When all else Fails with Iraq ...Pull the 9-11 card

[Spider]

http://capitolbuzz.blogspot.com/2005...ech-white.html
excerpt ........
"The terrorists can kill the innocent - but they cannot stop the advance of freedom. The only way our enemies can succeed is if we forget the lessons of September 11 ... if we abandon the Iraqi people to men like Zarqawi ... and if we yield the future of the Middle East to men like Bin Laden.".......
Another Excerpt ...............
"We have more work to do, and there will be tough moments that test America's resolve. We are fighting against men with blind hatred - and armed with lethal weapons - who are capable of any atrocity. They wear no uniform; they respect no laws of warfare or morality. They take innocent lives to create chaos for the cameras. They are trying to shake our will in Iraq - just as they tried to shake our will on September 11, 2001. They will fail. The terrorists do not understand America. The American people do not falter under threat - and we will not allow our future to be determined by car bombers and assassins."
He pulls it out twice ...........

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

9/11 was Trifecta Boy's little gift that keeps on giving.

[Crushaholic]

Why is it so hard to believe that the terrorists in Iraq are cut from the same cloth as the 9-11 bombers? They are willing to go so far as to cut heads off civilians. It's definitely believable that people like that would be insane enough to fly planes into buildings. The 9-11 hijackers are dead and Bin Laden is on the run, so we are now fighting people who AT THE VERY LEAST sympathize with the individuals who committed the 9-11 crime. It all goes back to 9-11 in an indirect way.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Crushaholic

Why is it so hard to believe that the terrorists in Iraq are cut from the same cloth as the 9-11 bombers?

These facts still remain unchanged:

1) The 9/11 hijackers were not Iraqis. 2) Iraq did not attack us. 3) Iraq was not a threat to us. 4) Iraq had no part in the 9/11 attacks.

Originally Posted by Crushaholic

It's definitely believable that people like that would be insane enough to fly planes into buildings.

But let's not confuse "believable" with "actual." A justice system where people can be imprisoned, tortured, attacked pre-emptively, or killed simply because of what we think they might or could do is more reminiscent of Nazi Germany than America.

Originally Posted by Crushaholic

The 9-11 hijackers are dead and Bin Laden is on the run, so we are now fighting people who AT THE VERY LEAST sympathize with the individuals who committed the 9-11 crime.

It would be more accurate to say that Bush's policies are CREATING greater and greater numbers of people in the mid-east who sympathize with the 9/11 hijackers. I recently posted a report created by the Pentagon for Donald Rumsfeld that confirmed this assessment.

Bin Laden, mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, is still at large, despite Bush's empty "dead or alive" promise. Bin Laden looked pretty healthy and comfortable in his last strategically-timed videotape message. Thanks to Bush's misdirected invasion and occupation of Iraq, al Qaeda recruitment is off the charts. (Too bad we can't say the same re: the U.S. armed forces.)

Originally Posted by Crushaholic

It all goes back to 9-11 in an indirect way.

Thanks to bush's killing spree in Iraq, the number of people in the region who sympathize with the 9/11 hijackers and who hate America has grown in a way that must give Osama a major chub.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by Crushaholic

Why is it so hard to believe that the terrorists in Iraq are cut from the same cloth as the 9-11 bombers? They are willing to go so far as to cut heads off civilians. It's definitely believable that people like that would be insane enough to fly planes into buildings. The 9-11 hijackers are dead and Bin Laden is on the run, so we are now fighting people who AT THE VERY LEAST sympathize with the individuals who committed the 9-11 crime. It all goes back to 9-11 in an indirect way.

If that was the case , we would be in Saudia Arabia .......... Why is it so hard to believe , that you want to take out Terrorism , you should go to where it Starts ?
this is like we are pissed off @ China so we attack Japan ......

[Garcia Bronco]

Originally Posted by Crushaholic

Why is it so hard to believe that the terrorists in Iraq are cut from the same cloth as the 9-11 bombers? They are willing to go so far as to cut heads off civilians. It's definitely believable that people like that would be insane enough to fly planes into buildings. The 9-11 hijackers are dead and Bin Laden is on the run, so we are now fighting people who AT THE VERY LEAST sympathize with the individuals who committed the 9-11 crime. It all goes back to 9-11 in an indirect way.

Don't even try...these lunatic terrorist sympathizers are far gone.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco

Don't even try...these lunatic terrorist sympathizers are far gone.

and now a word from the Retard section ..continue Garcia ....... your insight is deep

[Garcia Bronco]

Originally Posted by §Pide®

and now a word from the Retard section ..continue Garcia ....... your insight is deep

So you think you're a "lunatic terrorist sympathizers"...great.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco

So you think you're a "lunatic terrorist sympathizers"...great.

. I made a thread just for you GB ...... fits you to a tee ....... Reason why you are here state side and not fighting the good fight ......

[enjolras]

"The terrorists can kill the innocent - but they cannot stop the advance of freedom. The only way our enemies can succeed is if we forget the lessons of September 11 ... if we abandon the Iraqi people to men like Zarqawi ... and if we yield the future of the Middle East to men like Bin Laden.".......
Another Excerpt ...............
"We have more work to do, and there will be tough moments that test America's resolve. We are fighting against men with blind hatred - and armed with lethal weapons - who are capable of any atrocity. They wear no uniform; they respect no laws of warfare or morality. They take innocent lives to create chaos for the cameras. They are trying to shake our will in Iraq - just as they tried to shake our will on September 11, 2001. They will fail. The terrorists do not understand America. The American people do not falter under threat - and we will not allow our future to be determined by car bombers and assassins."
He pulls it out twice ...........

I think he has a point.

The genesis of 9/11 was largely our blanket withdrawl from Afghanistan.. as the Soviet Union pulled out, so did we. The resulting power vacuum led to the creation of a war state.. and eventually created a people so desperate they EMBRACED the Taliban simply because they could make the killing and destruction stop.

In Iraq we have that same problem. To pull out risks the same thing happening again. A lesson of 9/11 is that we can't simply surrender control of a nation to those extremists with the power to control (not govern) the people. It creates an environment of hopelessness that is a breeding ground for terrorists.

We've created the problem, we have to stick around to fix it lest we risk history repeating itself.

[fontaine]

Originally Posted by enjolras

I think he has a point.

The genesis of 9/11 was largely our blanket withdrawl from Afghanistan.. as the Soviet Union pulled out, so did we. The resulting power vacuum led to the creation of a war state.. and eventually created a people so desperate they EMBRACED the Taliban simply because they could make the killing and destruction stop.

In Iraq we have that same problem. To pull out risks the same thing happening again. A lesson of 9/11 is that we can't simply surrender control of a nation to those extremists with the power to control (not govern) the people. It creates an environment of hopelessness that is a breeding ground for terrorists.

We've created the problem, we have to stick around to fix it lest we risk history repeating itself.

Yeah but you could make the same argument for any area of conflict be it the former Yugoslavian states, Haiti, various African nations, Ethiopia, etc etc. The world will always be full of crazies, diehards, and fundamentalists.

[enjolras]

Yes.. but in only a few, rare, instances are they in general power. Free to do whatever the hell they feel like.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by fontaine

Yeah but you could make the same argument for any area of conflict be it the former Yugoslavian states, Haiti, various African nations, Ethiopia, etc etc. The world will always be full of crazies, diehards, and fundamentalists.

But not all of them have the world's second largest oil reserves.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

[Rigs11]

Nice try Dubya.

Bush slammed for Iraq link to 9/11

CNN) -- Critics of the U.S. war in Iraq have condemned President George W. Bush for attempting to link the insurgency there with the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington.

In a televised address marking a year since the U.S. handover of sovereignty in Iraq, Bush urged Americans not to "forget the lessons of September 11."

Speaking before a military audience at Fort Bragg, North Carolina Tuesday, the president set out his strategy for victory against the insurgency, including foreign groups such as that led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

He also pledged that American troops would stay in Iraq until their job was done and that the U.S. would not "yield the future of the Middle East" to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda terror network.

In a bid to shore up flagging domestic support for the war, Bush said the war against terror had "reached our shores" on September 11 and that sacrifices in Iraq were "vital to the future security of our country."

But Democrats accused the president of reviving a questionable link between Iraq and 9/11.

"I think the American people are a lot smarter than that," Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden said. "They've figured this out."

And in Britain, Lynne Jones, a lawmaker in Prime Minister Tony Blair's ruling Labour Party, said any attempt to suggest that Iraq was a response to the September 11 attacks was "absolute nonsense."

"There is absolutely no connection between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda," she said.

"What they have ensured, in invading Iraq, is they have actually promoted al Qaeda's involvement in other countries, including Iraq."

British MP George Galloway, who was expelled from Labour over his criticism of the war, said, "The truth is, as everyone can see, that Zarqawi and the other extremist formations that have sprouted in Iraq are the result of the invasion, not the reason for it.

"The swamp of hatred against the West has been vastly deepened by the actions of those two world leaders, Bush and Blair."

Australian opposition politicians said the speech reinforced fears that the conflict would drag on indefinitely.

"Iraq has been a conflict without timelines, without an exit strategy and indeed without a mission statement from day one," Labor Party spokesman Tom Cameron said.

"Australia needs to refocus on the region and the war on terror instead of getting bogged down in the bloody quagmire of Iraq's insurgency."

David Gergen, a political analyst who has worked in both Democratic and Republican administrations, said the speech was an attempt to "try to stop the slide" in public support.

"What he's playing for is time, so that there's not enormous pressure put on him to withdraw," Gergen told CNN.

Gergen pointed out that Bush never used the term "insurgent," referring to them instead as "terrorists."

"(September 11) has been all along his trump card," Gergen said. "He played it in the campaign; he's playing it again now."

Support for Bush's speech came from the governments of staunch U.S. allies Britain and Australia, who praised the president's pledge to keep forces in Iraq until the fight was won.

"It was a very good speech that highlighted the need to fight for freedom and democracy and the determination of the United States and our other coalition partners to win that fight," said Australia's acting prime minister, John Anderson, who was standing in while John Howard was on vacation. (Full story)

In Britain, which sent the second-largest contingent of troops to Iraq, Blair told the House of Commons Wednesday: "I was glad that we took the action we did."
'Reach out'

In his speech, Bush also rejected calls that the United States should send more troops to help put down the insurgency.

"Sending more Americans would undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead in this fight," he said.

"Sending more Americans would suggest that we intend to stay forever, when we are, in fact, working for the day when Iraq can defend itself."

Bush said Iraq has "more than 160,000 security forces trained," but Biden -- the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee -- said an overwhelming majority of those "have a long way to go."

"We have to do more to reach out and get the rest of the world in on the game," Biden said.

Bush asked for patience with the U.S. strategy, which he described as two-pronged -- with a military component to combat the insurgency and a political effort to build "the institutions of a free society."

"Our strategy can be summed up this way -- as the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down," he said.

While U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney last month told CNN that the Iraq insurgency was in its "last throes," the president said Tuesday that the United States had "more work to do."

"There will be tough moments that test America's resolve," he said. "We will not allow our future to be determined by car bombers and assassins."

Bush called the work in Iraq "difficult and dangerous."

"Like most Americans, I see the images of violence and bloodshed. Every picture is horrifying, and the suffering is real," he said. "It is worth it, and it is vital to the future security of our country."
Poll: Half of Americans doubt Iraq-9/11 link

The president faces an American public growing restless with Iraq.

According to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll released Monday, just 40 percent of those responding said they approved of Bush's handling of the war; 58 percent said they disapproved -- up 2 percentage points from May. (Full story)

Bush got higher ratings on how he is handling terrorism, with 55 percent approving and 41 percent disapproving.

The president made repeated references in his speech to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, calling Iraq "the latest battlefield" in the war on terrorism.

But Monday's poll found that half of Americans do not see the war in Iraq as part of the war on terror that began after September 11, 2001.
A third rationale for war in Iraq?

Sen. John Kerry, the Massachusetts Democrat who ran for president against Bush last year, told CNN's "Larry King Live" that the speech offered a third rationale for the war in Iraq.

"The first, of course, was weapons of mass destruction. The second was democracy, and now, tonight, it's to combat the hotbed of terrorism," he said. "But most Americans are aware that the hotbed of terrorism never existed in Iraq until we got there."

Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told "Larry King Live" he was satisfied Bush made his case.

"I think the president laid out tonight an excellent scenario of what the realities are and what we face. (The American people) needed that. Now we need to show some progress on the ground," he said.

There are about 138,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. More than 1,740 U.S. troops have died there since the war began in March 2003 -- 883 of them after last June's handover.

The Iraqi government has made key strides in the year since it regained sovereignty, including historic elections in January. But the fledgling country has seen no let-up in the insurgency.

Iraq's transitional administrative law calls for a new, permanent constitution to be prepared by August 15 and put to the voters in a referendum by October 15.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/06/...ntl/index.html

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Guess who'll take the blame for Bush's war

Resolved: Iraq is a mess.

If there's anyone present who still believes there isn't any comparison between this and Vietnam -- other than Michael "there isn't any comparison between this and Vietnam" Deaver, the former Reagan aide -- let him speak now, or forever lose eligibility for the Blindest of the Blind Hall of Fame.

History isn't just repeating itself. It's mocking us. Every bloody day we hear this glib administration cite the rosy progress of a perpetually grim situation, with its generals in tow, nodding in self-denying but sycophantic agreement.

Meanwhile we're back to counterinsurgency improvisations, frontless battles, body counts, indigenous-personnel training, fuzzy justifications, budget-blasting, a seething public at home, world scorn, and just plain disgust with how we got there and why we can't get out.

Resolved: Iraq is a mess and getting much messier.

http://pmcarpenter.blogs.com/p_m_car...wholl_tak.html

[Crushaholic]

Originally Posted by §Pide®

If that was the case , we would be in Saudia Arabia .......... Why is it so hard to believe , that you want to take out Terrorism , you should go to where it Starts ?

I DO have a problem with Saudi Arabia. They were very uncooperative in enforcing the "no fly zone" as part of the sanctions against Iraq.


Saddam DOES have a motive to hate the United States after Big Daddy Bush prevented him from taking over Kuwait. I refuse to believe Iraq is an innocent party in the terror game. We didn't go into a country that was pure as the wind driven snow. Hussein was GLAD that Osama and his thugs attacked the United States, even if he really DID have nothing to do with the attacks.

[Rigs11]

Originally Posted by Crushaholic

I DO have a problem with Saudi Arabia. They were very uncooperative in enforcing the "no fly zone" as part of the sanctions against Iraq.


Saddam DOES have a motive to hate the United States after Big Daddy Bush prevented him from taking over Kuwait. I refuse to believe Iraq is an innocent party in the terror game. We didn't go into a country that was pure as the wind driven snow. Hussein was GLAD that Osama and his thugs attacked the United States, even if he really DID have nothing to do with the attacks.

Now you're grasping. So we should invade other countries because they're "glad" that others attacked us? Oh brother.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by Crushaholic

I DO have a problem with Saudi Arabia. They were very uncooperative in enforcing the "no fly zone" as part of the sanctions against Iraq.

see that doesnt bother me , what bothers me is whabbism , that stuff is whacked ......

Saddam DOES have a motive to hate the United States after Big Daddy Bush prevented him from taking over Kuwait. I refuse to believe Iraq is an innocent party in the terror game. We didn't go into a country that was pure as the wind driven snow. Hussein was GLAD that Osama and his thugs attacked the United States, even if he really DID have nothing to do with the attacks.

I would agree with all of that , still no justifcation for invading , Saddam was an a-hole no question , but his connections in all of this was moot , Saudia Arabia has 10 fold the connection to Al Qadea , funding of Terrorist etc ....
See the way I see things is , you want to stop Terrorism , you attack the Birth place of it ... What we did was like this ..........
U.S.: Mexico we want you stop people from comming over our border .
Mexico : Suck my Burrito Honkey ......
US: Today we invade Panama , we have evidence of Panama is supporting these People comming over our border and they are damn happy about it ...........

[Crushaholic]

Originally Posted by §Pide®

see that doesnt bother me , what bothers me is whabbism , that stuff is whacked ......



I would agree with all of that , still no justifcation for invading , Saddam was an a-hole no question , but his connections in all of this was moot , Saudia Arabia has 10 fold the connection to Al Qadea , funding of Terrorist etc ....
See the way I see things is , you want to stop Terrorism , you attack the Birth place of it ... What we did was like this ..........
U.S.: Mexico we want you stop people from comming over our border .
Mexico : Suck my Burrito Honkey ......
US: Today we invade Panama , we have evidence of Panama is supporting these People comming over our border and they are damn happy about it ...........

Although I think Bush should do more to curb the illegal immigration into the U.S., this is on a completely different level. Thousands of people died in the worst attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor. Those who applaud THAT tragedy is unforgivable.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by Crushaholic

Although I think Bush should do more to curb the illegal immigration into the U.S., this is on a completely different level. Thousands of people died in the worst attack on American soil since the Civil War. Those who sympathize with THAT tragedy is unforgivable.

do you understand what Imagrents cost us per year ?
How many Americans die from Drug over doses ? That very well could be in the thousands ........
9-11 was horrid , cowardly act , but tto go after the people that sympathized with that , isnt the same as going after the philsophy that created these cowards .........so my comparision stands

[Garcia Bronco]

Iraq is linked to Terrorism...maybe not the specific 9/11 jerkoffs....but I see no difference between the radical Islamic fundamentalist on the west side or the east side...and as far as I'm concerned...we can't kill enough of them.

[Crushaholic]

Originally Posted by Rigs11

Now you're grasping. So we should invade other countries because they're "glad" that others attacked us? Oh brother.

The glee Saddam expressed PLUS his already known hatred for the United States for ruining his plans PLUS the belief that he had a WMD program going sets him apart from other countries that were glad that America was attacked. I refuse to believe that Bush purposely lied about WMDs, so we had enough reasons to go in there and take him out. We haven't found any WMDs, but we HAVE found terrorists and we are engaging the enemy.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco

Iraq is linked to Terrorism...maybe not the specific 9/11 jerkoffs....but I see no difference between the radical Islamic fundamentalist on the west side or the east side...and as far as I'm concerned...we can't kill enough of them.

there was no link . none whats so ever .........

[Spider]

Originally Posted by Crushaholic

The glee Saddam expressed PLUS his already known hatred for the United States for ruining his plans PLUS the belief that he had a WMD program going sets him apart from other countries that were glad that America was attacked. I refuse to believe that Bush purposely lied about WMDs, so we had enough reasons to go in there and take him out. We haven't found any WMDs, but we HAVE found terrorists and we are engaging the enemy.

The Terrorist like Zarqawi came after we invaded .......
2 reasons why the terrorist came to Iraq instead of Afghanistan .....
1. Location , Saudia Arabia , Syria , it is easier to train terrorist against our Troops then slip them back over the border to syria , Iran , Saudia Arabia , to airports to parts in western europe ......
2. Iraq is alot easier to get in then Afghanistan , mush less rugged country .....
so in a way we are training terrorist ............