| NYT | 0 | |
| Miami Herald | 0 | |
| Don Surber | 0 | |
| AP | 0 | |
| WaPo | Obama Urges Groups to Stop Attacks [on Dems who oppose ObamaCare] |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
"Change" You Can Believe In:
"Nixon didn’t try to do that. They couldn't control (the media). They didn’t try. [...] What the hell do they think we are, puppets?"
- Liberal opinion writer Helen Thomas, describing the Obama admin's penchant for heavily scripting public appearances & press conferences - 7/1/09
Scandal of the week
The NYT tells us what we knew already regarding the President’s attempt to take down Saddam Hussein. In this breathtaking example of overhype:
In the weeks before the United States-led invasion of Iraq, as the United States and Britain pressed for a second United Nations resolution condemning Iraq, President Bush’s public ultimatum to Saddam Hussein was blunt: Disarm or face war.
But behind closed doors, the president was certain that war was inevitable. During a private two-hour meeting in the Oval Office on Jan. 31, 2003, he made clear to Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain that he was determined to invade Iraq without the second resolution, or even if international arms inspectors failed to find unconventional weapons, said a confidential memo about the meeting written by Mr. Blair’s top foreign policy adviser and reviewed by The New York Times.
“Our diplomatic strategy had to be arranged around the military planning,” David Manning, Mr. Blair’s chief foreign policy adviser at the time, wrote in the memo that summarized the discussion between Mr. Bush, Mr. Blair and six of their top aides.
Sigh. Why is this news? The history of Saddam Hussein’s intent to deceive not just the UN but the entire international community was well known, so it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand why the President felt that war with Iraq was inevitable.
As usual, however, one has to read much farther into this document in order to get the context of the meeting. By January 31, Bush and Blair had already forced Saddam to allow Hans Blix back in the country for more weapons inspections, the purpose of which was to get the Iraqis to produce proof that they had destroyed their WMD stocks and equipment. That intermediate step came at the insistence of France, which wanted to delay consideration of the so-called “second resolution” wanted by Britain as political cover.
By the time Bush met Blair at the White House, Hans Blix had reported that the Iraqis would not cooperate with the inspections, only paying lip service to the inspectors. Now, thanks to captured notes of Iraqi meetings, we know that Saddam remained confident that his bribery of France and Russia (as well as their well-known economic interest in maintaining their contracts with the Saddam regime) would result in a stalemate at the Security Council over any resolution opening military force as a consequence of failure. That may be why France practically begged Blair at that moment not to pursue a “second resolution” (actually a 17th); they assured both the US and the UK that the previous sixteen resolutions gave plenty of cause for action, but that France would find it politically impossible to vote for explicit military action against Iraq.
By this time, had the US not had a plan for military action against Iraq, it would have been almost criminally neglectful. Why should it surprise anyone that two nations that faced war with Saddam Hussein would discuss the military strategy involved in that war?
[...]
In short, the Times presents us with a memo that shows the US and UK understanding that Saddam would not cooperate with the UN nor voluntarily disarm or step aside; history proved them correct on all those assertions. Given those as reality, the two nations prepared for war. If the Times finds this surprising, it demonstrates their cluelessness all the more.
Yep.
As usual, the NYT is all about sound and fury, signifying — well, here I go repeating myself.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
87 Responses to “Scandal of the week”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
Are you really that obtuse, or are you picking nits just because you’ve had your butt handed to you in this “argument” Kathy, and you’re having a snit attack?
In a post war environment, Iraq, like any other country, will not be as stable and “safe” as a long established democratic republic like the US. Give them time, but then, you leftist hand wringers are all alike, it isn’t perfect immediately, so you whine and bitch and moan about how terrible it is. You have all the patience of a three year old. Are we there yet? I’m tired. Are we there yet? When are we going to get there? Are we there yet?
Geez, grow up and live in the real world instead of your juvenile fantasy utopia. You’ll be happier, nothing makes one more unhappy than unrealistic expectations.
There are also plenty of areas in Iraq that are almost as safe as NYC. Take the Kurdish north, or the areas outside the Sunni triangle, you know, the areas where Saddam’s trained terrorists, the Fedayeen, didn’t dare go and set up shop.
But then, you only believe the MSM defeatist propaganda whores who report in depth, detailed news they painstakingly gathered from their suites in the Baghdad hotels. Yeah, that will give you the whole picture.
>But that’s not the question I asked,
>Cavalier.
It’s the question you should have asked. Because that’s the choice you would deny the Iraqis. You would prefer that they live under the brutal reign of a mass-murdering dictator like Saddam than the US get its lily-white hands dirty. Is Iraq perfect? Hell, no. Iraq has a long way to go before they have a secure country, but at least they’re on the way now. Why do people like you hate Iraqis so, that you would condemn them to cowering under Saddam without hope instead of giving them a chance to have a decent life someday?
It’s obvious, CavalierX, that liberals like Kathy view the Iraqi’s the same way people used to view blacks back when during the days of slavery. “They’re like little children, you can’t expect them to be capable of the same thing whites are capable of, they aren’t capable, so we shouldn’t expect too much of them.” Again, this is the “suble” racism of the left, the Democrats, and their fellow travelers. The racism of diminished expectations and dimished respect.
They don’t think “they” are really people you know…but they think the same thing, if not worse, about Republicans and conservatives, particularly if said Republicans/conservatives are minorities. “They” (meaning those poor ol’dumb (insert minority here) are just too stupid to know what’s best for them and vote/think/act accordingly.” Gag.
There’s that, and then there’s the “magic wand” they expect the government to wave and fix all problems in an instant. I frequently point out that it took Germany five years and Japan seven to build a functioning country after the previous government was toppled in a war, and that Kosovo is still an utter shambles after seven years. And none of those countries were plagued with terrorists supported by their neighbors! Liberals just blink, and immediately forget what I’ve just said. Why are we still there, it’s a quaaaagmire, it’s taking too long…
Cavalier, would you like to be an Iraqi living in Iraq right now, or would you rather be an American living in the United States right now?
Are you glad you’re living in the United States right now instead of Iraq? Or do you think it would make no difference to you either way, and you would be fine living in Iraq?
…liberals like Kathy view the Iraqi’s the same way people used to view blacks back when during the days of lavery. “They’re like little children, you can’t expect them to be capable of the same thing whites are capable of, they aren’t capable, so we shouldn’t expect too much of them.”
Severian, do you believe that only the United States could have freed Iraq? Do you believe that Iraqis were incapable of freeing themselves because they were too scared of Saddam Hussein? Do you think they need the big strong brave Americans to come in and fix their lives for them?
Do you think that Iraqis are capable of repairing power grids? Do you think they know how to build bridges and water treatment plants? Are they capable of setting up their own communications systems? Or do they need the smarter, more qualified Americans to do those things for them?
And none of those countries were plagued with terrorists supported by their neighbors!
And none of those countries were plagued with terrorists supported by their neighbors before the U.S. invaded Iraq in March, 2003.
There’s that, and then there’s the “magic wand” they expect the government to wave and fix all problems in an instant. … Why are we still there, it’s a quaaaagmire, it’s taking too long…
Soooo true, Cavalier. After all, it’s not like we Americans have to live in Iraq with a civil war raging around us. Hey, it takes time. It could take maybe another 10 years, who knows? Maybe even 20. No biggie. Cavalier and Severian and I can just stretch out on the sofa and read a book or watch the football game on tv, or grill some burgers on the deck outside. The war in Iraq won’t stop that. Who cares how long it takes? After all, those Iraqis are used to war and killing and hunger and disease. It would be terrible for Americans to have to deal with that; but for those childlike like Iraqis, it’s no big deal; it’s all they know anyway; they don’t suffer the way we would if we were them. So let’s sit back and relax with a cold one and watch them build their democracy.
Aren’t you GLAD you’re living in the United States, and not in Iraq right now, Cavalier and Severian?
Right CavalierX, they’re like little children. Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
But their impatience is selective. Communism still gets a pass, it’ll work sometime, someday, the fact it’s led to nothing but misery and mass murder for almost 100 years isn’t a reason to discredit it!
Kathy, you are reading and believing the most anti-American and biased sourses available. As for my knowedge of the military, I see the actual reports and measurements of mission data and miss distances. I don’t read what a military “propaganda” (in your view) minister says, I’ve designed the weapons, I know full well how accurate they are. Something all the “sources” you quote have no idea about. Not that the information is unavailable, it’s just that it’s not in line with their biases, so they just make up information on how terribl we are.
You are typical of the leftist, small minded, liberal. No matter what proof exists to the contrary, you keep on believing your weak, nihilist views. You are, basically, a victim/guilt junkie. You love the guilt associated with self condemnation of your own country, and then you attempt to lessen and assuage that guilt by claiming you are better than everyone else because YOU are against the evil old imperialist aims of the US. You’re a hypocrite of the first order, care nothing about anyone other than yourself, you care nothing for the Iraqis, you only claim to, in a completely inane and ineffectual way, so you can feel morally smug and superior. Kind of a smug icing on your guilt cake. Try not to break your arm patting yourself on the back for being soooo much better than the rest of us warmongers.
What you do not know would fill an encyclopedia, but you will never learn because you refuse to listen to anything that doesn’t reinforce your prejudices.
And don’t even start up with that depleted uranium BS. What you don’t know about that is also legion.
Gadzooks, you behave as if ignorance is a virtue.
>Communism still gets a pass
Well, that’s the biggest, most magical wand of them all. Once the government — meaning, of course, the grand bureaucracy of it, not annoying elected individuals — controls absolutely everything, then absolutely everything will work perfectly, all the time. And if you happen to notice that it doesn’t, then you “disappear.” For the good of the State, you know.
“Well, that’s the biggest, most magical wand of them all. Once the government — meaning, of course, the grand bureaucracy of it, not annoying elected individuals — controls absolutely everything, then absolutely everything will work perfectly, all the time.”
Which is just futher proof of the fact that liberals and leftists are immature and haven’t “grown up” and accepted responsibility for their own life. They want a perpetual, “perfect” daddy, the government, to come in and take all the hurt away and make it all better. No sense of self confidence, no sense of responsibility, no sense of self reliance. They are all children who have refused to grow up and become responsible, functioning adults. They want to excuse the most criminal of behavior by saying the perpetrators are victims, and don’t want to see anyone punished for their crimes, that would just make them feel bad. Unless the “crininal” in question is a member of our imperfect, non-socialist/communist government, or a conservative. YOu know, we people who insist on busrting their bubble and commit the ultimate crime of trying to make them live in the real world. The horror, the horror.
I know I said I wouldn’t post to this thread again, but I couldn’t let this go by. Kathy did say something that made alot of sense.
brown and black people were allowed to die through criminal inaction in New Orleans and those who survived have been almost completely abandoned
She is right. It is time to charge Mayor Nagin and Gov. Blanco for their criminal inaction. It is time to investigate these two bb brains for their negligence and inaction. It amazes me how bad it was in NO, when the main force of the hurricane hit east of there and wiped cities in Mississippi off the map, but MS didn’t have half the problems. Why you ask??? Cause the Republican Gov. Baurbor called for manditory evacuations on SATURDAY over 48 hours before the hurricane hit. Unlike his Dem counterpart in LA. She didn’t call for evacuations until Sunday less than 24 hours before the Hurricane hit. It is time to get these criminals out of office. – Lorica
Ohhh yes, and just because Saddamn didn’t have much to do with AQ doesnt mean he had nothing to do with terrorism. Even PBS finally got it right. Take alook at the 5th question.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/gunning/interviews/khodada.html
Surprise, Surprise. Ties to terrorist. Also let’s not forget that Ol’ Saddamn paid the families of sucide bombers 25,000.00 for Hamas. And that’s not because he was such a humanitarian. Those suicide bombers were attacking Israel and by paying these people he encouraged this action, and thus was a “destablizing” effect on the middle east. Looks like it ain’t all our fault after all guys. – Lorica
Lorica,
Kathy said “brown and black people were allowed to die through criminal inaction in New Orleans and those who survived have been almost completely abandoned”
Notice the inherent racism again? Poor ol’helpless brown and black people were allowed to die…it’s our job to take care of them because liberals all know they are too weak and stupid to take care of themselves. There were plenty of problems, most directly attributable to the local and staate DEMOCRATIC morons in charge, but again, notice the slight on the “brown and black” people. They need us white liberal betters to take care of them, the po’children.
Gag again.
Kathy, you are reading and believing the most anti-American and biased sourses available.
Anything that doesn’t slavishly support Bush administration policies is “anti-American” to people like you, Severian. And any news source that doesn’t consider itself to be cheerleaders for the conservative cause is left-wing by your lights.
As it happens, I get my information from a wide variety of sources, both print and online. I read newspapers, online publications, dozens of blogs (including conservative ones, obviously), and books. In fact, I probably get most of my general knowledge about current events and politics from books. I would be willing to bet that I do more reading, from a wider variety of sources, and from more diverse points of view, than you do, or than most of the people who have commented here do. I would lay odds on that. The only source I never look at is television news.
As for my knowedge of the military, I see the actual reports and measurements of mission data and miss distances. I don’t read what a military “propaganda” (in your view) minister says, I’ve designed the weapons, I know full well how accurate they are.
Okay, then I have some questions.
How does the military define “accurate” in the context of civilian casualties? In other words, when the military determines that a weapon is “accurate,” how many noncombatant casualties does it estimate are acceptable to still have the weapon called “accurate”?
What kind of weapons do you design? Do you design cluster bombs or fuel-air explosives? Do you design DU weapons?
Does accuracy correlate with no or very few civilian casualties? What other factors affect how many civilians will be killed in bombing operations? Target selection must be part of it, right? And programming in the correct target coordinates must be part of it too, right? I’m assuming that the most accurate weapon in the world won’t be accurate if the target coordinates are wrong; or if the target itself is wrong.
Here is arguably the most important question I need to have answered: How many civilian casualties have been caused by U.S. weaponry? What is the U.S. military’s estimate of the number of civilian casualties in Iraq; how did they reach that figure; what was their methodology; and where can I read about it?
Ohhh yes, and just because Saddamn didn’t have much to do with AQ doesnt mean he had nothing to do with terrorism. Even PBS finally got it right. Take alook at the 5th question.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/gunning/interviews/khodada.html
Surprise, Surprise. Ties to terrorist. Also let’s not forget that Ol’ Saddamn paid the families of sucide bombers 25,000.00 for Hamas. And that’s not because he was such a humanitarian. Those suicide bombers were attacking Israel and by paying these people he encouraged this action, and thus was a “destablizing” effect on the middle east. Looks like it ain’t all our fault after all guys.
Lorica, my understanding is that Sabah Khodada’s claims in this PBS interview were discredited because there was no evidence to back up what he said. I looked for a second independent source that might confirm Khodada’s claim, but couldn’t find one. Can you provide one?
As for Saddam Hussein paying the families of suicide bombers for Hamas: Is that why Bush had to invade Iraq? Because Saddam was giving money to families of Palestinian suicide bombers? Or is it a straw you’re grasping at to justify the war now that all the stated reasons for it have turned out to be false?
Because here’s the thing: If Saddam was overthrown because he was paying families of Hamas suicide bombers, then it didn’t make any difference, because Hamas won the Palestinian elections. Hamas is in power there now. So you can hardly use Saddam’s payments as a reason for the invasion now.
Poor ol’helpless brown and black people were allowed to die…it’s our job to take care of them because liberals all know they are too weak and stupid to take care of themselves.
I wish you had as much respect for the strength and intelligence of the Iraqi people as you do for the brown and black people trapped by the floodwaters in New Orleans.
I wish you had as much respect for the strength and intelligence of the Iraqi people as you do for the brown and black people trapped by the floodwaters in New Orleans.
Kathy please don’t make that sound like a race issue for New Orleans, because it has been proven that it was not race based probelms. Brown and black, well thier were just as many white in that equation, plus foriegn tourists.
I am sick of the media and everyone else throwing around race like it has no meaning. Race used to mean much more than it does now. Unfortunately, so many people jump up and down and scream racism for even the slightest thing, like McKinney, or Al Sharpton, or New Orleans Mayor Nagin.
When you you try and use racism as a bat to batter your opponents or to deflect criticism away from yourself (McKinney), then you cheapen what Racism really is, and when it really does happen not many people will care because so many have screamed it over and over for no good reason.
I will tell you this, America is the Least Racist Country in world from what I hear, which is pretty good considering America’s background and History with Slavery. It also shows in how America came together for the victims of Katrina, opening their homes, their hearts and their pocketbooks. Giving time, money, tears, and even the shirts off their backs to help out.
Now, I do recognize their are elements of racism, that is true in every society, but as a whole, I really do believe we are the least racist.
Aside from that, I also am sick to death of hearing about New Orleans. They were victims of flooding that happened after Katrina came through, Katrina missed New Orleans, but hit other cities and states, wiping them out as if a nuclear bomb went off. That bombs name was Katrina and had phenominal destruction that cut wide and hard into many places.
Where is the words on them?
Where is the spotlight on relief and help to them? Where is the stories about the struggles of the real victims of Katrina and not the victims of flooding?
I am not making light of New Orleans, but I do wish to point out there was much more to Katrina and the story than New Orleans.
NO Kathy, I PROVIDED YOU 10 links above backing up my claims and the Bush administration, but you want to stay in your little hate Bush/hate America world and suck your thumb and be insulting to others. Did you read a single one of my links?? You are so wide read, but yet you hang on the same DU/Move.Org diatribe as if it is air giving you life. All I was saying was that Sadamn did have links to other terrorist organizations outside of AQ. You do know there are other terrorist organizations outside of AQ don’t you Kathy??? Your tunnel vision is blinding you. I have defended my thoughts and posts in a variety of manners, only to have you come back with such a childish comment as:
As for Saddam Hussein paying the families of suicide bombers for Hamas: Is that why Bush had to invade Iraq? Because Saddam was giving money to families of Palestinian suicide bombers? Or is it a straw you’re grasping at to justify the war now that all the stated reasons for it have turned out to be false?
I am not even remotely grasping at straws, and I certainly wouldn’t be grasping at straws from the arguments that you have presented. All the stated reasons are false??? Damn that is alot of bodies to be false Kathy!!!! All the stated reasons are not false, except in the DU/Moveon.org world. 500,000 bodies are now false. Some concerned libs you people are. Everything you have presented has been easily knocked down by presented facts. I am done with this discussion. I refuse to debate with children. I felt that earlier, and now I am paying for it with childish comments like the one posted above. Good luck to you in this life Kathy. I hope and pray that you gain some deeper understanding of the events that this world is presently going thru.
Gentleman I suggest you just give Kathy the last word on this dicussion as we have done a wonderful job here defending our thoughts and beliefs. I for one will continue to believe this and support our warriors for the great job they are doing. – Lorica
Lorica, Kathy will never accept that Saddam supporting terrorists in Palestine by giving 25 grand to suicide bombers families as something bad, because after all, all they did was kill Jooooos. The anti-Semitic, racist, bigoted Left sees nothing wrong with that.
Kathy has demonstrated numerous times in this thread her racist tendencies, just as all liberals eventually do. You’re better off to ignore her, it’s best not to associate with nihilistic, racist, anti-American leftists.
- Communism will never take hold in America no matter how much the left howls and rants. It’s forever doomed in the seeds of its own destruction, which means the moonbats are faced with a continuing future of vengeful, bitter, cynical vetching for all time.
- “All lies all the time”, should be the moto of the “new” Democrats. They’ve become the “Heavens gate” cult for the 21st century, but then it shows at the ballot box.
Each time the public record exposes yet another one of their “Big Lies”, they retreat to some other screed, avoiding the truth like a gsggle of frenetic, babbling lemmings, all plunging over the cliff together.
- Embracing a world view of government Nanny statism, avoidance of any and all forms of personal responsibility, believing only in a sort of perverted amoral, anti-religious “Theism”. A hedonistic existance, with no hope or faith in the future, bleak and leading to inevitable dispare.
- Something like that can ruin your whole mellenium.
- Bang
Did you read a single one of my links??
Yes, I read the first one, about the Polish troops finding the rusted sarin gas shells that dated back at least 15 years to the first Persian Gulf War or even earlier.
I decided that, if that was your idea of “proof” that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction at the time of this current invasion, it was a waste of my time to read the rest of the links.
All I was saying was that Sadamn did have links to other terrorist organizations outside of AQ.
No, you said he had links to Hamas through his donations of money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. You did not mention any other terrorist organizations. Saddam is gone, and Hamas is now running the Palestinian government.
You do know there are other terrorist organizations outside of AQ don’t you Kathy???
Obviously, I do. I’ve been saying throughout this “discussion” that the U.S. invasion caused an explosion in terrorist activity. There are a lot more terrorist organizations and groups now than there were before March 2003, definitely.
- You have it “half right”. The war in Afghanistan, then in Iraq drew the murdering thugs of the Celiphate movement out of their spidey holes and into our crosshairs in their neck of the woods rather than ours, precisely not what Usama had in mind.
- Americas presense in Iraq has no bearing on the number of Jihadists. al Qaeda recruits new mentally deficient people to blow themselves up in the name of the cause every day, and would whether we were there or not. The only difference is where the WOT is being fought. Maybe you’d rather fight the Jihadists in the streets of America. You’re ideas are idiotic.
- Bang
Whew. Took me an hour to read this fun that you guys had.
I know one thing. 40,000 Americans are killed in auto accidents every year. I now know that even though Bush came into office that this is Bush’s fault. His lack of planning and arrogance has brought this country misery. And who would want to get behind the wheel and drive in this country? I don’t want to. We are oppressed. We went from 60,000 deaths per year only to be replaced with 40,000 deaths per year and it’s ALL the Bush administrations faults. Not the Syrian/Iranian Terrorist (I mean drunk driver and or driver on the cell phone). This administration declared preemptive war on the driver in this country. There was no need for that. We now have the right to revolt and take up arms and say the meanest falsest allegations because of our oppression.
Gather round folks we will take back this country to the days when we had more deaths per year. The Bush Administration decisions has shown that Bush doesn’t “care” about us. He doesn’t “care” about anything but oil for our vehicles.
RIGHT ON Baklava! The only reason Bushitler doesn’t allow cars to be made illegal is so his big oil cronies can continue to rake in the loot selling us gasoline and oil for them! The 40,000 Americans a year killed by cars are not as important to him as his big oil profits! I bet Halliburton makes cars secretly, they say it’s the Big 3, but do we really know. Some say that the Big 3 are really owned by Halliburton, and we all know Cheney and Bushitler are owned by Halliburton!
Outlaw cars now! No Blood for Oil!
I’m now a registered Democrat and I call for helmets for everyone. Anyone who opposes me is a greedy capitalist.
Americas presense in Iraq has no bearing on the number of Jihadists. al Qaeda recruits new mentally deficient people to blow themselves up in the name of the cause every day, and would whether we were there or not.
If that’s true, it’s only more proof that Bush lied to us. Because he told us before the invasion that the war was necessary to reduce the threat of terrorism. He didn’t tell us that Al Qaeda was going to have more recruits than they knew what to do with after the invasion. He didn’t tell us that dozens of other terrorist organizations would spring up after the invasion that didn’t exist before it.
The only difference is where the WOT is being fought. Maybe you’d rather fight the Jihadists in the streets of America. You’re ideas are idiotic.
But Bush did not tell us the purpose of the Iraq invasion was to fight terror in Iraq instead of at home. He told us the purpose of the Iraq invasion was to STOP terrorism.
Another thing: Didn’t you guys say a few times already that Iraqis were not living in terror? That they could go freely about their business with no or little fear? But here you seem to be implying that fighting insurgents on the streets of American cities would be a BAD thing. If it’s bad, then how can you say life in Iraq is good for Iraqis now?If fighting jihadists here would be a bad thing, a terrible thing, a highly undesirable thing to be avoided at all costs; then isn’t fighting them in Iraq bad, terrible, and highly undesirable for Iraqis, too? Why do you want to subject Iraqis to something you would not want to experience yourself?
I also have to say I’m surprised that you would support using American men and women as flypaper. That’s rather insulting to professional men and women trained to defeat dangerous enemies, not serve as human shields so the bullets don’t reach us at home.
If that’s the way you think of it…
What do you think of your local police? Oh that’s right. You live in a “good” neighborhood? No need to worry about it.
Defeatism is as defeatism does. Don’t get in that car today !
What do you think of your local police? Oh that’s right. You live in a “good” neighborhood? No need to worry about it.
You’re making an analogy between local police and U.S. troops in Iraq? I’m sorry, I don’t understand the parallelism there. Big Bang Hunter said that U.S. troops in Iraq are fighting terrorism there so it doesn’t come here. How does that analogize to local police? Local police protect the residents of a city or town or neighborhood from criminal activity in that same city or town or neighborhood. We don’t put police departments in Philadelphia so New Yorkers don’t have to fight crime in New York City.
Your argument doesn’t make sense. What’s the point you’re trying to make?
Defeatism is as defeatism does. Don’t get in that car today!
Again, what the hell does this have to do with fighting terrorists in Iraq so we don’t have to fight them in America?