Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 03/05/06 11:10 am:
in one sense I share your opinion of this tactic for yes,in places like Iraq that is exactly what is happening .

While the Bush Administration does backflips to explain to everyone here at home that we are fighting a war and not engaging in a law enforcement process, in Iraq we are treating illegal combatants like criminal defendants, all with an eye to "teaching" the Iraqis about democracy and generating the "good will" of the international community.

Under the laws of war, an Iraqi insurgent captured planting a bomb could legally be and should be shot on the spot. Instead, after questioning they are handed over to the Iraqi judiciary for trial. Many of these "caught" jihadis are released by the Iraqi judiciary within hours of capture, returning to kill and maim American soldiers.

I suppose political considerations always plays a significant part . It would've been a little impolitic for him to say 'kill the terrorists 'while in a country where the terrorist network has infiltrated much of the society to a point where the courageous President Musharraf has survived multiple asassination attempts due to his decision to support our efforts.

Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 03/06/06 6:11 pm:
Ronnie,

Generally I don't much care for how Bush critics tell us what he said "in essence." Tell us what he said, not your "in essence" interpretation. Bringing someone to justice doesn't necessarily mean they have to be formally charged, but giving to others what is their due. If bin Laden is terminated by a sniper's bullet I'd say he received his due.

Steve

Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 03/06/06 6:21 pm:
And just for the sake of defending my position and pointing out how cheap a shot you've taken...

Speech to the joint session of congress, 9/21/01:

"Tonight we are a country awakened to danger and called to defend freedom. Our grief has turned to anger, and anger to resolution. Whether we bring our enemies to justice, or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done."

State of the Union Speech 2002:

First, we will shut down terrorist camps, disrupt terrorist plans, and bring terrorists to justice"

Joint statement with Putin, 5/24/02:

"The member nations of the coalition must continue their concerted action to deny safe haven to terrorists; to destroy their financial, logistical, communications, and other operational networks; and to bring terrorists to justice."

May 16, 2003:

"And we'll find them. We'll bring them to justice."

Presidential debate 9/30/04:

"It's hard work. But, again, I want to tell the American people, we're doing everything we can at home, but you better have a president who chases these terrorists down and bring them to justice before they hurt us again."

March 3, 2005:

"The world is changing. And this country of ours will continue to do our duty, which is to find terrorists, bring them to justice through good intelligence and hard work and some brave souls, and at the same time work to spread freedom and liberty around the world."

His message has been consistent, bring the terrorists to justice or bring justice to them. You just can't seem to resist taking a cheap shot.

Steve

Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 03/06/06 7:26 pm:
Ron,

>>>A military commander who searches for his foe in a place he is known not to be has abandoned his right to be believed, respected, and obeyed.<<<

Gee, and I thought that the Iraq War was a complete and utter failure (a quagmire and another Vietnam, I believe you called it) because all the terrorists are fighting and beating us there.

So is the enemy there, or isn't it? You really should try to avoid contradicting arguments.

The bottom line is simple: the war in Iraq and the overall war on terror are proceeding apace. Democracy is developing in Iraq. There is no civil war taking place there, despite some people's wishes to the contrary. We now have tapes of Saddam and his people talking about having hidden the WMDs that he supposedly didn't have. The number of insurgents is decreasing DAILY, and the insurgency is down below 10,000, and dwindling. The Iraqi military is becoming more self-reliant every day. And there have been no attacks on US soil since 9-11. In other words, every single prediction and estimation made by Bush with regard to Iraq and the war on terror has come to pass. Every single one.

Elliot

Clarification/Follow-up by Erewhon on 03/07/06 1:04 am:
Elliott,

I don't believe that I have ever called Iraq another Vietnam. Did I?

It is a serious mistake that has killed and maimed more Americans (the only people Bush and his supporters ever mention in the fight against terrorism) than the WTC attacks did.

If there is a parallelt to be drawn with the WN war you could do worse than look at the mental scarring and breakdowns evident in returning troops.

Mean anything to you? Just the detritus of war? Collateral damage?

Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 03/07/06 2:11 pm:
>>>I don't believe that I have ever called Iraq another Vietnam. <<<

I remember you calling it a quagmire and comparing it to Vietnam.

>>>It is a serious mistake that has killed and maimed more Americans (the only people Bush and his supporters ever mention in the fight against terrorism) than the WTC attacks did.<<<

First of all, Bush makes it a point of mentioning our allies in the war on terror and in Iraq on a regular basis. England, Australia, and the other coalition partners and even the Iraqis themselves play very prominently in his speaches. You should probably try listening to them once in a while before criticizing.

Secondly, to claim that more Americans have been killed and maimed by the war in Iraq than in 9-11 is a lie and you know it. We lost 3000 people in the WTC attack alone. And there were thousands of injuries that rarely are reported on... everything from smoke inhalation, to losing limbs. I have several friends from my EMS days who were badly injured at the Trade Center as the buildings came down. One lost an arm. Another broke both his legs and a wrist. And we are still seeing the effects of the WTC rescue operations, with rescuers reporting illnesses caused by the environmental damage. And I haven't counted the deaths and injuries in the Pentagon and the deaths in Pennsylvania. So please pull the other one.

As for mental scarring--- FOX news reported last night that a new program is being offered here in NY to give care, both physical and mental to those still suffering from the effects of 9-11. You think that there is no mental scarring from that?

Do troops have trouble reintegrating back into society after returning from war? Absolutely. Should they be helped? Again, absolutely. And for the most part, they are getting that help. The DOD learned from the mistakes of the Vietnam War and are giving mental care to returning troops where necessary. But does that make the war less necessary to fight, or less justified? Nope.

Does it mean anything to me? Yes it does. I have family fighting over there. I have friends there now. I have a friend that just got back... a special forces guy, a Ranger Captain with a new wife. And if you think that he doesn't have the occaisional flashback, you're nuts. I feel for our troops. I care for them. I will do everything in my meager power to help them when they return, and support them while they are there. But I believe in the reason that they are there, and I believe that they are doing what is right to defend my country and my family. I honor their sacrifice. I don't diminish it by saying that the war they are fighting is unjust, wrong and detrimental to the people they are defending (us and the Iraqis).

War is harsh and painful, and it sucks. People die and people suffer in war. If everyone on Earth were willing to live in peace with each other, we wouldn't need to fight wars. But this is the real world, not utopia, and war is sometimes necessary to defend your way of life, your freedom and your safety. Until that changes, we will have wars, and we will have people who volunteer to defend our country. Some of them will die, and others will be injured and irreperably damaged. But that doesn't diminish either the need for war or the sacrifices they make. And it doesn't make the President a bad guy for seeing the need to fight when it happens.

Elliot

Clarification/Follow-up by Erewhon on 03/07/06 5:20 pm:
Can you give me the page? The syntax doesn't sound like me. I'd like to know iof I am guilty or not.

:)

Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 03/07/06 5:26 pm:
Wish I could... it was a while back. But you definitely called it a quagmire, and said "just like Vietnam". But it was so friggin' long ago, I'd have to do a week-long search to find it, if I could find it at all. I don't generally keep copies of these posts. I can tell you that it was back in your "Saladin" days, and it was part of our long conversations on the subject of the war back in 2003 and 2004.

Clarification/Follow-up by Erewhon on 03/07/06 5:28 pm:
OK.