Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

I hadn't heard the US was doing this, but I haven't been keeping up with the details. It wouldn't surprise me from the State Department, though.
1 posted on 08/23/2005 11:40:00 AM PDT by nosofar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: nosofar
?....LOSING THE WAR ON TERROR: .....NO WAY......

Russia, China, Japan, India, ARE STRONGER THAN EVER.....Before!!!!!!!

The 'whole' truth and NOTHING but the truth......

John14:6

2 posted on 08/23/2005 11:47:24 AM PDT by maestro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nosofar
If Andy McCarthy really believes that the U.S. support for an Islamic government in Iraq represents a setback in the "war on terror," then I'm afraid he's been delusional for a long time.

The so-called "war on terror" was officially lost when we insisted on calling it -- well, a "war on terror." Terrorism is a method of projecting force, not an enemy -- and our inability to publicly identify a real enemy pretty much guaranteed that this war would be no more successful than all of those other wars against nebulous, inanimate things (war on poverty, war on drugs, war on illiteracy, etc.). We might just as well have declared war on bad weather, and the results would have been the same.

As far as Iraq is concerned, there was no need -- after the summer of 2003 -- to maintain any illusions about the U.S. commitment to the effort. This was the period of time in which the U.S. Congress -- which couldn't even reach on consensus on funding the war effort in Iraq -- somehow managed to garner unanimous support for a Federal law to protect Americans from . . . now get this, folks . . . TELEMARKETERS.

3 posted on 08/23/2005 11:48:11 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (I ain't got a dime, but what I got is mine. I ain't rich, but Lord I'm free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nosofar
I have been despairing for a long time over the fact that the principal mission has been subordinated by what I’ve called the “democracy diversion” – the administration’s theory that the (highly dubious) prospect of democratizing Iraq and the Islamic world will quell the Islamists. (Aside: go ask Israelis if they think the fledgling “democracy” in Gaza and the West Bank – which is very likely to bring Hamas to power – promotes their national security.)

I'm extremely conservative, and I know that I'm inviting denials and flames with what I'm about to say. But I've felt since the beginning of this that the W admin. was naive. The way W spoke about democratization of the ME became an almost religious fiat in his mind, a command from "the God of liberty." He actually misused that scriptural phrase in this political context!

How could they NOT know the stiff and constant terrorist resistence we would face? How could they not know we'd face constant losses as long as we were there?

Fighting radical Islam head on is one thing. Staying in Iraq to build schools and repair water lines in the hope that a forced "democracy" will somehow chase terrorism away is, again, hopelessly naive. And it's a waste of American lives.

5 posted on 08/23/2005 11:59:15 AM PDT by mikeus_maximus (Hillary for Prez! -(The Whitehouse wants its china back; China wants the Whitehouse back))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nosofar

I think the war in Iraq was a mistake, but not because of whatever Constitution they produce. It's quite clear at this point that whatever document they produce won't determine the situation on the ground there. Some variety of civil war will decide that- you've got 3 major ethnic groups each of which want the oil and political power.

We'll stick around and get our soldiers killed and whenever we leave they will have their civil war. And the Shiites backed by Iran will very likely win and we'll have two Irans. All for the low, low price of 700 billion dollars or so and 5000 or so US lives.


8 posted on 08/23/2005 12:08:48 PM PDT by Altair333 (Stop illegal immigration: George Allen in 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nosofar
Nattering nabobs of negativity.
10 posted on 08/23/2005 12:13:50 PM PDT by sydbas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nosofar

I reluctantly have to agree with the article. Spreading democracy should not be our goal. We must first defend America. Then we can help those who are being oppressed and/or being slaughtered or starved in other countries.

Terrorists, domestic or foreign, pose a mortal threat and cannot be ignored. Anarchists also pose a serious threat because without law and order, we would descend into the darkness of survival of the fittest.

Having said that, the war in Iraq, justified or not, has been a noble war that freed millions from a murderous tyranny. We have learned many lessons from Iraq that will hopefully guide us to wiser decisions in the future. We must stay the course and continue to honor our military who carry out their country's mission regardless of their personal feelings and the abuse by ill informed US citizens.

God bless America.


11 posted on 08/23/2005 12:14:41 PM PDT by FOXFANVOX (Freedom is not free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nosofar
Once again, the press doesn't get it.

The war was always about asserting American power into a region that was funding organized terror against our civilization. The inevitability of terrorist nuclear weapons dictated our course of action if we wished to save ourselves from destruction.

WMD & Democracy were part of the ideological message to build the momentum to do this. This is not post WWII Europe and it was never realistic to plan specifically for a democratic transformation, however, it continues to provide a vision and goal to those in the region that are willing to work for it.

We have cleared the land and planted the seeds. They must decide for themselves what they want to grow. All this chatter about "what was promised" and "what the American people want" is just second guessing from the press, and it is getting very tiresome.
12 posted on 08/23/2005 12:15:21 PM PDT by Wiseghy (Part of the True Conservative Majority of Kaleefahrnya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nosofar

This NRO guy must believe everything he reads in the newspapers.


15 posted on 08/23/2005 12:36:28 PM PDT by Chaguito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nosofar

gloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloomgloom


19 posted on 08/23/2005 5:45:21 PM PDT by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nosofar
Though I agree with many of the posters here ... Bush is naive and his administration is doing a poor job in Iraq ... AND Bush is doing a piss poor job of selling this war to the american people ... the name we put on why we went there is irrelevant.

Central Asia cannot be ceded to the islamists. Iraq was a good place to start. We need to see the real threat and put a LOT more force on it. Get rid of the political generals and put war fighters in there. The cause is as great as the cause in WWII ... perhaps greater. We will be in the Dark Ages if Central Asia goes down the tubes. It will take a draft and millions of soldiers if we fail in Iraq and Iran is allowed to take over the whole area.
20 posted on 08/23/2005 5:58:53 PM PDT by mercy (never again a patsy for Bill Gates - spyware and viri free for over TWO YEARS now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson