Angela, You start your letter off on false pretenses. You state that we are losing the war. This is a typical libleral strategy. Start off with a lie and then everything that follows rings hollow. Karl Rove spoke the truth and it hurts libleral ears to hear it.
Republicans do control all three branches of government. That is why we are fighting the war on terror and not sitting around whining to the UN about when to start the sanction against Afganiatan.
Also another libleral ploy is noted in your letter: Sitting in a park and watching the children play. This is meant to evoke sympothy and make everyone wonder:Oh how could we start a war while moms are sitting and watching CHILDREN play in a park? Madame there were moms in the world trade center who died,and no doubt they too had children who liked to play in the park.
I am very glad that someone in washington finally had the guts to say what was long overdo.
As for liblerals not speaking loudly enough? Madame have you ever heard of Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi,Charles Rangle? CNN, Chris Mathews,The NY times ars all full of liblerals speaking out. The problem with them is they are outnumbered by people who support President Bush and this war on terror. Thank God for that!

Yard dog, nice try defending the indefensable don't be a coward and use your real name. It is obvious that Bush is in way over his head and has set us back one hundred years. WHAT DOES IT SAY about a country that elects a man who can't speak english and rises from a cowardly past to become it his own words a WAR PRESIDENT

It's not a bleeding heart letter unless the children are brought into it. I give it a 8.5 out of 10.

Thank you so much for your letter, Angela. You eloquently spoke for so many of us who have opposed the senselessness of this war from the beginning. History will prove that we were right, just as it did with Vietnam. Unfortunately, that will be too late for thousands of American soldiers who will have been sacrificed for oil profits for Halliburton and imperialist dreams of the neo-cons who now run this country. Bush once said that American military forces should not be used for "nation building", but as with so many other things he has said, this has proven to be just another of his lies.

Mac, set us back 100 years? 100 years from what? What the rest of the world thinks of us? That is another problem I have with you liblerals.You worry what everyone else thinks of us. I don't give a rat's rear end what everyone else thinks of us. As for electing a man who can't speak english: I bet he knows at least what the meaning of the word "is"is.
Signed: John Parson

George W Bush may know the meaning of the word "is", but he evidently doesn't know the meaning of the word "ended"...as in:

"Major combat operations in Iraq have ENDED."

G.W. Bush
May 1, 2003

If I'm to choose between lying presidents, give me the one who lies about his personal sex life, rather than the one who lies about placing the nation at war.

There you go, bud. You cannot dispute what I say,so you start about Bush's "lying". Major combat operations did end around may of 03. What we have now, is a few cowards who dress themselves up as ordinary citizens and blow themselves up for a few hundred dollars and a chabnce to have "40 virgins" in the afterlife.

By the way, John, this is the way the word "liberal" is spelled. You have now spelled it "libleral" six different times. One time might be a "typo", but not six times! Also, the following words are spelled this way: "Afghanistan", "overdue", "sympathy", and, in the manner in which you used it, "madam".

Have you ever considered a quick course in the use of "spell check"?

Thank you for your thoughtful letter Ms. Schroeder. There are many citizens who feel as you do and more are coming to see the light each day Carl rove and dubya kill more and more of our valient soldiers and Iraqis, whos only crime is to be in the wrong place, wrong time.

Maybe we could make a deal with Dick and Carl to pay the Halliburton Co. enough to satisfy their greed that they would be willing to let us pull out of Iraq. Until then Ms. Schroeder keep the faith, continue to speak out.

We must wrest control of our country from Carl rove and the right wing christian fundamentalists. They are poisoning our country with their lies and hate. This Yard dog person is but one example of the meaness that is part and parcel of Carl Roves repub party. Keep your chin up Ms. Schroeder America will come to its senses and decency will return to our country.

Major combat operations ended on May 1, 2003?

http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/list.php

Tell it to the families of these 1,605 soldiers who have died there since that day.

Yard dog:

"What we have now, is a few cowards who dress themselves up as ordinary citizens and blow themselves up for a few hundred dollars and a chance to have "40 virgins" in the afterlife."

Hee hee! So all this news of "major offensives" in the north and west aren't that at all, eh? Dude, there really is a war going on in Iraq. That's the truth. The Iraqis who are fighting are doing a darn effective job of ruining our victory parade there, considering the disparity in types of force available to the sides.

In case you're ready to string me up as a traitor, just realize that I'm only pointing out facts. It isn't treason to do that yet, I hope.

"The failure of this war is not our fault. We're not the ones who let Osama bin Laden get away,"

We went to Iraq under the information that we were supplied. Do you think we were the only country that had this information? Are we the only county there? Oh, and by the way, Clinton did let bin Ladan get away, the Sudenese government offered him to us. Clinton declined. Had he had a pair and went after those previous attacks, I don't beleive bin Laden would have been so bold. I guess he figured, why not, they're not going to fight back.

"I remember joining other moms in a neighborhood park to watch our toddlers play the day the war started. I felt ashamed to be there while people were killing and dying in my name, but I said nothing."

oh boo hoo hoo - I try not to be nasty in the posts, but this statement pushed me overboard. Angela, you make me sick to my stomach with your you're holier than thou attitude. What about the mothers in Iraq that would like to go to the park and watch their children play, watch them grow up. Send their daughters to school. See their sons be able to go off to college, without being grabbed and enlisted in Saddam's junior military, or if refuse, go to jail.
I didn't read anywhere in you post where it made you ashamed to think about the men, women, and children that died during the Civil War, World War I or II, what about 911?
So what Saddam didn't have WMD. He had them at one time - did he not use them on he own people? Did he not kill his own people? Do you really think that he had a high regard for life, maybe his own, but that's about it. We're over there, we're doing a good thing. The people of Iraq deserve freedoms. They deserve live a life without fear of a dictator. Like we Americans do.

Everyone needs to get off the Halliburton topic. They also have a subsidary company, KRB. They are not over in Iraq for oil. They are over there to provide support for our troops. Building camps and so forth. You want to why? My cousin, God rest his soul, couldn't get a manufaturing job in the United States, (NAFTA), and took a job over there with KRB. He was a foreman, was killed installing a broiler for a unit of our fine military. By the way, I also have several friends and family members there. And Angela, they are not killing in your name.

First off Angela, Carl Rove was talking about how liberals responded to terrorist attacks, not "who's to blame for the Iraq War". You just proved him right.

"The failure of this war is not our fault."
Have you told our troops that over there, that they are failing? Because they say differently. What about the Iraqi people are they aware of this, they risk their lives going to the polls,they continue to form their government, get blown up at recuiting stations, markets and ice cream palors? Are they aware that the terrorist have won?

"I remember joining other moms in a neighborhood park to watch our toddlers play the day the war started."

Really, I find that real hard to believe seeing as how the war started late at night.

"You and your pals got us into it"

Wrong again, that would Saddam Hussien. All he had to do was prove that his weapons had been destroyed, did he do that?

Bud said: "rather than the one who lies about placing the nation at war."

What lie was that?

Laura,

Saddam used gas against Kurds, an ethnic minority in the north of Iraq, and one looked down on by most Iraqi Muslims.

Halliburton and it's subsidiaries (and other contractors) are there for the contracts for rebuilding. Unbid contracts.

I'm trying to put together an informal list of talking points from these boards that are made by both sides. I doubt it'll ever be complete, because my job and my life take some time out of my day, but if it is, I'll post it on one of the many email-generated boards about the subject. It seems to me like these points are repeated ad nauseum by everyone on both sides. My question: Does anyone have anything NEW to add?

Eric said: "The Iraqis who are fighting are doing a darn effective job of ruining our victory parade there, considering the disparity in types of force available to the sides."

So the Iraqis are blowing themselves up huh? I wasn't aware that Zarqawi was from Iraq, I thought he was from Jordan. Here is what a Marine in Iraq has to say about who the terrorist are: "80% of the captured combatants here are foreign. Most are Saudi. Go figure. Most of the 9-11 bombers are Saudi. Fear vice Free Societies like Saudi Arabia breed dissenters and criminals....ultimately making bad neighbors. So, we fight here or on United States soil. See the connection now to 9-11? Why would they come to fight here? Hate brings them, hate brought them on 9-11." http://camelspider.typepad.com/howdy/

I know that not all are foreign, however the majority are. The everyday Iraqis what freedom, did they not prove that by going to the polls?

Trish, out of curiosity, how do you PROVE that you don't have something? Think about that before you answer.

And Laura, why is it that we should get "off" the Halliburton topic? Because it's embarrassing to you as a Bush/Cheney supporter? At last count, Halliburton and its subsidiaries have skimmed about $9 billion from the American taxpayers with unbid contracts in which they have been overcharging for their services.

And the statement that we "went to war with information that we were supplied" is really lame. There have been many documentations where people with relevant information (remember Richard Clarke & Joseph Wilson, for example) went to Bush and tried to tell him that his justification for going to war was flawed and/or outright non-existent. All of these voices of reason were systematically shut out, though, because they did not reach the conclusion that Bush & the Neo-Cons wanted.

And speaking of the chemical weapons which Hussein used to gas the Kurds in the 80s, do you know where he got them? From Ronald Reagan & George H.W. Bush, who were SUPPORTING Hussein then because at that time, Iran & Khomeni was the designated "boogeyman" of the day.

All of you people who continue to support this disastrous policy are living in a state of denial. I saw it once before, during the war in Vietnam. The same thing is happening all over again.

"We're not the ones who let Osama bin Laden get away"
So you have proof that the U.S. had OBL in custody and decided to release him? You need to contact CNN immediately for this exclusive!

"attacked the wrong country under false pretenses"
Which country was that? The one that had already used WMD's to kill it's citizens and was developing nuclear weapons to control the entire Middle East?

"under-armed our troops"
You're saying we had the arms but somebody decided to hide them from our own troops so they couldn't use them?

"and made no plan for an exit strategy"
The President outlined our exit strategy very succinctly the other night. When the job is done, we will leave.

I fear your view on the war is tainted by your hatred of conservatives and your anger at losing power.
Bush won, get over it.

Thanks, Dough. Hardly worth reading anymore. Same old tripe every day by the same old tripers and tripesses.

Oh, and Trish, the "lie" from George W Bush that got us into the war in Iraq was really a long list of multiple lies, but I will settle for the three most important ones here:

1) Iraq had WMD
2) Iraq was an "imminent" threat to the U.S.
3) Iraq was involved in the 9/11 attack on the WTC

I'll even give you another one. During the presidential debates in 2000, Bush said that U.S. Military forces should NOT be used for "nation building". (There's a transcript available if you doubt this.) What do you think he's doing right now?

Paul, are trying to imply that this administration is conservative? THAT'S a good one!

Radical, yes. Conservative, hardly.

What's conservative about squandering three straight years of budget surpluses & replacing them with four straight years of record deficits...each one being larger than the one before...while the president has YET to veto a SINGLE SPENDING BILL?

Bud said: "how do you PROVE that you don't have something?"

Well you could have documents or you could take a vacation in the French Alps while inspectors come into your country and verify it. Or you could abide by the UN's Resoultion Security Council resolution 687 (1991),:
"It also provides for establishment of a system of ongoing monitoring and verification of Iraq's compliance with the ban on these weapons and missiles."

Folks,

I don't consider myself a "proud liberal" or a hard-right conservative; I am for common sense and protecting the interests of all Americans.

I do believe we went into the war under false pretense. There's plenty of evidence that the WMD intelligence was flawed, and that Bush and company desperately wanted to go to war with Iraq long before the conflict started.

No hard evidence of any link between 9/11 and Iraq.

There's plenty of evidence that we went into the war on the cheap, and a lot of good advice about troop numbers and equipment was ignored. We still don't have enough equipment over there (http://www.azcentral.com/news/columns/articles/0618evthomason18Z10.html).

Having said all that, now that we are there, we HAVE to win. And that doesn't mean giving a timeline or deadline for troop withdrawal. The fact that foreign jihadists are coming into Iraq, and that the conflict is attracting more of these vermin, just means we have a smaller area to search in order to eliminate them.

We are not "failing" in Iraq. We are basically rebuilding a country from the ground up - not to the extent that the Marshall Plan did in WWII, but close. Iraq is not a small country. We are not only improving the physical infrastructure of the country. we are changing decades of thought patterns - something that is much harder to do. I realize that the American public has grown soft, and has little tolerance for the death of soldiers and support personnel in vague conflicts. Every American death in Iraq is a tragedy for that individual's family and friends, and a loss to the nation as well. How many committed Mothers and Fathers have we lost? How many future engineers, doctors, teachers, and artists have we lost? Despite the tragedy of lost lives, the death total in previous wars (even since World War II) has been much higher. We have been at war in Iraq since June 20, 2002, and have lost 1,744 American armed forces personnel so far, for an average of 45 a month. During the Korean conflict, which lasted almost exactly three years, we lost 12,580 American armed forces personnel for an average of 1,048 a month. During the Vietnam War (from the first commitment of Green Beret advisors on the ground in 1961 to the messy evacuation and end in 1975), we lost 58,183 American armed forces personnel for an average of 346 a month. It sounds awful to say this, but we should be grateful that in such a messy fight we have a death total that is nowhere near as horrible as previous conflicts. Maybe those of you who lived during the Korean War or the Vietnam War will understand what I am saying. Americans should realize that these are the kinds of fights we will be involved in from now on. Barring a clearly defined war with China or North Korea, this will probably be the nature of the majority of conflicts the US is involved in for the rest of my life ... fighting ethnic- or religious-based forces that endanger US interests, forces that cross national borders and identities. Very messy conflicts that can't be summarized in a 2-minute soundbite. As our national attention span dwindles to nothing, we will likely continue to become involved in complex confrontations that are ongoing.

It's the President's job, among other things, to give us a proper context that justifies national support and commitment for any military conflict. Bush, in Tuesday night's address, again missed an opportunity to speak clearly about the level of commitment it will take to reach our goals in Iraq. He did mention the fact that the US will not give a timeline or deadline for troop withdrawal. He should be speaking about the YEARS it will take to stabilize Iraq. Bush should be speaking very clearly about what is at stake here, we are in a worldwide fight against Fundamental Islam. Iraq is just one front. These fighters are not interested in just ruling the middle east. What is going on now is just the most recent cycle of Islam attempting to dominate the world by conquest. Islam is a religion of conquest and submission; there is no room for dissent or secular society. The president and Condoleezza Rice, among others, are seriously misguided when they say Islam is a "Religion of Peace".

In closing, regardless of what you think of the leadership of this country, find a way to support our armed forces overseas - they are only doing what the political leadership of the country had directed them to do. There are plenty of web pages where you can send an email, or contact a local reserve unit to send newspapers, paperbacks, phone cards, etc.

Well said, Michael,

I offer a point for thought.

OBL has been clear in his statements about his reasons for encouraging jihad against the US. He will stop when we:
stop aiding Israel
withdraw from Islamic holy grounds
*da--, there's another, but I'm having a senior moment.

He makes no statements about world dominion.

O.K. Trish, assume for the sake of argument, that everything you said took place...and that nothing was found. Is that PROOF that there was nothing there?

My point is that, by definition, it is impossible to prove a negative. In other words, we set out conditions to avoid overthrow of the Iraqi government that were impossible to satisfy...which was, after all, the intention.

Bush was going to war, come hell or high water.

Bud:

1) "Iraq had WMD": So all of these people lied as well as France, Germany, GB, Russia and the UN: "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

Oh and if you want more, I am more then happy to give them to you.

2) "Iraq was an "imminent" threat to the U.S". Well according to a lot of those quotes up there, yeah they were. ALso, because the UN had stated that Iraq had WMD, and after 9/11 we couldn't afford taking a chance. And Saddam refused to open his country up to inspectors. So if you don't have weapons, why wouldn't you co-operate with inspectors?
3) "Iraq was involved in the 9/11 attack on the WTC." Do you have a quote on this one, because I never heard it.

"I'll even give you another one. During the presidential debates in 2000"

So are you saying that after 3000 of our citizens were murdered on 9/11, that wouldn't change a governments foreign policy. So you think we should have done what in Afgan? Nuked them? Done nothing?

Bud said: "we set out conditions to avoid overthrow of the Iraqi government that were impossible to satisfy...which was, after all, the intention."

Oh I got it wrong, I thought that was the UN who set the resoultions.

Bud said: "Bush was going to war, come hell or high water."

Really so if Saddam said: "I'm taking a vacation in the French Alps, bring all the inspectors you want in, look where ever you want" Bush would have still went to war? Who would we have warred with? If the Iraqis invited them in who would we fight?

Other countries, offered Saddam a place to go he turned them down. Again I ask why?

People!

Trish will take everything you say and twist it around to her means and argument because she has no argument. We all can pull quotes and use them out of context just like she does. Oh yeah, you can also post as many times as you want to make your point seem like it's the correct one, just like she does. She's a robot repeating anything the republican party feeds into her memory bank. Don't argue with her. It just feeds the beast. Let her twist everything around until it bites her on the ass. Please, you'll have to forgive her because she had a rough childhood. It seems her dad ran off with her uncle. The two are now running up to Canada to exchange vows and make the whole thing legal. Where else but Canada would two brothers be allowed to marry?

Thanks for the spell check,bud. But you are not suppozes to get pursnell here.

Trish you do a helluva job here. And spel good two.

Dough,

You assertion that OBL and Al-Qaeda will cease
their killing of innocent men women and children,
when we stop supporting Israel, and "we" leave the Islamic Holy lands, is contrary to the following statements:

Al Qaeda's puported "key ideologist," Lewis
Atiyyatullah, makes some bold statements.

"The balance of power will change; the international system built-up by the West since the Treaty of Westphalia will collapse; and a new system will rise under the leadership of a mighty
Islamic state.

And all of that will occur within a few years-
maybe decades.

Al-Qa'ida does not wage wars similar to other
wars...Al-Qa'ida is completely willing to sustain the war for many years...The war will be won by the side which will be able to bear the pain longer."

Atiyyallah states, Al Qaeda's goals

No major obstacles in the way of the organization to achieving its strategic aims:

Breaking the existing world order
Uprooting Western dominance in the world and bringing the MUSLIM world to its...position as the WORLDS LEADING POWER.

"We hear a lot of blowhards in the media talking about how Al Qaeda just wants the U.S. to leave the Middle East, or some other thing that sounds reasonable, and then we can all be friends. What
a sick joke."

Dough, we know that the these Mulsim degenerates depend on people like you, to further their cause. Remember, Al-Qaeda is counting on you!

We realize that if push came to shove, we would find you hiding in a corner somewhere.

We will call you when it's OK to come out!

Just to add fuel to the fires of this terrorist thing. I read a story today in which the hostages from Iran have identified the new Iranian president as the ring leader of their incarceration. It looks like we're going to Teheran ladies and gentlemen!! Get ready for more blood shed.

Warrior, 'preciate the "all clear" promise.

I based my comment on information I read in "Imperial Hubris." It was regarding OBL.

Now, I am curious about OBL's relationship to Al-Qaeda. It's my impression they are partners, but not necessarily the same thing. Point being that I was talking about OBL's objectives, whereas those you quote are Al-Qaeda's.

Your quotes are new to me, and I appreciate the info, really. I'd also appreciate knowing the source, so I can read more.

Where there's Schmoek, there's fire.

OBL is the devil. There's your answer.

"Bush won, get over it."

Again, stupid people say this.

This is the no-brained conservative response to an argument they cannot win.

LOL at you Bush supporters!

I hate to get personal here, but I'm gonna say what others are thinking.

Trish, you are an idiot Bush puppet that clearly has mental problems. LOL. Well, I guess conservatism is a mental problem.

All this crap will stop the day a raghead goes into that playground full of mothers and children and blows him or her self up and kills a few dozen.

This war is all about keeping that from happening. So far it has worked. When the libs have their way that will change, if not before.

All right, I gotta chime in here.

I don't know the proper etiquette, but these attacks on Trish are really annoying.

I know, I know...she's big girl, and can take care of herself, etc.

If you don't like her posts, don't read them. The rest of us are grown-ups, too, and can judge for ourselves what's being twisted and by whom. I'm hear to learn, think, and grow, and these attacks, while amusing for a while, are useless. She's free (and should be) to post whatever she wants within the rules of this forum. As are we all. Let's show each other that we can rise above pettiness.

Truth,

I agree with 95% of what you say, but, OBL is a coward with money who throws buckets of shit in the air to see where it lands. The United States Government is the devil. They've told so many lies that the truth (sorry) is no longer of any effect. Whether Democrat or Republican, the rich get richer and the rest get f**ked. Those fascists already have another constitution in place. What will ratify it? More tragedy brought on by their determination to run the entire planet and to serve their shameless entitlement. Bin Laden gave them an excuse to control us further, the need for even more excuses allows him the time and space to create the tragedies they eagerly await. And "truth", THAT is the devil . . .

Briankeithhaper said: "Trish, you are an idiot Bush puppet that clearly has mental problems"

So you can't respond to anything I said so you attack me personally. Talk about the party of compassion and tolerance.

Dough said: "these attacks on Trish are really annoying."

Sorry about that dough, that would be my fan club. They like to follow me around and bask in my radiance.

"Let's show each other that we can rise above pettiness."

Oh didn't you know this is the new and improved tolerant and compassionate party. They like to spread the love.

But thanks for trying dough, but I have a feeling it will not help.

When you post stupid comments, you should expect negative posts.
Anyway, Dough, if you don't like my comments, .... don't read them.

And Mac,
Americas arrogance is fueling the rise in terrorist recruitment. Attacks on our soil in the future will be caused by our invasion of Iraq, among other things.

PS..We will never be able to "win" a war on terror. You see, terrorism is really an ideal and cannot be defeated. That's a no-brainer I thought.

Pettiness isn't a characteristic that exists only on one side of the aisle.

*throwing up hands*

It clearly states entering these blogs, to feel free to attack ideas, but not people. People who come to these sites, want to enjoy the posts and have intelligent conversations. The bashing needs to stop on all threads. If you don't agree with what someone says, there's no reason to call them stupid or a bitch, etc. Post your opinions and leave the crap at the door. Anyway, why are you bashing Trish? Because of views? I don't see her personally attacking you.

Trish,

The other day somebody called you bitch. I said before (in the archives but doubt you read) that you should take that as a compliment.

A personal attack is a sign of weakness. Being the victim of one means you are doing something right.

In my opinion, you are Yvonne brainwashed into being a republican.

And since Yvonne has been missing in action for awhile, I'm starting to really wonder if that isn't just my pot-induced paranoia.

truth, Were you high when you wrote this? It shows! Yvonne is sacred man. When in doubt: slam Allen!

remember those pots plants that the light fell on? They made it, I guess I owe you some bucks.

Steve,

Sad, but true. I thought Clinton was so smug and uncaring and evil. Then Bush came along and I think he may have outdone him. Every time I see the man, he looks like he's about to erupt into an evil snicker. I guess it's cause the joke is on us.

I'll take my pay in the other kind of green. :) BTW, got my own plant growing out in the backyard, but don't tell anybody.

And no, I'm not high. My head is still ringing from the wreck.

Yvonne is from the old school and she's shown me respect. I was hoping to get a rise out of her. I've kind of missed her.

I met her the other day. She is very cordial and a total lady. She let me make a bid on some work at her beautiful B&B. (If she had only quit calling me "Eb" . . .)

Briankeithharper, We will never be able to win a war on terrorism? What do you suggest we do. Roll over and let them come here and start blowing up buildings at will?
Also, I haven't read any stupid quotes here today, just a few personal attacks that have no place here. As for everybody just chillin',I thought this was the place to air one's differences.

And Steve,

That green juice that says citric magnesium is not a pleasant laxative.

Just in case you looked in the medicine cabinet at the B&B.

Tell Yvonne hey for me the next time you see her. I think it is too cool that you guys know each other.

Jon,

You're right. This is a place to air differences and discuss topics. Even a good-natured spat is appreciated now and then. Lately, it's like the system has been high-jacked by people even more annoying than me, though.

I like the free expression, though.

A lot of people have said people are cowards because they don't use their real names. I disagree. I think the use of aliases frees people to speak their real minds for a change. I love it. If that means things get ugly, so be it. Everyone has an ugly side. I'd rather see it than wonder why everyone is looking at me strange the next day.

Ain't that the truth!!!

Less you people know about me, the better!

Joe, You've given out more personal info than anybody else here! Is 241-03-9830 still your SS#?

Let's take a different look at the situation and see if we can get over the daily redundancies we see about the war and its causes. Let's talk about the effects if we don't succeed.

Let's expand the issue beyone Iraq and talk about the Muslim involvement in many attacks going back into the '80's.

Now, don't go accusing me of being anti-Muslim though what I may say will sound politically incorrect. There is no doubt that the attacks were perpetrated by Muslims, no matter what their country of origin.

What happens if we pick up and leave? Will we, then, be like Spain and at the mercy of the threat of attack? How about France which already has a Muslim population in the 20% range. What does the future hold for them? Where does the rest of the world make a stand if the most powerful nation in the world cannot hold it's own against terrorist aggressors?

Forget how we got into Iraq or who did or did not do something over the last 25 years of these attacks. The reality is we are there and many Muslims espouse the removal of all infidels, not just those in the Middle East. The removal. These radicals will not likely be content with us being silent or gone from the Middle Easet.

Do we believe we will go back to "normal" if we pick up and leave? How will this be perceived by those who espouse our extermination? There seems to be no apprehension about killing any who oppose them as they have killed thousands of their own people for their own purposes.

I'm with those who don't believe clever retorts advance the conversation here and hope for meaningful exchanges on this very important aspect of the current situation in which we find ourselves.

But shouldn't you really be saying islamic radicals instead of Muslim? The majority of the islam, muslim religion, is peacful. Unfortunatly, those within the faith who choose to carry out these acts give the whole religion a bad name. Just as the KKK professed that the acts they carried out were in the name of Jesus.

Now, there are some new ideas.

Instead of asking what will happen if we leave, what about asking what will it look like when we win? Will it mean an extended presence in a number of countries for possibly generations while the culture of Islam evolves? Is it even possible for Islam to do that? At best, I think it could evolve from radical fundamentalism to a more moderate stand, is that what we're trying to achieve?

What does "winning" mean? Killing all the terrorists? Is that possible in the current situation given the Islamic world's view of us and our activities? How do you identify a terrorist?

Mind you, I'm not trying to say it's hopeless, I'm just trying to get my mind around the questions that will define the situation.

Interesting.

Let me see, steve.....I have to get a mirror to see. I've got it tattoed on my butt in case something happened to me in the military.

Oh....I'm sorry was that too much information there.

Never mind. I'd have to shave to see it anyway.

My butt tatoo is a small pic of Ned Beatty with the caption: "Aintry or Bust"

Good blogs today

Newcomer and Dough:

good thoughs. I was disapointed that Georgey hasn't defined what winnning looks like. I think we now that we have no option BUT to win - but how will we know when we have won?

anyone?

We can't win this "war". It's impossible.

We definately will have attacks on our soil again and this "war" may be the reason why.

And classifying a Muslim as a terrorist simply because he is Muslim is dumb.

We will know we have won when the Iraqis are governing and policing themselves.They are on their way there now.

Jon,
You think we will win the war on terror?
If so, I applaud your shallow view of how the world works.
I wish I could be that ignorant.

Brian Harper said: "You think we will win the war on terror?"

Yes I do. It will not be in days, weeks or years but in generations. It is the children that are receiving shoes, school supplies, candy, beanie babies, medical care, food, water, (even new schools) all donated by caring people and delivered by coalition soldiers. These kids who are going to grow up in freedom and pass that on to their own kids.

Years ago when our own country was dealing with civil rights people back then thought "will racism every be stamped out". No it hasn't been completely but with each generation progress is made.

Do you actually think that these kids want to go back to living under tyranny? Free people have something to live and fight for. People living under oppression and tyranny have only hope, until that is beaten out of them and hate.

This is a project that UNICEF did, go look at the before and after pictures and you tell me which would you prefer? http://www.unicef.org/emerg/iraq/19883_19952.html

Brian Harper said: "this "war" may be the reason why."

Then let me ask you if invading Iraq created more terrorist, how come protecting the muslims in Bosnia didn't make them love us? How come we still had 9/11?

Do you really think that Adu and Mohammad were sitting in their house drinking tea, watching CNN and said "hey you know what, we need to go fight those Americans, why look at those people going to the polls"? Do you really think that if we cut and run, they are going to return to drinking their tea?

In your own words: "If so, I applaud your shallow view of how the world works."

James said: "how will we know when we have won?"

James I thought on this question awhile because really how will we know. I think we will know by the new leaders of the middle east, the generations coming up, starting with Iraq and Afghanistan Those who are raised in freedom and democracy and not raised on hate and fear.

Jon:

"We will know we have won when the Iraqis are governing and policing themselves. They are on their way there now."

some would argue Iraq was governing and policing themselves under Saddam H. - so I don't think that's a good answer.

Do you know Tom Lehrer? He was Mark Russell (the piano-playing political satirist before Mark Russell was born - the original and by far better than anything since. I like this comparison " If you've never heard him, he's very similar to Mark Russell, except that Lehrer's actually funny."

Anyway ........

Anyway - here's one called "Send the Marines"

When someone makes a move
Of which we don't approve,
Who is it that always intervenes?
U.N. and O.A.S.,
They have their place, I guess,
But first - send the Marines!

We'll send them all we've got,
John Wayne and Randolph Scott;
Remember those exciting fighting scenes?
To the shores of Tripoli,
But not to Mississippoli,
What do we do? We send the Marines!

For might makes right,
And till they've seen the light,
They've got to be protected,
All their rights respected,
Till somebody we like can be elected.

Members of the corps
All hate the thought of war;
They'd rather kill them off by peaceful means.
Stop calling it aggression,
Ooh, we hate that expression!
We only want the world to know
That we support the status quo.
They love us everywhere we go,
So when in doubt,
Send the Marines!

... now that was writing about 1965 - here's Tom's introduction to it:

"What with President Johnson practicing escalatio on the Vietnamese, and then the Dominican Crisis on top of that, it has been a nervous year, and people have begun to feel like a Christian Scientist with appendicitis. Fortunately, in times of crisis like this, America always has its number one instrument of diplomacy to fall back on. Here's a song about it:"

and this line:

They've got to be protected,
All their rights respected,
Till somebody we like can be elected.

... calls to question - what if the Iraq's convert to a leader like the new guy in Iran, who at best is not a member of the Bush inner circle, and a worst - well we don't know what he's gonna do yet.

Remember "Chalabi" ? He was this Admistration's Choosen successor to Saddam H. - until the Iraqi's kicked him out - then the admin' stalled the elections until they could find a new guy to their liking, until they finally had to let the Iraqi's vote, at which point Bush started talking that we were there for Freedom and Democracy, which is the current rational de jour.

Trish: Two things:

First, none of this is in disrespect to the troops, as I've stated before, its a hard balance.

Second: I totally agree:

"It will not be in days, weeks or years but in generations. It is the children that are receiving shoes, school supplies, candy, beanie babies, medical care, food, water, (even new schools) all donated by caring people and delivered by coalition soldiers. These kids who are going to grow up in freedom and pass that on to their own kids."

That said - it'd sure be nice to have a real coalition ...... and there's the problem that like 80% of the population in the middle east are "these kids". With the corporate rape and ME ME ME that America's experienced over the past 25 years, providing American Kids with school supplies, medical care, food, water, etc. is a challange.

But of course, I'm unpatriotic.

OK - one more - from my favorite newspaper, about Iran's newly elected government:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0701/p04s01-wome.html

".... the movement that propelled outgoing President Mohamad Khatami to his first landslide victory in 1997 - borne upon promises of democracy, respect for human rights, and more social freedom - is now unrecognizable."

Trish,
I admire your optimism, how ever misplaced it may be.
America's thirst for world domination undoubtedly will cause more terrorist attacks here in the USA. In the end will this war have been worth the death of so many innocent people? I don't think so.
And before you comment on how bad a dictator Saddam was, at least he kept domestic terrorism and overall chaos in relative check.
Abd you talk of a new generation of Iraqis living with freedom and not in fear. LOL!
Even our kids here at home live in a constant state of fear.

Brian Harper wrote:
"America's thirst for world domination undoubtedly will cause more terrorist attacks here in the USA."

Wow, thanks for that insight, I guess it has nothing to do with radical Islamic fundamentalists who loudly proclaim their goal is to destroy us and our way of life.

"And before you comment on how bad a dictator Saddam was, at least he kept domestic terrorism and overall chaos in relative check."

Yes, he did. The same way a "good" parent keeps his children in check by locking them in a closet for years.

You poor, misguided, foolish little man.

Larry Porter,
I feel sad for you that you can't understand the reason we have terrorists that hate us.
I can't go into a full US history lesson due to time constraints, but our policies have harmed people around the world for many, many years. Where you find a terrorist, you will always find an oppressor.

brainkeith,

I wanted to clarify from yesterday, that the attacks on Trish I was referring to weren't yours. There's been some rogue posters on the boards for a few days that have been getting annoying.

There really is no excuse for personal attacks here. No matter what one's point of view, whether one be a "liberal" (I don't think there are any any more, at least not by my definition), a "conservative" (used to mean something, not sure it does any more), or a "radical-right nutso wing-nut chickenhawk spawn-of-satan" (and those folks know who they are), there are several facts that have been proved and are irrefutable.

1. Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11th, 2001.
2. Iraq had no ties to Al Qaeda.
3. Iraq no longer had Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD).
4. George W. always wanted to finish what "Poppy" didn't and his puppeteers in Saudia Arabia wanted that, too. Hell, that's the only reason Karl Rove ran him for President.

I'll reckon with him when he gets to the Pearly Gates (boy, will he be surprised), as I will with you all, whether you be "liberal", "conservative" or a "radical-right nutso wing-nut chickenhawk spawn-of-satan."

Blessings to you all,
The Lord God

"Brian Harper said: "this "war" may be the reason why."

Then let me ask you if invading Iraq created more terrorist, how come protecting the muslims in Bosnia didn't make them love us? How come we still had 9/11?"

Perhaps good ol' BKH can tell all of the readers how come we were attacked on 11Sep. since, at that time we had not invaded Iraq. Ahh....perhaps the religion of peace and love had a bad day.

1. Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11th, 2001.
Who said they did?
Our action against Iraq, pursuant to UN mandates and Senate approval, was just another step in anti-terrorism being carried out worldwide.

2. Iraq had no ties to Al Qaeda.
Iraq always supported Al-Quaeda, with finances and as a safe haven. But what if they didn't? It doesn't matter, Iraq was a threat to the entire Middle East all on it's own.

3. Iraq no longer had Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD).
I guess you must have missed the news from 2003-2004. Chemical weaspon and biological weapon apparatus was found in many places, as were UN banned missiles, which were also classified as WMD.

4. George W. always wanted to finish what "Poppy" didn't and his puppeteers in Saudia Arabia wanted that, too.
Now that's just childish, and you know it.

The chickenhawks and right-wing corporate media done washed some folks' brains real good, ain't it so?

:-)

O'course in some cases it don't take much water. And no soap a-tall.

Blessings to you all,
The Lord God

For all those of you who would dare to question the President of the United States and the new smedia that blithely parrot its every utterance, I say you must be unfamiliar with some very basic truths to which our fearless leaders (most of whom never served his or her country in the military) subscribe:

"Ignorance is Strength"
"Freedom is Slavery"
"Peace is War"

Okay, I made up that last one. But the others have precedent and it would seem that the current administration is heavily invested in the first two.

At this point, I wouldn't be *that* surprised to next hear "Four feet good, two feet bad."

http://studentsfororwell.org/

Hey, Lord God/Not Trashy Trish/Steve:
Your immaturity is showing.

Yeh, tha'ts right, Larry, and besides that, the'yre stoopid, not msart like you and me.

You'res trooly,
George

Hey Larry, I was dumb as hell once, so I forgive you. That poster is not me.