War Will Begin Within Days

Electronic Telegraph ^ | 09/26/01 | George Jones and Anton La Guardia

[TonyInOhio]

Italics and highlighting are my doing.

I'll admit to having been a Blair skeptic in days past, but have been converted to an admirer since 911. His moving remarks on the evening of President Bush's Address to Congress expressed genuine sympathy and determined resolve, recalling the great Sir Winston Churchill's words at Christmastime, 1941:

What kind of a people do they think we are? Is it possible that they do not realize that we shall never cease to persevere against them until they have been taught a lesson which they and the world will never forget?

They seem fitting today, nearly sixty years hence.

[cicero's_son]

Afghanistan and the Taliban are practically incidental to our overall objectives in this war. They are a bunch of ignorant, mule-riding students armed with 20 year old stingers and leftover Soviet rifles. They simply have the misfortune of being obstinate and in our way.

I pray that there is a reason we are massing the largest military force since WWII in the region. Hitting the Taliban and taking out bin Ladin are good first steps, but we must turn our attention to Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya and any other states that harbor and support Islamicists.

Conservatives need to let Bush know that we will not be satisfied with another Powell "exit strategy."

[Professional]

What about the sanctions?! We haven't let the SANCTIONS sink in yet!

[porte des morts]

What you said.

[Centurion2000]

I pray that there is a reason we are massing the largest military force since WWII in the region. Hitting the Taliban and taking out bin Ladin are good first steps, but we must turn our attention to Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya and any other states that harbor and support Islamicists.

I'm of two minds on this .... we hear all the calls for tolerance and peace and it seems like the President is toming down his rhetoric as well. I'm starting to wonder if we're going to do anything at all.

And then another part notices that the US military force arrayed is total overkill for the forces in Afghanistan. So that part is wondering just exactly how many countries are going to get hit in the opening day of the American riposte ? I'm hoping that every single one of the terrorist states gets glassed.

[Paleo Conservative]

I'll admit to having been a Blair skeptic in days past, but have been converted to an admirer since 911. His moving remarks on the evening of President Bush's Address to Congress expressed genuine sympathy and determined resolve, recalling the great Sir Winston Churchill's words at Christmastime, 1941:

It's interesting to see the parallels between the leaders in Britain and th US today and 60 years ago. In WWII, the British had a conservative Prime minister while the US had the most leftist president it had ever had up to that time. Today the political alignments is just the opposite. While Blair's economics are not particularly leftist compared with previous Labour governments, his party has gone pretty far out on the cultural left. President Bush tends to be on the conservative side of most issues both economic and cultural.

Perhaps the cross-alignment of political power between the US and Britain will result in a stronger alliance than if both were conservative or both liberal.

[Professional]

but we must turn our attention to Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya and any other states that harbor and support Islamicists.

Oh, I'm sure we'll talk them all to death. Our first response to Osama should have been an ICBM in the vicinity of his hang out. That would have turned the countries you mentioned into blubbering fools. So far, we still look like a Clinton America. Bush, hurry the heck up, damn the torpedos. Renaming the battle was ultimate PC. Osama must be cackling his guts out.

[Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)]

From past experience concerning Panama and Iraq, we went in when it was good and dark (no moon).

[MileHi]

The Prime Minister attempted to calm concerns that terrorists might be planning biological or chemical weapons attacks on Britain after the head of the World Health Organisation warned governments to prepare for possible attacks. He said there was no specific threat and it was important not to be "alarmist" about such possibilities.

I am glad the Brits are on board. I also hope that no one targets them. Just as before WW2, they have disarmed, and the NRA and its members may not send extra guns and hand loaded ammo to them this time.

[cicero's_son]

We must never forget the stakes in this fight.

An American or European city will be attacked with a weapon of mass destruction by the Islamicists in the next decade if we do not completely gut our enemies. This may mean taking out heads of state, weapons manufacturing plants, terrorists, and armies. As Rumsfeld has reminded us a few times, nothing should be considered "off the table."

Our response is not about revenge or even justice. It is about protecting civilization from the barbarians.

[prov1813man]

Ditto, Ditto, Ditto. You reflect my sentiments on another thread....

Afghanistan is nothing more than a hideout, a pirate's cove. It's purpose is to give cover and deniability for the governments who sponsor, train and direct terror against the west. That part of the world has long considered the culture and practices of the west to be an abomination. Rice and medicine will not solve that. We MUST, beginning with Iraq, strike in the most visibly effective means possible all states known to sponsor these groups,eliminating both infrastructure and government.

To those that say this will only increase hate, so be it. Let them hate us. Without weapons, strategy, financing and coordination they can not translate that hate into terror on US soil.

[TonyInOhio]

To those that say this will only increase hate, so be it. Let them hate us.

Well spoken. Cicero thought much the same:

Oderint dum metuant

"Let them hate us, so long as they fear us."

[ppaul]

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
~~ John Stuart Mill ~~ </font size>

:

Your submissions please:</font color>
AMERICA ATTACKED: Online FReeper library -
Post your links to videos, photos, graphics, etc. </font color>HERE</font size></font color>

:

[GreenLanternCorps]

Ulmo, you are incorrect. The President has authority to undertake retaliation for the September 11th attacks from the Congress. Also as commander in chief he has authority to defend the US, and by implication retaliate against unprovoked attacks. He may also undertake other military actions when needed. We did this in the 1790 in the Quasi War with France, in the early 1800s versus the Barbary Pirates, the anti-slavery patrols off of Africa, the Boxer Rebellion expedition of 1900, etc.

[MileHi]

Cicero thought much the same:

Oderint dum metuant

"Let them hate us, so long as they fear us."

Ditto BUMP

[Romulus]

I'm hoping that every single one of the terrorist states gets glassed.

"Glassed."

Your agenda is not unknown, but we cannot possibly accomplish it without declaring ourselves the mortal enemies of muslims everywhere. Very well; if we are truly to attempt a war of anihilation on a billion muslims (most of whom have no power at all to influence their rulers), for whom and what will we be fighting? I ask only for information.

[Joaquin]

>From past experience concerning Panama and Iraq, we went in when it was good and dark (no moon).

I hope you're wrong on this one. We're just past 1st quarter so it'll be a while 'till the next new noon (Oct. 16).

[Centurion2000]

Your agenda is not unknown, but we cannot possibly accomplish it without declaring ourselves the mortal enemies of muslims everywhere. Very well; if we are truly to attempt a war of anihilation on a billion muslims (most of whom have no power at all to influence their rulers), for whom and what will we be fighting? I ask only for information.

As far as actually glassing ALL of the middle east that would be irrational anger speaking. However, we MUST make our response to this act of war so terrible that no one will even consider attacking the US.

As far as making enemies of a billion muslims, that is not the goal. The goal is to keep America safe from a WMD type attack. So long as those countries that are not eradicated believe that will WILL nuke at the slightest HINT of a WMD attack they will keep their populaces in line from doing so.

I have read the koran and their religion is simply NOT compatible with Western civilization, unless there is an Islamic reformation similar to the scale of the Protestant and Catholic reformation there will be global war, it's a question of when and not if.

Take out Medina or perhaps the Dome of the Rock (which was never mentioned in the koran) to show these people that we are SERIOUS about terrorism. They keep one holy city and we live in peace. If they continue, so be it.

[Romulus]

Take out Medina or perhaps the Dome of the Rock (which was never mentioned in the koran) to show these people that we are SERIOUS about terrorism.

I happen to share your views about the dangers of Islam and the indispensability of achieving its reform. But the sentiments expressed above are at variance with your claim that you do not seek jihad with Muslims at large.

Let's be reasonable, limiting our efforts to an enemy we can find and destroy.