I would not disagree, but would say that no one country over there (or here) could be considered CENTRAL anymore. The terrorist organizations are too widespread.
Were we to have gone into Afghanistan first, (which the rest of the world would have rejected) we would be in much worse shape.
In chess, one doesn't go for the Queen on the first move, unless one likes losing.
Iraq is a distraction with no bearing on the problem.
I disagree completely. What I believe you meant is that "NOW" Iraq is a distraction. Had we not gone in and removed Iraq's regime (Saddam's sons, the Saddam lookalikes (Saddam died months before the coalition strikes), the Republican Guard and the anti-air weaponry), and attacked Afghanistan instead, we would have two battles on our hands and many more dead. Things would be totally out of control.
We are being attacked there because we are there.
Fair enough. Organized Crime attacks us anywhere they don't want us. We are confronting worldwide organized crime, in it's face, and yes, it will attack us while we are they, and until we remove it. If you don't yet get it, the AQ is just another Org. Crime outfit hiding under clergy outfits.
So, you really believe Condi's nonsense that Iraq will deal a "mortal blow" to the terrorists?
When you take away the candies, the candystealers go away.
Saddam first supported (money,accomodations,info) the AQ. Then they took over most of his country. He and his Republican Guard had all they could do to protect Baghdad from them. He was being blackmailed, extorted, in a sense, in that he had to support them or they would do to him what they just did to the SAUDI's recently, and have been doing to everyone else.
Giving the source of wealth from oil to the Iraqi people, means the MONEY to AQ dried up. Accomodations are short (tikrit), and won't last long.
We are getting the cooperation of the other countries that the AQ forces fled to. Slowly but surely. Even if we manage to disband the AQ, their minions will join other organizations.
So, you are in a sense, correct. We can never rid the world of evil. Without evil, there can be no good.
BUT, we can't allow EVIL to be dominant. That is what the problem is, and what we are trying to correct, and the heart of the beast was Saddam and his regime.
We still have other beasts, in Africa, South America, not just the middle east.
And, the scariest beast of all is here.
We must calm ourselves. Sure, this is an emotional issue.
Sure, we get ruffled because whenever someone has the guts to take a stand we don't like, or sounds like they are parroting the media libs, we go all kooky.
Please, don't lose your self-respect. I have asked Alpowolf specific questions,and he/she has answered, and we both may profit from this exchange.
All it took was asking this poster what specifically did he think. That allowed me to discuss it properly. See, you never know. He could have had specifics (or may still) that would support his concerns and if true, might change your view too.
"A mind is like a business, it must be open to work"
Your point that AQ controlled most of Iraq is new to me. Is there a source where I can read more about that?