Post election euphoria

[DawgyNWindow]

http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...src=rss&rpc=22


Makes ya proud, doesn't it?

[PawDawg]

This would be a good time for Champion's party leaders to make a statement. They had to know it was coming. They will probably just ignore it.

[DawgyNWindow]

There's more:

http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...src=rss&rpc=22


I especially like this part:

"I swear by God we shall not rest from jihad until we...blow up the filthiest house known as the White House," the voice on the recording said.


Yep, Iraq has NOTHING to do with the war on terror.

[mildawg]

It really all boils down to one simple question that every person has to ask themselves: Would you rather fight them there or here at home?

It's just that simple. Sure, you can come on here and state your belief that the war in Iraq was under false pretenses and that the terrorists would not be in Iraq if not for the "senseless" invasion. Whatever your opinion, you cannot justify our NOT being on the offensive. Whether it be Iraq, Syria, Jordan, or Iran, we needed to take the fight to them and not sit back waiting on another 9/11. We will not cripple the terrorists or disrupt their plans by being passive.

Instead, we are in Iraq and Afghanistan and are on the offensive. The various terrorist groups are on the run, not only in Iraq and Aghanistan, but in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Asia, and Europe. Because we are taking the fight to them, they are unable to effectively launch any large-scale attacks outside the region. Sure, they're able to conduct strikes with suicide bombers and IEDs, but not here in America. So you guys that are thrilled with the idea of immediate withdrawal and redeployment may very well get your wish.

At the same time, so will the terrorists.

[parisdog]

It really all boils down to one simple question that every person has to ask themselves: Would you rather fight them there or here at home?

It's just that simple. Sure, you can come on here and state your belief that the war in Iraq was under false pretenses and that the terrorists would not be in Iraq if not for the "senseless" invasion. Whatever your opinion, you cannot justify our NOT being on the offensive. Whether it be Iraq, Syria, Jordan, or Iran, we needed to take the fight to them and not sit back waiting on another 9/11. We will not cripple the terrorists or disrupt their plans by being passive.

Instead, we are in Iraq and Afghanistan and are on the offensive. The various terrorist groups are on the run, not only in Iraq and Aghanistan, but in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Asia, and Europe. Because we are taking the fight to them, they are unable to effectively launch any large-scale attacks outside the region. Sure, they're able to conduct strikes with suicide bombers and IEDs, but not here in America. So you guys that are thrilled with the idea of immediate withdrawal and redeployment may very well get your wish.

At the same time, so will the terrorists.

Very good post. I wholeheartedly agree!

[TYLERTECHSAS]

It really all boils down to one simple question that every person has to ask themselves: Would you rather fight them there or here at home?

It's just that simple. Sure, you can come on here and state your belief that the war in Iraq was under false pretenses and that the terrorists would not be in Iraq if not for the "senseless" invasion. Whatever your opinion, you cannot justify our NOT being on the offensive. Whether it be Iraq, Syria, Jordan, or Iran, we needed to take the fight to them and not sit back waiting on another 9/11. We will not cripple the terrorists or disrupt their plans by being passive.

Instead, we are in Iraq and Afghanistan and are on the offensive. The various terrorist groups are on the run, not only in Iraq and Aghanistan, but in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Asia, and Europe. Because we are taking the fight to them, they are unable to effectively launch any large-scale attacks outside the region. Sure, they're able to conduct strikes with suicide bombers and IEDs, but not here in America. So you guys that are thrilled with the idea of immediate withdrawal and redeployment may very well get your wish.

At the same time, so will the terrorists.

Exactly! BTW, thanks for posting DIW.

[champion110]

The terrorist have come IN to Iraq AFTER we invaded. Don't you all get it?????

Anyway, I was driving home from my trip today and tuned into some of your conservative Christian radio. NO WONDER you guys have the views that you do. I was actually LAUGHING on the way home. I didn't have to miss some of you, though. They were saying the same things. I was amazed at the propaganda that was being stated.

The fact is that Christians HELP others. The Republican party has not been good with that and all of you know that (or you are so politically brainwashed that it is hopeless). The Republicans hurt too many people. While all of you are shouting that the Democrats are terrorists (which is ABSOLUTELY crazy) or yelling about your fear of Gay people getting married, there are people suffering all over the world and in our country. That is not very Christian.

So, go ahead and talk about how you think that the Democrats are bad on defense or bad for the economy. This administration had years and years to do something worthwhile and did not do that. I hope that we can all come together and try to do something now. Some will be stubborn and stick more to their hatred of Democrats than the facts, but some will realize that we need some balance in this country. You had the President, the Congress, and the Senate. Look where we are. It was time for a change and we got it.

As for the Democrats, it is time to do something. We cannot complain about things anymore. Put some solid goals out there and work hard. Turn our country back into a friend of the world and not its #1 enemy. Also, we worked hard to communicate to those evangelical Christians about what we are trying to do. Now is the time to put up or shut up. Show this country that good can prevail.

[mildawg]

Once again, you guys fail to read anything we post other than you disagree with Iraq and you hate Bush. I SAID: "you can come on here and state your belief that the war in Iraq was under false pretenses and that the terrorists would not be in Iraq if not for the "senseless" invasion."

You just don't get it. If not in Iraq, they would be somewhere else. We'd have to deal with them then. Whether it be Syria, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Indonesia, Bosnia, wherever -- WE WOULD HAVE TO DEAL WITH THEM!!! Better there than here. Better us dropping bombs on terrorist safehouses and training facilities than them flying planes into our buildings.

I hope the dems in congress have more sense than the ones on this board, but I highly doubt it. You guys go ahead and offer an olive branch to these terrorists and the states protecting them -- when they turn back around and smack you in the face with it, we'll be here to say "told you so."

[dhussdawg]

That is funny, I laugh very hard when I listen to liberals on the radio or TV. I do agree that the Repubs have nobody to blame but themselves though. It is the Dems time to try to prove something. Sadly, though, I dont think Pelosi will get much accomplished in the House, which will stifle other departments. I think her political grandstanding and party line voting may have helped bring her party to power, but I dont think it will unify it to do things. Mostly because I think she will only do fringe leftist things, she will kill independent thought from the left that doesnt fall in line with her thinking (out in the ether). She probably thinks her wacko San Fran views are everybody's views and she is dead wrong. Of course, with the way this country is divided, I dont think it would matter who is in power, not much is going to get done.

[dhussdawg]

Once again, you guys fail to read anything we post other than you disagree with Iraq and you hate Bush. I SAID: "you can come on here and state your belief that the war in Iraq was under false pretenses and that the terrorists would not be in Iraq if not for the "senseless" invasion."

You just don't get it. If not in Iraq, they would be somewhere else. We'd have to deal with them then. Whether it be Syria, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Indonesia, Bosnia, wherever -- WE WOULD HAVE TO DEAL WITH THEM!!! Better there than here. Better us dropping bombs on terrorist safehouses and training facilities than them flying planes into our buildings.

I hope the dems in congress have more sense than the ones on this board, but I highly doubt it. You guys go ahead and offer an olive branch to these terrorists and the states protecting them -- when they turn back around and smack you in the face with it, we'll be here to say "told you so."

Yeh, a Dem might can disagree that Iraq isnt the place to be, but if you dont think that we would be fighting terrorists somewhere, you are clueless. If we would have invaded Iran, they would be there. Hell, if we would have invaded Korea, they might have packed up and moved (probably not), they would have jsut started crap somewhere else where we would have had to go. I can understand the thinking that Iraq wasnt the best place to go, but dont think that a battle with the terrorist only happened because we attacked Iraq. It would have happened no matter where we would have gone.

[champion110]

Once again, you guys fail to read anything we post other than you disagree with Iraq and you hate Bush. I SAID: "you can come on here and state your belief that the war in Iraq was under false pretenses and that the terrorists would not be in Iraq if not for the "senseless" invasion."

You just don't get it. If not in Iraq, they would be somewhere else. We'd have to deal with them then. Whether it be Syria, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Indonesia, Bosnia, wherever -- WE WOULD HAVE TO DEAL WITH THEM!!! Better there than here. Better us dropping bombs on terrorist safehouses and training facilities than them flying planes into our buildings.

I hope the dems in congress have more sense than the ones on this board, but I highly doubt it. You guys go ahead and offer an olive branch to these terrorists and the states protecting them -- when they turn back around and smack you in the face with it, we'll be here to say "told you so."

Sorry, I only have a few minutes and am reading fast. I agree with the fact that we have to deal with it. I think that everyone understands that. As for "having more sense", we will have to debate that another time. You are angry and are lashing out a little with that one. I understand and felt the same way years ago when we lost control. The fact is though that NO ONE IS OFFERING AN OLIVE BRANCH TO THE TERRORISTS. That is a lie that is being spread through the Republican party. It mostly was being spread during the election. Even Bush admitted that he stated some things in the heat of the battle for the election, but knows that the Democrats understand the importance of this matter. Some of you fell for campaigne junk that you heard during that time and, actually, believe what you heard.

[champion110]

That is funny, I laugh very hard when I listen to liberals on the radio or TV. I do agree that the Repubs have nobody to blame but themselves though. It is the Dems time to try to prove something. Sadly, though, I dont think Pelosi will get much accomplished in the House, which will stifle other departments. I think her political grandstanding and party line voting may have helped bring her party to power, but I dont think it will unify it to do things. Mostly because I think she will only do fringe leftist things, she will kill independent thought from the left that doesnt fall in line with her thinking (out in the ether). She probably thinks her wacko San Fran views are everybody's views and she is dead wrong. Of course, with the way this country is divided, I dont think it would matter who is in power, not much is going to get done.

I will admit that I laugh at the libs, as well. All those shows do is cater to the people that will buy into it, so that they can keep their listeners. In fact, the politicians themselves do the same thing - both sides.

[mildawg]

Yeh, a Dem might can disagree that Iraq isnt the place to be, but if you dont think that we would be fighting terrorists somewhere, you are clueless. If we would have invaded Iran, they would be there. Hell, if we would have invaded Korea, they might have packed up and moved (probably not), they would have jsut started crap somewhere else where we would have had to go. I can understand the thinking that Iraq wasnt the best place to go, but dont think that a battle with the terrorist only happened because we attacked Iraq. It would have happened no matter where we would have gone.

Sorry, I misread your post. I get a little fired up about this subject. I agree with everything you said.

[mildawg]

Sorry, I only have a few minutes and am reading fast. I agree with the fact that we have to deal with it. I think that everyone understands that. As for "having more sense", we will have to debate that another time. You are angry and are lashing out a little with that one. I understand and felt the same way years ago when we lost control. The fact is though that NO ONE IS OFFERING AN OLIVE BRANCH TO THE TERRORISTS. That is a lie that is being spread through the Republican party. It mostly was being spread during the election. Even Bush admitted that he stated some things in the heat of the battle for the election, but knows that the Democrats understand the importance of this matter. Some of you fell for campaigne junk that you heard during that time and, actually, believe what you heard.

I hope that is true. But, let's be honest, a lot of these guys are pushing for a hasty withdrawal of US forces. Until we can get the Iraqi military trained and ready to go after these guys, we need to stay. I have friends that are currently there, and I don't want anything to happen to them or the other soldiers or innocent Iraqi civilians. But, their presence is a necessary one for the foreseeable future.

[champion110]

I hope that is true. But, let's be honest, a lot of these guys are pushing for a hasty withdrawal of US forces. Until we can get the Iraqi military trained and ready to go after these guys, we need to stay. I have friends that are currently there, and I don't want anything to happen to them or the other soldiers or innocent Iraqi civilians. But, their presence is a necessary one for the foreseeable future.

One plan is to triple the size of our training forces. The sooner we get the Iraqi's up and going by themselves, the better. There are a growing number of Iraqis in favor of this plan. Some believe that the sooner the Americans leave, the fighing will subside. I am not so sure about that, but I do know that the training should have been completed by now. I really don't understand why that is not going faster.

The next issue is getting our soldiers the equipment that they need (this has improved some over the last year, at least).

The best thing that could happen is have a Secretary of Defense that can handle this. You know, personally, I sort of like Rummy. I will definitely miss his quick wit in interviews. He is the only one in this administration that I liked hearing and found etertaining. We need someone capable, though. I hope this guy from A&M is the one. I am definitely NOT a military strategist - I just want one in office.