The president admits, finally, that this is a war of ideas

[Rodeo]

It was not too long ago that those of us who argued that it was necessary to understand the terrorists' motivations were branded as appeasers and weaklings. You literally could not bring the subject up without being shouted down by the administration and its defenders.

Finally, today, five years after 9/11, the president acknowledged that military might is not enough to win this war -- a war that will profoundly affect not only our lives but the lives of our children and grandchildren.

Today the president acknowledged that this is a war of ideas, and that in order to prevail we must stop people from becoming terrorists.

Better late than never.

Good on you, Mr. President. I hope that you follow up.

[techweenie]

Meantime... we have over 150,000 Americans standing on the soil of Iraq and Afghanistan, where their presence creates terrorists.

Maybe Dubya had to wait until Rummy wasn't around to say so.

Don't get me wrong -- it's admirable that somebody in the administration shows evidence of beginning to get it.

[pwd72s]

Yep! They have the idea that they want to kill all westerners, and we have a different idea...

[kach22i]

Originally posted by Rodeo
Today the president acknowledged that this is a war of ideas, and that in order to prevail we must stop people from becoming terrorists.

No way, I don't believe it...........please provide a link.

I put in "stay the course" in Google and clicked "I'm feeling lucky".

Here is the link:
http://www.thespeciousreport.com/2004/04040529bushbikeride.html

[Rodeo]

Well, I was perhaps a bit too giddy, based upon what I'd heard in media reports. I read the speech, and then read parts of the "new" strategy document released today. That document says:

Strategic Vision For The War On Terror

Our Strategy Recognizes That The War On Terror Is A Different Kind Of War, Involving Both A Battle Of Arms And A Battle Of Ideas. Not only are we fighting our terrorist enemies on the battlefield, we are promoting freedom and human dignity as alternatives to the terrorists' perverse vision of oppression and totalitarian rule. To win the War on Terror, the United States will continue to lead an expansive international effort to:

Defeat violent extremism as a threat to our way of life as a free and open society.

Create a global environment inhospitable to violent extremists and their supporters.

The speech today, when you read it, is actually depressing. The president seems to confuse a viable strategy for victory with repeating over and over and over and FCUKING OVER AGAIN that these are bad guys that want to hurt us.

WE KNOW THAT!

Today was more of the same. First he told us how nasty the enemy is, then he turned on the majority of Americans who disagree with his Iraq "policy" (if you can call it that). Oh well.

Read it for yourself, if you can find anything new, anything at all, please let me know.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060905-4.html

[Moneyguy1]

While our enemies are masters at playing chess, the administration is just learning to play checkers.

[Rodeo]

Most of the "liquid bombers" recently arrested in London were like 12-14 years old when 9/11 was being planned. Some were in diapers during Gulf I.

Focusing exclusively on a military strategy is a fool's game, and plays right into the hands of the enemy. It's part of the solution, but not even the biggest part.

[fintstone]

While the enemy attempts to destroy us from the outside...liberals attempt to do so from the inside. It is an evil alliance of two groups that will do anything to achieve their political objectives.

[dd74]

Who are the slow learners in this...ur...(lack of) illumination?

Bush for his continual baiting of these more-than-formidable and ever increasing "foes"?

Or us for believing he could change his xenophobic tune?

[fintstone]

Why should he change his tune? Just because doing the right thing is tough does not mean it is not the right thing...nor does it mean that it does not need to get done. Running from a problem never solved anything.

[speeder]

You are delusional if you believe that, Stoney. The brave "liberals" are trying to save what's left of this country from an internal force that is hell-bent on selling it off piecemeal to some wealthy defense contractors. Wake up.

I had dinner last night in San Diego w/ a WW2 infantry vet who has been a Republican since before anyone on this board was born, when I brought up Bush and Iraq he kiboshed the entire subject saying that, "it makes me too mad to even think about it." Bush and company have done more damage to our future and our relationships in the world than anyone could have imagined. It is though they are intentionally trying to bankrupt and destroy us.

This is a guy who until recently would not drive any German or Japanese car; even though he is rich he would only buy POS Cadillacs or other big3 cars due to patriotism and old lingering bias from WW2. And he is no snowman, rather a Harvard grad who has spent his life at the pinnacle of the capitalist/business world and is a textbook Republican.

You sir, are an extreme radical promoting a very destructive agenda for the USA and the world. And I do not understand it since you are quite intelligent and I believe a good and decent person. Your loyalties baffle me.

[fintstone]

Denis
No matter how loyal or brave the WW2 vet is...he probably receives even less factual information than many posters here. The level of anti-war propaganda is unbeliveable. I think it is quite telling that those who knnow the most about what is happening in both the overt and covert war on terror are the ones most solidly behind it. Your friend may well be a Harvard grad...but what exactly does that mean? The President went to an Ivy League school also...as did many of his advisors.
There is only one way out of this...and it is not retreat. That only plays into the hands of our enemy and portends an ugly future. letting them live will not endear us to them...only show that we are weak and encourage them to destroy us.
Thank you for the kind words...and I believe the same of you...however... IMHO you have been misled/are mistaken.

[dd74]

Originally posted by fintstone
Why should he change his tune? Just because doing the right thing is tough does not mean it is not the right thing...nor does it mean that it does not need to get done. Running from a problem never solved anything.

The tune needs to change because we aren't winning the war. The tune needs to change because the old tune is not communicating, it is combative.

Reports? What's going on where? Progress and how it is not being showcased as far as Iraq goes and our actions there...

Sure, one can blame the media. Personally, I distrust the media - maybe not to the extent that is prevalent with some who feel it to be a traitorous faction of disinformation. But if there was deductive proof that we are winning the war on terror, it would have to eventually come out on the evening news of they simply would not be doing their job. In short, all the news is bad news and justfully so.

In fact, in lieu of any good news, the opposite seems to be more fact than fiction - the war on terror/movement toward democracy has been an outright failure on our part.

Cases in point:

1) Possibly there was a democratic election in Iraq, but the body of power that has been elected has emerged as a bonefied hater of the U.S.

2) Iraq, though it is almost denied by U.S. officials, is in an active civil war.

3) The terrorists, continually, have been obtaining new recruits.

4) But most importantly, it is now being said across many news broadcasts that not just the Middle East, but the U.K. is an active breeding ground for muslim extremists. The U.K. is supposed to be our ally in this battle.

Philosophically, it is very, very difficult to defeat a thought process or feeling. This is why Communism is still a philosophical belief throughout the world and even the U.S. Winning the Cold War, as we did, was directed at the U.S.S.R., not Communism as a belief system. Our defeat of the old Russia of our youth, didn't even effect Communism.

The same can be said about terrorism. There is a reason these people want to blow up our people. There is a culture and belief system behind the damage they want to do. It is taught, it is celebrated, it is nearly bred into who you see, brandishing IEDs and burning the U.S. flag.

Bush can nuke the entire ME, but that will not destroy the "us against them" mentality that threatens life as we know it. In fact, it will only galvanize that mentality, and make life even more dangerous from this day onward.

So what favors is our president doing us? None, really, because while he should be concerned about terrorism infiltrating our own country, he is fighting battle worthy of Sysiphus on foreign ground that has nothing to do with our own well being.

[Moneyguy1]

I see you are back and in fine fettle.

Believe what you want. I, for one, cannot accept that we are, as a country, doing the best job we can do. Too many unanswered questions, too many loose ends, too much wishful thinking. Too many knowledgable people doubting the wisdom of the current approach and too many others willing to follow blindly, lest they lose favor with current leadership. Too much politicizing, too much emotion, too little long range planning and too much "sloganizing". I truly wonder about the provability of lines such as "We fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here". Unprovable, somewhat illogical, and aimed toward those with paranoid tendencies. All this while nothing is done to secure our borders. The battle is not just against "them" over there, it is against "us" over here. Pogo had it right: "We have met the enemy and he is us." Until we act together, put aside the posturing and come up with a workable approach, the situation will not noticably improve, andno amount of "feel good" speeches will change that.

I did some research on the "press" vs. the administration. It has only been in the past two+ years that sentiment has turned away from the current management. Five years ago, the president, Rumsfield and others were looked upon as competent and capable. Iraq changed all that as soon as it became clear that the aftermath was turning into something far more deadly than the vice president and SecDef had predicted. My take is that this country can tough out a lengthy conflict, so long as the difficulties are not minimized and played down. People like their truth straight up.

Retreat is not the answer. More intelligent use of our resources is. Stop paying for both sides of this war. The USSR, according to many, was beaten economically. That is one way to bring a superpower down; the death of a thousand cuts, and that is what the enemy has been doing, paying for their side of the fight with our dollars. In response we have retaliated over and over again with the same tactics, both at home and abroad. And, doing the same thing over and over, hoping the results will change is one definition of insanity.

I suggest a re-reading of "The Art of War". Most enlightning. The president would be well advised to place that little tome on his expanded reading list.

[fintstone]

First I will have to disagree with the premise that we are somehow losing the war. It is simply not true...by any measure. Would we like our work to be easier or faster? Of course!

The press turned on the administration once it was clear that the war would last long enough for them to do sufficient damage to the President to be worthwhile. They were against him long before the war....and certainly as far back as the previous presidential election.

I cannot imagine why having the President read The Art of War again would be of significant value. His generals in the field that conduct the war are most certainly familiar with it as well as most other classical views of conducting war.

[widebody911]

Originally posted by fintstone
First I will have to disagree with the premise that we are somehow losing the war. It is simply not true...by any measure.

Please enlighten us as to by which measures we're winning, and cite examples.

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by widebody911
Please enlighten us as to by which measures we're winning, and cite examples.

Don't bother. fint thinks if you say something enough times, with enough conviction, it becomes fact.

His premise is the same as it ever was: If you support the Bush administration on every front, you are a good and loyal American. If you have concerns about policy, foreign or domestic, you are an terrorist sympathizer that should be locked up in the name of "freedom."

He is the most un-American poster on this board.

[hytem]

I think all you "liberals" and "conservatives" out there ought to bury the hatchet. These are two of the most misused and abused words in American politics. Conservatives are often liberal and liberals are often conservative--depending on the moment. And most people are an admixture of the two--except maybe those who post in newsgroups (not me, LOL). And neither side has the patent on being correct. I'm especially talking about the Right--which is so vocal and hard-assed in the media these days. You know, the Anne Coulter types.The Left? In America, except for the PC types, there is hardly a ripple. Michael Moore doesn't do talk shows--only documentaries about power abuse.

It used to be the Center dominated both political parties. Now, the Republicans are almost strictly Right (you better tow the line, brother), and the Democrats center-left (without the Southern Right, which is now Republican). The polarization has driven many to the center as Independents--just waiting for the right Independent candidate. But that won't happen, as the two parties have made sure of that in the election system. It's hard to run as an independent--try getting into the Debates, for example.

The two major parties ought to open up and diversify--especially the Republicans. The polarization hurts the country.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally posted by Rodeo
Don't bother. fint thinks if you say something enough times, with enough conviction, it becomes fact.

Hmm... never seen that one used before; what a unique and inspired approach.

"Bush lied... Bush lied... Bush lied... Bush lied... Bush lied... Bush lied..."

"We fought to install a terrorist regime... We fought to install a terrorist regime... We fought to install a terrorist regime... We fought to install a terrorist regime... "

There are a few others, but you get the point.

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by Jeff Higgins
***"We fought to install a terrorist regime... We fought to install a terrorist regime... We fought to install a terrorist regime... We fought to install a terrorist regime... "***

That's not quite right. We fought to disarm Saddam of the non-existent WMD. Then, almost as an afterthought, we started thinking about setting up a democracy.

What we got was a radical, fundamental Muslim regime hostile to everything America stands for.

1. The Iraqi PM refuses to denounce Hizbollah
2. The Iraqi government refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist
3. The Iraqi speaker thinks insurgents that kill American soldiers should have monuments erected for them
4. The man that controls the largest block in Parliament and two ministries was once wanted "dead or alive" by America, is responsible for attacking American troops, and operates a militia that acts as a Muslim Shiite death squad.

Those are a very few of my facts. You got any to counter?