ozone again
Premier Member
Registered on
Apr-18-2002
More User Info
|
Message #113267 posted by ozone again (Info) March 13, 2008 18:41:18 ET
In Reply to: Re: America Will Not be Defeated posted by Torog (Info) March 12, 2008 06:11:55 ET
Torog sez: “I don't care if they found no 'direct operational link',there's a direct ideaological link between the baath party and saddam and sons,which whole-heartedly embraced hitler and naziism and usama's goals. Both groups wanted to destroy America and Israel and the ones that are still left,are still pursueing the same goals.
Are you reduced to making apologies for an enemy that wishes to destroy us ?
After the Bush admin is gone,who will you blame then ? How will you be able to continue to 'apologize' for the enemy's actions against us and the Free World ?
Must I remind you,that the most cherished goal of Islam,is to bring about the establishment of a world-wide caliphate and provoke the return of the 12th imam ?
We are facing an enemy,that is every bit as determined and blood-thirsty,as hitler,mao and stalin..and the world cannot go forward,until they are defeated.”
I said all that? I thought I posted an article from FOX News stating that Bush was wrong about our reason for invading Iraq. Or maybe FOX implied that the president lied. Oh jeez, let’s be charitable, maybe Bush was just misled. Like you said, doesn’t matter, though, does it? Because at the heart of it, both you and Bush had the same reason for wanting to go into Iraq --- a hard-on for revenge, plain and simple.
The whole mission was ill-conceived and poorly executed. Sure, we took out a dictator, but one that Bush senior was wise enough not to remove, because he realized the power vacuum that would result.
You keep talking about protecting America, and the necessity --- as much as you say you regret it --- for collateral damage in pursuing that protection. Well, if you’re willing to accept collateral damage, that should have meant leaving Iraq alone, and the Iraqis to deal with Saddam, so that we could concentrate on Afghanistan, where we knew al-Qaeda was.
At one point in the 1990s, Usama bin Laden offered the Saudis and Kuwaitis to take his fighters into Iraq to take out Saddam. They may have all been Sunnis, but they certainly weren’t on the same page. Saddam was a secularist, bin Laden a fundamentalist. It was the U.S. that created the power vacuum in Iraq and sucked al-Qaeda into it, and instead of one battlefield, we have two. Remember what happened to Germany in WWII with too many fronts?
Actually, I don’t even know what you’re talking about anymore. Somewhere along the line, the right-wing rhetoric got ramped up to include all of Islam as the enemy, not just al-Qaeda. That means all of the freedom-loving Muslims in Iraq are our enemies --- all of them. Why are we even worrying about giving those ingrates democracy? Think they’ll convert to Christianity if they get democracy? Christianity, which has the stated goal of trying to convert all of humankind to follow Christ, in preparation for the return of Christ? Hmm, sounds similar to Islam in the broad strokes.
|
