruiting)?
America is secure when other nations are secure.
What is this, a slogan writing contest? Please explain how the lackadaisical approach by some nations to deal with radical Islamic terrorism is our fault? You keep blathering about “killing terrorists.” How do you propose we do that in nations such as Indonesia where these maniacs are tolerated?
Nice to see you’re finally out of the closet with that, Jay.
Since when is the United States responsible for the security of other nations?
And there’s the problem with con ideology in a nutshell. America is secure when other nations are secure. Things we do or don’t do have consequence inside and outside of our borders. There are no more bubbles, and things don’t happen in a vacuum. When the Republican policy is simply doing the simplest and dumbest thing, you guys end up wondering what the heck happened when it all blows up violently in the face of a child.
Jay C. There were no Islamic terroris attacks on American soil for 8 years after the first World Trade Center bombings. Eight years of no Islamic bombings and how many country’s did we invade to accomplish this stretch of peace? Bush is just barely beyond the half way point at four years since 9-11 and we’ve seen an increase in the amount of terrorism around the world, not a decrease. If the rest of the world is burning around us how safe does that make us? And I’m sorry, did you say that other countries are responsible for their own security? Did you say that the United States is not responsible for the security of other counties? If we aren’t responsible for the secuirty of other countries why are we responsible for Iraq? Why don’t we pull out now? And hell, if we aren’t responsible for anmy other country’s security, why the hell are we responsible for exporting democracy by force? Sounds to me like you pretty much shot down the last viable reason for us being in Iraq.
And JayC, if you don’t care to find out what would motivate someone to strap on a bomb and kill innocent people what good is killing the guy going to do? He wanted to die anyway. You say you stopped him from killing innocents? Well of course and that’s good. But you still haven’t done anything to stop the next guy from deciding to strap a bomb on himself, and the next, and the next and the next and the next. As we’ve seen, as long as the root causes of terrorism aren’t dealt with, there will always be one more person willing to strap on a bomb. We can’t stop them all no matter how many terrorists we kill. We can’t stop them all even by addressing the root causes — whatever they may be — but we can certainly reduced the number of people we have to kill, right? Doesn’t that make sense? I know it makes you feel good say talk about killing terrorists but killing terrorists does not solve the problems caused by radical Islam. For all we know, we are indeed encouraging more people to strap on bombs by doing
Jay C. apparently doesn’t understand the nature of terrorism. He believes that because AQ hasn’t struck US soil in 4 years, this somehow translates into “we’re winning.”
But rube that Jay C. is–he can’t explain why terrorism is increasing. Jay C. can’t explain why our military is stretched so thin, we’d be unable to effectively respond to a more conventional warfare scenario. And, of course, Jay C can’t explain where things like civil liberties have gone.
The nature of terrorism is that it hits targets of opportunity; if that means a soft target can be found in Oslo–so be it. If NYC presents an opportunity–so be it. The goal of terrorism is to force your opponent to alter behavior; to co.
The fact is Iraq was never a major player in terrorism; the only argument Jay C can make in this regard is that Saddam gave monies to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. Guess what? Our big ally, Saudi Arabia actually conducts televised telethons in support of the families of suicide bombers. To this day. You want real state supporters of terrorism? Try Pakistan.
Jay, its called cutting of our relationships with nations that are ruled by despots and tolerate terrorism. We have no moral authority when we tell the Saudis “please sir, don’t treat your people like shit and stone women and pay for terrorists”.
You keep blathering about killing terrorists.
That’s the best way to stop them from killing us, dont you think?
Judith Miller ‘retiring’ from NYT sometime after retiring from the human race.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/cia_leak_miller;_ylt=AvCeWbBgwzsfQj7meijq2Nms0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ–
Quaker,
Are you denying that there are multiple reports of strong Islamic involvement/motivation in both incidents. Are you not aware of anti-Chrisitian ‘pogroms’ by Muslims in sub Saharan Africa? And regardless, my enemy is the terrorist - whether he’s regardless of religion, ethnicity. But only an idiot wouild deny that the primary impetuts to the WW terrorist problem has Islamic radicalisnm at its base.
And furthermore, I think it unfortunate to put it mildly, that the left seems to treat every terroist incident as first and foremost a political weapon tio use against George Bush. And since Bush-hate seems to be the number one factor in the lives of so many leftists, one is not surprised by the almost seeming glee that greets every terrorist attack. Its why I vote for a crappy guy President like Bush and will do the equivalent again. The left can be trusted to run the country.
Dugger
Dugger, do you find it at all unusual that anyone would use the phrase “since Bush-hate seems to be the number one factor in the lives of so many leftists” (or something like it) as an argument for his position on nearly any subject?
At some point does “left-hatred” become just as blinding as “Bush-hatred”?
I propose that the answer is yes and that the point at which it occurs is this:
Now back to the subject at hand.
I was asking about two specific references you made, one regarding Beslan and the other regarding an attack in Indonesia. You remarked that these events lead you to understand that “we” need to fight back.
Why are these specific events so significant to you? How are they attacks on “we”? In other words, what spawns the solidarity you feel with the victims of these attacks that prompts you to consider attacks on them something you want to fight back against?
If a Hindu mob in a rage of rumors of cow slaughter burns a Muslim village in India, is that a different sort of event to you? Is it NOT something “we” need to fight back against?
If Christians in the former Yugoslavia kill hundreds of their countrymen, that’s not something that riles you in the same way?
If you can, try to leave behind the temptation to turn this into another opportunity to rail about the perfidy of “the left” and tell me what your earlier comment means.
I presume you mean “can’t, be trusted” but then again you also typed something as baseless as “almost seeming glee that greets every terrorist attack.”
Show me the lefty who has ever said “HOORAY! TERRORISTS KILL DOZENS! NOW WE CAN ATTACK BUSH!” It’s all in your mind.
On the same token, one could argue that you greet every terrorist attack as a gleeful excuse to rail against (a) Islam (b) Democrats (c) honest criticism of our current war strategy.
BD, Did you read the lead in to this item. Let me refresh your memory for you:
“I don t know how much longer the right is going to keep on pretending that Americans and American interests don t continue to be under major threat from Al Qaeda affiliated terrorists every day”
The focus, re the terrorist attack, is on the American right. My pint precisely. Try again.
And Quaker, Bush hate has been legitimized in places like the New republic - Chait. See, its OK to hate Bush. Your problem is with your allies - not me.
Re Beslan:
“This funding helped the Wahhabis to finalize control over the institutional infrastructure of the de facto independent state and led for calls for the imposition of sha’riah even though most Chechens (and Caucasus Muslims in general) are Sufis. The al-Qaeda presence in Chechnya was headed up by bin Laden’s protege Amir ibn al-Khattab, a Saudi national who had previously assisted Islamic fighters in the Tajik Civil War and the Armenia-Azerbaijan War over Nagorno-Karabakh. ‘
But believe what you want.
Dugger