US report says Iraq fuels terror

There's plenty of room for a similar thread. Besides, Bob provided a link I hadn't seen.

I suppose we should have anticipated this:

"However, a White House spokesman said the newspaper report was "not representative of the entire document".

It's always out of context, isn't it? I'd wager the ENTIRE document was far more damning than this fairly obvious assertion. The sad part is that because so many people are dying there is no satisfaction in saying, "I told you so."
 
I certainly agree that this isn't an "I told you so" moment. However, I believe that if this information is true, we would be foolish to ignore it. It tells us at the very least that our current tactics in Iraq are backfiring and we need to come up with a new strategy as we have failed to win the hearts and minds.

Either way, I'll save my judgement until more information is released.
 
My strategy would be as follows:

I would airlift a few hundred metric tons of porn into the entire Mideast. You can't strap a bomb belt on and blow yourself up in a police station when you're busy appreciating a figure like Erica Campbell's.

Remember how we handled the Great Depression? Stuff like the Tennesee Valley Authority, or any of the other government sponsored projects that built infrastructure and gave people a decent job? Let's give Iraqis an incentive to rebuild.

Then, airlift IKEA catalogs all over the region. Show 'em what the fruits of capitalism can get you.

Most, if not all of these are meant purely in jest.
 
Back in '03 I was against the Iraq war. Not because I was smart and could foresee this quagmire we've gotten into (I actually believed a lot of the propaganda), but because I thought a "preemptive" war was a horrible precedent to set. I was against the first Bush's "rescue" of Kuwait -- why on earth was saving a kingdom worth a single drop of American blood?! I thought Geo. H.W. Bush should have been impeached.

I'm tired of hearing people on TV saying that the troops are sacrificing their lives to protect me. The ones sent to Korea were protecting me from what? The ones sent to Viet Nam were protecting me from what? The ones sent to Panama were protecting me from what? The ones sent to Granada were protecting me from what? Kuwait? Iraq?

I'll tell you what -- this is the last war that I'm NOT on a street corner protesting BEFORE it starts.
 
Libertarian said:
Back in '03 I was against the Iraq war. Not because I was smart and could foresee this quagmire we've gotten into (I actually believed a lot of the propaganda), but because I thought a "preemptive" war was a horrible precedent to set. I was against the first Bush's "rescue" of Kuwait -- why on earth was saving a kingdom worth a single drop of American blood?! I thought Geo. H.W. Bush should have been impeached.

I'm tired of hearing people on TV saying that the troops are sacrificing their lives to protect me. The ones sent to Korea were protecting me from what? The ones sent to Viet Nam were protecting me from what? The ones sent to Panama were protecting me from what? The ones sent to Granada were protecting me from what? Kuwait? Iraq?

I'll tell you what -- this is the last war that I'm NOT on a street corner protesting BEFORE it starts.
Click to expand...

I hope that future generations share your pre-war skepticism, Libertarian. War should ALWAYS be the last resort and when that last resort is the only path - the war should be against those who attacked us and not a neighboring country.

You're also right about the rhetoric used to enlist young men and women into the cause. The soldiers in Iraq are no more protecting Americans than I did when I was in Vietnam. Vietnam fell and the Communists didn't show up on the shores of California - Iraq will likely suffer the same fate (hopefully WITHOUT 59,000 of our casualties) and I'm sure we won't see Iraqis attacking Macy's or Disneyworld.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom