Jump to content

What al-Quaida really wants


Recommended Posts

PNAC (and the members thereof) posed the idea of Regime change to President Clinton - which then became U.S. policy in December of that year.

The 3 men who I've named are some of the most powerful men in the world. It's kind of obvious that PNAC is simply their publicly stated policy which is being enacted (and references to such can be found in President Bush's state of the union speech from 2002) while hidden behind other excuses for "beuracratic reasons" as Paul Wolfowitz has stated because the rest of Bush's cabinet did not agree with him, Rumsfield, or Cheney.

It's no conspiracy - it's what they've been saying they were going to do for the past 7 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 111
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

C'mon Silk. This kind of stuff only happens in techno-thriller novels. I agree with alot of the PNAC fundamental principals - does that make me evil?

It is a ridiculously long stretch to read the PNAC website and to say that the Iraq war was just its mission statement coming to fruition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So PNAC urging 'Iraq regime change' to President Clinton and pushing for it's implementation into U.S. Policy (which happened in December 1998 and was referenced in the Joint Resolution from Congress in 2003) is wild coincidence.

You have to be deaf, dumb, and blind to believe that the 3 members of PNAC dropped their opinions when advising Bush on the course to take in Iraq.

They were pushing for Clinton to invade.

And I believe that their policies are disastrous for this country - and if you agree so much with their principals you need to flat out state that you believe 'unfriendly regimes' should be deposed and have the lives of U.S. soldiers used to do so even though we aren't threatened, nor attacked by any of these.

I don't believe I'd sacrifice my friends/family just so those in power can remake the world in the image they wish (or as Iraq demonstrates fail miserably in doing so).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

You have to be deaf, dumb, and blind to believe that the 3 members of PNAC dropped their opinions when advising Bush on the course to take in Iraq.


Obviously you are wrong again, seeing as how I am neither death, dumb, nor blind, and yet I find the whole idea ludicrous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Prez:

Obviously you are wrong again, seeing as how I am neither death, dumb, nor blind, and yet I find the whole idea ludicrous.

I suppose my faith in those who are not severely handicapped as I stated to research and formulate their opinions based on facts instead of propaganda is misplaced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

George W. Bush has flatly stated that he disseminates Propaganda on Iraq - and you basically lap it up and say "atta boy chief - kill those A-rabs!"

I happen to believe in national sovereignty, and treating others as we would like to be treated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

and you basically lap it up and say "atta boy chief - kill those A-rabs!"

And of course I said that right? Would you mind pointing out where? You must be getting desparate, else your rage clouds your reason.

quote:

and treating others as we would like to be treated.


Oh of course, and the terrorists will see you making all nice-nice and stop? This is getting amusing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And of course I said that right? Would you mind pointing out where? You must be getting desparate, else your rage clouds your reason.

You might as well be saying it. Your arguments revolve around the "better them than us" attitude that America should outsource it's problems to the civilian populations of 'non-America' countries. I happen to believe that we should deal with terrorists ourselves, even if it means facing them at home. Which we are going to have to do considering we are bogged down in Iraq instead of securing our own country.

Oh of course, and the terrorists will see you making all nice-nice and stop? This is getting amusing.

Ummm... the Iraqi civilians weren't making anything. We brought a war to their backyard. They weren't doing anything to us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Which we are going to have to do considering we are bogged down in Iraq instead of securing our own country.

To bad the Senate nor Congress agree's with you here... our biggest security risk IS the border, but the thing is they want those Hispanic vote's and that's why they aren't touching the border

At this stage of the game I actually wish we would pull our troops out and put them on the border to further protect our country

The thing about the civilian's need's to stop though. They welcome the freedom we brought them (yes, you heard me Silk, the freedom the US brought them... you constantly forget that they now have clean water, energy, good food, education for the children, police, and no worry of a Tyrannical Ruler killing them when they voice there opinions)

However, the terrorist's don't like that, they'd rather have that country under the palm of there hand's and in there control. They don't want those people to have freedom's, that's why they are killing there own race, because they believe that in killing there own race they'll give up there freedoms. And actually, that will occur if we pull out, meaning all our hard work would be in VAIN and all those soldiers who died would also be in VAIN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't advocate leaving. I'm just pointing out the complete ignorance and stupidity of going there in the first place.

We can't afford to leave - which is where I agree with you 100%. We owe it to the Iraqis to leave behind a stable country that is as free as possible.

Because they didn't deserve the s***storm that we invited into their backyard.

After all, as un-American liberal Bush hater John Quincy Adams said:

"America does not go abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

After all, as un-American liberal Bush hater John Quincy Adams said:


Look, no one called you a liberal because you disagree with the Bush administration. I disagree with the Bush administration. Hell, I disagreed with Reagan's administration on several things. But someone, somewhere is going to diasgree with you no matter what you do. As the President, you learn to accept that and do what you think is best.

Waht makes you SOUND liberal sometimes is when you take an event, a quote, a fact, and put it into a context in such a way that you declare there can be NO OTHER interpretation, regardless of the jumps in logic you need to make in order to ge there. PNAC + Iraq does NOT = diabolical global plot. Just as Higher global temps + elitists scientific agendas doesn't equal man-made global warming.

I know you are not a liberal. I've read your stuff. You are one of the good guys. But, on this, your attacking where you should be watching, and assuming the worst when you should be questioning. You are suspicious before trying to understand. I admire your passion, but I wonder if it isn't a tad misplaced?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The face of the matter in Iraq is that there is no acceptable reason why American blood is being spilled there in my view because:

1.) Iraq had never attacked the United States

2.) Iraq had never threatened to attack the United States

3.) Iraq had no capability to attack the United States

Those three put together for me = invalid target. $25k rewards for suicide bombers is something that I would take a harsh stance on - but not something I would approve of spending half a trillion dollars to stop - considering those suicide bombers aren't targetting us. It's a collossal waste of money. And did not make us safer in the slightest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Silk, he was supporting terrorism. He had terrorist camps in his country. Some of us THOUGHT he had WMD. Can't you at least concede that, at absolute worst, an error was made?

I for one don't believe it was an error, but to say it is a waste of money is ignoring the good that is being done. All sympathies for those innocent Iraqis killed by the terrorist murderers, but the VAST majority of the population is 100% better off. And we have a concentration of terrorists such we have never seen. We don't have to go looking for them - they are ALREADY THERE! I like Jag's Terrorist Roach Motel analogy, personally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Silk, he was supporting terrorism. He had terrorist camps in his country. Some of us THOUGHT he had WMD. Can't you at least concede that, at absolute worst, an error was made?

Can't you at least concede that Saddam Hussein didn't have complete control over his country?

His power was waning post-Gulf War to the tribal sections of his country - leading to extensive changes in state policy that were catalogued by Human Rights Watch.

Can't you concede that the United States of America has terrorists training within our own borders?

Can't you concede that Saddam Hussein was more worried about having toilets plated in Gold and sitting on plush cushions than he was about attacking the United States?

Can't you concede that all these factors together mean that Iraq was at worst no more a threat to the United States than terrorists inside our own borders?

We could've shut down terrorist training camps with aerial strikes and bombardment. Not needing to spend a half Trillion dollars on an occupation.

I for one don't believe it was an error, but to say it is a waste of money is ignoring the good that is being done. All sympathies for those innocent Iraqis killed by the terrorist murderers, but the VAST majority of the population is 100% better off.

You wave off the civilian casualties with "all sympathy" but what you don't seem to grasp is that, for all your jingoistic rhetoric about 'freedom' and 'clean water' - that doesn't replace the sons, daughters, husbands, wives, brothers, sisters, cousins, aunts, uncles that have been slain.

20 THOUSAND (at the lowest estimate) have been killed. Car bombs explode daily. People are kidnapped, and held hostage in their neighborhoods. I doubt that "freedom" is going to make them feel better. Especially the definition of 'freedom' in southern Iraq.

And we have a concentration of terrorists such we have never seen. We don't have to go looking for them - they are ALREADY THERE! I like Jag's Terrorist Roach Motel analogy, personally.

And I view that as horrible. Do you believe China would be justified in 'pre-empting' the United States and drawing terrorists into our country?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Can't you at least concede that Saddam Hussein didn't have complete control over his country?


Yes.

quote:

Can't you concede that the United States of America has terrorists training within our own borders?


Again, yes. But these missions do not have to be mutually exclusive of one another, as our DOMESTIC war on terror should involve mostly non-military organizations.

quote:

You wave off the civilian casualties with "all sympathy" but what you don't seem to grasp is that, for all your jingoistic rhetoric about 'freedom' and 'clean water' - that doesn't replace the sons, daughters, husbands, wives, brothers, sisters, cousins, aunts, uncles that have been slain.


Yes, slain by TERRORISTS!!! The car-bombs, the suicide bombs, the kidnappings, the beheadings, all perpetrated by people whose evil thirst fot blood would not have just vanished if the invasion would not have taken place.

Regardless of what you think, it really gets to me when these poor people are hit yet again by savages. But our anger NEEDS to be directed at the rightful parties. It is, and always has been, the terrorists, and no one else.

quote:

We could've shut down terrorist training camps with aerial strikes and bombardment. Not needing to spend a half Trillion dollars on an occupation.


I disagree. First, the intelligence was not near complete- most of them were well concealed and hard to find. Secondly, air strikes have limitaions on their effectiveness. Ask any of our military brothers here - if you want a job done right, you have to send in ground-pounders to SEE that it is done right.

quote:

Can't you concede that Saddam Hussein was more worried about having toilets plated in Gold and sitting on plush cushions than he was about attacking the United States?


I admit it IS possible that is all he was interested in, but somehow I doubt it. His active support of terrorism and harboring of terrorists makes this a dubioius assumption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Again, yes. But these missions do not have to be mutually exclusive of one another, as our DOMESTIC war on terror should involve mostly non-military organizations.

My point is mostly that terrorists being inside of a country does not constitute 'supporting terror.'

quote:

Yes, slain by TERRORISTS!!! The car-bombs, the suicide bombs, the kidnappings, the beheadings, all perpetrated by people whose evil thirst for blood would not have just vanished if the invasion would not have taken place.

Regardless of what you think, it really gets to me when these poor people are hit yet again by savages. But our anger NEEDS to be directed at the rightful parties. It is, and always has been, the terrorists, and no one else.

Since the War in Iraq is a collossal blunder as I have illustrated, these Iraqi civilians have died (in my view) needlessly and have had their country turned into a war zone because we invaded.

I do not turn a blind eye to who is doing the killing, but you shouldn't turn a blind eye to why they are killing Iraqi civilians.

Because we are there.

quote:

I disagree. First, the intelligence was not near complete- most of them were well concealed and hard to find. Secondly, air strikes have limitaions on their effectiveness. Ask any of our military brothers here - if you want a job done right, you have to send in ground-pounders to SEE that it is done right.

Special forces? Subterfuge? Air recon? There were many options we had to update our intelligence. We have UAV's over Iran as we speak.

There has to be a more cost-effective way than spending $Half a Trillion to 'look around to make sure'

Seriously...

quote:

I admit it IS possible that is all he was interested in, but somehow I doubt it. His active support of terrorism and harboring of terrorists makes this a dubioius assumption.

I'd really love for you to produce a list of 10 things that are proven that Saddam Hussein has done to actively assist terrorism.

For the basis of discussion - because there are very few things he did, and many dubious claims by this administration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I'd like for you to produce a list of 10 things, and link to government sources that 'prove' that Saddam was complicit in each. I already know about the $25k to suicide bombers, and if you'd like I'll count that as 1.

List them like so:

1. Blahblahblah

URL= Source

2.

..

...

....

10. Blahblahblah

URL= Source

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record, CNSNews is registered to:

Media Research Center

325 S. Patrick Street

Alexandria, VA 22314

The Media Research Center is a conservative group who in their own words:

bring balance and responsibility to the news media. Leaders of America's conservative movement have long believed that within the national news media a strident liberal bias existed that influenced the public's understanding of critical issues. On October 1, 1987, a group of young determined conservatives set out to not only prove - through sound scientific research - that liberal bias in the media does exist and undermines traditional American values, but also to neutralize its impact on the American political scene. What they launched that fall is the now acclaimed --- Media Research Center (MRC).

(They are a step above Newsmax.com in regards to reliable reporting)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...