Jump to content

The War on Terrorism


Recommended Posts

It seems to me that Democrats and others are attempting to subvert the war on terrorism and are confusing the Iraq phase of that war. They are protesting and saying things like:

That is why America supported the President in Afghanistan, WE WERE GOING AFTER TERRORISTS. Many Americans are still wondering, however, why we are in Iraq.

They either see NO connection with Iraq and terrorism or they don't want to see the link in order to bash Bush.

I say what about Sodams payments to the families of suicide terrorists murders? What about terrorists training camps in Iraq? What about Sodoms terrorist acts of genocide against the Kurds?

Did you actually think the War on Terrorism would be limited to Afghanistan? Do you think it is limited to Iraq? Why do you think Libya acquiesced to inspections? Do you think possibly that Colonel Mu'ammar Abu-Minyar al-Qadhafi, Leader of the Revolution, De facto Head of State was possibly thinking he could be next?

Did you think the war on terrorism would be a short little contained exercise in Afghanistan? I think not. President Bush told the nation

"Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there.  It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated."
That statement in no way limits the United States to Afghanistan or to a time table that will fit into the minds of anyone with a short attention span.


Americans are asking:  How will we fight and win this war?  We will direct every resource at our command -- every means of diplomacy, every tool of intelligence, every instrument of law enforcement, every financial influence, and every necessary weapon of war -- to the disruption and to the defeat of the global terror network.

This war will not be like the war against Iraq a decade ago, with a decisive liberation of territory and a swift conclusion.  It will not look like the air war above Kosovo two years ago, where no ground troops were used and not a single American was lost in combat.

Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes.  Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen.  It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success.  We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest.  And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism.  Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.  (Applause.)  From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.

I suppose that like John Kerry many on the left are surprised that President Bush has done exactly what he said he would do. Are they just not used to dealing with honest people?

I think the war in Iraq can be summed up by quotes by President Bush and John Kerry.

I suggested that all the evils of Saddam Hussein alone were not a cause to go to war. - John Kerry

For all who love freedom and peace, the world without Saddam Hussein’s regime is a better and safer place. - George Bush

For those reasons, the coming presidential election may be the most important in the history of our nation. The war on terrorism MUST be won. President Bush will be committed to see it through. I am not convinced John Kerry will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"NONE is so blind as he who WILL NOT see."

Liberals will cry and belly ache...All the way to President Bush's SECOND term!

WAR EAGLE....GOD Bless....Vote Bush...EARLY AND OFTEN (Only in Fl should you vote more than once!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weapons of Mass Destruction-The Bush administration contended that Iraq had enormous stockpiles of chemical and biological agents, illegal missiles and were very close to achieving nuclear capability. If true, this would be a monumental reason to attack Iraq.

We were told that the al-Samoud II missile would travel 800 miles, over 700 miles further than was allowed. It was reported in February of this year that it only goes 108 miles, minus its' heavy guidance system. The Bush administration knew this claim was false before we attacked, but did so anyway.

Iraq had attempted to purchase enriched uranium from Niger, said Bush. It was reported March 6 of this year by the UN's chief nuclear inspector that the documents were forged. The Bush administration knew this claim was false before we attacked, but did so anyway.

We were told that U.S. intelligence indicated that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents. According to top UN inspector Scott Ritter, this was the area of the inspections process that had the most profound impact by destroying Hussein's missile arsenal. The Bush administration knew this claim was false before we attacked, but did so anyway.

Iraq also allegedly tried to import 81mm hardened aluminum tubes for gas centrifuges, used to enrich uranium. David Albright, a physicist and former UN weapons inspector said in October of last year that this purpose was unlikely and was most probably to be used for rockets. The Bush administration knew this claim was false before we attacked, but did so anyway.

We were told of the thousands of tons of chemical weapons they possessed. This allegation didn't take into account weapons destroyed in the first Gulf War or by UNSCOM, according to a report dated June, 2000, by Scott Ritter. He also said that any unaccounted chemical agents would've deteriorated and been useless. The Bush administration knew this claim was false before we attacked, but did so anyway.

Bush said Iraq had a fleet of unmanned aircraft that could be used in missions targeting the US. No such fleet ever existed. The Bush administration knew this claim was false before we attacked, but did so anyway.

During the months of January-March of this year, due to threat of military action, UN weapons inspectors were given free reign over Iraq, including the Presidential palaces where the Bush administration claimed stockpiles of illegal weapons and mobile bio labs were located. Hussein allowed U2 spy planes to fly over Iraq. Inspectors went in with specific coordinates supplied by the US and found nothing. Surveillance photos purporting to show new research buildings at Iraqi nuclear sites. When the U.N. went into the new buildings they found nothing. Within weeks, Bush ordered inspectors out of Iraq and began invasion.

Terrorism-The Bush administration asserted that Iraq had ties not only to Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, but, to 9/11 itself. Iraq was a training ground to the world's terrorists and, indeed, was funding, training and equipping them, the administration said. If true, there would be no doubt as to the magnitude of this threat or the speed with which it must be neutralized.

Condoleeza Rice said there were contacts between al-Qaeda and Iraq that could be documented. Unfortunately, they weren't. Intelligence agencies knew of tentative contacts between Saddam and al-Qaeda in the early '90s, but found no proof of a continuing relationship. In fact, in an audio tape of bin Laden, he called Hussein's Ba'athist Party 'infidels.' According to an official British intelligence report written in January, 2003, "There are no current links between the Iraqi regime and the al-Qaeda network, there has been contact between the two in the past, but any fledgling relationship foundered due to mistrust and incompatible ideologies." The Bush administration knew this claim was false before we attacked, but did so anyway.

According to Bush in Oct., 2002, "Iraq trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases ... Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints." The area in question was in the northern Iraq Kurdish province, separated from Hussein by the US no-fly zone. Had he wanted to aid or eliminate them, his reach did not extend that far. The Bush administration knew this claim was false before we attacked, but did so anyway.

Secretary of State Colin Powell insisted in February, at the UN, that Iraq supported other terrorist groups such as Ansar al-Islam. According to one of its' leaders, Majamuddin Fraraj Ahmad, in an interview with ABCNEWS February 5, 2003, "They are our enemy," adding that his group opposes Saddam Hussein because, unlike Osama bin Laden, Saddam is not a good Muslim. In fact, their leaders say they seek to overthrow Saddam Hussein and his government. The Bush administration knew this claim was false before we attacked, but did so anyway.

Vincent Cannistraro, a former CIA chief of counter-terrrorism, says the Bush administration was putting fierce pressure on the CIA to produce evidence about the Iraq al-Qaeda link that it didn't have. "They are not getting it from the CIA because the CIA, to its credit, is telling it the way they see it, which is what they should be doing, describing the world as it is, not as policy-makers wish it to be, or hope it to be, but as it is." The Bush administration knew this before we attacked, but did so anyway.

Saddam Hussein the brutal dictator-There is no doubt that Hussein was a brutal, oppressive dictator. The case can be made that his sons were even worse. The gassing of Kurds did happen, albeit in 1988 under the watchful eyes of Reagan/Bush/Rumsfeld, who chose to do nothing then. Political dissidents were imprisoned and tortured simply for disagreeing with the regime. Human rights were not high on Hussein's list of things to do. Had human rights violations been the argument given to attack Iraq it might've garnered more support in this country as well as the rest of the world. Maybe not. But, at least it would've been honest and not frittered away every ounce of goodwill the rest of the world poured on us following 9/11. Not working through the UN will be one of the biggest bugaboo's of this war, I believe. I think there will be long-term unrest because any government established will be viewed as an American puppet. I don't think that would've been the case had the UN been involved from the beginning. Ironically, Bush now realizes this and has asked for the UN's assistance. This will end up costing Americans untold billions of dollars (well over 100 as of now) that I think could've been better spent rooting out legitimate terrorist groups elsewhere. As our attention was diverted toward Iraq, Taliban and al Qaeda members have begun re-infesting Afghanistan and are again subsidizing their activities through narcotics trafficking.

In the end, Saddam Hussein is gone, which is a good thing. I just don't think that end justified the means with which the Bush administration got there and shows an incredible amount of poor judgement and lack of responsibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, we have people within our country that are so short-sighted that they are willing to gamble the security of the nation for no other reason than to be petty. 9-11 should have been the wakeup call we needed to get our heads out of the sand and realize we are vulnerable, and the best way to stay ahead of these islamic savages and to keep our country safe is to take the fight to them. We stood by for 8 years (from the first WTC attack) throwing words at the terrorists instead of showing them we actually meant business and we are paying the price for this now.

What we have to ask ourselves now is, do we have the will to continue this fight or do we revert to our actions of the past and sit back and expect the terrorists to suddenly start diplomatic discussions with us. I'll tell you right now, the latter isn't going to happen. These murdering savages want us all dead, and this started well before the war began. They are not going to stop, and we have to maintain the will to keep them on the defensive.

Since 9-11, we have seen the country split into two distinct groups; one group has shown itself willing to stand up and fight to defend the country while the other has decided to stick their collective heads further into the sand in the hopes that the terrorists will forget about us and go back to attacking the Israelis. It's not going to happen, we are in this for the long haul and it is time for us to come together, grow a pair, and go out and destroy this enemy before they get us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome back Al, defender of all things democrat and liberal and proponent of all thing anti Bush. I thought when I started this thread that it just might be the one to rescue you from the deep-seated depression of Howie Dean’s demise. Welcome back Al!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

al is consistent, if not anything else.

i was at a dinner party last night w/ a small group (2 other couples) and before the evening ended, the bush-bashing started...primarily focused on how pitiful his press conference was the other evening. unfortunately i missed the entire thing (was teaching), and couldn't really say much one way of the other.

what struck me about these people was their incredulity (incredulousness?) over how anyone could vote for bush. being a combination of things (a southerner, a guest, a gentleman, etc.), i kept pretty quiet.

one of the guys then stated that he couldn't see voting for kerry either. he was so boring & uninspiring...all agreed! and struck up the 'lesser of 2 evils' stance.

take note: their dislike of both men, as stated last night, was in their communication abilities and/or lack of charisma.

style over substance.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

al is consistent, if not anything else.

The truth needs not waver, otherwise my posts would read like this:

Well, it doesn't matter if they DID find WMD's, the reason for not attacking them is because Iraq doesn't have ties to al Qaeda.

(two weeks later)

Well, it doesn't matter if Iraq DOES have ties to al Qaeda, the reason for not attacking them is because they weren't trying to get uranium from Niger.

(two weeks later)

Well, it doesn't matter if they DID get the uranium, the reason for not attacking Iraq is because they had nothing to do with 9/11.

(two weeks later)

Well, it doesn't matter if Iraq WAS involved with 9/11, the reason for not attacking them is because they aren't able to attack the US with UAV's.

(two weeks later)

Well, it doesn't matter if Iraq DOES have UAV's capable of attacking the US, the reason for not attacking Iraq is because they don't have WMD's!!!

Cycle through this post 50 times and you'll get an idea of the level of denial in which some are willing to reside when it comes to justifying the attack on Iraq!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Create New...