The Politics of Fear

[Bronco_Beerslug]

This short OP-ED hits it out of the park.

-------------------------------------------------------------
The Politics of Fear (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/18/opinion/18wed1.html)
Published: July 18, 2007

It had to happen. President Bush’s bungling of the war in Iraq has been the talk of the summer. On Capitol Hill, some of the more reliable Republicans are writing proposals to force Mr. Bush to change course. A showdown vote is looming in the Senate.

Enter, stage right, the fear of terrorism.

Yesterday, the director of national intelligence released a report with the politically helpful title of “The Terrorist Threat to the U.S. Homeland,” and Fran Townsend, the president’s homeland security adviser, held a news conference to trumpet its findings. The message, as always: Be very afraid. And don’t question the president.

Certainly, the report’s conclusions are disturbing. Nearly six years after 9/11, terrorism remains a huge threat. Al Qaeda has replaced leaders killed or captured by the United States, regrouped in its former home base in the tribal lands on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border and is trying to use affiliated terrorists in Iraq “to raise resources and to recruit and indoctrinate operatives.”

If the report is given an honest reading, it is a powerful rebuke to Mr. Bush’s approach to the war on terror. It vindicates those who say that the Iraq war is a distraction from the real fight against terrorism — a fight that is not going at all well.

The administration, however, seized on the report and, through bald political timing, tried to use it to dampen calls for an end to Mr. Bush’s catastrophic war. That required some particularly twisted logic. Ms. Townsend, for example, dismissed a reporter who asked whether the fact that Al Qaeda has regrouped in the area from which it planned the 9/11 attacks suggested that it was a mistake to divert American forces to Iraq. She said Al Qaeda headed by Osama bin Laden and the terrorists in Iraq that use the name Al Qaeda are the same.

In fact, we’ve seen no evidence of that, and none was in the intelligence report, at least the page and a half of conclusions released to the public.

Was there a link before the war between Osama bin Laden and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the terrorist leader in Iraq? Ms. Townsend refused to answer. “This is ground long covered,” she snapped.

Indeed it is. The answer is, “No.” In fact, Mr. Bush’s bungled invasion spawned a new terrorist army and gave it a home base. Now, the report said, those terrorists are the only ones affiliated with Al Qaeda that are “known to have expressed a desire to attack the” United States.

The White House denied that the report was timed to the Senate debate. But the administration controls the timing of such releases and the truth is that fear of terrorism is the only shard remaining of Mr. Bush’s justification for invading Iraq.

This administration has never hesitated to play on fear for political gain, starting with the first homeland security secretary, Tom Ridge, and his Popsicle-coded threat charts. It is a breathtakingly cynical ploy, but in the past it has worked to cow Democrats into silence, if not always submission, and herd Republicans back onto the party line.

That must not happen this time. By now, Congress surely can see through the president’s fear-mongering and show Mr. Bush the exit from Iraq that he refuses to find for himself.

[codeman]

This short OP-ED hits it out of the park.

-------------------------------------------------------------
The Politics of Fear (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/18/opinion/18wed1.html)
Published: July 18, 2007

Yada yada yada!

What I find interesting in this post is that the liberals will go to all ends to attack the policies of the President. I have yet to hear one single recommendation from the liberals that isn't self serving and most likely damaging to the country.

Try to do better, will ya?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

What I find interesting in this post is that the liberals will go to all ends to attack the policies of the President. I have yet to hear one single recommendation from the liberals that isn't self serving and most likely damaging to the country.

Try to do better, will ya?Try adding something to the topic. Point out exactly what you don't agree with and then explain why.

[Spider]

What I find interesting in this post is that the liberals will go to all ends to attack the policies of the President. I have yet to hear one single recommendation from the liberals that isn't self serving and most likely damaging to the country.

Try to do better, will ya?

you ****ing p***Y , this maybe normal to you , but this is the outcome of Bush's policy ..........take a real good look you sick **** http://farm1.static.flickr.com/127/416908826_1cc05ba647.jpg

[Spider]

Yeah take a long look at that picture Codeman , and remember this , you are such a coward you have to pack a weapon everywhere you go ..... No weapon will help this man , he has to face the world the rest of his life like that .....you are a punk

[codeman]

you ****ing p***Y , this maybe normal to you , but this is the outcome of Bush's policy ..........take a real good look you sick **** http://farm1.static.flickr.com/127/416908826_1cc05ba647.jpg


If you think that war is beautiful you are delusional. The facts of war are that young men die and are wounded. A new fact is that when terrorists attack young men, old men, young women, old women and children die. If your problem is the way the war on terror is being waged try making a plan that will do the job. It's obvious that what we are doing now is not fully doing what it was intended, but then to attack what is being done without an alternative solution is ludicrous.

Withdrawing would not be good for the country, good for the region over there nor would it lessen the chances that Al Queda would attack again. In my estimation there will be another attack sometime within the next 2 years. Their timing will be questionable but it will happen and it will be on a larger scale than 9/11. The last I read about the desires of Al Queda was to kill 1,000,000 Americans on a single day. Do you think that they would abandon that because we pulled out of Iraq?

Are you aware that Iran is actively attempting to find a way to eliminate Israel? Are you aware that other than the U.S. Israel has enough WMD's to get a good start on destroying that whole region? That doesn't even touch the possibility of there being any loose nukes floating around.

Keep your head in the sand if you must, but don't spout off that it's bad because our Marines get wounded or killed and that you care. If you cared you'd be doing something about it other than whining on a bulletin board. Have you contacted your congressmen and senators? Have you provided any substantial recommendations to alleviate the situation? Have you even considered the fact that as long as we are in Iraq that a large number of Al Queda members are conducting the insurgency in Iraq? Or are you under the impression that the people of Iraq are doing this on their own? I'm sure that the local neighborhood arms dealer makes sure that each of the citizens there have enough explosives to build the IED's that are currently being used. Where do you estimate the explosives are coming from?

If you think I haven't seen wounded and dead soldiers you are mistaken. I wasn't a ground pounder but I did my tour in Vietnam. Have you ever seen people that have been Napalmed? Have you ever seen those guys from the Vietnam war that are still suffering the effects from that war? The war in Iraq is currently minor compared to the death and dismemberment from Vietnam. If you don't like war, that is your right. You just have to realize that sometimes war is necessary, whether this one will be proven to be necessary will be discussed for many years to come.

And for your picture, you did notice that this Marine SGT is wearing his uniform with pride.

[Spider]

If you think that war is beautiful you are delusional. The facts of war are that young men die and are wounded. A new fact is that when terrorists attack young men, old men, young women, old women and children die. If your problem is the way the war on terror is being waged try making a plan that will do the job. It's obvious that what we are doing now is not fully doing what it was intended, but then to attack what is being done without an alternative solution is ludicrous.

Withdrawing would not be good for the country, good for the region over there nor would it lessen the chances that Al Queda would attack again. In my estimation there will be another attack sometime within the next 2 years. Their timing will be questionable but it will happen and it will be on a larger scale than 9/11. The last I read about the desires of Al Queda was to kill 1,000,000 Americans on a single day. Do you think that they would abandon that because we pulled out of Iraq?

Are you aware that Iran is actively attempting to find a way to eliminate Israel? Are you aware that other than the U.S. Israel has enough WMD's to get a good start on destroying that whole region? That doesn't even touch the possibility of there being any loose nukes floating around.

Keep your head in the sand if you must, but don't spout off that it's bad because our Marines get wounded or killed and that you care. If you cared you'd be doing something about it other than whining on a bulletin board. Have you contacted your congressmen and senators? Have you provided any substantial recommendations to alleviate the situation? Have you even considered the fact that as long as we are in Iraq that a large number of Al Queda members are conducting the insurgency in Iraq? Or are you under the impression that the people of Iraq are doing this on their own? I'm sure that the local neighborhood arms dealer makes sure that each of the citizens there have enough explosives to build the IED's that are currently being used. Where do you estimate the explosives are coming from?

If you think I haven't seen wounded and dead soldiers you are mistaken. I wasn't a ground pounder but I did my tour in Vietnam. Have you ever seen people that have been Napalmed? Have you ever seen those guys from the Vietnam war that are still suffering the effects from that war? The war in Iraq is currently minor compared to the death and dismemberment from Vietnam. If you don't like war, that is your right. You just have to realize that sometimes war is necessary, whether this one will be proven to be necessary will be discussed for many years to come.

And for your picture, you did notice that this Marine SGT is wearing his uniform with pride.
is this how you sleep at night ? war is horrid , thats why we had no business going into Iraq ,but you pieces of **** act cavalier about it , I ma not anti war , I am anti Iraqi war , dont see the need to make our finest pay a high price cause some títty fed mommas boy playing cowboy in Texas wants to go on a binge , and **** you for justifying the Iraqi war ...... My Dad was in Nam , you **** .......

[codeman]

is this how you sleep at night ? war is horrid , thats why we had no business going into Iraq ,but you pieces of **** act cavalier about it , I ma not anti war , I am anti Iraqi war , dont see the need to make our finest pay a high price cause some títty fed mommas boy playing cowboy in Texas wants to go on a binge , and **** you for justifying the Iraqi war ...... My Dad was in Nam , you **** .......

And you never served? You let daddy maintain our freedoms and you didn't lift a finger. My dad was in WWII and Korea. I was drafted but served more than 25 years collectively.

What you fail to understand is that when someone joins the military they take an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the U.S. and to follow the orders of those appointed over them. Each of them that take the oath understand that, very few of them shirk their responsibility to that oath.

Do I think the war in Iraq is good, absolutely not. I do agree that there was a need to remove Saddam, he committed many acts of war after the war in 1991. He committed enough of those acts for us to go in during Clintons administration, but he didn't have the backbone to do it. What many Americans thought going in, liberals and conservatives alike, was that the war would be a cakewalk like the war in '91. They didn't count on the outside assistance from Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and a few other countries to fund and contribute to the insurgency.

Get a clue, we are there, we are going to attempt to finish what we started. It may not be the best solution but it's the one we are going to be stuck with until we either get the job finished or a liberal gets in office and determines they are going to pull out or do a LBJ and start the draft back up and send more over there. War is big business and even the liberals will use that to their benefit.

[DenverBrit]

And you never served? You let daddy maintain our freedoms and you didn't lift a finger. My dad was in WWII and Korea. I was drafted but served more than 25 years collectively.

What you fail to understand is that when someone joins the military they take an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the U.S. and to follow the orders of those appointed over them. Each of them that take the oath understand that, very few of them shirk their responsibility to that oath.

Do I think the war in Iraq is good, absolutely not. I do agree that there was a need to remove Saddam, he committed many acts of war after the war in 1991. He committed enough of those acts for us to go in during Clintons administration, but he didn't have the backbone to do it. What many Americans thought going in, liberals and conservatives alike, was that the war would be a cakewalk like the war in '91. They didn't count on the outside assistance from Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and a few other countries to fund and contribute to the insurgency.

Get a clue, we are there, we are going to attempt to finish what we started. It may not be the best solution but it's the one we are going to be stuck with until we either get the job finished or a liberal gets in office and determines they are going to pull out or do a LBJ and start the draft back up and send more over there. War is big business and even the liberals will use that to their benefit.

The war WAS a cakewalk, as expected. It's the incredible incompetence of the Bush administration's handling of everything else.

The military did its job, while the Whitehouse was too busy patting itself on it's collective back to plan for the peace. The premise for going to war has long been discredited. What the hell did they expect when they unraveled Saddam's oppressive regime, sent the entire (Sunni) military home, allowing it to keep its weapons, and stood by dumbfounded as the previously oppressed majority (Shias) began to take their revenge.

What we are seeing was anticipated by almost everyone who is an expert on the region. That would include, EVERY living, former head of the Joint Chiefs, who sat before Congress, prior to the war. To a man, they told the House that invading Iraq would create a fertile recruiting ground for terrorists, destabilize the country and region and leave Iran as THE power in the region. Ironic, when one remembers the reason for stopping the first Gulf War: Bush sr, didn't want to weaken the Iraqi army to the extent that they couldn't maintain a balance of power against Iran.

No matter how one looks at it, this administration is incompetent and deceptive on a criminal level. Before you label me a 'liberal', I'm like Charles Barkley: "I was a Republican until they lost their minds".

[codeman]

The war WAS a cakewalk, as expected. It's the incredible incompetence of the Bush administration's handling of everything else.

The military did its job, while the Whitehouse was too busy patting itself on it's collective back to plan for the peace. The premise for going to war has long been discredited. What the hell did they expect when they unraveled Saddam's oppressive regime, sent the entire (Sunni) military home, allowing it to keep its weapons, and stood by dumbfounded as the previously oppressed majority (Shias) began to take their revenge.

What we are seeing was anticipated by almost everyone who is an expert on the region. That would include, EVERY living, former head of the Joint Chiefs, who sat before Congress, prior to the war. To a man, they told the House that invading Iraq would create a fertile recruiting ground for terrorists, destabilize the country and region and leave Iran as THE power in the region. Ironic, when one remembers the reason for stopping the first Gulf War: Bush sr, didn't want to weaken the Iraqi army to the extent that they couldn't maintain a balance of power against Iran.

No matter how one looks at it, this administration is incompetent and deceptive on a criminal level. Before you label me a 'liberal', I'm like Charles Barkley: "I was a Republican until they lost their minds".

I don't disagree with everything you posted, but I also don't agree with all of it.

Since the republicans lost their mind what have you become? You don't want to be labeled a liberal but you seem to be playing the same record they are.

Recognizing facts would be great if you could offer up some way of handling the situation better than it is currently being handled.

The standard line is to attack the President and not give a viable alternative to the situation. I see so many people trying the fear mongering in an attempt to keep Bush from becoming a dictator. That is laughable, there are far too many safeties built into the system to allow that to happen.

As for the war, I support the concept of why we are there. Too many possibilities that are not accounted for.

It's late, I'm out.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

And you never served? You let daddy maintain our freedoms and you didn't lift a finger. My dad was in WWII and Korea. I was drafted but served more than 25 years collectively.

What you fail to understand is that when someone joins the military they take an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the U.S. and to follow the orders of those appointed over them. Each of them that take the oath understand that, very few of them shirk their responsibility to that oath.

Do I think the war in Iraq is good, absolutely not. I do agree that there was a need to remove Saddam, he committed many acts of war after the war in 1991. He committed enough of those acts for us to go in during Clintons administration, but he didn't have the backbone to do it. What many Americans thought going in, liberals and conservatives alike, was that the war would be a cakewalk like the war in '91. They didn't count on the outside assistance from Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and a few other countries to fund and contribute to the insurgency.

Get a clue, we are there, we are going to attempt to finish what we started. It may not be the best solution but it's the one we are going to be stuck with until we either get the job finished or a liberal gets in office and determines they are going to pull out or do a LBJ and start the draft back up and send more over there. War is big business and even the liberals will use that to their benefit.

What a croc of crap!!! You noobie Neocons here need to research the forum before posting sh*t out of your arse and making fools out of yourselves. Read the Bush timeline of lies to gain some badly needed reference and facts before posting political tripe in this forum.

[codeman]

What a croc of crap!!! You noobie Neocons here need to research the forum before posting sh*t out of your arse and making fools out of yourselves. Read the Bush timeline of lies to gain some badly needed reference and facts before posting political tripe in this forum.

I see that you have done the liberal memory course. Forget everything that has happened that doesn't agree with your current position.

You do remember the NO FLY ZONES? right? You do remember the Iraqi AF attacking our planes while they patrolled the NFZ's. You do remember the times our aircraft were fired upon during those years don't you?

You need to pull your head out of your liberal sand box, drink some more of the koolaid and then move on to a few of the facts.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I see that you have done the liberal memory course. Forget everything that has happened that doesn't agree with your current position.
You do remember the NO FLY ZONES? right? You do remember the Iraqi AF attacking our planes while they patrolled the NFZ's. You do remember the times our aircraft were fired upon during those years don't you?
You need to pull your head out of your liberal sand box, drink some more of the koolaid and then move on to a few of the facts.

Geeezus, are you really this ignorant to try and base Bush's war on no fly zone violations? This is truly uninformed tripe at the highest level, sickening really.

[DenverBrit]

I don't disagree with everything you posted, but I also don't agree with all of it.

Since the republicans lost their mind what have you become? You don't want to be labeled a liberal but you seem to be playing the same record they are.

Recognizing facts would be great if you could offer up some way of handling the situation better than it is currently being handled.

The standard line is to attack the President and not give a viable alternative to the situation. I see so many people trying the fear mongering in an attempt to keep Bush from becoming a dictator. That is laughable, there are far too many safeties built into the system to allow that to happen.

As for the war, I support the concept of why we are there. Too many possibilities that are not accounted for.

It's late, I'm out.


I haven't 'become' anything. My views are the same as they were before Iraq. My views are the same when we decided to stop the real war on terror, in Afghanistan, and head into Iraq. Why Iraq? Who knows. The WMD issue was bogus, the terrorist threat was bogus; Bin Laden hated Saddam as much as he hated the West....he regarded him as an 'Infidel' for his suppression of Muslims. Given time, Bin Laden would probably found a way to assassinate him.

As for 'attacking' the President, there is no need. Just stating the facts and looking at his performance is condemnation enough. So anyone who states the facts, or disagrees with the policy...including elected Republicans, makes them Liberals?? What a bankrupt response to reality. The only reason that more elected Republicans haven't been more strident in their public condemnation of this administration is simple: The next election.

It's typical of the Neo-Cons to label anyone who states the facts, as Liberals. Well, ok. If dealing with reality and caring about the tens of thousands who have been killed or mutilated in Iraq makes me a Liberal, then I'm a Liberal.

So if you have solutions, what are they?? After all, you're the one who feels that we should have gone into Iraq in the first place. So how do you prevent Iraq from becoming another Palestine or a festering cancer that is a breeding ground for terrorists??

If you honestly can't see the unbelievable mess that has been created....for reasons that have yet to be revealed. Then you are simply another blindly loyal Bush supporter, who will take any position to support a policy that will continue to have consequences for us all in our lifetime.

[yavoon]

I thought this was an article about ghaffney.

[baja]

I haven't 'become' anything. My views are the same as they were before Iraq. My views are the same when we decided to stop the real war on terror, in Afghanistan, and head into Iraq. Why Iraq? Who knows. The WMD issue was bogus, the terrorist threat was bogus; Bin Laden hated Saddam as much as he hated the West....he regarded him as an 'Infidel' for his suppression of Muslims. Given time, Bin Laden would probably found a way to assassinate him.

As for 'attacking' the President, there is no need. Just stating the facts and looking at his performance is condemnation enough. So anyone who states the facts, or disagrees with the policy...including elected Republicans, makes them Liberals?? What a bankrupt response to reality. The only reason that more elected Republicans haven't been more strident in their public condemnation of this administration is simple: The next election.

It's typical of the Neo-Cons to label anyone who states the facts, as Liberals. Well, ok. If dealing with reality and caring about the tens of thousands who have been killed or mutilated in Iraq makes me a Liberal, then I'm a Liberal.

So if you have solutions, what are they?? After all, you're the one who feels that we should have gone into Iraq in the first place. So how do you prevent Iraq from becoming another Palestine or a festering cancer that is a breeding ground for terrorists??

If you honestly can't see the unbelievable mess that has been created....for reasons that have yet to be revealed. Then you are simply another blindly loyal Bush supporter, who will take any position to support <b>a policy that will continue to have consequences for us all in our lifetime.</b>


That's the worst of all this, the decisions of the last 6 years will effect us not only for the duration of our lives but our children's lives could be effected to an even greater degree.

[mosca]

I haven't 'become' anything. My views are the same as they were before Iraq. My views are the same when we decided to stop the real war on terror, in Afghanistan, and head into Iraq. Why Iraq? Who knows. The WMD issue was bogus, the terrorist threat was bogus; Bin Laden hated Saddam as much as he hated the West....he regarded him as an 'Infidel' for his suppression of Muslims. Given time, Bin Laden would probably found a way to assassinate him.

As for 'attacking' the President, there is no need. Just stating the facts and looking at his performance is condemnation enough. So anyone who states the facts, or disagrees with the policy...including elected Republicans, makes them Liberals?? What a bankrupt response to reality. The only reason that more elected Republicans haven't been more strident in their public condemnation of this administration is simple: The next election.

It's typical of the Neo-Cons to label anyone who states the facts, as Liberals. Well, ok. If dealing with reality and caring about the tens of thousands who have been killed or mutilated in Iraq makes me a Liberal, then I'm a Liberal.

So if you have solutions, what are they?? After all, you're the one who feels that we should have gone into Iraq in the first place. So how do you prevent Iraq from becoming another Palestine or a festering cancer that is a breeding ground for terrorists??

If you honestly can't see the unbelievable mess that has been created....for reasons that have yet to be revealed. Then you are simply another blindly loyal Bush supporter, who will take any position to support a policy that will continue to have consequences for us all in our lifetime.
Codeman can't seem to get a grasp on people unless he can compartmentalize them into little boxes ... liberal or conservative, either supports Bush or is against Bush. No in-between. Gotta have that label to slap on them. You're either with us or you're against us!

[Spider]

And you never served? You let daddy maintain our freedoms and you didn't lift a finger. My dad was in WWII and Korea. I was drafted but served more than 25 years collectively.

What you fail to understand is that when someone joins the military they take an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the U.S. and to follow the orders of those appointed over them. Each of them that take the oath understand that, very few of them shirk their responsibility to that oath.

Do I think the war in Iraq is good, absolutely not. I do agree that there was a need to remove Saddam, he committed many acts of war after the war in 1991. He committed enough of those acts for us to go in during Clintons administration, but he didn't have the backbone to do it. What many Americans thought going in, liberals and conservatives alike, was that the war would be a cakewalk like the war in '91. They didn't count on the outside assistance from Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and a few other countries to fund and contribute to the insurgency.

Get a clue, we are there, we are going to attempt to finish what we started. It may not be the best solution but it's the one we are going to be stuck with until we either get the job finished or a liberal gets in office and determines they are going to pull out or do a LBJ and start the draft back up and send more over there. War is big business and even the liberals will use that to their benefit.

No I didnt serve , tried , but wanted for attempted murder ( more to it then this , but that what was the original charge , instead of facing it I ran .lesson learned ) ..........the rest of your post is pure bull**** ...... probably some fat redneck decked out in camo hiding out in a closet ,wanting to be G.I.joe with a kung fu grip .....

[Spider]

P.S. I am taking the daves advice.....my last post to you fat ass

[gunns]

What I find interesting in this post is that the liberals will go to all ends to attack the policies of the President. I have yet to hear one single recommendation from the liberals that isn't self serving and most likely damaging to the country.

Try to do better, will ya?

I have a response to that.....WHAT???

Withdrawing would not be good for the country, good for the region over there nor would it lessen the chances that Al Queda would attack again. In my estimation there will be another attack sometime within the next 2 years. Their timing will be questionable but it will happen and it will be on a larger scale than 9/11. The last I read about the desires of Al Queda was to kill 1,000,000 Americans on a single day. Do you think that they would abandon that because we pulled out of Iraq?


I heard the same crap about withdrawing from Vietnam. Didn't happen.
And do you truly think that Al Queda's desires to kill us are any different whether we are in Iraq or not? Do you think those desires have increased because we are in Iraq?

If you think I haven't seen wounded and dead soldiers you are mistaken. I wasn't a ground pounder but I did my tour in Vietnam. Have you ever seen people that have been Napalmed? Have you ever seen those guys from the Vietnam war that are still suffering the effects from that war? The war in Iraq is currently minor compared to the death and dismemberment from Vietnam. If you don't like war, that is your right. You just have to realize that sometimes war is necessary, whether this one will be proven to be necessary will be discussed for many years to come.

Yes, I've seen the effects of the Vietnam war on some of it's soldiers first hand. My ex husband was one and a prime reason for our divorce were those effects, along with an awful lot of his buddies. My son is now in Iraq and he wears his uniform proudly too. He joined to give back to his country, to fight for our freedoms and defend our rights to them. He's doing his duty as commanded but isn't delusional enough to believe his duty has anything do with why he joined the military. His view at this point is to protect his buddies so all of them can come home.....and possibly go through what his dad did. The point is that this war had absolutely nothing to do with protecting us from the terroristic acts that have happened to us, although it was presented like that......and that they are still trying to use that same fear to keep this war going. I have no doubt that terrorist will attempt another strike on us but it will not be quelled by staying in Iraq nor does being in Iraq protect us from it. And the American people have figured that out. Well, except some.

[codeman]

I'm really worried here.

[fido]

ummm, Iraq did not attack us and everyone here does agree that Iraq has shifted our attentions from Afghanistan.

[codeman]

ummm, Iraq did not attack us and everyone here does agree that Iraq has shifted our attentions from Afghanistan.
UMMMM, from 1991 through 2000 Saddams planes attacked our planes while patrolling over the No Fly Zone. that in itself was an act of war. Saddams boys fired surface to air missiles at our planes, that too was an act of war. The only problem is that Clinton let it go on without any response.

The battle in Afghanistan is still being waged. The attention you are speaking of is only the attention of the media.