EDITORS NOTE, re: "Don't like the way Bush is conducting the War on Terror? Address the issues with him."

We have repeatedly tried to contact the President through the "public forums" he has held, however because the N-R cannot be certified as a total friendly and absolute loyalist to this adminstration, we have never been given clearance to attend any of these "town meetings".

It's a Rove thing, ya know.

Ed:

On 9/11 more than 2000 innocent US citizens and foreign visitors were killed in less than an hour.
Probably more than a 100 to 1000 times that number have been and will be affected physically and or emotionally forever.

We cannot stomach the sacrifice of 2000 people over several years to protect ourselves and others. What a selfish bunch of self-centered hiprocrits we are!

I wonder if the news media spent 15% of their total news coverage on the positives in IRAQ if the american people would feel the same! The early NASA program was deriled! Look what great spinoff has occured from the effort!

Those citizens who want to "keep their head in the sand" and think this terror was going to go away are just plain mistaken.

So far as Iraq is concerned, it is ashame that we want to blame President Bush because the current intelligence from all the intelligence agencies of the WORLD at that time were either wrong or their intelligence simply has not been confirmed! So far as I know the WORLD community knows the weapons existed at one time. The primary question is "Where did they go?" Certainly, it would be great if they have been destroyed! To me it is kinda like IRAN has no enrichment program going on. HA! HA!

Unfortunately, France, Russia, Germany (I think) and othes were getting rich from Saddam's kickback program and therefore their opposition and unhelpfulness in the Iraq situation is compromised to the point of being unethical and certainly shameful. I think they should be procuted for war crimes.

The Terrorist have now been fully exposed in the world. There mission is convoluted and frankly, to me unclear other than just pure hatred. Will they ever be defeated? I do not know, but we, the world, are all better off because we are now aware and are fighting back.

Iran and North Korea are two unstable countries preparing to inflict additional damage. Just listen to the american public if North Korea is able to release, sell or otherwise get a dirty bomb or worse released. Stay Tuned!

JDR,

In what capacity do you work for the News-Record? How did you ask Rove for credentials as a member of the media?

Shippy,

You are clouding the issue with the 9/11 reference, as so many in the Bush administration did before the declaration of war. And I think that with the Libby indictment, we are now getting a clearer picture of what many people have believed all along -- that the administration had a plan to invade Iraq, and 9/11 became a convenient excuse.

How many times does it have to be proven that Iraq was uninvolved in the 9/11 attacks before you will stop using that as a justification? My life was changed on that day, with the loss of a relative in the World Trade Center. And every time I hear that somehow the war in Iraq is linked to that day, it infuriates and insults me.

You wrote:
"We cannot stomach the sacrifice of 2000 people over several years to protect ourselves and others. What a selfish bunch of self-centered hiprocrits we are!"
The selfish and self-centered are the ones who took us into this war to further their own interests using misleading information, unsubstantiated reasoning, and exploitative patriotism to justify it. I can stomach the loss of 2000 or 20,000 or 200,000 if it is for our safety and security. But this war is about neither. We took on an impotent enemy for reasons that I cannot fully comprehend. The optimist in me can't believe it was just for oil or revenge over the assassination plot of Bush I. But the realist in me can see that it isn't about our protection either. If anything, we are less safe now than ever before.

My goodness, people - lighten up.

The post was a JOKE - but based on a serious situation.

Let me spell it out to you:

The President holds "town meetings" that are promoted as "public forums" but entry is restricted to people who can be verified as ones who will cheer and offer an illusion of total support.

===

Call me stupid but I believe honest purposeful discussion is a good thing - a good thing missing in all the name calling and nasty politics.

===

Certainly many US citizens and foreign visitors were killed in less than an hour, and more than a 100 to 1000 times that number affected.

The question is - did we do into Iraq with the intent of kicking the Taliban's butt or were there alternative motivations. We'll never agree, so let's not even have that discussion.

I personally weep for the sacrifices being made by many American's. The question is are we using their sacrifice wisely or have we squandered a great many lives?

I agree the news media spends to much time being negative, and there is real positive stuff happening. You should agree not everything going on is a bed of tulips and at least some of it is genuinely bad policy and bad warring.

I am NOT "keeping my head in the sand", and am very consistant: we're in for a long haul - which is why we need to be a little SMART about it.

You wanna know why there is an Anti-War movement? It's simple - the President has not done a good job focusing on the problem. If we were truely at war, profiteering (Halliburton) would be outlawed, and we'd be ask to do more than purchase duct-tape and swallow the high price of fuel. He and his cronies have 1/2 the country bush-wacked into calling the other half un-patriotic. A divisive strategy, not uniting us against a clear common threat. Pisses me off (obviously).

The intelligence of the world was NOT universal, even discounting for the obvious exploitation - read France and Germany, then add Halliburton - read up before you make such silly statements.

The primary question IS Where did the WMD's go? - but we're ruining our economy (a core Al Qaida strategy, btw) and buring both time and international friendships by fooling ourselves about Iraq.

Can we leave Iraq? Hell no - not now. We screwed it up when we disbanded the Baath parth and all the existing structures in the country. Now we're having trouble rebuilding it all. What a surprise. No one has a solution - not even the GW Cronie Band - why do you think they are so quiet about it - except for an occassional and frankly rare rally the troop speech?

Glad you mentioned Iran and North Korea - I totally agree - Stay Tuned.

James and Howie, thank you for your well-written comments. I think the front page of every newspaper in the USA should contain an article on the war, every day. Today I read on the internet that 6 more soldiers were killed.

I strongly agree that to bring 9/11 into a discussion of the war in Iraq is an insult to our intelligence. Country singers have made a fortune exploiting this event..."Have you forgotten???" It mentions Bin Laden. Why did we not attack Saudi Arabia, home of the majority of terrorists and Bin Laden. Makes more sense than Iraq. I wonder if we will ever know the REAL reason for the attack on Iraq. I'll bet Karl Rove knows.

Howie, James and Carol, Your posts and thoughts more accurately describe the situation we are now in than does Ed's or shippy's. I think Ed's post is not satirical nor a joke and I think shippy's post proves there are still some people who will defend Bush no matter how damning the evidence.

James, All the evidence thus far indicates there were NO WMD that could have been a threat to the US. Primitive, short range WMD were found; ones Saadam used on his own people. I have read he didn't even have the capability to produce long range WMD and had not for over ten years.

You have hit the proverbial nail on the head with regard to our financial demise being an al qaida objective. That is the reason NY was their target. Now all they have to do is keep us embroiled in putting out fires in Iraq (a lot that we started) to totally bankrupt us. With China owning 75% of our debt now, should they decide we are too much of a risk to keep bankrolling us, we are totally screwed. Objective met!

In Sun Tzu's book "The Art of War" he says it is imperative to know your enemy if you are to be victorious in defeating them. It is quite apparent Bush (Rove) did not know Bin Laden before we went to war. And Bush certainly didn't know al qiada before we entered Iraq.

We have meddled in the ME without a lot of thought as to how to extricate ourselves. As a result we are stuck in a situation that can suck us dry, financially and emotionally. Call me a pessimist if you will. I prefer to think of myself as a realist.

Carol, We did not attack Saudi Arabia because the Bush family has long been in bed with the powers in that country. And despite Howie's optimism, we did not need to take control of that country to get at their oil supply (because of the close "family ties"). Iraq was another story. Even the wars within Iraq prior to our invasion has been about location of the oil wells and who has control in that area imo.

And I bet you are right about Rove. He is the mastermind of the Bush administration.

This president doesn't need dead people to demonize him. He's done that job well by himself....probably the only job he HAS done well.

Yvonne---Cutawad!!! You promised.

This should be on the front page of every newspaper.

From the AP today:

Those deaths raised the death toll for October to more than 90, the highest monthly total since January when 107 American service members died. The latest deaths brought to 2,025 the number of U.S. service members who have died since the Iraq war began in March 2003.

The media are obsessed with death as it sells. That's one reason they went orgasmic when the death toll reached 2K (as they were when it reached 1K). The other reason is that they can use this to advance their anti-Bush political agenda.

A wonderful example of this obsession is the 10,000 reported dead in New Orleans in the early days of Katrina.

I have no problem with the N&R running stories of some of those who died and their families. We do need to remember they were real people with families, hopes, and dreams. I do however agree with the writer that this should not be done only when a certain number is met. CBS News does this nightly in their "Fallen Heros" segment and I commend them for it.

Maybe the media could also run stories on those who have come back and are proud of their efforts in this war. They could describe the positive things they have done for the people of Iraq. (Yeah I know, when hell freezes over). I know these people are out there as I have spoken with several of them personally.

Carol I still never get a response when I ask you about a solution, just more complaints. What would you do with this war if you were president? Don't go into how you would have never gotten into it in the first place as the fact is we are there. If elected today what would you do? Useful solutions please....

2000 dead over 2 and a half years of war.

Is that supposed to be shocking?

While we didn't lose but around half that number in a week in New Orleans, there were over 100,000 dead in a day during the Tsunami, and around that number dead following the earthquake in Pakistan.

At least the 2000 died for a cause, not the result of a natural disaster.

Dying of a cause is more noble than what most of us will die from.

I support the war, I support the soldiers, and I support the President.

You can disagree with that. That's your right. I won't demonize you for having a different opinion. Nor will I infer that you are unintelligent.

Dan,

You make a good point. I've spoken to several soldiers who have returned from Iraq. 100% of them report the positive things they've done. 100% of them feel we are winning and that we are doing the right thing.

These aren't people that I know. Just people who I've had the chance to meet at church, at college campuses.

They aren't paid lecturers. They are people.

It is very telling that these folks aren't on the news. If the media care so much about these soldiers, why are they repressing their positive stories?

That's why the whole thing stinks to high heaven.

I'm reading a bit between the lines - but here's my take after talking with .

It [apparently] really depends on where you were stationed. A co-worker that recently came back was in a primarily Kurdish region, and the folks there were helpful, for example pointing out to his unit Arabs that look to his untrained eye like everyone else, but the Kurds knew them to be outsiders and trouble makers.

Many US soldiers are isolated - living in the Green Zone - with no real contact other than raids and patrols. One of the key problems is the understaffed military has to move around - little contact is repeated so friendships and personal connections are hard to establish.

N-R: Are you listening? Your readers what to see some of the good stuff too.

If I were president today, I would be looking for ways to leave Iraq as soon as possible. As you said, I would never have been there in the first place. I and many others knew from the beginning that once we invaded, there was no way out.

Since we have learned that Iraq was no threat to us and have made it a fight for Iraqi freedom, we need to realize that the USA's idea of democracy is not embraced by most Middle East countries. Many don't believe in separation of church and state. Many want their religious sect in power and will kill whoever gets in their way. We have not been welcomed with open arms as Bush led us to believe would happen. They want us out.

If Canada decided that the USA had WMD, which we do, would we welcome their invasion? If we fought to remove them, would we be insurgents or freedom fighters.

The arrogance of George Bush is embarrassing to me. The only "mistake" he has acknowledged was New Orleans. I don't think he made a mistake there, I think that everyone involved was surprised at the severity of the storm and the breach in the levee was Mother Nature at her worst. See, I don't blame Bush for everything. Just the war and gas prices.

"If Canada decided that the USA had WMD, which we do, would we welcome their invasion? If we fought to remove them, would we be insurgents or freedom fighters."

Ok now that I'm finished laughing about Canada.
So Canada invades us, we have a right to defend ourselves against their military, even the Mounties. I'm sure some of these "insurgents" feel justified in fighting our military, that I can understand.

But while we are fighting the Canadians, we also decide to attack our own citizens by blowing up markets and churches and creating chaos. Is that what "freedom fighters" do? That's what the "insurgents" (I call them terrorists) do.

What does "looking for ways to leave Iraq as soon as possible" mean? Details please?

On another note: Canada isn't invading us, Mexico is, just not militarily.

I'm not really defending Carol's post, but it is a fact that yesterday's Freedom Fighters are the daddy's of today's insurgents.

Remember we sold weapons to our enemy Iran (in hoped exchange for Western hostages) while also supporting their enemy Iraq (ignoring the Iraqi use of chemical weapons).

Since Iran was such a threat, the US, Britain, France, Germany, and the USSR all provided military support and even components of Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction program. 843 United States companies have been listed as being involved in arming of Iraq, with 70 shipments of microorganisms (including anthrax bacillus).

Ain't nothing simple is there?

Back to Iran: Great profits came to the US from sale of weapons to a desperate Iran - and that cash went to covertly fund the Contra's in Central America (damn commies down there). When the congress found out "we" were involved in the overthrow of duly-elected governments, albeit socialist, they tried to stop the funding.

To keep pressure on the commies, Nancy Reagan's husband (not him, but his appointees) sold illegal drugs (crack cocain in California) to gain replacement cash to buy weapons in support of these commie-haters (ok - that is only highly documented and not "proven" *) ...

Then of course there is most famous Freedom fighter of all: the wealthy Saudi named Osama bin Laden, who was a prominent mujahideen organizer and financier who funneled money, arms, and Muslim fighters from around the world into Afghanistan, with the assistance and support of the American, Pakistani, and Saudi governments - all to beat back the Soviet Invaders.

The rest of the story we all know.

===

*In August 1996, San Jose Mercury News reporter Gary Webb published a series titled Dark Alliance, linking the origins of crack cocaine in California to the contras. His controversial and highly damaging revelations were disputed at the time; subsequent revelations largely confirmed his findings. Freedom of Information Act inquiries by the National Security Archive and other investigators unearthed a number of documents showing that White House officials, including Oliver North, knew about and supported using money raised via drug trafficking to fund the contras, yet a similar number of sources hold that to be false.

PS: Thanks to Wikipedia and a long lunch for the opportunity to refresh my memory!