Looks like the "Modern Minutemen" are it it again

[fintstone]

Well it looks like the left's "modern minutemen" are at it again. How liberals can side with such murderers is beyond me. Two young soldiers tortured and beheaded....but no outrage there.....nothing like when an US soldier had an Iraqi terrorist wear underwear on his head.

This should be a wake-up call for those who want the US to cut-and-run. The only thing that keeps these murderers from doing the same in the US is opportunity. Better kill them in Iraq before the bastards come here to kill you or someone you love.

[tabs]

We Broke it so now we own it. There is no cutting and running, U'd see Osma and his boys set up camps there in flash if that happened. It would turn into another Somilia.

We are there even if it means 100,000 US dead.

[svandamme]

you fail to mention Fint, that the bear wouldn't be stung by the bees if he didn't stick his face in the Hive...

the soldiers wouldn't have been tortured and killed if they weren't there in the first place

and don't twist my words now :

i realize it is a very tough deal for those who endured the torture, and died for no reason ... i hope they rest in peace now.... it wasn't their fault they were stuck in that sjthole sandbox on a misguided mission , doing the dirty work for the suits who sent em there, the same suits that shrug their shoulders to a statistic and casually sign a "dear misses xxx, sorry for your loss"-letter

[cool_chick]

What the HELL are you talking about Fintstone?

They're "siding" because you haven't heard anything the day we learned the boys were murdered? good grief.

I didn't see any outrage from the right either...guess they're siding with those who took those boys' lives too, huh?

[cool_chick]

And furthermore...

Originally posted by fintstone
Better kill them in Iraq before the bastards come here to kill you or someone you love.

What proof do you have that this would happen and what proof do you have that this won't happen if we stay in Iraq?

[fintstone]

The terrorists were here before (9/11) and they are still trying to come. They have continually said that was their mission...why do you not believe them? Didn't the recent terrorists arrests in Canada and Georgia or the planned gas attack on the NY City subway get reported on CNN?

[lendaddy]

9/11 happened because they knew Bush was going to start a war on terror anyway and they wanted to land the first blow. Had Gore won, they never would have considered attacking us. Geez Fint, keep up.

[jyl]

We've created a disaster in Iraq. Before we invaded, the country was ruled by a bad guy who treated his citizens badly, thumbed his nose at the Bushes, and said defiant things.

But Iraq was not full of Islamic terrorists, suicide bombers, genocide, dead civilians, and suffering US soldiers. Now it is - thank you, USA.

If we pull out now, the country will collapse and be torn apart by Syria, Iran, the Kurds, ethnic factions, etc. It'll be a decades-long civil war - sort of a Somalia, with lots of oil to fight over.

So we're stuck. We're going to continue spending appx $100BN/yr US taxpayer money, 700-800/yr US dead, 3,000-5,000/yr US wounded. Worst of all, >10,000/yr Iraqi civilians killed - I realize some could care less about Iraqi deaths, but if you're going to be "outraged" let's not forget who's doing most of the dying in Iraq.

This will go on until Iraq has a functioning government that is strong enough to keep the peace and hold the country together. When does this happen? Its not in sight. The US government keeps telling us about successful "milestones" - interim Iraqi govt, constitution, various elections, etc etc - but meanwhile the country remains dysfunctional and torn by violence. Bush is now conceding he'll pass this mess on to the next President. As Kennedy gave Vietnam to Johnson who gave it to Nixon, so too W.

(Or, this will go on until whatever momentary government exists in Iraq tells us to get out. Which could happen for short-sighted political reasons, e.g. to win an election. The US government would sigh in relief and sprint for the door.)

[Nathans_Dad]

Originally posted by jyl
But Iraq was not full of Islamic terrorists, suicide bombers, genocide, dead civilians, and suffering US soldiers. Now it is - thank you, USA.

Pre-US Invasion Iraq was full of:

1). Islamic terrorists: Check.
2). Suicide bombers: Check.
3). Genocide: Double Check.
4). Dead civilians: Triple Check.
5). US Soldiers: Ok, you got that one right.

20% correct on that post I guess...

[VW Blonde German Chick Voice]

You get an F!!

[/VW Blonde German Chick Voice]

[cool_chick]

Originally posted by fintstone
The terrorists were here before (9/11) and they are still trying to come. They have continually said that was their mission...why do you not believe them? Didn't the recent terrorists arrests in Canada and Georgia or the planned gas attack on the NY City subway get reported on CNN?

Reread the question:

Re: your statement: Better kill them in Iraq before the bastards come here to kill you or someone you love.


What proof do you have that this would happen and what proof do you have that this won't happen if we stay in Iraq?


In other words, what do you mean "better to kill them in Iraq?" What proof do you have that they would come if we were not killing them in Iraq, and what proof do you have that we won't be killing them here if we're in Iraq?

It's apples/oranges. Iraq has no impact on what happens here....

[nostatic]

Hubris is destroying this country.

[lendaddy]

The Iraq Afghanistan experiment is a nip-it-in-the-bud approach to the looming world war. If it works and the region does embrace capitalism and freedom, the world may avoid the war to end wars (though of course we won't know it).

If it fails we will look at the current costs in life and treasure as drops in the sea by comparison. It would be nice if our country could unite behind the noble goal, but alas....no.

[cool_chick]

Originally posted by lendaddy
The Iraq Afghanistan experiment is a nip-it-in-the-bud approach to the looming world war. If it works and the region does embrace capitalism and freedom, the world may avoid the war to end wars (though of course we won't know it).

If it fails we will look at the current costs in life and treasure as drops in the sea by comparison. It would be nice if our country could unite behind the noble goal, but alas....no.

The country is united behind the noble goal, they are divided by the foolishness and naivety that some actually believe the current "method" would work.

Trying to fight an unconventional enemy, who is all over the world, with a conventional tactic, which is to invade some very small country in one small location in the world, which, BTW, didn't even have much in the way of the enemy in it (terrorists), will never address the global issue.

[sammyg2]

Lendaddy, that post is soooo wrong. Was it sarcasm? If so, please disregard this post.
9/11 was a continuation of a failed attempt to blow up the world trade center.
The terrorists tried to blow it up with a truck loaded with explosives long before bush had anything to do with anything, but the truck only blew up the basement and parking garages and some other minor damage. If I remember correctly, Clinton was in office then. Several years later they came back to finish the job but that time they were successful.

I seem to recall Clinton sending cruise missiles to Afghanistan to try and kill bin laden. The war on terror (and vice versa) was started long before our current president took office.

Stijn, it's easy to criticize a bully when he is acting as your personal bodyguard and protecting you from other bullies.
Let me ask you a direct question:
Do you think it is all right for a leader of a country to use chemical weapons to murder tens of thousands of his own people? We are not talking military here, we are talking about the attempted extermination of a large percentage of an ethnic group.
If not, how do you think the rest of the world should react to that type of action?
It sounds like you think it is OK to use chemical weapons on thousands of innocent women and children, and the rest of the world should just look the other way and ignore it.

This world of full of people who can pretend to take the high road because they know deep down that someone else will have the courage to step up and do what is necessary.
The blood is still on their hands, even if they run and hide.

[lendaddy]

Yes my first post was sarcasm.

[svandamme]

Originally posted by sammyg2
Stijn, it's easy to criticize a bully when he is acting as your personal bodyguard and protecting you from other bullies.
Let me ask you a direct question:
Do you think it is all right for a leader of a country to use chemical weapons to murder tens of thousands of his own people? We are not talking military here, we are talking about the attempted extermination of a large percentage of an ethnic group.
If not, how do you think the rest of the world should react to that type of action?
It sounds like you think it is OK to use chemical weapons on thousands of innocent women and children, and the rest of the world should just look the other way and ignore it.

don't go telling me that that US went to Iraq to Liberate the Iraqi's, if that was the reason , it's 10+ years to late

the Bully went in there for no reason other then selfish ones.

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by svandamme
don't go telling me that that US went to Iraq to Liberate the Iraqi's, if that was the reason , it's 10+ years to late

the Bully went in there for no reason other then selfish ones.

Somebody just watched Syriana

But seriously, you think this war is helping our econmomy or government in any way? Selfish?????to what end?

[fastpat]

Originally posted by fintstone
Well it looks like the left's "modern minutemen" are at it again. How liberals can side with such murderers is beyond me. Two young soldiers tortured and beheaded....but no outrage there.....nothing like when an US soldier had an Iraqi terrorist wear underwear on his head.

This should be a wake-up call for those who want the US to cut-and-run. The only thing that keeps these murderers from doing the same in the US is opportunity. Better kill them in Iraq before the bastards come here to kill you or someone you love.

I'd guess that the US government disemboweled one too many Iraqi's and they got even, though I 'd say they would have to capture and "take care of" many more US government thugs than just two.

As I've stated in this forum, if America was invaded, I'd kill the invader in the most horrendous ways I could devise; and keep on killing him until the day, hour, and minute he left my land.

It would appear the Iraqi Freedom Fighters know what to do and are doing it.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by lendaddy
9/11 happened because they knew Bush was going to start a war on terror anyway and they wanted to land the first blow. Had Gore won, they never would have considered attacking us. Geez Fint, keep up.

No, 9/11/2001 happened because the US government didn't do its' primary job, defending America.

The US government isn't doing its' primary job now either.

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by fastpat
No, 9/11/2001 happened because the US government didn't do its' primary job, defending America.

The US government isn't doing its' primary job now either.

Was 9/11 an invasion of ourr country by your definition?