More politics
ray a
5,703 Posts
From a blog:
"France was stunned last week when the Islamic Army in Iraq kidnapped two Frenchmen. The outspoken pacifist nation believed its opposition to the U.S.-led war and its lack of troops in Iraq would protect it from such hostage situations."
France is discovering the Neville Chamberlain approach really doesn't work.
"France was stunned last week when the Islamic Army in Iraq kidnapped two Frenchmen. The outspoken pacifist nation believed its opposition to the U.S.-led war and its lack of troops in Iraq would protect it from such hostage situations."
France is discovering the Neville Chamberlain approach really doesn't work.
Comments
The mindset of these terrorists is so far removed from anything I can fathom - there will be significant hell to pay for this one. Hundreds of thousands of Russians are gathered in Red Square today and Putin is making a lot of noise.
It will be interesting to hear what the Bush and Kerry camps respectively say about this one.
Retired General Tommy Franks words ring particularly true today. "Fight em here or fight em there, make no mistake, we will fight them. I choose to fight them there." That's not an exact quote, but pretty close. I agree with him and this tragedy in Russia is a grim reminder of several hundred of the reasons why.
I think that with regard to the Russian tragedy, the terrorist community in general, and the separatist Chechens in particular, are about to find out just how formidable an opponent Vladimir Putin is - I know I wouldn't want to be on his bad side.
Speaking of Chechnya, if they want to break away from the Russian Federation, why doesn't Russia just let them? I never have understood that.
>more "sensitive" in our war against terror, that
>the terrorists would react more positively!
LarryC - Just how "sensitive" were the terrorists when they flew the planes into the WTCs and the Pentagon? How about the all the embassy bombings or taking small children hostage? Sensitive???
I think not!! What are we to do? Tell them that if you will quit this ugly stuff we'll serve you milk and cookies? When I was a kid and we had a fox get in our chicken coop a couple of times and killed several laying hens, my dad wasn't too sensitive. He sat beside a tree outside and when the fox made another appearance, BANG! No more lost chickens. Then there was a new fence and traps set up for any other sly foxes that had a notion to get to the chickens. All this talk about sensitivity, not spanking kids, not talking roughly to them ...hogwash. My dad as well as I lived by the motto.."Spare the rod and spoil the child" and I turned out pretty good and I have three wonderful sons who are none the worse for wear and have not had to go see a shrink because I spanked their little behinds or made them go to their room or hollered at them to be quiet and made them do it.
No, I personally don't think that the United States of America or any other nation needs to show any "sensitivity" to these unsensitive terroristic animals that threaten our freedom.
Have a great day and do eat more spinach.
Sensitive is how you describe hemorroidal tissue, not war strategy. x:-)
Engaging more passive countries around the globe in sensitive conversation and touchy-feely strategy deployment conversations and the perfect harmony of Kum-By-Yah while drinking French Purified Water is not going to mean one whit to terrorists. Their objective is clear. I am not aware of any US military action/presence in Gaza and the West Bank. Democrats got us into Viet Nam and kept us there for over 10 years. Republicans got us out. Viet Nam, notwithstanding John Kerry's mantra, is not the issue 35 years after the smoke cleared there. The issue is the dead bodies in the twin towers and 350 funerals in Russia this week, and those that will surely follow for a long time to come. The issue is not the Pol Pot regime or Cambodia or our failure in pushing back Communism during the Tet offensive 35 years ago.
People who herd themselves into groups always have and will always kill other groups of people who are herded together in other places and military machinery is the only, ultimate practical defense to that reality. Songs, chants, hands clasped together or raised in signs, cardboard painted with words, well-populated oak conference tables nor cobwebbed tanks will do anything other than aid and abet the enemy.
One of the first goals of the liberal, Democrat party is gun registration in this country. One of the secondary goals of that group is gun confiscation and reduction of our military machine. Those who would kill each and every one of us and totally and completely erase our society anxiously await those possibilities.
Other countries have been dealing with terrorism for ages. We'd been touched by it before 9/11 but not to the magnitude as others had been. Now that we have first hand knowledge, everybody's got an opinion. I think we're still on a learning curve with this. Is there a correct way to deal with terrorists? Probably not, since no one has been able to at any point in history.
My fate and that of my grandchildren, if I ever have any, rests on whether or not the discussion will change from 35 year old smoke and mirrors to a full discussion of Senator Kerry's actions, votes, remarks, and switches over the past 20 something years. Not whether 'W' got a dui or smoked pot or got assigned chump duty or whether Kerry was despised or slung a medal.
My fate and the fate of my grandchildren rests on
whether or not there will be a full discussion of George W. Bush's actions, votes, remarks, honesty over the last 20 years.
Finally, there is an old expression "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it" and that is exactly what I see happening now.
Neither of us will change the opinion of the other. I just hope (and dare to pray) that there are more of 'us' than there are of 'y'all'.
Santayana was one of the first modern day naturalists. He also supported Mussolini (but I couldn't find any record of his opinion of Hitler, but his silence and the fact Mussolini and Hitler were allies speaks volumes). Unfortunately, for Santayana he discovered too late that Mussolini was not the great savior of Italy and he ended living the end of his life in exile with a group of Catholic nuns in Italy unable to leave the country to return to the US or to Britain. His quote is used often, but we must keep in mind Santayana's wisdom was limited. And don't forget the context in which he made the statement - I believe it was relative to WWII.
As long as evil leaders such as Osama, Saddam, Hitler, Mussolini, Pol Pot, Stalin, Napoleon, etc exist, we will have to repeat history. The trick is dealing with these people in a way that effectively solves the problem at any given time. We have rid the world of Sadam, but obviously others as bad have filled his void. Some day Osama will be gone, but he will have a replacement. Initially, in the late 30's Britain went it alone against Hitler and Mussolini as would by the side with our head's in the sand. France caved then too. Other European countries played the Chamberlain card. By 1941, the US woke up and joined Britain. I for one am glad Britain had the courage to take the selfless and lonely stand that they did in 1938.
I'm not debating your point that Saddam had to be brought down, of that there is no question. The man is a maniac, as were his sons. My issue with this is not a Bush vs Kerry sparring match, spare me. I think they are both idiots and we're screwed no matter who wins in November. My problem, and what I was trying to convey, is the implication that being on the liberal side of things means that I somehow feel sympathy for terrorists or don't want to see them die slowly. Thats crap.
The president wants to blow a country off the map? Fine, who am I to stop it. Just be a man for Pete's sake and tell me thats what you want to do. Don't play into my fears to get my support, I've lost enough sleep.
I can't think who that might be.
"Going it alone is not working and only makes things worse."
The worst thing would be to do nothing, alone or not. You conclude that it's not working, but consider the more dire consequence of doing nothing at all. Standing with a group has always been easier. Just because the numbers start to fall off, it's no reason to drop all arms; that's a certain loss.
Whether you believe the WMDs are/were there or not - read "Saddam's Bombmaker" by Khidhir Hamza. Mr. Hamza is the exiled Iraqi who was in charge of that country's nuclear programs. You guys talk about having nightmares? This book is what gave them to me.
One more thing. It is totally incomprehensible to me that we are having this discussion on the eve of the anniversary of 911. I know of nothing this country did to justify, ligitimize or in any way make understandable what terrorists did on 911. Nothing. And to suggest we are being insensitive to their needs or legitimate goals just makes me crazy. I still have trouble believing what happened even when I see the tapes. And I refuse to accept blame for their conditions - real or imagined, and I most certainly will not agree with their goal if its accomplishment involves my anniliation. I yield the soap box.
Today's date may be part of why I am having such a hard time expressing myself and why I am becoming so frustrated and emotional. There is a guy who travels around with a bell in remembrance of the victims of 9/11. Yesterday it was around the corner from me, in front of the park which houses the statue of Paul Revere, in view of the Old North Church. Said park is right next to the fire station and I could see the raw pain on the faces of my firefighters as folks were invited to ring the bell.
As I drifted off to my night of sleep for an hour/up for an hour, I could hear the bell gonging over and over. It sounds very similar to the bell the Catholic church rings when a parishoner dies. Not a great way to fall asleep but I figure I'm lucky to have woken up as healthy and free as I was yesterday so how can I complain?
I know I am too young to appreciate alot of what has happened in the past- the wars, the politics. I can only go with whats in my heart.
This war will not be won by taking moderate stances, regardless if you are a liberal or a conservative. Terrorists are extremists who live by the extreme and it must be our resolve that they die by the extreme. In the previous two world wars, negotiation, appeasement, underestimating the enemy, and sensitivity had no effect and they will have no effect here either. Waiting before we get the world's "OK" before we respond is a moderate stance and will get us killed. To quote Whatever, " Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
If you pay close attention to Putin's remarks following the horrible incident in Russia...you will see that he blames much of it on the US. Apparently, we granted asylum to one of the Chech rebels that Russia considers to be the most dangerous (perhaps a Jack of Diamonds in Russia's deck).
My point is that one nation's terrorist is (or could be) another's freedom fighter. While we will never agree on global terrorist standards...we should work as much with our allies as possible. The more cooperation we have, the more likely we are to prevent the migration of those that would bring harm to our nation or another.
And I'm forced to comment on the "sensitive" issue again. I really do not believe that Kerry meant a "warm fuzzy" kind of sensitive. I believe he meant "more aware". We all know that these are not easy decisions, especially when the lives of our service men and women are at stake..I hope that the decisions are being made based upon the best information available...not just upon doing what you said you would--even when the situation calls for a change of course. I believe that this is what Kerry meant.
Don. no one is taking your guns! The ban on assult weapons is set to expire...and will likely not be reinstated anytime soon... x;-)