How Do We "Win" a War on Terror? - Page 35 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

peragro · #**511** 09-06-2006, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raymr

Maybe if they could be turned on to sports and sex, they wouldn't be so hell-bent on blowing up half the world.

I think it's the lack of bacon. Mmmmmmmmmmmmm, bacon.

And don't even start with that "turkey bacon" stuff! That's just another horrible lie!

Botnst · #**512** 09-06-2006, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dculkin

...
How many people has the adminstration branded as traitors for saying those exact things?

Has the Adminstration called anybody a traitor?

peragro · #**513** 09-06-2006, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Has the Adminstration called anybody a traitor?

Not even John Walker Lindh - poster boy for treason.

Honus · #**514** 09-06-2006, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Has the Adminstration called anybody a traitor?

OK, so maybe I exaggerated. But has the administration questioned the patriotism of its critics? Repeatedly. Will I find you cites to specific quotes? No. When you and peragro start supporting your claims with evidence, then maybe I will reciprocate. So far, it's been too one-sided. Everytime I say something that is undeniably true, you guys ask for facts. I provide them. You ignore them. When I ask for facts, you guys just get sarcastic. I ain't playing that game anymore.

Botnst · #**515** 09-06-2006, 08:37 PM

It's the difference between asserting a belief (which I frequently do without any evidence of support) and asserting a fact, which I almost always have some back-up. Sometimes I don't. Occasionally I've been proven wrong to my own satisfaction and when that happens I have never failed to acknowledge it.

If one says, "I believe that the Administration, through its activities, questions the patriotism of its' critics" it would be silly to argue the assertion of belief. But if one were assert through a rhetorical question a supposition as though it's a fact, then it's fair game.

In my opinion.

B

Honus · #**516** 09-06-2006, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Surf-n-Turf

Nanny nanny boo boo. Nah, I'm just kidding d.

I don't know about the Admin. But I question it. We are in a pickle now, whether it's Bush or Kerry or Clinton or Clintoness. In the world arena the last thing we need is to look like a bunch of bickering little girls. Marsha Marsha Marsha. It shows nothing but weakness and a festering boil that is eager to be lanced by our enemies. And make no mistake. Our enemies are not France, Germany, Russia, China.

Healthy disagreements are a sign of strength, not weakness. If the administration was being straight with the American people, then they might have a legit beef with people who criticize their policies. Unfortunately, they have never been straight with us, about anything, and they have unfairly attacked their political opponents. And Rumsfeld is just a total dick who has no regard for whether he causes further division.

Having said all that, I agree that it is not helpful to have everyone *****ing about how the war on terror is going. It would be nice if we could call a domestic truce, where W quits pretending that he has everything under control and his opponents quit *****ing about his incompetence to date and try instead to find a way out of our current pickle. That would be nice.

Honus · #**517** 09-06-2006, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Surf-n-Turf

...Administration being straight with us...blah blah as if all the other administrations told you everything they were up to. Reno had the same disregard along with Allbright. Perspective depends on point of view...

I can't speak for Albright, but you are mistaken about Reno. Based on what I saw, and based on what I have been told by people who really know, Reno always tried to put the country's interests first. She has tremendous integrity. She was just not up the job as AG.

Quote:

See about point of view above. You almost said something nice but crapped out with the "pretending that he has everything under control". That my friend, is what any President must do. It's when you show that you don't have it under control that things go bad.

That's fair. W should continue to pretend he has a clue. It's the people around him who should reach out for opposing views to see whether they might learn something.

peragro · #**518** 09-06-2006, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Surf-n-Turf

Healthy disagreements here at home, fine. Our media spreading it around the globe, not good. Administration being straight with us...blah blah as if all the other administrations told you everything they were up to. Reno had the same disregard along with Allbright. Perspective depends on point of view.

See about point of view above. You almost said something nice but crapped out with the "pretending that he has everything under control". That my friend, is what any President must do. It's when you show that you don't have it under control that things go bad.

Kinda brings to mind 3 people with regard to the office of the president.

First being Wendell Wilkie, FDR's opponent for president in 1940. When asked if he'd rather be president or support freedom he chose the latter. He lost against FDR, after a good run. After his loss be became an outspoken proponent of FDR because the country was at war.

Second being Richard Nixon. I don't remember much from his time as president. I do remember that he willingly gave up the presidency to avoid further embarassment to that office. I wonder who would do the same today?

Lastly, Ronald Reagan. I can't confirm the truth of it or not, but I recall hearing that he never removed his jacket while he was in the oval office. He always thought that he should be dressed properly while sitting in that room - true class.

We have come far from these three gents.

Healthy disagreement is key. the only problem is trying to decide what that is. Kinda like pornography...

aklim · #**519** 09-06-2006, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dculkin

I can't speak for Albright, but you are mistaken about Reno. Based on what I saw, and based on what I have been told by people who really know, Reno always tried to put the country's interests first. She has tremendous integrity. She was just not up the job as AG.

Reno's qualifications for the job were that she was a female and attorney. Look at the picks to AG that didn't get confirmed. All women. Coincidence?

peragro · #**520** 09-07-2006, 12:37 AM

Concerning those CIA prisoners and what the program entailed and what was gained from it. A long read, but very interesting... And characterized by some as the wrong thing to do - the CIA program, I mean.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/print/20060906-3.html

cmac2012 · #**521** 09-07-2006, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikemover

This is the best part of the whole article.

The partisan politics of the whole thing are obvious, and are to be expected. One party will ALWAYS blame the other for the "bad times", and will fail to give credit for the "good times".

But this paragraph is the important one. So many people fail to realize, or at least refuse to admit for moronic politically-correct reasons, that the true root of the problem is radical Islamic culture. The situation has been brewing for a LONG time, and the clerics and leaders of this movement prey upon the weak, the poor, the uneducated....

It is a cancer, and the cancer is spreading. You don't "negotiate" with cancer. You take radical measures to eliminate it.

Until our government, and the rest of the civilized world, starts dealing with it as such, we are going to continue to spin our collective wheels.

I say we quarantine it instead. We take steps to secure borders and let them stew in their own juices. This will never happen because we lust after their resources and have arranged it so we can't live w/o them.

I don't like these people but sad fact is they have more justification for considering western modernization a cancer as we have steadily encroached on their territory with business desires and cultural exports for the past multiple decades.

Do you remember the little (about 5'4" I'm guessing) GI who stood on a tank and led little Iraqi kids in some pop song sometime in '03? He got semi-famous over it. The tune had some squeeky interludes that mimiced horniness, complete with pelvic thrusts. The kids were eating it up while adults in the background were giving off looks that could kill.

It didn't really surprise me. Imagine American parents in the early 60s being faced with Prince, instead of just the Beatles. And that's just the tip of the iceberg of Arab/Islamic culture shock. Of course that doesn't justify mass murder in our cities but it does create an atmosphere where they feel like they're being over-run with a decadent imported culture.

A cancer, if you will (Cheney-ism).

cmac2012 · #**522** 09-07-2006, 01:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raymr

Or maybe not so radical measures. Capital punishment may work as a deterrent for some, but most people avoid a life of crime because they have better choices. The people being sucked into radical Islamism probably see no alternatives. The long term solution is to keep big groups of people from joining by making sure they have other more interesting and fulfilling pursuits.

Well put. Won't be easy but it's the only lasting solution.

cmac2012 · #**523** 09-07-2006, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dculkin

That's a straw man. No Democrat in any position of authority has made that argument.

About 3/4ths of his arguments involve straw.

peragro · #**524** 09-07-2006, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

I say we quarantine it instead. We take steps to secure borders and let them stew in their own juices. This will never happen because we lust after their resources and have arranged it so we can't live w/o them.

So your solution is to stop all trade with the rest of the world, close off our borders and allow no one in and no one out?

peragro · #**525** 09-07-2006, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raymr

Or maybe not so radical measures. Capital punishment may work as a deterrent for some, but most people avoid a life of crime because they have better choices. The people being sucked into radical Islamism probably see no alternatives. The long term solution is to keep big groups of people from joining by making sure they have other more interesting and fulfilling pursuits.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

Well put. Won't be easy but it's the only lasting solution.

hmmm, in what type of society would one find more interesting and fulfilling pursuits. Possibly a free and democratic one?