Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And being in the military or a vet doesn't make anyone a hero or even a good person. They're not defending any of my rights in their little excursions overseas.
Except for that little thing about being able to live without having a bomb go off on your bus or in your building,store,school,mall,wedding,funeral,hotel or ?
Years ago I might have agreed with you up UNTIL the WTC was bombed then hit by planes and the numerous attacks that've been stopped since.
Leaving out any argument of why as it doesn't matter now the point we are now at is we either face and fight 'em there or here. So for y'all who are of the mindset "I haven't seen anyone attacking our shores" need to get a reality check and quit thinking about this "war" as a conventional one, it's far,far from that. There will be no uniformed soldiers landing on any beach in mass, no, the way this now works is doing enough damage/killing to make you FEAR going outside or even come out from under your bed. Kids,women,everyone young and old all are fair game in this "war".
If after thinking about this you're still of the opinion that the military is not defending your right to walk down the street without being blown to bits and your freedom of religion I suggest you watch the video of the WTC attacks and think about how happy you'd be if we had many more of those and YOUR family/friends were in or near.
Sorry to go off on a tangent but these kind of statements kind of "irk" me to say the least.
Except for that little thing about being able to live without having a bomb go off on your bus or in your building,store,school,mall,wedding,funeral,hotel or ?
Years ago I might have agreed with you up UNTIL the WTC was bombed then hit by planes and the numerous attacks that've been stopped since.
Leaving out any argument of why as it doesn't matter now the point we are now at is we either face and fight 'em there or here. So for y'all who are of the mindset "I haven't seen anyone attacking our shores" need to get a reality check and quit thinking about this "war" as a conventional one, it's far,far from that. There will be no uniformed soldiers landing on any beach in mass, no, the way this now works is doing enough damage/killing to make you FEAR going outside or even come out from under your bed. Kids,women,everyone young and old all are fair game in this "war".
If after thinking about this you're still of the opinion that the military is not defending your right to walk down the street without being blown to bits and your freedom of religion I suggest you watch the video of the WTC attacks and think about how happy you'd be if we had many more of those and YOUR family/friends were in or near.
Sorry to go off on a tangent but these kind of statements kind of "irk" me to say the least.
I'm glad we have military willing to fight for us, but the notion that the current wars make us safer common but false. Fueling the hatred for another generation of children is not only backwards in logic, it also makes traveling abroad less safe and less available to American's it also endangers and distances our allies.
The WTC strike warranted a Marque and Reprisal on those involved, not a full blown occupation and decimation of two countries that cost billions and thousands of soldiers lives. Now we are rebuilding those countries with no better reputation on the US Treasury credit card. There is nothing about the current warmongering in the US that is sensible or safer.
I'm glad we have military willing to fight for us, but the notion that the current wars make us safer common but false. Fueling the hatred for another generation of children is not only backwards in logic, it also makes traveling abroad less safe and less available to American's it also endangers and distances our allies.
The WTC strike warranted a Marque and Reprisal on those involved, not a full blown occupation and decimation of two countries that cost billions and thousands of soldiers lives. Now we are rebuilding those countries with no better reputation on the US Treasury credit card. There is nothing about the current warmongering in the US that is sensible or safer.
I humbly disagree with you.
We are actually closer to agreement than you may think. First things first though, there's nothing we could do short of converting to the Muslim religion and Sharia law that would change how the next generation and the one following them feels about us, even if we pulled out of everywhere and left everyone alone we'd still be targets to be conquered and converted.
As for the current "war", we've not fought a war since the first boots hit the ground in Viet Nam. If we had it would have been all over (for them) long ago. Our only mission should've been to decimate Bin Laudin and his merry band of killers (we've put a hurt on 'em but they're still around) and let any country know that if they give any terrorist organization safe haven and we get hit again THEY will be considered complicit and will pay a price, not just a stern talking to or a very stern letter.
Afganistan? Either they stand up and take control of their own destiny whatever that is or they don't, either way it's time to go with the caveat that "the great satan" will return if we're poked again only next time it won't be as gentle as it was this time.
We are actually closer to agreement than you may think. First things first though, there's nothing we could do short of converting to the Muslim religion and Sharia law that would change how the next generation and the one following them feels about us, even if we pulled out of everywhere and left everyone alone we'd still be targets to be conquered and converted.
As for the current "war", we've not fought a war since the first boots hit the ground in Viet Nam. If we had it would have been all over (for them) long ago. Our only mission should've been to decimate Bin Laudin and his merry band of killers (we've put a hurt on 'em but they're still around) and let any country know that if they give any terrorist organization safe haven and we get hit again THEY will be considered complicit and will pay a price, not just a stern talking to or a very stern letter.
Afganistan? Either they stand up and take control of their own destiny whatever that is or they don't, either way it's time to go with the caveat that "the great satan" will return if we're poked again only next time it won't be as gentle as it was this time.
I agree that converting everyone to Islam and Sharia law would probably gain us ally status with them, I think we have some examples of diverging societies, cultures and religions in other countries that do not have terrorists attacks. Most of the advanced non-Islamic countries in Europe and Asia are far closer to the source of the problem, yet they rarely if ever have attacks. That is why one can logically conclude that our actions and occupancy is fueling the continued danger.
I agree, if you harbor and aid enemies you should be given a marque and reprisal for that as well. If it is sanctioned by an entire government (no Islamic country has declared war on us) then we move forward with war.
Would you really consider Vietnam much different than Iraq/Afghanistan? We sent troops in without the full force of the military and political correctness in mind only to let them get slaughtered and driven out of the country. I would say the last real war is even prior to Vietnam.
Vietnam also further proves the point, you can visit Vietnam now without much risk even being an American and they are churning out widgets for the world and US economy at a levels like China did 10+ years ago. They are our economic friend now because we simply left them alone and let them govern themselves and they are better for it.
I know, don't you just hate victims always getting everything they want for just being a victim.
This is a characteristic I hate most about this country is the ability to blame the victim and reward the criminal.
In the mind of neanderthals, might makes right. I would not be surprised if deep down inside some of them identify more with the shooter than Gifford. One even implied that Loughner has as much right to own a gun as Gifford does.
I agree that converting everyone to Islam and Sharia law would probably gain us ally status with them, I think we have some examples of diverging societies, cultures and religions in other countries that do not have terrorists attacks. Most of the advanced non-Islamic countries in Europe and Asia are far closer to the source of the problem, yet they rarely if ever have attacks. That is why one can logically conclude that our actions and occupancy is fueling the continued danger.
I agree, if you harbor and aid enemies you should be given a marque and reprisal for that as well. If it is sanctioned by an entire government (no Islamic country has declared war on us) then we move forward with war.
Would you really consider Vietnam much different than Iraq/Afghanistan? We sent troops in without the full force of the military and political correctness in mind only to let them get slaughtered and driven out of the country. I would say the last real war is even prior to Vietnam.
Vietnam also further proves the point, you can visit Vietnam now without much risk even being an American and they are churning out widgets for the world and US economy at a levels like China did 10+ years ago. They are our economic friend now because we simply left them alone and let them govern themselves and they are better for it.
Tell that to the 1.3+ million killed by Khmer Rouge policies.
Pol Pot's rise to power and the slaughter that occurred in both Vietnam and Cambodia can be directly linked to the US pulling out of Vietnam in 1975. Plus the fact the Democrat controlled Congress screwed over the deal Nixon had made with Vietnam in order to get our MIAs and POWs back home by stabbing them in the back.
Stopping government sanctioned terrorism is what Public Law 107-40 is all about. At the time it was enacted into law on September 18, 2001, the Afghan, Iranian, Iraqi, and Syrian governments all sponsored international terrorism. These governments not only provided safe harbor, but also financial support, training and medical facilities, weapons, logistics and transportation.
While the terrorist sponsoring governments of Iraq and Afghanistan no longer exist, both Syria and Iran remain on the list of legitimate military targets under Public Law 107-40.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
