[Toshi]

Thanks for the gramatical help there coach.

You are saying that Islamic terrorists are not in Iraq.....oh OK I must have missed that....

Both groups are terrorists and so that way they are the same. They weren't around when the US went into remove Saddam. They came after! I can't make it much clearer for you unless I brake out crayons.

You are saying we should be going after the ones directly responsible for 9/11. Good! Now what about the ones not directly responsible for 9/11 but have used the country of Iraq to attack the devil that is the USA? They are separated by YOU also.

"grammatical" . islamic insurgents are fighting in iraq now. but they are not fighting against the u.s. per se, but rather against occupation forces in their own country. under hussein iraq was many things, but it was also SECULAR. thus islamic militants and saddam hussein held each other in disdain. it is only through gwb's war that all this mess in iraq has occurred.

those fighting against u.s. forces are not terrorists in same sense of al qaeda. they are more like resistance fighters, guerillas -- yes, i do make a distinction.

9/11 = Bin Laden and his islamic terrorist fringe
Iraq w/Saddam = removing dumb dictator that didn't play nice
Iraq w/o Saddam = Inflow of Islamic terrorist (not neccesarily Bin Laden) to mount a new front (a new 9/11) with America

9/11 and Iraq w/o Saddam are similiar in the fact that they are rooted in islamic terrorism. They do not need to be attached at the hip. The fact that they chose Iraq to wage their battle is TOTALLY seperate from the reason we went into Iraq in the first place.

see above. iraq was secular. if it is overflowing with islamic militants now it is our own fault and doing.

YOU are talking like the Iraqi terrorists are exempt from US action because they are not part of the group that participated in 9/11.... Wrong! They attacked us in Iraq (new field of battle) They are now terrorists. It isn't the war on BinLadens group specifically but any group that decides they need to kill americans and concequently other nationalities to get to us.

I suggest you relook at your classification because it would seem you think the Islamic terroist in Iraq are not guilty of attacks on the US and the people we are there to protect.

That makes no sense.

so now any group of people who resists the u.s. military is automatically terrorists? can the world purely be divided into groups of the u.s., the u.s. military, noncombatants and terrorists?

 

[RhinofromWA]

i agree that pre-9/11 policy won't stand in today's world.

I think we can all agree with that.

but the u.s. certainly wasn't "ignoring them and leaving them alone" before 9/11. we have been the biggest supporter of israel and its policies by far ever since the country's foundation. we have installed and supported corrupt regimes, largely if not entirely because they sell us oil. bin laden has such widespread support among the muslim world because his grievances are real, are logical.

The problem comes after he lays out his differences....and then plans to bomb, blow up, and out right kill people (especially civilians) to somehow address his greivences.

this is not to say that the majority of these muslims, let alone myself, support terrorism as a legitimate means of change so he may be shooting himself in the foot.

If that were literally the case (shooting himself in the foot) would make everyones job a lot easier.

 

[RhinofromWA]

"grammatical"

Figures.

islamic insurgents are fighting in iraq now. but they are not fighting against the u.s. per se, but rather against occupation forces in their own country. under hussein iraq was many things, but it was also SECULAR. thus islamic militants and saddam hussein held each other in disdain. it is only through gwb's war that all this mess in iraq has occurred.

What are they fighting for? If they stopped we would be able to leave....don't they see that? We wanted Saddam gone, but the USA is a BIG BADDER enemy. The Islamic terrorist went where we were/are and for that I can't fault them. They recruited their religious army along the way with people unsure of what is to come. Again good terrorist policy.

those fighting against u.s. forces are not terrorists in same sense of al qaeda. they are more like resistance fighters, guerillas -- yes, i do make a distinction.

Yet you think we should just let them blow us up and not shoot back? What should we do?

see above. iraq was secular. if it is overflowing with islamic militants now it is our own fault and doing.

Not intirely see my comments above. Terrorist came in to fight the US and found a large portion of people they could recruit. What are they fighting for? The return of a opressive dictator? The lack of any sort of democratic election?

so now any group of people who resists the u.s. military is automatically terrorists? can the world purely be divided into groups of the u.s., the u.s. military, noncombatants and terrorists?

You tell me if they people organizing and funding the guerillas are not islamic terrorists. If you fight by terrorist means you are a terrorist, right? They are not an army of soldiers in any loose sense. They are a terrorism network organized by someone/somegroup outside their own accord.

Does that make them terrorist in Iraq? Yes. If they are not terrorist, what are they? Are they not to be treated like an opposing armed group? Even though they use acts of terrorism instead of out and out military attacks.

 

[Toshi]

What are they fighting for? If they stopped we would be able to leave....don't they see that?

that's not true. we'd be there, guarding the oil wells, pipelines and depots all in the name of repaying the costs of an unasked-for war.

Yet you think we should just let them blow us up and not shoot back? What should we do?

no, i think we should actively go after those who shoot at us. this includes bin laden for 9/11 and the snipers in iraq as well.

You tell me if they people organizing and funding the guerillas are not islamic terrorists. If you fight by terrorist means you are a terrorist, right? They are not an army of soldiers in any loose sense. They are a terrorism network organized by someone/somegroup outside their own accord.

Does that make them terrorist in Iraq? Yes. If they are not terrorist, what are they? Are they not to be treated like an opposing armed group? Even though they use acts of terrorism instead of out and out military attacks.

what would i call them? maybe insurgents. maybe militias. maybe resistance fighters? i am not sure. were our founding fathers terrorists when they used unconventional tactics against the redcoats?

 

[scofflaw23]

Toshi is the sh!te.

 

[genpowell71]

What were those 3 options again?

Bush, Kerry, or stay home and get laid?

Aint it obivious? Both dudes suck, so why not bring in whichever idiot gets elected with a bang...

 

[Changleen]

The problem comes after he lays out his differences....and then plans to bomb, blow up, and out right kill people (especially civilians) to somehow address his greivences.

He has no other recourse, since US foreign policy has robbed him of a political voice.

 

[Changleen]

Terrorist came in to fight the US and found a large portion of people they could recruit. What are they fighting for? The return of a opressive dictator? The lack of any sort of democratic election?

You tell me if they people organizing and funding the guerillas are not islamic terrorists. If you fight by terrorist means you are a terrorist, right? They are not an army of soldiers in any loose sense. They are a terrorism network organized by someone/somegroup outside their own accord.

Does that make them terrorist in Iraq? Yes. If they are not terrorist, what are they? Are they not to be treated like an opposing armed group? Even though they use acts of terrorism instead of out and out military attacks.

I disagree. The people you are now fighting are (previously) moderate Shi'ite Muslims, headed by Al Sadr. A recent poll in Iraq showed Sadr had 95% support amongst Iraqi Shi'ites. The guy the US imposed on them has 2%.
From their point of view you could say they are fighting for democracy and the US is trying to enforce an unelected, unwanted puppet government. (Which it is..)

These people are NOT terrorists. They are the Iraqi people fighting for what they believe in. They have been branded terrorists by US media.

Secondly, nearly all of the fighting going on in Iraq now IS conventional.

 

[Skookum]

Toshi is the sh!te.

Yah we've offered him vice-presidency on the Gay Penguin ticket, but we've yet to hear anything back.

 

[Toshi]

Yah we've offered him vice-presidency on the Gay Penguin ticket, but we've yet to hear anything back.

i accept! i'm all for penguin and puffin rights

 

[Skookum]

What were those 3 options again?

Bush, Kerry, or stay home and get laid?

Aint it obivious? Both dudes suck, so why not bring in whichever idiot gets elected with a bang...

Not smart, some people would love the opportunity to vote. While i totally agree with your statement due to both parties constantly bending to the dictates of big business, i really hate the idea of someone not voting out of frustration. Give a protest vote to Nader before you choose not to go to the polls, see maybe if you can sneak your girl into the booth.....

 

[Changleen]

Unfortunatly, a vote for Gay Penguin, is a de-facto vote for Bush. Sorry Gay Penguin.

 

[TheMontashu]

jest remember the gay Penguin will be declared unsonstitutional

 

[Skookum]

i accept! i'm all for penguin and puffin rights

Awesome, world domination should come much easier now.

haha how can one not vote for Gay Penguin!

 

[Changleen]

http://www.gaypenguinforamerica.com/

 

[chicodude]

Not smart, some people would love the opportunity to vote. While i totally agree with your statement due to both parties constantly bending to the dictates of big business, i really hate the idea of someone not voting out of frustration. Give a protest vote to Nader before you choose not to go to the polls, see maybe if you can sneak your girl into the booth.....

I am with you, i would be one of those people who would LOVE to vote (but I'm not 18 for two more years ) but it makes me made when i see my friends that are over 18 not give a crap about voting. I think if we dont take the opportunity to vote we will lose the privilage forever..........

 

[ohio]

After all, we brought it upon ourselves Right?

Congratulations on choking down the BS spin from the RNC hook line and sinker. You have officially proven yourself mindless. No one moderate enough to be at the DNC believes anything like that... but it won't stop prominent republicans from claiming dems do.

I'm used to the negative campaigning from both sides, but the blatant lying AT the convention (rather than through "independent" infomercials) is a new one for me.

 

[ohio]

9/11 and Iraq w/o Saddam are similiar in the fact that they are rooted in islamic terrorism.

9/11 yes, Iraq no. You're buying a lie.

In Iraq we are facing radical tribal groups, some fundamentalist (usually the Shiite) some secular (mostly Sunni... Saddam's old buddies). It's a power struggle, partially against each other, partially against the new Iraqi "government" and partially against American "occupiers" (in quotes because that's THEIR belief, not mine). NONE of these are technically terrorist groups. They are armed militants engaging (mostly) other armed non-civilians (though they are clearly less discriminate about that than Geneva convention would like).

The ONLY Islamic terrorism in Iraq is what has come in from the outside, because Iraq is now the closest place to Iran, Pakistan, and Saudi arabia to find Westerners to terrorise. This is a tiny number of people, and a miniscule problem compared to the tribal groups mentioned above. Bush and Cheney would like you to think of it as all one problem and all one group. For all I know Bush might actually believe that.

 

[fluff]

Does anybody really believe that the USA will be in any more danger under Kerry than under Bush? The USA is by far the most powerful nation on earth and is certainly not likely to be harmed (in any substantial sense) by any middle-eastern entity. Makes for a good scare story though, and the citizens of the US seem to enjoy being scared (or plain just scare easy).

Decisions on who to vote for in this election do not revolve around Iraq or the GWOT. The decision does not depend on the personalities chosen to front the only two feasible options you have to elct for President.

You can do three things, you can accept that you are voting for one of two very similar political philosophies, you can vote for Nader, or you can stay and home and ignore all this ****. A better option would be to get off your arse and do something to revive true democracy; the inertia may seem too great, but then if everyone had believed that we'd still have slaves etc.

If you choose between Kerry and Bush you are choosing between an ideology that pays no more than lip service to 98% of the population (Republican) and an ideology that pays slightly more than lip service to that same 98% of the population (Democrat).

Should you be fortunate enough to be within that other 2%, you could vote Bush to try and get a bigger slice of the pie, but you're fat enough already really, so why not try giving a **** about the rest of the world? (If you are in that 2%, wtf are you doing in this forum anyway?)

If, as is almost certain, you are in the 98% with the rest of us suckers, you may be a wannabe 2%-er and hence vote Buch in the misguided belief it'll get you a bigger slice of that pie, but given that the bigger slices are going to the 2% you are not part of, you'll just be screwing yourself as well as the rest of us.

So basically, if you're too blind to see the end of your nose, vote Bush. If you can see the end of your nose, vote Kerry.

If you find that you can actually see other peoples noses (when you not kissing them (in which case your eyes should be shut anyway)), get out there and do something for the people, not the oligarchs. It won't be easy and you may not see the fruits of your labor within your lifetime but if you believe in Democracy it'd be worth it.

11th September 2001? It was one day, three years ago, it makes little sense to base decisions on one day, three years ago.

 

[johnbryanpeters]

Mr. Bush utterly fvcked up the response to 9/11 when he hit Iraq.

He and his posse turned a stable, evil, internationally ineffective dictatorship into a platform for ongoing attacks on the west.

He has cost many of our soldiers their lives, or simply brought them back maimed.

He has cost the United States credibility with its former allies and earned it increasing detest by the muslim world.

He places religious and political ideology before pragmatism and thereby blinds himself.

He has fed the rich at the cost of ordinary folks who used to work for a living.

J

 

[fluff]

Oy vey, this is what it's become about:

 

[Jesus]

Way to form an opinion! I'm sure America is proud of your astute judgement.

Thank you. I believe I have astute judgement also!

 

[N8 v2.0]

I like Bush!!!!

All kinds of Bush!

 

[jmvar]

I think that people need to understand the what is really going on in Iraq, there is a number of Muslim groups that do not want a SECULAR, APPOINTED PUPPET GOVERNMENT. Do we know what that means? They want a nation that is founded on the beliefs of their religion.

Meanwhile the US wants to appoint(<-install) a government where they can slowly and systematically rape Iraqui people and its natural resources (this was evident by the only buildings that did not sustain damage during the taking of Baghdad, the Iraqui Oil Ministry Building). The US wants a government that will bow down to its every demand and will not have a problem doing it for a white, christian country such as the US. Don't belive me? History tells it all, look at the history of US installed governments through out the world, you will see that right behind the installation of said gov. comes an influx of American companies that privitize that nations utilities, natural resources and becomes a new tax haven for manufacturing facilities.

You are all kidding yourselves if you think that "Muslims" or "Islamic Nations" are the only ones that hate the US "for their freedom". That is a joke, go to any Latin American country and ask them what they think of US policy....HAH....

Go to the UN website and look at the resolutions that the US has vetoed. Not just in the middle east but through out the world. They have all of the resolutions by date and all of the meeting minutes. It is pretty interesting.

Changleen, I cringe everytime I read one of your posts, you have a lot of things to say but you gotta tone it down with the insults...

 

[Jesus]

Changleen, I cringe everytime I read one of your posts, you have a lot of things to say but you gotta tone it down with the insults...

I agree, why so angry?

You come from the land of hobbits. Who are a lighthearted and happy folk!

 

[I Are Baboon]

Cocksor Like Bush Also. You Could Call Cocksor A Bush-ranger!!!!

Scrotor Enjoys Bush As Well. Scrotor Is What You Could Call A Bush Master!!!!!

Stop posting useless jibberish or you're going to be given a ridemonkey time out.

 

[fluff]

Stop posting useless jibberish or you're going to be given a ridemonkey time out.

Hey, at least he was concise. Unlike some others round here

 

[jmvar]

Changleen, I agree with you on a lot of points, if we all agreed on everything this forum would be very boring. If we all disagree and insult each other we will get shut down. If we all disagree and discuss we have a cool forum where we can poke fun at each other for our political beliefs...

 

[pnj]

terrorism is going to hit the US more and more and it's not going to be done by people from other countries as much as it is going to come from our own people.

watch.....

but, to quote a line from one of my favorite movies, The Breakfast Club, "JUST ANSWER THE FVCKING QUESTION!"

if two people vote for opposite people, why should they vote at all? do their votes not cancel each other out?

now, this may have been answer already and I missed it because of the five freakin pages of crap I had to wade through....:eyesroll:

 

[Skookum]

if two people vote for opposite people, why should they vote at all? do their votes not cancel each other out?

uhm hmmm take 2 divide it by 1 times it by 1 then subtract it again carry over another 1 then subtract 1 then times it by 0. hmmmm this is much too confusing for me, why don't you just vote for Gay Penguin, i hear he'd cut alcohol taxes.

 

[dante]

both go, both vote for your respective candidates, then have fun with the rest of your vote. I voted for the Free-Marijuana candidate in the last gubernatorial election. :evil:

 

[N8 v2.0]

Best thing is not to discuss politics at your house. You don't wanna hurt your nookie supply..

 

[dante]

Best thing is not to discuss politics at your house. You don't wanna hurt your nookie supply..

(although my gf and I agree on just about all of the major issues, and most minor ones too. :heart: last "discussion" we had was whether Colorado's Rape Shield Law was applicable in the Koby Bryant case...)

 

[Changleen]

Changleen, I cringe everytime I read one of your posts, you have a lot of things to say but you gotta tone it down with the insults...

Fair enough, I do get fairly 'into it' sometimes, but it just really pisses me off sometimes when people just say something that they

a) haven't thought about,
b) HAVE thought about, and which makes them a racist/other type of idiot
c) comment on things they clearly have no knowledge or have done zero background reading on.

This is a political debate forum, and sometimes it's really cool. To me it's a place to actually discuss issues, to put forward a point of view and allow others to criticise it - defend it if you can, and maybe change people's minds about a few things, albeit even subtly.

I don't mind the odd joke, I'm not like some crazy 'stick to the point' facist, but there is the whole of the rest of RideMonkey for that.

What really cheeses me off is when people jump into the middle of a serious and interesting exchange with some statement they think is funny, when in reality it's probably racist, stupid, crap. I'll try to just ignore it in future...

 

[RhinofromWA]

He has no other recourse, since US foreign policy has robbed him of a political voice.

BS.....

That does not give them a free "blow up your local police agency" and not got to jail card. When they attack civilians puprosely and aparatically they are doing it because they chose to not because the US has taken their voice away. That is how they choose to address their grievencess.

Isn't that what the UN is for?

 

[RhinofromWA]

what would i call them? maybe insurgents. maybe militias. maybe resistance fighters? i am not sure. were our founding fathers terrorists when they used unconventional tactics against the redcoats?

the founding fathers were very much so....in the eyes of the british.

then again I don't remember the founding fathers slitting the throats of cow milkers and bombing the local mercantile shop "just because"

 

[RhinofromWA]

These people are NOT terrorists. They are the Iraqi people fighting for what they believe in. They have been branded terrorists by US media.

Secondly, nearly all of the fighting going on in Iraq now IS conventional.

1- then they should elect this dolt in to office.

2- Last time I checked raiding police stations and bombing public meeting places is not "conventional" fighting. It is sparatic attacks to cause fear...maybe even a little "terror"?

 

[RhinofromWA]

9/11 yes, Iraq no. You're buying a lie.

In Iraq we are facing radical tribal groups, some fundamentalist (usually the Shiite) some secular (mostly Sunni... Saddam's old buddies). It's a power struggle, partially against each other, partially against the new Iraqi "government" and partially against American "occupiers" (in quotes because that's THEIR belief, not mine). NONE of these are technically terrorist groups. They are armed militants engaging (mostly) other armed non-civilians (though they are clearly less discriminate about that than Geneva convention would like).

The ONLY Islamic terrorism in Iraq is what has come in from the outside, because Iraq is now the closest place to Iran, Pakistan, and Saudi arabia to find Westerners to terrorise. This is a tiny number of people, and a miniscule problem compared to the tribal groups mentioned above. Bush and Cheney would like you to think of it as all one problem and all one group. For all I know Bush might actually believe that.

They walk talk crap and look like ducks.........

So they cannot be terrorists because they are from thier same country?

I agree much came from outside...and their are tribal groups. All are using terror tactics to fight their battles.....with little regard for civilians.

We cornered a few hot spots so fighting became more "conventional-like" but it is still fighting small fringe groups that use terrorist approaches to fighting for their cause.

 

[RhinofromWA]

Does anybody really believe that the USA will be in any more danger under Kerry than under Bush? The USA is by far the most powerful nation on earth and is certainly not likely to be harmed (in any substantial sense) by any middle-eastern entity. Makes for a good scare story though, and the citizens of the US seem to enjoy being scared (or plain just scare easy).

Decisions on who to vote for in this election do not revolve around Iraq or the GWOT. The decision does not depend on the personalities chosen to front the only two feasible options you have to elct for President.

You can do three things, you can accept that you are voting for one of two very similar political philosophies, you can vote for Nader, or you can stay and home and ignore all this ****. A better option would be to get off your arse and do something to revive true democracy; the inertia may seem too great, but then if everyone had believed that we'd still have slaves etc.

If you choose between Kerry and Bush you are choosing between an ideology that pays no more than lip service to 98% of the population (Republican) and an ideology that pays slightly more than lip service to that same 98% of the population (Democrat).

Should you be fortunate enough to be within that other 2%, you could vote Bush to try and get a bigger slice of the pie, but you're fat enough already really, so why not try giving a **** about the rest of the world? (If you are in that 2%, wtf are you doing in this forum anyway?)

If, as is almost certain, you are in the 98% with the rest of us suckers, you may be a wannabe 2%-er and hence vote Buch in the misguided belief it'll get you a bigger slice of that pie, but given that the bigger slices are going to the 2% you are not part of, you'll just be screwing yourself as well as the rest of us.

So basically, if you're too blind to see the end of your nose, vote Bush. If you can see the end of your nose, vote Kerry.

If you find that you can actually see other peoples noses (when you not kissing them (in which case your eyes should be shut anyway)), get out there and do something for the people, not the oligarchs. It won't be easy and you may not see the fruits of your labor within your lifetime but if you believe in Democracy it'd be worth it.

11th September 2001? It was one day, three years ago, it makes little sense to base decisions on one day, three years ago.

Very well written fluff.

Except one part bugged me...

If you choose between Kerry and Bush you are choosing between an ideology that pays no more than lip service to 98% of the population (Republican) and an ideology that pays slightly more than lip service to that same 98% of the population (Democrat).

The whole article tells me you are disgusted at politics as they exist in the world.....and rightfully so.

The part I seperated out tells me you are a disgusted at the political world LIBERAL. It is really a strongly opinionated statement and is little than the Yin to N8's Yang ) I thought that last bit was funny) That whole bit directly above is just more partisian babble.

But, all in all, the majority of the post I can relate to to a degree and I thank you for typing it.

 

[RhinofromWA]

I think pnj and his wife should just practice Kama Sutra (sp?) and forget voting that way they know where each other are the whole day....

or in my case 15 minutes at least.