The wrong battle front
I believe the answer to letter writer Darrel Richardson’s question — “When will al-Qaida and the terrorists who want to destroy America surrender?” — is never and, under the present and perhaps future administration, the troops can never come home. This is based on Richardson’s apparent view of this situation (“The wrong question,” Sept. 19).
Al-Qaida/terrorists will only be defeated when all nations stand up to them — preferably united in purpose. Terrorist leaders must be killed, imprisoned or disabled, and their funds/weapons must be cut off.
The Iraq war is not the right battle front. It is so complex and involves so much more than al-Qaida that it has become virtually impossible for any complete, sustainable success.
Roy M. Cantrell, Aurora
thank you harry reid for once again saying we have lost the battle.
Posted by on October 3, 2007 06:27 AMRoy has the liberal answer--all we have to do is wait for the entire planet to give their approval, get on board and join us in battle.
In the meantime, we are all targets. Brilliant!
Posted by on October 3, 2007 08:13 AMNo, we're not all targets... The troops in Iraq are targets, and the liars in power who sent them are the targets. Just ask me and I'll point them out for you.
As for the rest of us, the scare tactics aren't working anymore. We're on to you.
roy,If you would watch the news or read a non-liberal paper you would know we are fighting Al Qaeda over in Iraq.We are beating Al Qaeda badly right now ,if we keep it up we can run Al qaeda and eliminated them in Iraq.If we do what the dems. want to do,by surrendering,they will be able to regroup.So what is above your head here?
Posted by Keith on October 3, 2007 09:07 AMStop with your ridiculous fear! The "terrorists" have no navy, no air force and their "soldiers" have the technology level 1700's European armies. They have NO weapons of modern warfare. They are NO meaningful threat to the US.
Some, not many, of the "terrorists" are GOOD GUYS that are fighting for justice. 20 years ago Ronald Reagan defined Osama bin Laden as a "good guy" (Reagan lied) and gave him lots of weapons to resist the USSR. Osama NEVER changed his stripes! Ronald Reagan HELPED Saddam Hussein with Iraq's unprovoked attack on Iran. That is how Reagan extorted the money for Iran-Contra.
It is as if the supporters of the occupation of Iraq are Winston Smith from the novel "1984" and have re-written history to keep Americans in fear. Please find your honesty, grow-up, regain your memory of history and act like adults. Keeping a colony in Iraq or Afghanistan violates every Ideal that Americans proclaim. Our colonies of Cuba and the Phillipines turned out VERY badly and Guam, Puerto Rico and VI are basket case places totally dependent on government handouts.
"Terrorists" are criminals. Some do dramatic damage (McVEigh). Some instill wild fear (Zodiac Killer, Bind-kill-torture killer, John Wayne Gacy,etc). Some do economic damage (Marc Rich and Pinkus Green(pardoned they were), Enron, Tyco, etc). Some are continuous parasites on society(Tammny Hall, organized crime families, Las Vegas, pimps, drug dealers,etc).
We have an exponentially greater chance of being killed by lover, or a police officer, or a meteorite, than by a "terrorist". And we give families of people killed by "terrorists" a couple million bucks, which means the 190 billion Congress just spent for the occupation could compensate 95,000 victims of terrorism. !!!!! 95,000 !!!!!!!
Proportion! Put this situation in proportion.
roy,If you would watch the news or read a non-liberal paper you would know we are fighting Al Qaeda over in Iraq.We are beating Al Qaeda badly right now ,if we keep it up we can run Al qaeda and eliminated them in Iraq.If we do what the dems. want to do,by surrendering,they will be able to regroup.So what is above your head here?
Posted by Keith on October 3, 2007 09:12 AMAnd while we're immersed in Iraq's civil war the real Al Qaeda leadership (remember Osama & his henchmen?) is planning & regrouping. But I guess the Airhead-in-Chief "doesn't pay much attention to Osama" - the guy who killed 3,000 Americans 6 years ago.
And then you get babbling morons like Keith who sound even more stupid than Bush - the only thing these wingnuts have in their arsenal is fear - and most Americans are starting to see through that already.
Posted by drew on October 3, 2007 09:41 AMDave,
You seem to forget that weapons of modern warfare are not just the Navy and Air Force. Small arms and explosives are more usefull in an urban or mountainess environment. Warfare has and probably will always revolve around the use of soldiers. The "terrorists" don't need ships or aircraft, they already have access to these through our modern forms of transportation. 1700's technology was very efficient at killing large numbers of people and still is. If one terrorist has the capability of killing fifty people at a time, does that make him/her less of a threat than one plane with a 500 pound bomb?
The purpose of terrorism is to instill fear in the general population, the purpose of the criminal is to instill fear in one victim.
I do not have all the answers, nor do I have all the information. However, I do believe that the only way to fight terrorism is to do so in their own "yard". Allowing them to conduct these acts outside of their "yard" only emboldens their commitment to do so.
"Stop with your ridiculous fear! The "terrorists" have no navy, no air force and their "soldiers" have the technology level 1700's European armies. They have NO weapons of modern warfare. They are NO meaningful threat to the US." Dave
You don't get out much do you Dave.
Posted by GW on October 3, 2007 10:19 AMDave, I think you need to go to the doctor. All that koolaid you have digested can not be good for you. Your blood pressure is on the rise and we see veins popping out on your forhead
Posted by on October 3, 2007 10:36 AMdrew,you stupid idiot.Find out the facts before you write your babblings.
Posted by Keith on October 3, 2007 10:41 AMwe'll win the war on terror just as soon as we are finished with the war on poverty and the war on drugs
Posted by just sayin' on October 3, 2007 10:48 AMwe'll win the war on terror just as soon as we are finished with the war on poverty and the war on drugs. Oh yeah the war on Christmas too.
Posted by just sayin' on October 3, 2007 10:50 AMDang, all this time I thought Bush (sulphur) was the terrorist. His Hitler style of invading countries on lies and his use of chemcical weapons causes me more fear, than Al Qaeda. I have never been fearful of seeing AlQaedar or Iraq Republic Guard folks in my driveway, when I pick up my moring newspaper.
Felons in our midst. We would be better off if we just jailed Bush and Alito for being UCMJ-felons, AWOL, desereters, and guilty of illegal separation and discharge. Heck, pretend they are black (OJ, Vick, Emmitt Till, Elijah and his son Wallace D. Muhammad-served 3 years in federal prison for military draft evasion, etc.).
Posted by draftdodgingisntafamilyvalue on October 3, 2007 11:06 AMDang, all this time I thought Bush (sulphur) was the terrorist. His Hitler style of invading countries on lies and his use of chemcical weapons causes me more fear, than Al Qaeda. I have never been fearful of seeing AlQaedar or Iraq Republic Guard folks in my driveway, when I pick up my moring newspaper.
Felons in our midst. We would be better off if we just jailed Bush and Alito for being UCMJ-felons, AWOL, desereters, and guilty of illegal separation and discharge. Heck, pretend they are black (OJ, Vick, Emmitt Till, Elijah and his son Wallace D. Muhammad-both served 3 years in federal prison for military draft evasion, etc.).
Posted by draftdodgingisntafamilyvalue on October 3, 2007 11:08 AMkeith recess is over time to go in and color.
Posted by larry on October 3, 2007 11:20 AMNice post Dave. Sure, we need to be vigilant but the scare tactics being used by the power brokers have a lot of people in a near panic. This works well for them because it means some people are willing to surrender their rights to the powerful which enables them to increase their power over the people they are supposed to serve.
Posted by Stan B on October 3, 2007 12:06 PMOK - Un-American raises his un-attractive head again - I'd recognize that lyrical syntax anywhere.
Are you & Keith hanging out in the trailer again while the rest of us are working? What are you two doing when you're not watching Dooks of Hazard? OK - forget I asked that - ugh!
Posted by drew on October 3, 2007 12:10 PMdrew
Is this really Howard Cosell using his big fancy words again. Muhammad Ali said ugly people use fancy words to distract from their ugliness. Ali was quite fond of "Lyrical Syntax".
Posted by Sting like a Bee on October 3, 2007 12:30 PMYup-I'm really Howard Cosell using fancy words & "lyrical syntax" to hide my ugliness - you got me! Unlike you, Keith & un-American you what uses simpil language to deflect attention from your ravishing attractiveness! (sorry if those words is too fancy!)
Posted by drew on October 3, 2007 12:41 PMThank-you General Cantwell. Take your white flag and write on it your support for the other women running your party of pussies
Posted by on October 3, 2007 12:51 PM