Clarification/Follow-up by LTgolf on 11/17/04 12:37 pm:
Just a note.....

Lets not forget that this is the world wide web and visible to anyone in the world with a computor.
What we say here is visible to the world.

Terrorists are NOT winning and we are NOT fighting badly.

There will never be a conventional war again, so we must deal with the issue at hand. The reason there will be no conventional war is because we are to powerful and the enemy are to cowardly to come out in the open and fight for their cause. Terrorists are loosers and anyone that sympathises with them are loosers.

I say to one and all,,,, DO NOT BELITTLE AMERICA IN A TIME OF CRISES......

Leon

Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 11/17/04 1:05 pm:

Helloooo, excon to the bewildered:

>>Is Afghanistan your proof that we are losing the war in Iraq?<<

Afghanistan is proof that a popular insurgency can't be won militarily - by anybody. Viet Nam is further proof.

You're right LT, our military could defeat any conventional army, and the terrorists don't fight that way. But, that's the way it is. That IS the war we are involved in.

What we lost, and why the insurgency has gained popular support, is the hearts and minds of the people. Oh, in the beginning we had an opportunity for their hearts and minds, but that began to disappear with the looting of the Iraqi treasures. We have never recovered from that. As a matter of fact, it got worse - a lot worse. You may think Abu Grahib was an aberration, but the Iraqi's don't. We have so brutalized them, and so disrespected them, that, no matter how long it takes, I believe they will ultimately defeat us - just like the insurgency defeated us in Viet Nam.

>>>Not only have we not lost the war, we have actually already won it. It's all over except for the terrorists dying.<<<

Duuuhhh! Maybe you haven't been paying attention, but it's the terrorists who we're at war with.

And, LTGolf, I've saved the last for you.

Free speech is good. It just is. That's the way the founders designed it. They didn't say, only "popular" speech is free. If only popular speech was free, there would be no need to include that provision at the very top of the Bill of Rights.

Plus, if you're looking for a message that my unpopular speech sends to the terrorists, it would be that in a free society, anyone can speak their mind without fear of death.

This country was founded in dissent. Criticism of the government (my specialty) is VERY, VERY patriotic. I hope we win the war on terror, but closing my eyes to the facts does not support my government, my family, my neighbors, or more importantly, our boy’s in harms way.

Let me say it louder, DISSENT is NOT belittling my country.

Here's a little more for you. The insurgency is not in Afghanistan. It's in Iraq. Anyone who wants to fight us is going to Iraq, not Afghanistan. Elections in Afghanistan mean victory to you?? It's a country still run by warlords growing the world’s supply of opium poppies, propped up by our puppet.

Is anyone here paying attention???

excon

Clarification/Follow-up by darkstar on 11/17/04 2:01 pm:
...........no :)

Clarification/Follow-up by LTgolf on 11/17/04 2:08 pm:
hmmm, as I recall we were dessenting against the British, not America.(God love em)

News flash ...
We did not go to Afghanistan to remove the poppie growers, we went there to reciprocate against terrorists, and did quite well.

It would seem that Pres Bushs plan is working, we have centralised the terrorist actions in Iraq , per your own words, they all come to Iraq to fight us. Thats a good thing.

Maybe im wrong but I thought the looting of the Iraqui treasures was done by the Iraqui people.

I dont think anyone closes their eyes to the facts, its just that some are so anti government they cannot see the forest for the trees and others kind of sort things out befor rushing to judgement.

I agree, there is nothing wrong with dessent, but there is when its politcally biased .

Finally
We are winning the war on terrorisim.
Elections are a good thing.
at times winners do loose but never do loosers win.

Leon

Clarification/Follow-up by powderpuff on 11/17/04 2:08 pm:
Be careful dear brother, you may end up drawing unwanted attention to yourself in this time of war. Our government is in the process of trying to determine who is and who isn't an enemy right here in our own country.
If you value your freedom, why not come up with a global solution to terrorism instead of critizing our government's attempts to make the world a safer place?

Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 11/17/04 2:26 pm:
ex,

I admit it would be hard to be patient if one of my kids was over there...but I still think the cause is worth it.

And, just a little bit more on the technical aspect of this 'war' to add some needed perspective. It is officially designated by the UN as "The situation between Iraq and Kuwait." So for all those who stressed the president 'rushed to war' in Iraq, it has been so designated since August 2, 1990...hardly a rush to finally resolve "The situation between Iraq and Kuwait".

Steve

Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 11/18/04 9:47 am:

Hi PP:

I’m glad you brought that up. As a matter of fact, I do have a solution to world wide terror.

When I was in the slam and somebody broke the rules (as convicts are want to do), I was always surprised at the response of the administration. Instead of going after the wrong doer, they would “lock down” the institution and take away a privilege from everybody. Then they would say it’s not our fault you don’t have privileges, “that guy” screwed it up for you. (Kinda like you folks deny that Bush is doing it to us, and blame the terrorists.)

I never understood that. I guess those of you who think we should be “locked down” ala the Patriot Act, and the totally invasive yet totally ineffective searches at the airport, DO understand it.

For my part, I always thought they should go after the bad guy, and leave me alone.

I think the same is true in our war against terror. For my part, I would have gone after the bad guy’s, and gone after them hard. We didn’t. The Saudi’s are the bad guy’s – we’re kissing their ass because they have oil. Fundamentalist Muslims are the bad guy’s in Jordan, Egypt, Pakistan and many others, but we love their leaders and support them. Their people hate them and us for supporting them, and we’re not doing a damn thing about it.

What we are doing instead, is losing in Iraq, where there really weren’t any terrorists (there are now).

I suppose some of you think I’m a namby pamby anti-war dude. Actually, I’m the opposite and I think George Bush is the namby pamby kiss ass. My plan for victory in the war on terror, would have been to turn the dessert into glass unless those regimes knuckled under.

excon

Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 11/18/04 2:32 pm:
You believe that we are losing the war in Iraq. So what is your solution? Instead of taking on the terrorists in Iraq, we should instead take them on in Egypt, Syria, Jordam Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc.

How many countries do you propose we go into?

And you think we are losing now? We truly WOULD be losing if we split up our forces among 6 or 7 (or more) countries.

Excon, your idea is the MOST UNREALISTIC plan for stopping terrorism that I have heard. The only realistic way for us to fight in that many countries at once with a significant force is to go nuclear. Is that what you are advocating? Because if it is, the I gotta tell you, if you think we're losing the minds and hearts of the Arabs now, you ought to see what's going to happen if we go nuclear without some sort of WMD provocation.

Completely unrealistic, Excon. And I think you know that.

So what is your true agenda here?

Same as usual, I think: to bitch and moan about how terrible the government is, how they are screwing you personally, and how Bush is the devil himself.

Get over it, excon. The world is full of problems that don't have simple solutions. Governments aren't omnipotent. They do the best they can. You might not agree with their solutions, and if you don't, you are free to bitch about it as much as you want. You are even free to try and change it. But your constant whining about the evils of the government are getting old. You can't do any better than they can, and you know it. So ease up, sit back and enjoy the ride just like the rest of us. Or come up with a better solution... one that really works, not an unrealistic one.

Elliot

Clarification/Follow-up by powderpuff on 11/18/04 5:47 pm:
Hello Brother,

I just had the pleasure of flying through several airports to get back out to Maryland. At the first airport, I was given the thorough security check. My bags, including my check on, and carry on and purse where not only xrayed, but hand searched, I was set aside, and giving the wand, not the usual wand, a more sophisticated one. And had to take off my shoes, and then be patted down and felt up all over my body, including my soft spots. I assume since it was a smaller airport, and there were no lines at the security check, they had nothing better to do than to put me through the wringer.

Don't know about you, but I made it safely here with all my possessions, in tact, and with less worry about any problem passengers that might try to do something to crash the plane. I don't mind the extra security and feel safer for it.

And I hate to disagree with you, but I was under the impression that Saddam had lots of thugs working for him, thugs that I would classify as terrorists....

And one more thing dear Brother, if you want them to leave you alone and go after the bad guy, you will have to make a better effort at coming across as one of the good guys instead of one of the bad guys.

Dissent may be a good thing, in its place. Out of place it can give someone the idea you are the bad guy whether you are or not.

Now be a good guy, or at least put on a good guy disguise.