Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,843 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I see that our efforts in Iraq are finally paying off. At the nominal cost of half a trillion dollars and who knows how many American casualties,the AP has reported in the newspaper yesterday that the Iraqi's are paying $.05 a gallon for gasolene. If we stay another 5 or so years it probably will be FREE.(for them) And of course we helped them have the right to vote. Have we helped solve the terrorism problem throughout the world?? Have we made American citizens safer?? Well-- I !!!! Hummmmm ???? ----------
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
143,595 Posts
So...What Are You trying To Say?

Well, we have killed about 30 thousand Muslim Fundamentalists who hated us enough to want innocent Americans dead just because we're Americans & not Muslims. We busted up their training camps and we turned then into fleshy paste. I happen to like them much better dead than alive.
They want us dead just because we don't read the Koran & flop down on the ground toward Mecca 4 times a day. That's our big crime in life...we don't dig Mohammed and we need to die because of that.
There is no way of ever knowing how many of them would have tried to come here to turn the U.S. into another Israel where car bombs are going off on every street corner & in every restaurant. The dumb, brain dead morons keep flooding into Iraq from neighboring countries to take their crack at killing our American soldiers & we are doing a pretty damn decent job of thinning out their ranks & making them very dead.
At this point in time we have still lost more Americans in 9/11 than in our war on Iraq. I sure don't want see American soldiers die but, if I were younger I would be over there right now.
I personally would volunteer.
And don't think (for one minute) that we have not had a profound impact on those countries psychologically...even though they are keeping a good "poker face" about it all. Next time we're not going to get permission from the United Nations before we go in either.
Trust me they KNOW that if they attack the United States that we are going to turn their Home Turf into a Garbage Dump Toxic Wasteland.
They don't want us to know that they know it but, they know it.
Personally (at this point in time) I think we should nuke about 50 mosques over there right now. That's just my opinion though.
We can't even measure the number of dollars that 9/11 cost this country in lost revenue & a couple more of those would have thrown the United States into an Economic & Total Panic Tailspin. A Trillion dollars would be "pocket change" compared to what two more major terror attackes inside the U.S. would cost this country. So...is everything going absolutely Ginger Peachy over in Iraq???...No, it isn't.
But, if we had just gone in right away & started blowing things up & killing people instead of playing damn footsie with the United Nations for 8 months ~ which DID give the radicals more than enough time to move all of those munitions & explosives into Iran & Syria & who knows where else...we would have been out there by now.
Maybe "if and when" we have another domestic terror attack in the United States we should just let you and John Kerry handle it.

So...What would you have done differently? I'm curious.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,826 Posts
Well said, QK! :hand56:

We have taken on a pretty large job...draining the swamp of wahabist islamic fundamentalism won't be quick or easy, but it is absolutely essential for a couple of reasons:

As you stated, imposing sharia (islamic law) on the world is their stated goal...think Taliban in your neighborhood.

The Middle East and their supply of oil is (at this time) critical to the economy of the entire world, not just the USA...the rest of the planet may whine about "American Imperialism", but I'll bet that they are quietly pleased to see us do the heavy lifting to secure the world's oil supply...and make no mistake; the islamists would gladly cut off the oil supply to cripple the worlds economy and further their goals.

Afghanistan and Iraq are only the opening acts in this struggle....
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
143,595 Posts
The Price Of Gas

Who cares what they are paying for a gallon of gas in Iraq? What does that hafta do with anything? They are paying $8.00 a gallon for gas in Europe & they are not involved in Iraq.
I also sure don't want to downplay the loss of American life. I sure don't want to see piles of American soldiers die but, we have lost more than 2,000 troops in an hour in War II & there were not a whole lot of whining crybaby Ex Love Child Hippie Mothers moaning all over the country about it.
My Mother In Law had six (count em) Six of her brothers all serving at the same time and the family at home was worried absolutely sick about it but, they kept their mouths shut. My Dad & his four Brothers fought & his Sister was a War Nurse.
Lets not get too used to fighting wars where nobody ever gets hurt or killed.
China WILL be able to send NUKES over here in two years. For right now...They are are HAPPY to keep taking our Cash American Dollars for that cheap garbage they make over there (that we can't seem to get enough of) BUT, they ABSOLUTELY hate us too!
What are we going do about that?
Nothing?
Maybe we need another Clintonesque type president in the White House to "look the other way" and ignore everything for 8 more years. :mad:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
Right on !!!! I can just about guarantee you that with 20-25 years , China will not only 'own' us but the rest of the world will be bowing down to them also. They have been planning basically that for years and it is approaching exponantialy !!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
25,537 Posts
QKShooter said:
Trust me they KNOW that if they attack the United States that we are going to turn their Home Turf into a Garbage Dump Toxic Wasteland.
In my opinion (and they do frequently get me in trouble) that IS the problem....... They DON'T care!! As long as they think they'll be going to a better place we can't win by "playing nice". And most of us are not as willing to die as they are (I'm not), if we were we'd be "winning".

QKShooter said:
So...What would you have done differently? I'm curious.
Now there is the $64,000 question! My only thought would have not gone into Iraq (at this time), but now it's too late. If we can't finish this one in a satifactory way we might as well hunker down and prepare for the storm.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,099 Posts
No nukes...

puts too much radioactive trash in the atmoshpere...

If we just carpet bomb them with with fuel/air bombs set to go off at about 500 feet above ground and every mile or so, it would do the same thing without endangering the whole world.

See ? Where there is a "will" there is a way... :eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,843 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
"What would you(I) have done differently?" Since I am not privy to the same daily intel briefings that the President is, that is hard for me to say---BUT---if you want another comment from me then here it is.>>> We should (should have) put some of our military on our borders to take care of the problem that the ordinary civilians(milita) are trying to take care of down in Texas right now. BTW, I applaud them and their efforts. The reserves and the National Guard troops that are leaving their families,some of them for the third time, to go to Afganastan and Iraq, should be used as they were ment to be used,to protect the homeland. I feel that means here at home. Bring them home. Put them on our boarders with orders to shoot anybody,reguardless of sex or age,that attempts to illegally cross the boarder. Is it possible to secure our boarders?Sure it is! ----------Remember the detailed picture,that the President showed us(me AND you)of the 18 wheeler that was a "mobile chemical lab". Remember the president telling the American people how Saddam HAD(not might have,not could have,not that we suspect him of having)weapons of mass destruction. He did not tell us that we were going to invade Iraq to secure "the worlds oil supply". Where are those weapons? Don't you think that if they had ever,at any time, been there(in Iraq)that we would have come up with some(any) trace of them?? I know what some of you will say. They were their but he moved them prior to our invasion. I don't want any President to come on national TV and lie to my face. If he says"Iraq has weapons of mass destruction". Or if he says"I did not have sex with that woman." If the President does not have all the facts then he should hold his comments until such a time as he does. I know what your thinking. President Bush had been briefed that Iraq had WMD. That's true,but he is the"captain of the ship". He is the person responsible. If he knew and lied,it's his fault.If he did not take the time to find out all the facts,it's his fault. Take your pick. If I was in his shoes and the intel community told me these things as facts and I inturn told the American people on national TV,when I found out about it----HEADS WOULD ROLL. How many people have you heard lost their job or went to jail for feeding the President false intel ?? I feel that the President told the intel community what he wanted to hear and they told him just that. My main concern is that we will NEVER be able to bring out soldiers and sailors home. I love my country. I hate terrorists. I want my country to just make them disappear. Don't tell me how,where,or how many. I want my country to take care of it's own people,not the people in other countries. Is a country a direct threat to America? If so lets take care of the problem. If another country is lead by a brutal dictator that routinely kills his own people, too bad.Their,see,I'm not insensative.I JUST DON'T CARE !------------
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
20,045 Posts
+1, QKShooter.

There was a time that everyone, even the Democratic opposition, agreed that Sadam had WMDs and I believe he either did and got rid of them or the stuff is still buried in that sandpit (armpit) of a country. He buried a load of fighters out in the desert, why would he not also bury that type of weapon? I don't think Bush lied, he has taken it on the chin becuase we haven't found it yet.

I completely agree with comments on Bush not protecting our borders, and I have a REAL problem with that, but he is doing the right thing in Iraq and Afghanistan right now, IMHO. His daddy pulled out too fast and people have never let him live it down. Now we have someone that is committed to stay there until the job is done and the Democrats want him to pull the troops out so they can then say he was wrong all along. The problem with fighting a war these days is there is too much of it on TV. We have to hear of every individual that dies in this war. The media and the Democrats are trying to personalize the war to garner opposition. And it appears to be working on people that don't understand the importance of the commitment to stay until we can leave without the old factions (or new ones) taking over again.

No more attacks in the US illustrates the value of the war and is going a long way to keep us safe over here. Wait until a Democrat gets into office and pulls troops out of Iraq and it starts all over again. Then let's revisit this topic.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
749 Posts
Whether or not the WMDs were there, whether or not Iraq was an immediate threat, whether or not things are going the way we wanted them to. This war was necessary as Iraq was a terrorist resort!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,563 Posts
It's always easy to Monday Morning Quarterback. Put yourself in Pres. Bush's place. You have just had 3000 people murdered on our own soil by terrorists. Everyone in the US and international intelligence community plus lots of other people know that Iraq has Nuclear, Chemical and Biological weapons unaccounted for since the last war. Iraq is ruled by a ruthless dictator and the country sits between two of the biggest state supporters of terrorism in the Middle East. The Oil For Food program is a sham allowing Saddam to purchase whatever he wants. The Afganistan effort is going very well. Now do you wait until a [radioactive mushroom cloud / genetically engineered plague / subway filled with nerve gas] terrorist attack occurs, or do you act to remove one of a long list of terrorist supporting governments?

And Lebanon took back their freedom and Kaddaffi gave up his WMD without us even flying a bomber over either country.

My complaint is still the open borders. Pull the troops out of Europe, Korea, etc. Keep the bases overseas open as staging areas. Put our troops on the borders and close them. If someone is caught trying to enter illegally, put them on a slow freighter to the farthest southern point of Mexico. If they aren't Mexican, stuff them in Gitmo until we can confirm they are not terrorists, then ship them back by freighter. If an illegal is found in this country, seize their assets and offset the cost of repatriating them to their home country. If an employer hires an illegal to work for them, fine them the amount it would cost them to hire an American citizen for that calendar year.

Ok, I'll get down off the soapbox now...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
20,045 Posts
Yeah, I have to agree with you, AutoFan, enough is enough on the border issue. The illegals should be returned as far away as we can get them so it is an ordeal to get back. And I absolutely agree that those that employee them should face some stiff fines and penalties. That's the only way we can stem the tide without building a strong wall; don't give them jobs....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,843 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
So,would it be wrong on my part to assume that you gentlemen are in favor of invaiding North Korea ?? How about Iran ?? These two fit the bill---both terriorist hideouts and they have the very real possibility of having WMD. What say ye ??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,826 Posts
RSSZ said:
So,would it be wrong on my part to assume that you gentlemen are in favor of invaiding North Korea ??
Yes, it would be. (Speaking only for myself, of course)
RSSZ said:
How about Iran??
Iran with nuclear weapons is more of a threat. I believe that they have threatened to nuke Isreal the minute they have the means to do it. I don't think for 1 minute that Isreal is going to stand by and let them do it, however. Will it be necessary to "invade" Iran after their nuke capability has been diminished? I can't say. It will get very ugly very fast if general war breaks out in the region, and we will have to get involved to secure the oil supplies...particularly in the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic choke-point for worldwide oil delivery.
Or...can we just bring all the troops home from Iraq, pretend 9/11 never happened (or at least try to forget and forgive), get back to life as it was before all the unpleasantness, and be ready to accept that an occaisonal attack on the scale of 9/11 is just going to happen, and that's the way it has to be?
I think that the reality of the world we live in is this: the nuclear genie can't be stuffed back in the bottle....Pandora's box has been opened and we can't close it. And it's going to get uglier in the future. Do we take steps now to secure our future, or get back to chasing interns and letting the (sorry 'bout this, Chris :biggrin: ) U.N. handle the situation?
In my opinion, .05 cent gasoline in Iraq isn't where your attention should be focused, RSSZ.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,483 Posts
letting the (sorry 'bout this, Chris ) U.N. handle the situation?
Ouch - recoils under the savage assault on senses!!

Brushes self off - breaths deep ...

OK TA - I survived that LOL! :biggrin: Not sure how much more I can take tho !!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
20,045 Posts
RSSZ said:
So,would it be wrong on my part to assume that you gentlemen are in favor of invaiding North Korea ?? How about Iran ?? These two fit the bill---both terriorist hideouts and they have the very real possibility of having WMD. What say ye ??
I could also support it once we get Iraq squared away, but I think that the Iranians are probably watching very closely what we do in Iraq and Afghanistan right now. If all the hand wringers and "anti war" protestors (Bush haters) keep it up it will be more likely that countries like Iran and N. Korea will crank up the rhetoric and become to become a serious problem in the future.

Cindy Sheehan, who says she "supports the troops, but not the war", in a recent CBS interview (which CBS has not run) referred to the insurgents (terrorists) in Iraq as "freedom fighters". Her group has recently taken up protesting in front of Walter Reed Army Medical Center where many of our wounded troops are recovering. They do not want success in Iraq. They want this war to be a failure so the Democrats will have a chance at the White House next election. As I said before, I think Bush did the right thing in going into Iraq. I think that they did, in fact, have WMDs (and honestly so do many of the Democrats that are now attacking him for not finding them) and that this war will go a long way in reducing terrorism and I won't blast him for his efforts in that effort. The nickel per gallon gas story has no relevance on whether we should have gone to war with them...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,843 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Team American, You seem to have tied the terrible incident on 9/11 with the invasion of Iraq. I feel that ,HELL YEAH,we should have taken our "pound of flesh" after 9/11---- BUT---- not after we told them that we was coming and waiting 6-8 weeks for them to prepare for our attack. Also I think that it would have been very important to attack/invade the right countries. Afganistan--HELL YES ! But what about Saudi Arabia ??? That's where the 9/11 scumbags came from(and were probably trained there). Instead,our President invited the leaders of Saudi Arabia to Crawford Tex. Then held their hand,kissed them on the cheek,and said what fine people/leaders they were. On camera,to the American people. This gave me a sick feeling. We need to "tell it like it is".Some of our "friends and allies"(?) are helping/funding the POS that are killing Americans. And it's not just Saudi Arabia. Those countries are (IMO) the ones that we need to "take care of". In the mean time I wish that our leaders would refrain from making comments that are ment to scare and/or intimedate the BG's. (or make the American people feel good)"We will find you. We are coming to get you. We will not forget." These comments don't work on the likes of the people that are targeting American civilians. We simply just need to go to where thay are hiding,living,being trained,OR being financed and take care of the(our) problem. By any and all means available. I would hope that you gentlemen realize that I'm all for kickin' some A$$----lets just make sure that it's the RIGHT A$$.-----------
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,826 Posts
RSSZ said:
I would hope that you gentlemen realize that I'm all for kickin' some A$$----lets just make sure that it's the RIGHT A$$.-----------
And that is the process that we have only just begun. If radical, fundamental Islam (Wahabism) is the real problem, and I believe it is, then Saudi Arabia is definitely on the "list of things to do". Maintaining the flow of oil to the world, however, prevents us from merely nuking the entire region from orbit :wink:

Saddam has been giving aid and comfort to Al Quaida types for a long time, and please remember that the delays before going into Iraq were all due to footdragging at the U.N. And, I believe that the vote in Congress authorizing the invasion was pretty much unanimous based on the available information...the WMD stuff was there at one time...where did it go is the $100 question.

9/11 was the wake-up call that finally got the ball rolling...and it still has a long way to roll.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,563 Posts
Iran will act based on its perception of our resolve and magnitude of response. Think of the Iranian Hostage Crisis. It dragged on and on, because the Iranian Revolutionary Government thought (rightly so) that the US (in the form of President Carter) would not react quickly or strongly to their actions. As soon as President Reagan comes into office, the hostages are released, because of their perception of what the US would do.

Now North Korea is something else. Perhaps a public policy that any WMD attack on US forces or allies will result in a counter attack on the GOVERNMENT of North Korea using any and all "special weapons" in our arsenal. That or a covert tac nuke on N. Korea's nuke bomb facilities using a stealth bomber, with a public statement the next day to the effect of "we told you those things are dangerous"...

I think Teddy Roosevelt had it right - "Speak softly and carry a big stick".
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top