How about listening to your President? These are GWB's own words.

``People should feel comfortable about expressing their opinions about Iraq,'' he said. ``This is not an issue of who is patriotic and who is not patriotic. It's an issue of an honest open debate about the way forward in Iraq.''

Backpedaling, or is he actually speaking the truth? So, it appears that we who oppose the war are not giving aid and comfort to the enemy as so many have wrongly stated on this site.

This is not an issue of who is patriotic and who is not patriotic. It's an issue of an honest open debate about the way forward in Iraq.''
Ah, but one must learn to read fully the teachings of the eloquent one.

about the way forward in Iraq ~~ I looked in the dictionary and the word 'forward' does not mean; 'to retreat or surrender'.

Pulling out before the job is done is NOT an option. You should know that Barry ~ you're married.:leghumper

So many here have blathered on and on about "giving comfort to the enemy" that they must feel like fools now that the Fearless Leader has spoken.

Another meaning of the word 'forward' could also be interpreted as 'positive'. The poor left, the most miserable, negative creatures on the planet.

It is unfortunate that you have to interpret GWB's words. So typical.

Well, I'll just say this, I don't think you guys give aid and comfort to the enemy. You just give them something to look forward to if you ever get back into power any time soon. I find it interesting that the left always thinks that they are so enlightened and smarter than the right. And don't say you don't guys, because you do. You think all we do is listen to whatever GW says and follow like lemmings. If you guys are so much smarter and better, than why do you all say the same damned drivel over and over and over again. Don't turn this around on the republicans just yet. I promise I'll fully discuss that with you guys. But here's my question. If you guys are so much better, where is your grand scheme to fix the world? Show me your plans and give me proof that they will work. Tell me how pulling out of Iraq will help out the situation over there. Quite honestly, I would never become or vote democrat because it has become the party of the anti-republican. It's like some leftover hippie thing. You just want to go against big money, big companies, and anyone else who has it better than you. Part of that means being 180 degrees away from any republican seat holder, whether it is president, senator, governer, etc. Now, you guys have some great people in your party, and I don't think that most democrats are crazy. The problem is that you have a few voices representing the masses, and they aren't representing well. I guess what I'm saying is, why the hell do you keep posting this kind of crap and thinking, "Oooooohhhhhh, I got those repugs this time!!!!!" It's getting old and tired, just like your mom. You remind me of my boss. Instead of thinking of a new vision for my dealership and thinking of ways to get more customers in the door, he'd rather bitch and complain because I didn't put all three phone numbers of a customer on a document, only the best to reach them on. Why don't we all stop bitching about the president, and think of something else to debate. I'm so bored of this, that is why I don't post here anymore. You guys post over and over, I can't count how many threads you start here, with what end in mind I don't know. Do you honestly think that fossten, brian, or myself are going to read one and one day be like, "Gee Barry, you are so much more enlightened than me. You really did get us repugs that time. Wow, I think I'll join your side and help destroy the evil right." Because that will never happen, and I think that you know that. All I have to say is BLAH.

It is unfortunate that you have to interpret GWB's words. So typical.
And your idol Clinton wasn't the master of nuance? ...depends what the meaning of is ~ is. lol. You're really reaching on this one, again.

All I have to say is BLAH.And we have a new smiley for that...:blah:

I believe that I have clearly stated before that I never voted for Clinton and I've never defended his actions, ever.

This is just another typical lame example of RWW diversionary tactics to deflect criticism away from GWB.

How about listening to your President? These are GWB's own words.

``People should feel comfortable about expressing their opinions about Iraq,'' he said. ``This is not an issue of who is patriotic and who is not patriotic. It's an issue of an honest open debate about the way forward in Iraq.''

Backpedaling, or is he actually speaking the truth? So, it appears that we who oppose the war are not giving aid and comfort to the enemy as so many have wrongly stated on this site.

There is a fundamental difference between "expressing your opinion on Iraq" and telling lies about Iraq, making things up about Iraq, or rewriting the history of why we went into Iraq. The first is fundamentally American, and it is right for Bush to defend it. The latter, which is what too many on your side of the aisle are doing, tends, in fact, to give aid and comfort to the enemy.

This week, to cite just one example, a college professor in New Jersey publicly stated that our soldiers in the field should shoot their commanding officers. Is that "expressing your opinion on Iraq" or "giving aid and comfort to the enemy."? I know which one it is. Do you?

What are you blaming Bush for now?

The WORLD is starting to turn against Al-Qaeda.

Economy is growing at the highest rate since the 1970's.

Gas has come down 30% in the last 6 weeks.

Unemployment remains at 5%, which many economists consider full employment.

Iraq has gone surprisingly well. Next month 25 million people vote on a new Constitution for their country.

The United States will be a slow pullout of Iraq. Forces will remain in the region so we can keep an eye on Iran and Syria.

North Korean talks have gone very well using the multi-nation talks that presidential democrat candidate Kerry did not want.

A new trade pact is being worked out with China, opening up their huge market to US goods and services.

France is in turmoil. Love it.

No new attacks on US soil during Bush's term in office so far...knock on wood.

Home ownership at an all time high.

Stock market getting back to pre-crash highs.

Inflation hovers around the all-time low.



I can go on and on. What do you lefties have to say that is POSITIVE for a change.

I'll start for you.

1) Hillary will be your nominee for President. :Bang

Bryan,

You've got to take those BuSh goggles off. Even your precious Rasmussen polls shows that 56% of Americans think BuSh is dishonest.

Hillarity is not my choice for President, nor was her husband. I'd vote Republican if McCain runs.

Why do you always divert to the Clinton name when we're clearly talking about BuSh?

Even your precious Rasmussen polls shows that 56% of Americans think BuSh is dishonest.48% thought that even before Bush was elected President the 1st time. The other 8% are a by-product of one of the biggest continuing smear campaigns by the MSM.

Every other headline is BUSH LIED. What do you expect? The average joe blow is too stupid to know what is going on in everyday life, much less politics. All these people know is what is told to them on TV. They are the Democrats power base and they have been spoon-fed the Bush lied campaign for years on end. And long as Bush continues doing the right thing, his ratings can be 1% as far as I am concerned.

Joey cries about the divide in this country. Got news for you. Doesn't matter who is in the Presidency, the divide will continue to widen as long as the left and the media continue to mislead.

So many here have blathered on and on about "giving comfort to the enemy" that they must feel like fools now that the Fearless Leader has spoken.

Barry, the fool is the one that does not understand, and APPRECIATE the entire situation.

Yes, Master of circular arguements.

Yes, Master of circular arguements.

What would you like for me to clarify for you?

So many here have blathered on and on about "giving comfort to the enemy" that they must feel like fools now that the Fearless Leader has spoken.

Hmm. Let me check - - - - - - - - -

Nope. Don't feel like a fool.

In fact, I'll say it again: Anybody who says we should pull out of Iraq, or that Bush took us to war over false pretenses, is giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

Right now, the greatest allies the terrorists have is the American Left Wing Congressmen who, by the way, don't even have the guts to vote what they blather on about. Cowardly through and through.

Hmm. Let me check - - - - - - - - -

Nope. Don't feel like a fool.

In fact, I'll say it again: Anybody who says we should pull out of Iraq, or that Bush took us to war over false pretenses, is giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

Right now, the greatest allies the terrorists have is the American Left Wing Congressmen who, by the way, don't even have the guts to vote what they blather on about. Cowardly through and through.

Well then let me be the first to officially give aid and comfort now that fossten has defined it so clearly for us...

Bush took us to war over false pretenses. There is no doubt about it, all that's left is the spin recovery of saying 'well he didn't *know* they were false pretenses'

We should pull out of Iraq right now. Today in fact we should implement a strategic withdrawal. Support our troops by bringing them home for the holidays.

Well then let me be the first to officially give aid and comfort now that fossten has defined it so clearly for us...

Bush took us to war over false pretenses. There is no doubt about it, all that's left is the spin recovery of saying 'well he didn't *know* they were false pretenses'

We should pull out of Iraq right now. Today in fact we should implement a strategic withdrawal. Support our troops by bringing them home for the holidays.

"Allahu akbar!" Said the terrorists. "We have another convert to wage the holy jihad against the godless infidel Americans. Allah will reserve 72 virgins for you."

Raveneyes, if we pull out of Iraq, just where do YOU suggest we fight the terrorists next?

Raveneyes, if we pull out of Iraq, just where do YOU suggest we fight the terrorists next?

The internet? The banks? The terrorist cells that exist here and in europe? In our hearts? With our goods and services? Drop a McDonald's on every block and broadcast cable TV for free across fringe nations, I'll bet you'll see terrorism go down dramatically.

"Allah will reserve 72 virgins for you."


Isn't it 42? And do the three that I've had in life count against the total?

:D

Bush took us to war over false pretenses. There is no doubt about it, all that's left is the spin recovery of saying 'well he didn't *know* they were false pretenses'

Please prove your allegation with FACTS.

The internet? The banks? The terrorist cells that exist here and in europe? In our hearts? With our goods and services? Drop a McDonald's on every block and broadcast cable TV for free across fringe nations, I'll bet you'll see terrorism go down dramatically.

Please explain how this "happy" plan of yours is going to work, as a practical matter.

Please prove your allegation with FACTS.


It's already been done for me several times...no need to re-hash over again


Please explain how this "happy" plan of yours is going to work, as a practical matter.

As a practical matter no particular plan of war on terror is going to work 100%. The current war on terror however will do NOTHING to decrease terrorism, rather it will only create more terrorists. We are currently feeding right in to the hands of Al Queida by giving them more people who are happily enrolling in their ranks to support their fallen brethren and dead countrymen.

You want to disassemble terrorism? You take out it's teeth, not by punching them out, rather by feeding it candy and waiting for them to rot away.

It's already been done for me several times...no need to re-hash over again

You actually think that is PROOF? You ACTUALLY b-e-l-i-e-v-e that?http://www.geocities.com/vitas00/LINCOLNS/a.gifhttp://www.geocities.com/vitas00/LINCOLNS/a.gifhttp://www.geocities.com/vitas00/LINCOLNS/a.gif

Provide links to credible information.


You want to disassemble terrorism? You take out it's teeth, not by punching them out, rather by feeding it candy and waiting for them to rot away.

Right!!! By making Iraq a democracy. Other Islamic countries will follow the example, by the sheer weight of the successful example.

Feeding candy to terrorists is like liberal Democrats giving freebies to the poor, when instead they should have engineered incentive oriented programs.

Terrorists are, by definition, irrational. You try dealing directly with them rationally. On your own.

It's already been done for me several times...no need to re-hash over again


Baloney. You can't prove that if you tried.


As a practical matter no particular plan of war on terror is going to work 100%. The current war on terror however will do NOTHING to decrease terrorism, rather it will only create more terrorists. We are currently feeding right in to the hands of Al Queida by giving them more people who are happily enrolling in their ranks to support their fallen brethren and dead countrymen.

You have no basis whatsoever to make that claim. You know nothing about terrorism as evidenced by the opinions you post. I can cite example after example indicating that we are winning the war on terror, while all you can point to is France and Spain, where they gave in to terror (your plan) and now they are lost.
You haven't answered my question - Where do YOU think we should fight the terrorists? It's easy for you to say "The current plan won't work." But I don't ever hear you coming up with an alternative plan - just like your kool-aid-dispensing leaders in the media and congress.


You want to disassemble terrorism? You take out it's teeth, not by punching them out, rather by feeding it candy and waiting for them to rot away.

What are you a dentist? What do you mean, take out its teeth? Once again, you make a vague statement without clarity.

His statement was pretty clear to me.

His statement was pretty clear to me.

Do you want to explain his statement? Do you agree with him?

Or should he explain it himself.

or should I just be tired of explaining and re-explaining when all it's going to get me is called names and rough housed.

I try to see from the other side of things whenever I'm arguing. Apparently I'm the only one.

You go ahead and have your fun with your war on terror. I'll be one of the millions who will outlive you and have to deal with the repercussions in my generation and then the generation after me can come in and be all bull-in-a-china-shop again and start the whole cycle over.

Maybe one day we'll manage to blow the whole damned world to smithereens...hopefully it will be after I'm long dead and gone

You haven't answered my question - Where do YOU think we should fight the terrorists?

Points upward and repeats:

"The internet? The banks? The terrorist cells that exist here and in europe? In our hearts? With our goods and services? Drop a McDonald's on every block and broadcast cable TV for free across fringe nations, I'll bet you'll see terrorism go down dramatically."

or should I just be tired of explaining and re-explaining when all it's going to get me is called names and rough housed.

I try to see from the other side of things whenever I'm arguing. Apparently I'm the only one.

You go ahead and have your fun with your war on terror. I'll be one of the millions who will outlive you and have to deal with the repercussions in my generation and then the generation after me can come in and be all bull-in-a-china-shop again and start the whole cycle over.

Maybe one day we'll manage to blow the whole damned world to smithereens...hopefully it will be after I'm long dead and gone

Pal, make your case. MAKE IT CERTAIN.

State facts, ...

State facts, or be known for being full of it. It is your reputation....

Great...well then I'm just full of it.

You know why? Because I'm some know it all punk who hasn't ever seen anything or done anything and I only know it all because I've never been anywhere or been in the real world.

So since I'm so full of it, feel free to stop arguing with me because my words are meaningless and obviously have no weight.

Great...well then I'm just full of it.

You know why? Because I'm some know it all punk who hasn't ever seen anything or done anything and I only know it all because I've never been anywhere or been in the real world.

So since I'm so full of it, feel free to stop arguing with me because my words are meaningless and obviously have no weight.

Bottom Line: aVeneyes has nothing to contribute to a "Politics & Current Events" here.

I have yet to see you actually say something.

No doubt, that is my fault, correct?

I have yet to see you actually say something.


http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/showthread.php?t=14833
http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/showthread.php?t=14443
http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/showthread.php?t=14317
http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/showthread.php?t=14040


I've said plenty.

F-you
:mad:

http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/showthread.php?t=14833
http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/showthread.php?t=14443
http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/showthread.php?t=14317
http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/showthread.php?t=14040


I've said plenty.

F-you
:mad:

I am not going to read that crap. You have had NOTHING to say, and more importantly, CONTRIBUTE here. You are a total loser.

Give us a link to where you actually said ANYTHING, anything at all.

I am not going to read that crap. You have had NOTHING to say, and more importantly, CONTRIBUTE here. You are a total loser.

Give us a link to where you actually said ANYTHING, anything at all.


How about you stop replying to my nothing then? If I'm such a loser then why is it so important that you prove me one?

F-you
:mad:


That says it all, doesn’t it? IQ +/- about, more or less, your shoe size.

How about you stop replying to my nothing then? If I'm such a loser then why is it so important that you prove me one?

You post, I will reply.

:blah: :blah: :blah:

We should pull out of Iraq right now. Today in fact we should implement a strategic withdrawal. Support our troops by bringing them home for the holidays.

See...this is what I'm talking about. This is not support. If we were to just up and leave Iraq, what would all of my bretheren have died for?

The left continuously speaks of supporting the troops but at the same time draws attention from the good and belittles the reason why we are there. They slap a yellow ribbon on their vehicle and then go on TV talking about all the poor innocent civilians we are killing. Which by default would make the Armed Forces a bunch of murderers.

They have no clue of the affect of their words once they pass their silver tongues. This is not support...this is not expressing your feelings...this is a blatant attack on the hearts and minds of US Servicemembers and a direct boost to the credibility of our enemies.

His statement was pretty clear to me.

Do you want to explain his statement?

:blah: :blah: :blah:

Yep, I agree.

---------------------------------

On Agreeing to the Resolution
11/19/2005
House Roll Call No. 608
109th Congress, 1st Session

Failed: 3-403 (see complete tally)


The House failed to pass H. Res. 571, to express the sense of the House of Representatives that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately, by a recorded vote of 3 ayes to 403 noes with 6 voting "present", Roll No. 608.

---------------------------------

Not only are you leftocrats in the minority, you are in the far lunatic fringe. Even Democrats are embarrassed about you. And you just don't get it, do you.

See...this is what I'm talking about. This is not support. If we were to just up and leave Iraq, what would all of my bretheren have died for?

The left continuously speaks of supporting the troops but at the same time draws attention from the good and belittles the reason why we are there. They slap a yellow ribbon on their vehicle and then go on TV talking about all the poor innocent civilians we are killing. Which by default would make the Armed Forces a bunch of murderers.

They have no clue of the affect of their words once they pass their silver tongues. This is not support...this is not expressing your feelings...this is a blatant attack on the hearts and minds of US Servicemembers and a direct boost to the credibility of our enemies.

How are you going to place YOUR OPINION over how I MEANT it?

Arrogant

Arrogant and stupid

I want our servicemen and women home for the holidays. I think that is the support they need. Their job is done...they've 'liberated' Iraq. The men and women who have died have not died in vain...regime change has occurred.

Pal, make your case. MAKE IT CERTAIN.

State facts, ...


Facts? How about some solid facts from the right? Last time I checked that new evidence on the WMD's and tie's to Saddam/Al Qaeda didn't pan out.

Ah, but one must learn to read fully the teachings of the eloquent one.

about the way forward in Iraq ~~ I looked in the dictionary and the word 'forward' does not mean; 'to retreat or surrender'.

Pulling out before the job is done is NOT an option. You should know that Barry ~ you're married.:leghumper


Correct, but 'Forward' also means.....

1)Lacking restraint or modesty; presumptuous or bold
2)Deviating radically from convention or tradition; extreme

So, if you're going to interpret GWB's words how you see fit, then anyone can interpret them thier own way as long as they use some definition of 'FORWARD'...

Point is, he was saying that open debate is encouraged and disagreement doesn't imply that you're the enemy. Unlike the garbage that other's have said here. At least that's what I got from the quote.

Points upward and repeats:

"The internet? The banks? The terrorist cells that exist here and in europe? In our hearts? With our goods and services? Drop a McDonald's on every block and broadcast cable TV for free across fringe nations, I'll bet you'll see terrorism go down dramatically."


Oh, I see, we'll Big Mac'em to death. They'll supersize until they die of diabetes. Wow. What a great idea.

The internet? The banks? What in the HE77 are you talking about? Or do you even know?

While we're doing internet "stuff", they're blowing up buildings. Yeah, that's real effective.

Let's try something you could answer in a more clear way:

If we had never gone into Iraq, would the terrorists have respected us for taking our 'punishment' on 9/11, and never attacked us again?

Oh, I see, we'll Big Mac'em to death. They'll supersize until they die of diabetes. Wow. What a great idea.

The internet? The banks? What in the HE77 are you talking about? Or do you even know?

While we're doing internet "stuff", they're blowing up buildings. Yeah, that's real effective.

Let's try something you could answer in a more clear way:

If we had never gone into Iraq, would the terrorists have respected us for taking our 'punishment' on 9/11, and never attacked us again?'

He means (as I read it) you give them a better way of life, you educate them. If your average uneducated poor peasant is no longer uneducated and doing without he/she will less likely be inclined to listen to some nut job preaching hatred and asking them to be a suicide bomb. You're essentially saying the same thing of why troops are in Iraq, its just a different approach to the same outcome.

As far as your question about Iraq... Who knows? Can you say that we will never be attacked again because we went into Iraq? I'm a bit confused, are we or aren't we in Iraq because Saddam was in on the 9/11 attacks... The righties here go back and forth on this.

'

He means (as I read it) you give them a better way of life, you educate them. If your average uneducated poor peasant is no longer uneducated and doing without he/she will less likely be inclined to listen to some nut job preaching hatred and asking them to be a suicide bomb. You're essentially saying the same thing of why troops are in Iraq, its just a different approach to the same outcome.


You just made an unsubstantiated, ridiculous claim that has no evidence whatsoever to support it. You also have no insight into the terrorist mindset. The most effective way to reduce recruiting of terrorism is to wipe out the recruiters. Education has no real effect on terrorism. Look how educated our Democratic leaders are, and they preach anti-Americanism daily.

As far as your question about Iraq... Who knows? Can you say that we will never be attacked again because we went into Iraq? I'm a bit confused, are we or aren't we in Iraq because Saddam was in on the 9/11 attacks... The righties here go back and forth on this.

It's understandable that you are confused, but it's not by what we righties say, it's by what your leaders are spouting. We have been saying the same thing over and over again, and it's NOT what you just said. None of us ever said that Saddam was in on the 9/11 attacks. Geez. Get your story straight. We are in Iraq because despite UN resolutions, Saddam refused to cooperate with inspectors and disarm. The president, senate, and congress all agreed that we needed to go in there.

Furthermore, I want Raveneyes to answer this question, since he has shown a propensity for dodging questions and deflecting/distracting from the point.

You just made an unsubstantiated, ridiculous claim that has no evidence whatsoever to support it. You also have no insight into the terrorist mindset. The most effective way to reduce recruiting of terrorism is to wipe out the recruiters. Education has no real effect on terrorism. Look how educated our Democratic leaders are, and they preach anti-Americanism daily.


You just made an unsubstantiated, ridiculous claim that has no evidence whatsoever to support it.

Oh, I see, we'll Big Mac'em to death. They'll supersize until they die of diabetes. Wow. What a great idea.

The internet? The banks? What in the HE77 are you talking about? Or do you even know?

While we're doing internet "stuff", they're blowing up buildings. Yeah, that's real effective.

Let's try something you could answer in a more clear way:

If we had never gone into Iraq, would the terrorists have respected us for taking our 'punishment' on 9/11, and never attacked us again?

I think we could have used the tactics I've talked about to avoid a war while still retaliating.

BigMacing a culture to death is a clearly valuable and effective tactic. Look at the whole backlash world wide to the export of US culture. Look at Saudi Arabia. Look at Egypt. Look at Kuwait. These are all muslim countries that are very loyal to the American way of life and have very little objection to the things that we do.

The internet, the banks, I'm talking about propaganda and money control.

The US controls more of the world's money supply and international trade than any other country in the world. We have influence over key banks and trade organizations capable of completely shutting down the money flow of any person or entity we see fit. If we really wanted to we could return the middle east to the stone age by simply cutting off the money flow to them. Al Quieda has clearly been hamstrung by our control over their money flow, and we could go even further.

The internet is the most valuable propaganda resource EVER! The world today has been trained in to believing anything they see in print as fact. The internet is primarily the worlds most widely distributed free print publication....I'm willing to bet more people have access to the internet than those that have access to the Bible which is the world's best selling book. Placing sites in to the hands of key people in terrorist organizations...slowly and marginally altering sites with hacking attacks that belong to terrorist organizations...distributing propaganda in waves and getting people in terrorist organizations to question themselves.

The internet is also a valuable tool for tracking and spying. Terrorist organizations use it as a communication tool, and no matter how good someone is at hiding their tracks on the internet, there is no 100% way to hide where information came from (otherwise there would be no way to send back information to them).

If we took the brainy road while they take the brutish road it will lead to a victory. Yes they blew up a building...we leveled two entire countries in response. Now the war begins in ernest, and rather than give terrorist organizations rallying points by blowing up more things ourselves, we should be more subtle.

The world today has been trained in to believing anything they see in print as fact.

Edit: The LWW have been trained in to believing anything they see in print as fact.

There ~ the truth be told.

Edit: The LWW have been trained in to believing anything they see in print as fact.

There ~ the truth be told.

No that is not the truth, and is completely sidetracking my argument for no reason other than to pander to your conservative buddies.

I think we could have used the tactics I've talked about to avoid a war while still retaliating.

BigMacing a culture to death is a clearly valuable and effective tactic. Look at the whole backlash world wide to the export of US culture. Look at Saudi Arabia. Look at Egypt. Look at Kuwait. These are all muslim countries that are very loyal to the American way of life and have very little objection to the things that we do.

The internet, the banks, I'm talking about propaganda and money control.

The US controls more of the world's money supply and international trade than any other country in the world. We have influence over key banks and trade organizations capable of completely shutting down the money flow of any person or entity we see fit. If we really wanted to we could return the middle east to the stone age by simply cutting off the money flow to them. Al Quieda has clearly been hamstrung by our control over their money flow, and we could go even further.

The internet is the most valuable propaganda resource EVER! The world today has been trained in to believing anything they see in print as fact. The internet is primarily the worlds most widely distributed free print publication....I'm willing to bet more people have access to the internet than those that have access to the Bible which is the world's best selling book. Placing sites in to the hands of key people in terrorist organizations...slowly and marginally altering sites with hacking attacks that belong to terrorist organizations...distributing propaganda in waves and getting people in terrorist organizations to question themselves.

The internet is also a valuable tool for tracking and spying. Terrorist organizations use it as a communication tool, and no matter how good someone is at hiding their tracks on the internet, there is no 100% way to hide where information came from (otherwise there would be no way to send back information to them).

If we took the brainy road while they take the brutish road it will lead to a victory. Yes they blew up a building...we leveled two entire countries in response. Now the war begins in ernest, and rather than give terrorist organizations rallying points by blowing up more things ourselves, we should be more subtle.

I hardly know where to begin.

Re-read your first paragraph. Are you for or against Western culture? I can't tell. In any event, Western culture is what the Islamic extremists OBJECT to, so exporting more of it isn't going to help. You cite countries like Saudi Arabia as emulating Western culture. Do you realize those countries have problems with Islamic terrorists as well? Did you notice what happened in Jordan the other day?

As for the Banking world, no, the USA cannot just shut off money to other countries. We can track terrorist activities through the financial systems, and use it as an investigative tool. In fact, we have, and we are. Much of what we know of the September 11 hijackers came from reconstructing their bank records prior to September 11. But do you realize that a lot of money in the Arab world is outside the banking system altogether? Alternate money movement systems, called Hawalas, are widely used in the Islamic world, both in and outside the Middle East.

Your comments on the internet fall primarily in the category of "So what?" If they all have internet access now, as you assert, it doesn't appear to have been too effective in stopping, say, suicide bombers. The real problem in the Islamic extremist world is that most of the news (read: indoctrination) comes from radical clerics preaching hatred of the West from within the Mosque walls. This is an enormous problem in Europe in particular, where everyone has access to the Internet. So I guess showing them Google hasn't helped; they still want to kill the infidels. Even the Liberal ones.

The statement that we leveled two countries is irresponsible and displays only your bias. I presume you're referring to Afghanistan and Iraq. Both those countries were not "leveled" and in fact the infrastructures there are in better shape and work better since we've been there.

You imagine you're offering some wiser solution here, but in fact you've just listed things we're already doing. And we already know how ineffective NOT using the military to respond to terrorism is, because we had an eight year test of that theory, called the Clinton administration.

You imagine you're offering some wiser solution here, but in fact you've just listed things we're already doing. And we already know how ineffective NOT using the military to respond to terrorism is, because we had an eight year test of that theory, called the Clinton administration.

As I recall, 9/11 happened during Bush's watch not Clinton.

As I recall, 9/11 happened during Bush's watch not Clinton.

That's right. Mohammed Atta parachuted via C-130 into America on September 10th with all his buddies, stayed overnight in the airports, and then waltzed onto the jetways and took over four airplanes as easy as pie. Why, they didn't even need weapons because Bush gave them the codes to open the outer doors! And they got lucky and learned how to fly the planes on the way to the targets! What geniuses!

EVERYTIME WE START TALKING ABOUT BUSH YOU LEFTIES BRING UP CLINTON!

But since you brought it up...:N

That's right. Mohammed Atta parachuted via C-130 into America on September 10th with all his buddies, stayed overnight in the airports, and then waltzed onto the jetways and took over four airplanes as easy as pie. Why, they didn't even need weapons because Bush gave them the codes to open the outer doors! And they got lucky and learned how to fly the planes on the way to the targets! What geniuses!

EVERYTIME WE START TALKING ABOUT BUSH YOU LEFTIES BRING UP
CLINTON!

But since you brought it up...:N

Actually, RB3 brought up Clinton and I'm fairly certain by his post he is a republican/conservative type of person.

As I recall, 9/11 happened during Bush's watch not Clinton.

Yes, it did. And Bush's military response is effective, Clinton's non military dithering was ineffective; yet your side seems to be arguing for the Clinton approach. So do you have a point? Or did you just not read the post?