"Struggle for Civilization" - is he serious?

[Lightning Bolt]

A "simple solution"...

All of you out there that are still freaking out over security, whenever your reminded to remember by our faultless Commando-in-Chief , try this...

VOLUNTEER FOR SERVICE YOURSELVES AND GET YOUR LOUD-MOUTHED, TYPE-IN-CAPS SELF-RIGHTEOUS A$$ES OVER THERE TO "FIGHT THE WAR ON TERROR" FOR YOURSELF!!

I realize they won't take you for various reasons, but if enough of you war-mongers stood up I'm certain exceptions would be made!
We are already stretched to the brink (many of our reservists out of Camp Pendleton are leaving on their 4th tour), so your brave contributions would be appreciated.

This should be no problem, right?

You've have had no problem supporting the sending of thousands upon thousands of servicemen and women who have already served their terms
and are being forced back by "clauses" in their commitment agreements so far, so why wouldn't you want to join them??

If this is asking too much, or seems preposterous even in by mention...
imagine what THEY are going through, and with NO PLAN OTHERWISE, what they are faced with going through for WHO KNOWS HOW MANY YEARS???

Terror attacks have existed for decades, ...if anyone cares to look it up.
Sadly, there is NO ABSOLUTE SECURITY in our cities.
Was Columbine a symptom of al-Queda??
How about Oklahoma City??

To "kill 'em over there before they get us here" only ESCALATES INSECURITY and CASUALTIES, but that just doesn't seem to faze a good many of you.

There certainly are no easy answers, but any examination of history only shows us that to remain in a state of perpetual overseas war,
like the Middle East likes to suspend itself in, does NOTHING to secure peace.
Containment and diplomacy are always the eventual PROCESS and are continually ONGOING.

Don't try to point to WWII... we "sealed that peace" with an atomic bomb.
I'll bet a good many of you wish we would just excercise that option right now!


If we, as children, were forced to learn lessons in history, why is it, as seemingly wiser adults, we cannot remember the lessons taught to us by history?....

[parrothead216]

Wow, this place is really political this week. So here's my 2 cents worth. I just got back from a week long class at the Department of Homeland Security in Alabama (you know that place where all of the incompetant, idiots hang out <sarcastic>) Let me assure you that it was probably one of the best, most organized, well taught classes that I have ever been to. Every one of the staff was an EXPERT in their field. I learned a lot of information that we just don't hear from ABC, NBC, MSN (insert any initials you like). For instance- Did you know that there are 13 provinces in Iraq and we are having trouble in only 4 of them. The struggle for power between Sunni/Shiite has been going on for many years and that is what we are seeing in Iraq now. The main reason that we have all of these terror groups coming together, organizing and acting more boldly has nothing to do with GW really. First of all global communications and technology are huge contributers to the terrorist movement. Second- remember the USS Cole? What did we do about it? Nothing! How about the bombing of our barraks in Lebanon by the Hezbollah? Nothing. Somalia- We ran. WTC (the first time)- Nothing. Are you seeing a pattern here. Anyone who studies human (or animal, for that matter) behavior knows that this is how behavior problems sart. They start small- hmm, got away with that- then bigger, got away with that one too- get what I'm saying? So really I think that there are many presidents that can share in the blame if blame is to be made for where we are today!!

Did you honestly expect a Department formed by this President to make any link to terrorism and his actions. Surely you are not that naive!

[parrothead216]

Hey Quiet and Shy, go down to the store and buy yourself a sense of humor. By the way, if terrorists are only hitting us because of what Bush is doing, why are the also targeting all the other countries that "hate" us too?? Why did they attack us during Clinton being in office??
The bottom line is yes we are the big dog, and the world without a big dog is a world in chaos. Do you really think the North Korea's head whackjob is the way is is because of the USA? No. Yes some countries may disagree with us, but when push comes to shove, we are the ones they are looking to for help.
The UN can put anyone on double secret probation, but they have no teeth.
And as to arrogant and ignorant? If you would like to compare education or experience feel free to contact me to show how incorrect you are.
And WINO, thank you very much

IJM, back off on the critism of Q&S, she is and intelligent articulate woman. Just because you don't agree with her opinions, doesn't allow you to DISMISS her well presented thoughts. We all have opinions on a lot of issues, but try remember that even though we may differ on some things, we all love Jimmy and his music.

She is a LADY. a real lady and is deserving of respect!

[Quiet and Shy]

Hey Quiet and Shy, go down to the store and buy yourself a sense of humor.

Wow, I acknowledge and congratulate you on your humor re. MJ and soccer and that's the response I get??

Pretty pathetic.

And thanks, 216.

[RinglingRingling]

She is a LADY. a real lady and is deserving of respect!

definitely what 216 said . While she and I may not always see eye-to-eye, but Q&S is definitely capable of thinking for herself and reasoning out a valid defense of her position. I'd take her moderate, reasoned approach to the "soundbite" mentality most of Bush's supporters seem to espouse every time.

[krusin1]

A "simple solution"...

All of you out there that are still freaking out over security, whenever your reminded to remember by our faultless Commando-in-Chief , try this...

VOLUNTEER FOR SERVICE YOURSELVES AND GET YOUR LOUD-MOUTHED, TYPE-IN-CAPS SELF-RIGHTEOUS A$$ES OVER THERE TO "FIGHT THE WAR ON TERROR" FOR YOURSELF!!

I realize they won't take you for various reasons, but if enough of you war-mongers stood up I'm certain exceptions would be made!
We are already stretched to the brink (many of our reservists out of Camp Pendleton are leaving on their 4th tour), so your brave contributions would be appreciated.

This should be no problem, right?

You've have had no problem supporting the sending of thousands upon thousands of servicemen and women who have already served their terms
and are being forced back by "clauses" in their commitment agreements so far, so why wouldn't you want to join them??

If this is asking too much, or seems preposterous even in by mention...
imagine what THEY are going through, and with NO PLAN OTHERWISE, what they are faced with going through for WHO KNOWS HOW MANY YEARS???

Terror attacks have existed for decades, ...if anyone cares to look it up.
Sadly, there is NO ABSOLUTE SECURITY in our cities.
Was Columbine a symptom of al-Queda??
How about Oklahoma City??

To "kill 'em over there before they get us here" only ESCALATES INSECURITY and CASUALTIES, but that just doesn't seem to faze a good many of you.

There certainly are no easy answers, but any examination of history only shows us that to remain in a state of perpetual overseas war,
like the Middle East likes to suspend itself in, does NOTHING to secure peace.
Containment and diplomacy are always the eventual PROCESS and are continually ONGOING.

Don't try to point to WWII... we "sealed that peace" with an atomic bomb.
I'll bet a good many of you wish we would just excercise that option right now!


If we, as children, were forced to learn lessons in history, why is it, as seemingly wiser adults, we cannot remember the lessons taught to us by history?....

First, LB, you need to back off and choose your words carefully... some members of this board ARE vets and HAVE served. No, I didn't go, but my father-in-law (lifetime military) served a hitch in Iraq, so I've got a firsthand account of exactly what's going on there.

Couple of arguments you made you better find a way to explain...

You say "killing them over there" only escalates insecurity and casualties... exactly how are you arriving at that conclusion? Yes, we've lost some fine young military men and women, but sadly enough, fighting is their job and casualties are a part of it. On the homefront, though, no successful terror attacks here since 9/11/01 - something's working.

Second, you say containment and diplomacy are always the eventual process and are ongoing. I take that to mean you believe that containment and diplomacy are the solutions to threats. Sorry bud, the solution to threats is winning. Nothing more, nothing less. If diplomacy got it done, the UN would be our finest institution instead of the hapless establishment of foolishness we all know and love.

And last, some of us DID learn the lessons of history. Appeasement doesn't work. Neville Chamberlain taught us that lesson to the tune of hundreds of thousands of war-dead. Would really rather we didn't have to re-learn that one.

Terrorists are not amenable to negotion. If we leave them alone, they will not leave us alone - they will use the time and space to find better ways of killing us. You defeat terrorism by making it ineffective and making terrorists dead. Period.

[Wino you know]

L.B.:
JUST BECAUSE we want to defend ourselves does NOT make us war mongers.
Do you REALLY think if we cut & run we'd be left alone by these Islam-o screwballs?
They'd just come here and kill more of us. BELIEVE IT!
We take the war to them so they don't bring it to us.

Remember this-if the terrorists would lay down their weapons, there would be no more violence.
If we laid down OUR weapons, there would be no more U.S.

[bumper]

I was kinda thinkin Quiet and Shy can defend herself without any help from the boys club...that's what strong independent women do aint it?

It is what is....we are either gonna fight them here..or fight them there..there being anywhere we can find them in large disposable numbers. Know this, they want you, us dead in any manner they can accomplish it.

United States isolated? we are the lead dog Quiet and Shy, all others look to us to do what we do best, lead. You might now always agree with U.S. Policy but..given the choices of a couple years ago....I will definetly back Bush over Kerry second stringin the Iraq gig as I would guess the only nations sorry to see Bush in the house are N. Korea and Iran...both next on the most wanted list.

Welcome to 4th generation warfare...the way of the future and the likes we have never seen before.

[Lightning Bolt]

First, LB, you need to back off and choose your words carefully... some members of this board ARE vets and HAVE served. No, I didn't go, but my father-in-law (lifetime military) served a hitch in Iraq, so I've got a firsthand account of exactly what's going on there.

Actually, I don't have to back off of anything, as I didn't demean our loyal and brave fighting men and women. I support their ranks, and only wish to see our ELECTED administration execute a mission in a much smarter manner. My 2nd cousin is a 19-year old Marine Lance Corporal and is awaiting his first Iraq assignment.

You say "killing them over there" only escalates insecurity and casualties... exactly how are you arriving at that conclusion? Yes, we've lost some fine young military men and women, but sadly enough, fighting is their job and casualties are a part of it. On the homefront, though, no successful terror attacks here since 9/11/01 - something's working.

Public vigilance and law enforcement are responsible for that.
If you honestly believe that current statistic has ANY connection to our invasion of Iraq, then you probably also believe that Saddam helped in the 9/11 plot,
and that would pretty much show your hand right there...

... If diplomacy got it done, the UN would be our finest institution instead of the hapless establishment of foolishness we all know and love.

There was no problem with the U.N. back in '91, when the elder Bush successfully petitioned the U.N. for sanctions and, later, support for Desert Storm.
We had universal support and a WIDE COALITION for that action back then. Do you recall that war?
The facts that are on the table today (No credible evidence of WMD) are only supporting the U.N.'s lack of wider approval toward this "intervention".
Just because you choose to IGNORE these facts doesn't make the U.N., the council of the world's nations, IRRELEVANT. That attitude is similar to the deplorable "swift-boat" tactics of the '02 election. It's a hyena attack and only reflects pure ignorance.

Appeasement doesn't work. Neville Chamberlain taught us that lesson to the tune of hundreds of thousands of war-dead. Would really rather we didn't have to re-learn that one.

I addressed that war earlier, but nice job of parroting the RNC's latest attempt of justifying this current mess from...oh, just last week!
What happened to the chase for the REAL TERRORIST bin Laden?
Wasn't al-Queda the source of all this to begin with? ..talk about your appeasing the terrorists, geez... try getting it straight, K.
When invaders start hitting our shores, the timeworn Chamberlain analogy might actually be relevant.

Terrorists are not amenable to negotion. If we leave them alone, they will not leave us alone - they will use the time and space to find better ways of killing us. You defeat terrorism by making it ineffective and making terrorists dead. Period.

Finally, a point we can agree on! Continue to use covert missions, spies and drones to hunt and kill terrorists.
It's with countries, where you use diplomacy and sanctions. You work to AVOID all-out invasions and occupations. This administration just was too short-sighted and,
frankly, arrogant in its' evaluation of the region and America isn't buying W's line of crap anymore.

[Quiet and Shy]

From CNN.com...It gives an interesting overview of how US is viewed around the world re. several "hotspots".

Analysts: Bush's cowboy image waning; world still wary
POSTED: 6:03 p.m. EDT, September 16, 2006

WASHINGTON (AP) -- When President Bush addresses world leaders at the United Nations this week, he will have fewer options and lower expectations on almost every major foreign policy front than a year ago.

The United States is relying more readily on international institutions and alliances for help in Iran, Lebanon, North Korea, Sudan and elsewhere. Yet, according to analysts, the Bush administration has less room to maneuver.

Bush and his foreign policy advisers have tried with some success to dispel the caricature of Bush abroad as a Texas cowboy riding alone and herding the U.S. into an unpopular war in Iraq.

But the war, now in its fourth year, devours resources and energy for other global objectives and feeds mistrust about U.S. intentions, experts say.

"I'm not sure they have changed their minds about to what extent to proceed unilaterally and how much to use military force so much as they have run out of options," said Richard Stoll, a political science professor at Rice University who studies foreign policy and national security.

With Bush nearly halfway through his final term, time is dwindling for him to accomplish his signature goals of confronting terrorism and spreading democracy, and he faces more distractions at home, said Andrew Bacevich, a professor of international relations at Boston University.

Friday, Bush told reporters what his Tuesday speech to the U.N. General Assembly would focus on. He said he would carry a strong message, "based upon hope, and (a) belief that the civilized world must stand with moderate, reformist-minded people and help them realize their dreams."

A year of change
A scan of the globe, however, points up the defensive posture for the U.S. these days and the changed circumstances from a year ago.

In Afghanistan, five years after the U.S.-led invasion ousted the Taliban from political power, the militant Islamic group is proving a resilient enemy for NATO forces in the south while suicide attacks have spread to the capital, Kabul. President Hamid Karzai's credibility has been undermined by the bloodiest fighting since the Taliban's fall, failure to control the drug trade and wide disparities between the rich and poor. Karzai is a U.S. favorite whom Bush will see at the White House this month.

In North Korea, the breakthrough weapons agreement announced during last year's U.N. opening session fell apart weeks later. Now the communist government is boycotting talks with the United States and other nations. The situation worsened when North Korea tested a long-range missile theoretically capable of reaching the U.S.

In Iraq, political gains and the capture of a terrorist leader have not stopped the wholesale killing. U.S.-backed Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, whom Bush will see in New York, has failed to make his security plan stick. Washington shelved plans to withdraw some American troops this year despite declining public support in the U.S. for the war and growing calls from Congress for a phased withdrawal. Bush has acknowledged that U.S. forces will remain there for years.

In Iran, the government has accelerated its nuclear program and defied U.N. demands. The U.S. is still the main force for U.N. penalties that allies find unappealing or of questionable value. With Tehran trying to undermine a fragile U.S.-built consensus, the weeks ahead may show whether the U.S. can persuade the Security Council to impose meaningful penalties or whether the administration will concede the futility of a course pursued for more than two years. Meanwhile, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is trying to deflect suspicion that the U.S. intends to topple Iran's ruling mullahs or bomb its nuclear sites.

In the Mideast, the prospects for progress for peace between Israel and the Palestinians look more remote than at this time in 2005. Former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is unconscious from a stroke; his successor, Ehud Olmert, has political problems after an inconclusive war with Hezbollah militants in Lebanon. Humanitarian and political crises followed the victory of Hamas militants in Palestinian elections and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas was vastly weakened.

Hamas' victory was the biggest blow to Bush's goal of spreading democracy in the region. Yet the U.S. said little about political reform in Egypt and Saudi Arabia while appealing to those Arab allies for help during the recent Israeli-Hezbollah war.

Bush may need help around the globe, but he could not resist taking a swipe at the United Nations during his White House press conference Friday. He stopped just short of calling the United Nations feckless in its response to the death and destruction in Sudan's Darfur region.

"I think a lot of Americans are frustrated with the United Nations, to be frank with you," Bush said.

[Indiana Jolly Mon]

Now let me get this straight. I made a joke (scary thought that it is true) and get called "arrogant and ignorant" by Quiet and Shy and I am the bad guy? My response in no way attacked or called names, I informed that I was being sarcastic and just responded to her calling me a dumbass and not seeing the big picture. So I asked questions back in a civilized manner and instead of a response I get attacked. I never said I was a Bush supporter or not, but frankly the response is what liberals get blamed for all the time, bashing the person asking instead of actually answering the question.
If asking Q & S to get a sense of humor offended her that deeply, I am sorry, it was not meant as such. I do not believe in being an "internet tough guy" like some do, it is too easy to hide behind a computer.
I simply asked questions which no one seems to answer.
So flame on and bash me instead of maybe facing the truth that neither the right or the left is innocent or 100% wrong in this or any other matter.
Have a great day,
Love the arrogant and ignorant one.

[Crazy Navy Flyer]

Struggle for civilization? What do you think?

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/shared- ... _Pope.html

When asked what the democrats would do differently to fight terrorism last week on TODAY James Carvell said "Communication, we'd talk with them." I suppose that might work.

[RinglingRingling]

Now let me get this straight. I made a joke (scary thought that it is true) and get called "arrogant and ignorant" by Quiet and Shy and I am the bad guy? My response in no way attacked or called names, I informed that I was being sarcastic and just responded to her calling me a dumbass and not seeing the big picture. So I asked questions back in a civilized manner and instead of a response I get attacked. I never said I was a Bush supporter or not, but frankly the response is what liberals get blamed for all the time, bashing the person asking instead of actually answering the question.
If asking Q & S to get a sense of humor offended her that deeply, I am sorry, it was not meant as such. I do not believe in being an "internet tough guy" like some do, it is too easy to hide behind a computer.
I simply asked questions which no one seems to answer.
So flame on and bash me instead of maybe facing the truth that neither the right or the left is innocent or 100% wrong in this or any other matter.
Have a great day,
Love the arrogant and ignorant one.

reading thru the posts in the thread, I am not seeing where she called you a dumbass.

[Quiet and Shy]

Now let me get this straight. I made a joke (scary thought that it is true) and get called "arrogant and ignorant" by Quiet and Shy and I am the bad guy? My response in no way attacked or called names, I informed that I was being sarcastic and just responded to her calling me a dumbass and not seeing the big picture. So I asked questions back in a civilized manner and instead of a response I get attacked. I never said I was a Bush supporter or not, but frankly the response is what liberals get blamed for all the time, bashing the person asking instead of actually answering the question.
If asking Q & S to get a sense of humor offended her that deeply, I am sorry, it was not meant as such. I do not believe in being an "internet tough guy" like some do, it is too easy to hide behind a computer.
I simply asked questions which no one seems to answer.
So flame on and bash me instead of maybe facing the truth that neither the right or the left is innocent or 100% wrong in this or any other matter.
Have a great day,
Love the arrogant and ignorant one.

I was referring to a particular mindset I find dangerous as opposed to pointing at a particular indivudual...apparently you chose to take it personally. I can try to be clear in my posts but I can't control how you (or others) choose to interpret them.

[Indiana Jolly Mon]

Okay, semantics aside, I guess arrogant and ignorant doesnt mean dumbass, whatever. But can you maybe address the points I brought up???
Again, not starting a fight here, just curious as to the answers.
Specifically:
The Marine Barracks in Lebanon, First WTC bombing, attacks in Paris, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, the USS Cole. All this before W. Not to mention Spain and England recently.

[Paradise]

A "simple solution"...

All of you out there that are still freaking out over security, whenever your reminded to remember by our faultless Commando-in-Chief , try this...

VOLUNTEER FOR SERVICE YOURSELVES AND GET YOUR LOUD-MOUTHED, TYPE-IN-CAPS SELF-RIGHTEOUS A$$ES OVER THERE TO "FIGHT THE WAR ON TERROR" FOR YOURSELF!!

I realize they won't take you for various reasons, but if enough of you war-mongers stood up I'm certain exceptions would be made!
We are already stretched to the brink (many of our reservists out of Camp Pendleton are leaving on their 4th tour), so your brave contributions would be appreciated.

This should be no problem, right?

You've have had no problem supporting the sending of thousands upon thousands of servicemen and women who have already served their terms
and are being forced back by "clauses" in their commitment agreements so far, so why wouldn't you want to join them??

If this is asking too much, or seems preposterous even in by mention...
imagine what THEY are going through, and with NO PLAN OTHERWISE, what they are faced with going through for WHO KNOWS HOW MANY YEARS???

Terror attacks have existed for decades, ...if anyone cares to look it up.
Sadly, there is NO ABSOLUTE SECURITY in our cities.
Was Columbine a symptom of al-Queda??
How about Oklahoma City??

To "kill 'em over there before they get us here" only ESCALATES INSECURITY and CASUALTIES, but that just doesn't seem to faze a good many of you.

There certainly are no easy answers, but any examination of history only shows us that to remain in a state of perpetual overseas war,
like the Middle East likes to suspend itself in, does NOTHING to secure peace.
Containment and diplomacy are always the eventual PROCESS and are continually ONGOING.

Don't try to point to WWII... we "sealed that peace" with an atomic bomb.
I'll bet a good many of you wish we would just excercise that option right now!


If we, as children, were forced to learn lessons in history, why is it, as seemingly wiser adults, we cannot remember the lessons taught to us by history?....

Whoa up there cowboy. I know that it has been a while since this thread started and not that I want to re-hash old arguments.
Just wanted to say that I am a Paramedic in a a fairly large community. I also serve in the Reserves and while I haven't been called to go to Iraq I certainly can. Many of my friends and co-workers have gone and have come home with many stories both tragic and uplifting which is pretty much the story of our profession anyway. One of the main classes taught in Alabama was being aware of secondary devices. These are planted purposely to harm emergency workers and not just by international terrorists but also domestic terrorists, drug dealers, etc. Many of the people that were in my class in Alabama, and several instructors, were Paramedics, EMTs, Firefighters and Police Officers that were in New York City working on 911. They don't like to talk about it much but they do in hopes that this type of event will never occur again. They were definitely NOT the aggressors but many of them died anyway and many more are living with lifetime disabilities from working in this toxic environment.
In addition to being a field paramedic, I am a "tox-medic". This means that I enter contaminated environments- biological, chemical and radiological- to treat and decontaminate victims. Please know who you are trying to insult before you actually do it. I put my life on the line every day along with my fellow responders and as a first responder to many of the events that have and could occur in our world, I feel that I have a right to state my opinion, as do you, without being patronized. Please defend your position with logic facts and not not nasty comments about people that you do not even know.

[bumper]

Don't try to point to WWII... we "sealed that peace" with an atomic bomb.
I'll bet a good many of you wish we would just excercise that option right now!


Odd..I don't remember an A bomb dropped on or near Germany

[Moonie]

OH it's easy for LB to run his mouth...

especially since we saved his sorry ass, as well as the entire nation from which he hails, in WWII...

war mongers? LB rarely thinks before he speaks...if it hadn't been for the USA, he'd not be speaking the Queen's English...

[Lightning Bolt]

Born and raised and residing in SoCal,
but, Moonbeam, you're being confused by this (or much else for that matter) really doesn't surprise...

[Wino you know]

Don't try to point to WWII... we "sealed that peace" with an atomic bomb.
I'll bet a good many of you wish we would just excercise that option right now!

DAMN RIGHT!!!!!!!!!