It's on him now.

[faithmd 14]

The war will not "come with them". Iraq is not going to invade the United States (although, who could blame them?).

I'm missing where I said Iraq was going to invade us, in my earlier post I think I mentioned the fundamentalists (you know, the insurgents-not Iraqi civilians). I certainly do not think the Iraqi civilians will be coming over and starting a war with us. What WILL happen is the slow and insidious infiltration of terrorists into society (either ours or anywhere else deemed not to be living the way of fundamental Islam) and when you least expect it, there will be a dirty bomb or another terror strike like 9/11 (yep, I mentioned 9/11) or the London Bombings or the first WTC, or the USS Cole, or the Marine barracks in Beirut, the discotheque in Berlin, the bombings on Fiji, the cruiseliner that was hijacked in the Mediterranean, the bombing in Manila...

Sadam Hussein was what kept the country stable. It was removing him that de-stabilized Iraq. And please don't play the 9/11 card. Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11.

Excuse me, but I never said Iraq had ANYTHING to do with 9/11 You quoted me, as stated now for a third time:"Us being over there trying to get the situation stabilized (which is sadly become fruitless because I fully believe our enemy was not only underestimated, but largely unknown) is largely the reason we haven't had another 9/11. That and our improved intelligence."

I sort of miss where I said Iraq or Saddam perpetrated 9/11? What I said was that our attempting to stabilize the situation (and perhaps I'm globalizing our troops in the Middle East, as opposed to in Iraq only) and our improved intelligence (I believe) has helped to prevent another occurence like 9/11. I suppose I could have said London Bombings instead of 9/11, interchangeable really.

Sure, we could have done nothing and maybe we should have. Maybe he would have just continued along happily pillaging his people and by now he would have just been a washed up dictator, but consider the possibility that he could easily have been (and very likely was) planning to take over the world by any means necessary. (Kuwait was just a first stop for him in 1990-91.) There have been many comparisons to Hitler made, and I don't think they are too far off. But we'll never know, will we? So those who oppose the war (let me clarify, in Iraq) and those who do not (I would never say I think it's great we are there, and do NOT think I'm a Bush lover, because I am NOT) will be able to spin the possibilites any way they want to. But then again, I am not at all convinced Saddam is dead, anyway. But that's another thread altogether.

No he didn't. He told his advisers what he wanted to hear, and that's the "information" they gave him.

That just doesn't make any sense. If the thought is that Bush is an idiot, then what you are suggesting is that he is an absolute genious to come up with a way to tell his advisers what they are to then tell back to him, and then he somehow single-handedly was able to convince Congress to declare war, all based on his own personal agenda? He made all this up and somehow created all the intelligence reports, too? He fed them himself to his advisors? What, is he a hyponotist, or did he use some kind of Jedi mind trick on his Cabinet, the Joint Chiefs, and Congress? He convinced all these people? People can't have it both ways, he can't be so smart as to be able to do all that, yet be as stupid as some folks believe.

There is absolutely no reason to believe this to be true. It's just more Bush propaganda.

What propaganda? Bush is not keeping us informed enough to create any propaganda. (Which is one of my many beefs with this administration.) The only propaganda I've been hearing is from the enemy and supporters of the enemy. Lots of stuff from former anti-Western clerics, former Iraqi officials (many of whom are now supposedly dead) and insurgents (Al-jazeera anyone?).

The fighting is not with Iraqi's, it is with insurgents, they will go anywhere to defeat us. They tried to bring that fight to our soil on September 11, 2001, and to Britain's soil on July 7, 2005. That's just to name a few.

I'd rather see the troops here protecting us then over there. I do not believe we can change things there. A madman like Saddam didn't come to power in a vacuum after all.

The way our troops protect us here is by being over there. It is illegal for them to perform policing action in the States. That is the function and purpose of our police forces, Homeland Security and National and Coast Guard troops.

Not so. There are quite a few people who remember Pearl Harbor.

First of all, Pearl Harbor was not "the war," it was a sneak attack that drew us into the war (US declared war on Japan on 12/8/1941-on Monday, Pearl Harbor was 12/7/1941-a Sunday, why? Because the politicians did not want to come in on a Sunday, they had to wait until the work week to declare war). And by the way, it did not occur on American soil, Hawaii was not a state until 1959, Hawaii at the time had a monarchy and its own King, we were there as a guest of Hawaii. The last war on American soil with a foreign enemy (for the record) was the Mexican-American War from 1846-1848.

No one touched on what I brought up earlier and I have to believe that is because it doesn't help the case of those who want us out: The fact is that this conflict, though sad because even one life has been lost, is statistically (for the length of time in the conflict, and for the amount of firepower expended and territory covered) the least in troop causalties than any other conflict in the history of mankind. Again I bring up: Nearly 4,500 Allied and American troops lost their lives in mere hours on the 6th of June, 1944 alone.

There have been 3,503 coalition deaths in the war in Iraq as of March 29, 2007, according to a CNN count.

WWII, which was from 1939 (but the US wasn't in it immediately) to 1945, resulted in a loss of 407,000 US troops.

During the first two days of Iwo Jima 3,650 soldiers were killed and that was taking an island so tiny it barely held an airstrip. Iwo Jima was invaded after 74 days of continuous naval and air bombardment, and STILL when we arrived, there was a loss of more lives in the first two days than have been lost in the entire Iraq war.

It won't stop even if we DON'T leave, so what's your point? And besides that, we are not the world's police force. It is not our responsibility to protect every nation from themselves.

We are not protecting every nation from themselves, we are protecting our nation from those who want to destroy us and our way of life. Those people are and/or were based in that region (Iraq, Afghanistan, etc...). People tend to forget that us going in this time was round 2 with Saddam Hussein. Lest we forget that at the time of the first war he had the number four military in the world and was invading other countries (sound familiar, Hitler anyone?). We went in because he was again saber-rattling. He did it once, there was no reason to believe he was bluffing this time. He was even defiant to all inspections after Desert Storm. We knew that at one time, he had a shitload of weapons and believed he was working on nuclear capability. That was the intelligence we had during the Clinton administration. Remember weapons inspectors and Iraq?

We can't...nor should we keep trying. The Iraqis did not start beheading Americans until Americans showed up in Iraq. If we bring our people home, the Iraqis may continue to fight with one another, but they are going to do that anyway, no matter what. We can't stay in Iraq forever. Would you have us re-enact Vietnam? Sixteen years and we still lost. Iraq has all the makings of another Vietnam.

It is being made into another Vietnam by folks who protest the war just like they did then. The men and women who came home from Vietnam were spat on, we are metaphorically spitting on our troops with every protest and outcry against what they are there doing. Sure we have free speech, and I'm not saying we shouldn't be able to express our opinion about the war, but I also have to believe that our protests are not helpful to our troops. During WWII, American people did not protest the war, they supported the troops by not protesting the war. By protesting the war, you are comforting and aiding the enemy. You are encouraging those who want to kill us. DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND? The fundamentalists will NOT stop until everyone on earth conforms to their view of Islam. Everyone must follow their laws and think the way they want us to think. And those of us who were not born of Islam will be enslaved. Yes, as in slaves. It doesn't matter if it's Iraq or Afghanistan or Israel or Syria or anywhere, the fundamentalists want everyone who does not believe as they do, DEAD. Iraq is just perfect for them. It has divided our nation and played right into their hands. We are giving them exactly what they want. They are using a millenia old, very effective tactic: infiltrate, divide, confuse and conquer. We're already well into the confused part, way past divide. They are frighteningly close to conquering us. But if choose to not believe that, then I do wish you luck.

First of all, I did not say I supported Saddam Hussein. I said he kept the country stable while he was in power, and that is a fact. And, while I have never personally "supported" Saddam Hussein, the United States government, in the person of Ronald Reagan, certainly did.

Oh yes, and we supported Hitler (Hitler's great Hindenberg was in the US when it blew up) and Noriega, too. But that, like our support of Saddam, was before we knew exactly what atrocities they were capable of. When we knew, we took them out. We also supported the Soviet Union all during WWII, until they turned on us. You know, just because someone is once your ally, doesn't mean they will always be your ally. So your argument about us supporting Saddam at one time is pointless.

One last thought: Like it or not, we are in the situation. If we pull out without a victory, do you realize that everyone who has died there, and who will die, will have died in vain? Our troops and the civilians. All for nothing...

The fact is that we are a world power and there are responsibilities and consequences that go with it. One of those is to stay a world power.

Now I really am done. I have to go to bed. And I wore I would never get into one of these discussions. It's fruitless, one is not likely to change the other's mind. And that's okay. Differences is what makes the world go 'round.

[faithmd 14]

The issue of pulling out from Iraq will mostly likely be a moot point because Iran will be detonating (or at least attempting to) nuclear weapons on the West. We all know (or should know, and if you don't then wake up and smell the Folgers) that they will not be stopping with Israel. Half of the Jewish population resides in the US, so to Iran, we are Israel.

But again, that's another thread...

[Carlene 12]

Faith....

You are correct, in that nothing posted here is likely to change anyone's mind. But you are mistaken about Hawaii.

From the State of Hawaii's official web site...

In 1893, with Queen Liliuokalani on the throne, the Americans formed a Committee of Safety and declared the monarchy ended. In 1894, the Republic of Hawaii was established. On August 12, 1898, the government of the Republic transferred sovereignty to the United States. Hawaii became a territory of the United States in 1900.

[lisah25 3]

so you support a man who killed millions of people and actively practiced genocide, funded suicide bombers who have attacked Israel? How can you support a murderer?

I suppose you think Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot were just fine human beings?

You, madam...disgust me :angry

She didn't in any way say she supported Saddam, or HOW he kept the country stable.

[Carlene 12]

If we don't confront jihadis on the sands of the mid east, where is a better place?

If not now, when?

They are not going to stop. They are not concerned about 'bad press'.

They are not concerned about any of the Democrat talking points. They are not concerned about celebrity support, or the daily outpouring of the liberal bloggers.

Their goal is the establishment of the Caliphate. Listen to their spokesmen. Watch their actions.

Oat-cell carcinoma doesn't listen to reason or respond to diplomatic efforts either.

It's comments like this that make Muslims think the "war on terror" is actually a war against Muslims.

A Jihad, by the way, is not necessarily an armed conflict. It can also mean spreading Islam by word of mouth and by example, much the same way Christians spread Christianity.

Most Muslims support the reign of a Caliphate in Muslim countries. There is no cohesive, executable plan for Muslims to take over the world. What makes me so sure? Mostly the fact that Muslims cannot stop fighting among themselves long enough to plan a global takeover.

[Machele 0]

Continuing to fight a war that we cannot win is not only stupid, it's completely insane. When you can't identify the enemy, you can't win the war.

Who said we can't win it? My brother is in Iraq, and as a soldier and an American, he believes that the US military CAN win in Iraq.

[jono201 0]

Who said we can't win it? My brother is in Iraq, and as a soldier and an American, he believes that the US military CAN win in Iraq.

win what exactly-hey i heard it was "mission accomplised" years ago. Now what are we going to win again? A win over terrorists that were never in Iraq pre-Amercian invasion? Just remind me or let me know when we have won.

[Carlene 12]

Who said we can't win it? My brother is in Iraq, and as a soldier and an American, he believes that the US military CAN win in Iraq.

Machele.....I respect your opinion and your brother's. Especially your brother's. Because my son was in Iraq too, and may soon deploy to Afghanistan for a year. Some soldiers believe the war is winnable, and some don't. Just like the rest of us. But I salute every American who has spent even one day in that awful place, regardliess of his/her political views.

We can agree to disagree on the war, but we are united, I'm sure, in our hopes and prayers for the safe return of all Americans and an end to this awful war.

[mousecrazy 2]

Let's pray for a victorious return for our soldiers...I am praying for that.

Faithmd, while it might be pointless getting into these discussions, it also might now. I still participate; you never know who you might be encouraging. Too many people out there think they are "alone." I think most Americans, contrary to the talking points being heard from the majority party (a thin majority at that), do not want America to be a loser. Rational people exist; I must believe that.

Thanks for jumping in. I enjoyed your response.

[anonemouse 1]

I hate all this talk about "winning" or "losing". Shouldn't it be about our soldiers? If "winning" requires us to sacrifice thousands of American men and women and thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians for a pie in the sky ideal, I'd rather be a "loser". This isn't high school football. It's people's lives.

How about we pray that our soldiers don't return in pieces or in coffins?

[Wheetsin 714]

Pointless depends on what you see as the point. If "changing someone's mind" (as indicated) is the point, then probably it's pointless. If voicing your opinion, sharing perspective or information, or even participating just for the sake of killing some time is the "point", then these conversations are never pointless.

[lizrbit 0]

man yall can fling some poo.

just watchin it gets my heart rate up. someone calling someone hitler and stalin and what not?

Fling that Poo!

how do we feel about abortion?

[2bthinagn 3]

Who said we can't win it? My brother is in Iraq, and as a soldier and an American, he believes that the US military CAN win in Iraq.

Machele..tell your brother Thanks for his time and service. I appreciate him doing his job. What if those soldiers felt they were there and couldnt win? I think it would be very hard for them to do their job. My son will be going back for his third deployment. I very much support the soldiers, I dont know that I support why they are there.

[anonemouse 1]

I very much support the soldiers, I dont know that I support why they are there.

Exactly. None of us wish harm on our soldiers. They are just doing what they are told, after all (with the few exceptions that have made the news). We just feel that they shouldn't be forced to risk their lives because of the misguided (and downright illegal, IMO) actions of this administration.

[anonemouse 1]

man yall can fling some poo.

just watchin it gets my heart rate up. someone calling someone hitler and stalin and what not?

Fling that Poo!

I prefer to think of it as "flinging opinions," No one's opinions are "poo."