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

To: A_perfect_lady
Why does he suppose we have not had another major attack here in the States? Because we took the war to them, just exactly as President Bush said we were going to do. We'll fight them on the streets of Baghdad so that we aren't fighting them HERE.

It is tough-sounding rhetoric, but does it really make sense to "take the fight to them?" How many troops and how many billions of dollars and how many decades do you think it might take to kill every single Islamic extremist? Will we have hundreds of thousands of troops perpetually stationed in the heart of Arabia, drawing interference and distracting the terrorists? How long before the terrorists get smart, grow bored of blowing up our soldiers in Iraq, and return to blowing up our civilians in skyscrapers?

There will never come a point at which we can declare victory in Iraq. For every terrorist we kill in Iraq two more are born and another migrates from Pakistan to join the carnage.

48 posted on 02/04/2007 10:16:28 AM PST by ForOurFuture
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: ForOurFuture
How many troops and how many billions of dollars and how many decades do you think it might take to kill every single Islamic extremist?

The goal is not to kill every single Islamic terrorist. The goal is to show the Muslim world that economic prosperity and individual freedom is preferable to dying for an ideology that keeps them in the dark ages. The truly hardcore types will never be converted, but the millions of muslims who are not so fanatical, given a choice between a comfortable life and a violent death may well choose the comfortable life. And that is when the tide could turn.

51 posted on 02/04/2007 10:21:45 AM PST by A_perfect_lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

To: ForOurFuture
It is tough-sounding rhetoric, but does it really make sense to "take the fight to them?" How many troops and how many billions of dollars and how many decades do you think it might take to kill every single Islamic extremist?

First off, "every single" is a ridiculous overstatement.

Second, maybe these complaints over "how many troops" and "how many billions of dollars" would start to carry some weight if our losses thus far were more than a blip by historical standards, and if our country were starting to show at least some signs of being at least somewhat impoverished by the effort. You know, if the sales of Nintendo Wii's were slowing down or something.

Till/unless that day comes, these are weirdly melodramatic complaints.

Will we have hundreds of thousands of troops perpetually stationed in the heart of Arabia, drawing interference and distracting the terrorists?

I don't know about "perpetually", but let's say, for the sake of argument, that I declare the answer to be:

"Yes, until further notice."

Now, tell me, what's your problem with that, exactly? Why, specifically, would that bother you?

How long before the terrorists get smart, grow bored of blowing up our soldiers in Iraq, and return to blowing up our civilians in skyscrapers?

Good question. But notice, if that happened, we could, and would draw down the Iraq presence. You can worry about a perpetual Iraq presence or you can worry about terrorists ceasing to focus on Iraq, but not both, because the latter would negate the necessity for the former.

There will never come a point at which we can declare victory in Iraq.

You are right. That is because, contrary to what most people seem to think, it is not really a "war" per se. The war was fought, and won, in 2003. What we have is a reconstruction and counterinsurgency, which takes longer, and which comes with no clear-cut "victory" per se. Ok?

The only real question is, are Americans tough enough to stick it out? The bizarre thing is, it's NOT AFFECTING the vast majority of Americans AT ALL, and yet the answer STILL might be "no". Which I don't get at all.

I can take complaints from people who are ACTUALLY AFFECTED by a thing. But 95% of what we hear are complaints from people whose precious, pampered, spoiled-brat lives haven't been TOUCHED at all by the Iraq endeavor. Is it really too much for me to ask those people to kindly shut the hell up? I suppose it is, but a guy can dream....

60 posted on 02/04/2007 10:46:20 AM PST by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

To: ForOurFuture
How many troops and how many billions of dollars and how many decades do you think it might take to kill every single Islamic extremist?

How many billions of dollars and decades are you willing spend enforcing the No-Fly-Zone and keeping the sanctions in place against Iraq?

Will we have hundreds of thousands of troops perpetually stationed in the heart of Arabia, drawing interference and distracting the terrorists?

That's exactly what it would have taken to keep Saddam contained and prevent him from invading Kuwait and SA and attacking our troops in the Gulf.

Eventually Saddam would have acquired enough weapons conventional and unconventional from nations willing to void the sanctions to attack us. It was only a matter of time....

How long before the terrorists get smart, grow bored of blowing up our soldiers in Iraq, and return to blowing up our civilians in skyscrapers?

They already want to do that, but we have the leadership and footsoldiers pinned down in Iraq and Afghanistan. We're fighting the head now, not the tentacles.

We would have fought this war eventually, and it would have looked just like this! Quit whining, quit being a little defeatist drama queen and support your damned country!

66 posted on 02/04/2007 10:59:41 AM PST by Cogadh na Sith (There's an open road from the cradle to the tomb.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | 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