'Overseas Contingency Operation'

[DiveCon]

Who has the resources to attack all of our trading partners and beat them all in a war? al-Qaeda? I don't think so. Your scenario is a bit far fetched.

uh, you really are narrow minded
who said they would attack ALL of them at the same time?

I'm not of the opinion that al-Qaeda or any terrorist organization could attack and defeat nations such as France, Germany, Canada, or Great Britain in any kind of war, let alone all of them.

well, they have already attacked France, Spain, UK
and they tried to attack Canada but were caught


how far are you willing to let them grow before you are willing to respond?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

uh, you really are narrow minded
who said they would attack ALL of them at the same time?

I'm not of the opinion that al-Qaeda or any terrorist organization could attack and defeat nations such as France, Germany, Canada, or Great Britain in any kind of war, let alone all of them.

well, they have already attacked France, Spain, UK
and they tried to attack Canada but were caught


how far are you willing to let them grow before you are willing to respond?

Well I believe that if we're trading with Middle East nations, getting our military out of their lands, stopping sanctions that only hurt innocent civilians, and stop bombing them then they're going to find it far more difficult to grow. People aren't going to want to join a terrorist organization if they have no specific grievances against us, they're not going to leave their lives and their families to wage jihad on us just because they don't like our freedoms. There will always be radicals that hate us for whatever reason they can come up with, but I believe they'll be in much more of a minority if we quit giving them reasons to hate us.

 

[DiveCon]

I'm not of the opinion that al-Qaeda or any terrorist organization could attack and defeat nations such as France, Germany, Canada, or Great Britain in any kind of war, let alone all of them.

well, they have already attacked France, Spain, UK
and they tried to attack Canada but were caught


how far are you willing to let them grow before you are willing to respond?

Well I believe that if we're trading with Middle East nations, getting our military out of their lands, stopping sanctions that only hurt innocent civilians, and stop bombing them then they're going to find it far more difficult to grow. People aren't going to want to join a terrorist organization if they have no specific grievances against us, they're not going to leave their lives and their families to wage jihad on us just because they don't like our freedoms. There will always be radicals that hate us for whatever reason they can come up with, but I believe they'll be in much more of a minority if we quit giving them reasons to hate us.

you still dont get it
that would be seen as a sign of weakness by them


thats why it was such a mistake to leave Saddam in power after liberating Kuwait
it was seen as a weakness in the US and was used to grow numbers

fighting them ahas actually REDUCED their numbers in spite of what lib morons say

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Terrorism is here to stay because it's a tactic, and you can't wage a war against a tactic..

Mindless blatherskite repeated without thought. Regurgitation without cogitation. Read that again and really think about it.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Terrorism is here to stay because it's a tactic, and you can't wage a war against a tactic..

Mindless blatherskite repeated without thought. Regurgitation without cogitation. Read that again and really think about it.

I read it, thought about it, and stand by it.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Terrorism is here to stay because it's a tactic, and you can't wage a war against a tactic..

Mindless blatherskite repeated without thought. Regurgitation without cogitation. Read that again and really think about it.

I read it, thought about it, and stand by it.

Then clearly you need to study the terms you use.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Mindless blatherskite repeated without thought. Regurgitation without cogitation. Read that again and really think about it.

I read it, thought about it, and stand by it.

Then clearly you need to study the terms you use.

I disagree.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

I read it, thought about it, and stand by it.

Then clearly you need to study the terms you use.

I disagree.

The "no shit Sherlock" statement of the day!

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Then clearly you need to study the terms you use.

I disagree.

The "no shit Sherlock" statement of the day!

Thanks.

 

[Xenophon]

Changing the name is just so important.

 

[Truthmatters]

Bush repetedly changed teh name of the war you fools.

 

[jillian]

My suggestion is to adopt a foreign policy of non-interventionism, and to bring all our troops from around the world home.

Either extreme is wrong. There needs to be a middle ground where we intervene when it's in our interests and we don't when it's not.... The neo-con version is overly agressive and designed to say "F you" to the rest of the world. But the non-interventionist philosophies will just allow the bad guys to victimize everyone else.

 

[Xenophon]

Bush repetedly changed teh name of the war you fools.

Ah, we are again seeing the Douchebaggery of saying something stupid is ok now because a moron did it before.

When will it register that saying 'Bush' does not absolve people from being assholes?

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Bush repetedly changed teh name of the war you fools.

Again we see the desperate, infantile "Mom! The other kids did it too!" defense.

Care to enlighten us all, on the various names Boooooosh called the GWOT?

 

[WillowTree]

Who has the resources to attack all of our trading partners and beat them all in a war? al-Qaeda? I don't think so. Your scenario is a bit far fetched.

well over in Europe,, you got Russia, you got Germany,, in the mideast,, you got lots of folks who could interupt free trade..

And when has Germany expressed any interest in world domination since WW2? Russia may be more belligerent these days, but I've not seen anything that makes me think they're interested in world domination.

Do you have any idea how short the amount of time is since WW2? and then ask yourself,, without interventionish what might Germany do?? Given their history?

 

[DiveCon]

Bush repetedly changed teh name of the war you fools.

Again we see the desperate, infantile "Mom! The other kids did it too!" defense.

Care to enlighten us all, on the various names Boooooosh called the GWOT?

not to mention it is an outright LIE
truthNEVERmatters lied, the Bush admin changed the name ONCE

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

well over in Europe,, you got Russia, you got Germany,, in the mideast,, you got lots of folks who could interupt free trade..

And when has Germany expressed any interest in world domination since WW2? Russia may be more belligerent these days, but I've not seen anything that makes me think they're interested in world domination.

Do you have any idea how short the amount of time is since WW2? and then ask yourself,, without interventionish what might Germany do?? Given their history?

My guess is they'd be as peaceful as they are now. Given the history of Great Britain and France do you think they could potentially be a problem as well?

 

[007]

Who has the resources to attack all of our trading partners and beat them all in a war? al-Qaeda? I don't think so. Your scenario is a bit far fetched.

uh, you really are narrow minded
who said they would attack ALL of them at the same time?

I'm not of the opinion that al-Qaeda or any terrorist organization could attack and defeat nations such as France, Germany, Canada, or Great Britain in any kind of war, let alone all of them.

They don't just use terrorists as soldiers, ALL muslims are potential combatants, and if you think that if we just "leave these people alone" they'll for some magical reason stop wanting to KILL all of us, you are incredibly naive. They'd just call that a victory and press on with THEIR WAR against WESTERN CIVILIZATION. You can do one of two things with these people, die fighting them, or die NOT fighting them. I think I'll take die fighting them.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

No, not all muslims are potential enemies, there are those who want nothing to do with the extremists. Think about why they hate us. Because we're free? Maybe some of the more extreme terrorists, but how do they get so many to join their cause? Because there are actual bread and butter issues that muslims are mad at the United States about. Military presence in their holy lands (Iraq and Saudi Arabia), murderous sanctions, and bombings and attacks that end up killing innocent civilians.

 

[DiveCon]

No, not all muslims are potential enemies, there are those who want nothing to do with the extremists. Think about why they hate us. Because we're free? Maybe some of the more extreme terrorists, but how do they get so many to join their cause? Because there are actual bread and butter issues that muslims are mad at the United States about. Military presence in their holy lands (Iraq and Saudi Arabia), murderous sanctions, and bombings and attacks that end up killing innocent civilians.

there were NO US troops in Iraq at the time of 9/11
nor were there any at the time of the wtc bombing in 93
and we were invited into Saudi