Quote:
Originally Posted by Swimmer
I beg to differ. The military could win on thier own if they didn't have to stay out of the mosques. If they could enter and destroy what is inside the war would end.
|
In all honesty I've never heard a single military or terrorisim expert assert such a thing. I don't believe it for a moment.
Quote:
|
I have asked this question before and I'll ask it again of the anti-Bush group. What would you have done different after 9/11 than what Bush and most of Congress did?
|
Who's anti-Bush? I'm anti bad policy
Quite simply, we should have recognized 9/11 for what it was...not an offensive strike against our freedom by crazy terrorists, but rather the result of a global Islamic insurgency that feeds from many sources.
This is the problem with the entire notion of the "terrorist". If you either are a terrorist or you are not then logic would dictate we could sinply target and kill terrorists to be successfull. This is the rational I hear repeatedly in these pages by many of you...
But the reality is we're fighting insurgents...it's a groundswell of rage against the entire world. We're target number one not because we're free, but because the USA is known as the world leader and our economy is the underpinning of the global economy.
This rage is present in every nation on earth. Some of it is perhaps justified and much of it is not.
But the US Military can't kill everyone we say is a terrorist when there's a stream of rage that's rooted in over a billion people, most of whom don't have the freedom or means to express any difference of opinion.
I could go on...but this is the fundamental problem with our post 9/11 policy.
-spence
Threaded Mode