Hey BUSH!! PAY ATTENTION!!!

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

A little something that makes a point.

 

 

 

 

 

The Real Enemy Staring Us in the Face

By BOB HERBERT

July 12, 2004, New York Times

 

Justin Hunt, a young man from Wildomar, Calif., about 75 miles east of Los Angeles, was determined to join the Marines. When recruiters pointed out that he was grossly overweight, he spent a year losing more than 150 pounds. Then he signed up and was promptly sent to Iraq, where he was killed last Tuesday in an explosion. He was 22.

 

Three American soldiers, not yet publicly identified, were killed yesterday in two separate attacks on military patrols north of Baghdad. On Saturday four marines were killed in a vehicle accident near Falluja. And five more American soldiers were killed Thursday in a mortar attack on a base in the Sunni-dominated city of Samarra.

 

For what?

 

Even as these brave troops were dying in the cruel and bloody environs of Iraq, the Senate Intelligence Committee in Washington was unfurling its damning unanimous report about the incredibly incompetent intelligence that the Bush administration used to justify this awful war.

 

The bipartisan committee, headed by Republican Senator Pat Roberts, declared that the key intelligence assessments trumpeted by President Bush as the main reasons for invading Iraq were unfounded.

 

Nearly 900 G.I.'s and more than 10,000 Iraqi civilians have already perished, and there is no end to the war in sight. The situation is both sorrowful and disorienting. The colossal intelligence failures and the willful madness of the administration, which presented war as the first and only policy option, can leave you with the terrible feeling that you're standing at the graveside of common sense and reasonable behavior.

 

A government with even a nodding acquaintance with competence and good sense would have launched an all-out war against Al Qaeda, not Iraq, in the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11. After all, it was Al Qaeda, not Iraq, that carried out the sneak attack on American soil that destroyed the World Trade Center and part of the Pentagon and killed 3,000 people. You might think that would have been enough to provoke an all-out response from the U.S. Instead we saved our best shot for the demented and already checkmated dictator of Iraq, Saddam Hussein.

 

Bin Laden and Al Qaeda must have gotten a good laugh out of that. Now they're planning to come at us again. On Thursday, the same day Iraqi insurgents killed the five G.I.'s in Samarra, the Bush administration disclosed that bin Laden and his lieutenants, believed to be operating from hideouts along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, were directing an effort by Al Qaeda to unleash an encore attack against the United States.

 

According to Tom Ridge, the homeland security secretary, the latest effort may well be timed to disrupt the fall elections.

 

If that happens, I wonder if we'll finally get serious about the war we should be fighting against bin Laden and Al Qaeda. Maybe not. Based on the impenetrable logic of the president and his advisers, a new strike by Al Qaeda might lead us to start a war with, say, Iran, or Syria.

 

If we know that bin Laden and his top leadership are somewhere along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, and that they're plotting an attack against the United States, why are we not zeroing in on them with overwhelming force? Why is there not a sense of emergency in the land, with the entire country pulling together to stop another Sept. 11 from occurring?

 

Why are we not more serious about this?

 

I don't know what the administration was thinking when it invaded Iraq even as the direct threat from bin Laden and Al Qaeda continued to stare us in the face. That threat has only intensified. The war in Iraq consumed personnel and resources badly needed in the campaign against bin Laden and his allies. And it has fanned the hatred of the U.S. among Muslims around the world. Instead of destroying Al Qaeda, we have played right into its hands and contributed immeasurably to its support.

 

Most current intelligence analysts agree with Secretary Ridge that Al Qaeda will try before long to strike the U.S. mainland once again.

 

We've trained most of our guns on the wrong foe. The real enemy is sneaking up behind us. Again. The price to be paid for not recognizing this could be devastating.

 

 

 

----------------------------

 

No shit. It's about time SOMEBODY started yelling about getting the "Mission Accomplished" with bin Laden and Co. Then again, maybe we can hold out til the elections and have bin Laden "found" just in time. Right? RIGHT??? Poor Abby Hoffman, you warned us about these kinds of people.

 

[Guest INXS]

I don't think it's fair to blame the deaths of any servicemen on anyone. When someone joins the army they should understand that it's a high risk job and there's a chance that they may be killed or injured, and also that they are required to serve worldwide.

 

I agree with the article that Bin Laden and co should be a priority ( I guess they were, we DID go into Afghanistan first), but I also have to say that Iraq was based on lies, poor intelligence and at the moment, has made the "war on terror" WORSE.

 

I have to agree, I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest to see Bin Laden 'captured' in late October.

[Stephen Joseph 0]

You know, honestly, stop with the conspiracy theories.

Blah Blah Blah.

 

And I suppose we should only act in our lives when we have all the information and know every potential outcome...I mean, that's what you're saying.

 

Then all life would be would be sitting around not moving because you don't know every potentiality.

 

We stuck our necks out, made a move, and now we're living with the consequences.

 

And while you're at it, you're not going to blame the Nazi's of WWII for the deaths of millions of men and women in uniform.

 

Or how about this? You're not going to blame the death of a cop on a criminal who shoots him, because the cop should've EXPECTED such.

 

Whatever.

 

EDIT: And by the way, if you read into that some sort of justification from the right-wing of why we went to war, you're a fool. For a history lesson, I wasn't exactly in favor of going in, but I'm not going to cry conspiracy, act like soldier's are getting what they should've expected, and there's no one really evil out there in Iraq

 

And on a later note, what evil? is Michael Moore fighting. Really. If your definition of evil is the juvenille hatred felt towards Bush by many, then we really have watered down evility.

 

EVIL is Hitler. EVIL is Stalin. EVIL is a rapist. EVIL is a serial murderer.

Edited July 13, 2004 by Stephen Joseph

[Guest Cerebus]

This is the biggest load of shit I've ever seen in the New York Times. And that's saying something.

 

The Intelligence Committee report WOULD hurt if NBCR weapons and intelligence were the sole reason for Bush attacking Iraq.

 

It wasn't.

 

In fact, the intelligence the committee slammed was practically universally accepted.

 

Ted Kennedy believed it. Jaquec Chirac believed it. They opposed the war.

 

But whatever. Bob Herbert wanted Saddam to stay in power and doesn't believe our soldiers should have died to take him out. It was better to keep him in power after all he was only opressing some brown folks. Who gives a damn?

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

And on a later note, what evil? is Michael Moore fighting. Really. If your definition of evil is the juvenille hatred felt towards Bush by many, then we really have watered down evility.

 

EVIL is Hitler. EVIL is Stalin. EVIL is a rapist. EVIL is a serial murderer

 

No shit. The EVIL BUSH=Hitler deal is annoying. Bush ranks as maybe a Class "B" Asshole on the "Bad person" scale.

[Black Lushus 0]

i think we should just send Charlie Sheen, Michael Beihn and the other Navy SEALS boys in to take care of it and be done with it....errr wait a minute...

[Stephen Joseph 0]

And on a later note, what evil? is Michael Moore fighting. Really. If your definition of evil is the juvenille hatred felt towards Bush by many, then we really have watered down evility.

 

EVIL is Hitler. EVIL is Stalin. EVIL is a rapist. EVIL is a serial murderer

 

No shit. The EVIL BUSH=Hitler deal is annoying. Bush ranks as maybe a Class "B" Asshole on the "Bad person" scale.

And hell freezes over when AoO not only quotes me, but quotes me and then agrees.

 

=) Thanks yo.

 

 

And yeah, if you're place Bush anywhere ... that works

[Guest GreatOne]

I'd like to find out from the leftists on this board what they'd think if today were 1943 and we were fighting Mussolini and Hitler in addition to Hirohito's fightin' kamikazes.

 

Maybe you could tell my grandfather who was in Italy in '43 that he fought in a 'for what?' war too.

[Mystery Eskimo 0]

Don't be ridiculous. How can you even begin to compare WW2 with Iraq?

[Guest Xias]

I'd like to find out from the leftists on this board what they'd think if today were 1943 and we were fighting Mussolini and Hitler in addition to Hirohito's fightin' kamikazes.

 

Maybe you could tell my grandfather who was in Italy in '43 that he fought in a 'for what?' war too.

But that's an idiotic comparison, because Italy and Germany were CLEAR allies of Japan. Obviously, as has been proven time and time again, Iraq aren't allies of the group that attacked us.

 

No one's saying that getting a murderous dictator out of command is a bad thing. But what we are saying is that the time and effort could have been better spent on people who were posing an immediate threat to us. Now those people are still out there and planning an attack, and more people could die simply because we were too busy dicking around with Iraq to stop them.

 

-Xias

[Jobber of the Week 0]

I'd like to find out from the leftists on this board what they'd think if today were 1943 and we were fighting Mussolini and Hitler in addition to Hirohito's fightin' kamikazes.

 

Maybe you could tell my grandfather who was in Italy in '43 that he fought in a 'for what?' war too.

Kind of extreme to compare a reactionary war involving many countries to us going and picking a fight with someone on our own violition.

[tommytomlin 0]

And the fact America was two years late to the war kind of diminishes your argument that the left would sit on their hands. Both sides of politics sat on their hands until Pearl Harbour.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

I'd like to find out from the leftists on this board what they'd think if today were 1943 and we were fighting Mussolini and Hitler in addition to Hirohito's fightin' kamikazes.

 

Maybe you could tell my grandfather who was in Italy in '43 that he fought in a 'for what?' war too.

Oh and we'd be speaking german today if we didn't get involved in WWII? Riiiiight. Either way Hitler went he was gonna have his Waterloo. Either with the Russian winter or that big pond 'tween us and Europe. DUH! Besides all the guy writing the article wants is for the Bush Admins. to put more focus back on bin Laden and al Queda! What is wrong with that?

[MrRant 0]

You are a fucking moron.

[Guest Cerebus]

Don't be ridiculous. How can you even begin to compare WW2 with Iraq?

The same way you compare it to Vietnam.

 

Incorrectly.

[Stephen Joseph 0]

I'd like to find out from the leftists on this board what they'd think if today were 1943 and we were fighting Mussolini and Hitler in addition to Hirohito's fightin' kamikazes.

 

Maybe you could tell my grandfather who was in Italy in '43 that he fought in a 'for what?' war too.

Oh and we'd be speaking german today if we didn't get involved in WWII? Riiiiight. Either way Hitler went he was gonna have his Waterloo. Either with the Russian winter or that big pond 'tween us and Europe. DUH! Besides all the guy writing the article wants is for the Bush Admins. to put more focus back on bin Laden and al Queda! What is wrong with that?

Um.

 

No.

 

If we hadn't have gotten involved, there would have been no second front, and Hitler would not have had to spread his forces all over Fortress Europe V2.0.

 

The Russian Army had heart, but it was very far behind technology-wise to the Germans. The only reason Russia was able to mount its offensive is that most German units were waiting to the ALLIED attack.

 

Learn history.

[godthedog 0]

and once again, the topic gets de-railed after everyone chooses to pay attention to the most dumbfuck comment possible on the subject.

[Guest Cerebus]

and once again, the topic gets de-railed after everyone chooses to pay attention to the most dumbfuck comment possible on the subject.

Well since this thread never had a real topic except some idiot in the New York Times spitting off a generic protest against the war in Iraq you really can't fault the posters for getting off topic.

[Stephen Joseph 0]

I think the topic was dead by the time I posted what I did anyways.

 

If there was "discussion" like between Rant and Xias in that gay marriage thread, then that one's lively.

 

Or what C said.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

This topic was dead when its title was in ALL CAPS.

 

Oops, my bad, I missed the "ey" in "Hey"...

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

and once again, the topic gets de-railed after everyone chooses to pay attention to the most dumbfuck comment possible on the subject.

Isn't it weird what people pay attention to? Oh yeah, and good luck making movies.

[Guest MikeSC]

But that's an idiotic comparison, because Italy and Germany were CLEAR allies of Japan. Obviously, as has been proven time and time again, Iraq aren't allies of the group that attacked us.

Might need to re-check the info, as links between Al Qaeda and Iraq existed as far back as 1991. There is a reason why they never caused problems in Iraq.

-=Mike

[Guest Xias]

But that's an idiotic comparison, because Italy and Germany were CLEAR allies of Japan. Obviously, as has been proven time and time again, Iraq aren't allies of the group that attacked us.

Might need to re-check the info, as links between Al Qaeda and Iraq existed as far back as 1991. There is a reason why they never caused problems in Iraq.

-=Mike

Were they allies of the group that attacked us at the time of the attack? Not according to the 9/11 Commission, who completely dismissed the idea.

 

Oh, wait, you're a conservative, I'm sure you've got some conspiracy theory about commission members attending liberal movies or something....

 

-Xias

Because in the conservative world, Republicians really want to hurt their own party!

[Guest GreatOne]

You are a fucking moron.

Says somebody who lives in Western Washington.

[Justice 0]

But that's an idiotic comparison, because Italy and Germany were CLEAR allies of Japan. Obviously, as has been proven time and time again, Iraq aren't allies of the group that attacked us.

Might need to re-check the info, as links between Al Qaeda and Iraq existed as far back as 1991. There is a reason why they never caused problems in Iraq.

-=Mike

Were they allies of the group that attacked us at the time of the attack? Not according to the 9/11 Commission, who completely dismissed the idea.

 

Oh, wait, you're a conservative, I'm sure you've got some conspiracy theory about commission members attending liberal movies or something....

 

-Xias

Because in the conservative world, Republicians really want to hurt their own party!

Whether or not they were actually involved in 9/11 doesn't mean they weren't allied in one way or another, nimrod. Even if 9/11 didn't have any Iraqi involvement, that doesn't dim the fact that Iraq was big into helping terrorist groups and other dangerous extremists in the Middle East.

 

Eh, wait, you're a yuppie. You don't actually know how the real world works, so what's the use in trying to explain anything to you.

 

-Powerplay

... Damn, you are just so friggin' familiar...

[Guest PlatinumBoy]

I'd like to find out from the leftists on this board what they'd think if today were 1943 and we were fighting Mussolini and Hitler in addition to Hirohito's fightin' kamikazes.

 

Maybe you could tell my grandfather who was in Italy in '43 that he fought in a 'for what?' war too.

Oh and we'd be speaking german today if we didn't get involved in WWII? Riiiiight. Either way Hitler went he was gonna have his Waterloo. Either with the Russian winter or that big pond 'tween us and Europe. DUH! Besides all the guy writing the article wants is for the Bush Admins. to put more focus back on bin Laden and al Queda! What is wrong with that?

Even if Russia had beaten Germany, and nothing happened to us (doubtful once Japan ruled the Pacific), it's not like NOTHING would have happened to us, since you know--there wouldn't be any Jews left (for the most part), and just as many Chinese and Pacific Islanders would have been slaughtered by the Japanese.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

But that's an idiotic comparison, because Italy and Germany were CLEAR allies of Japan. Obviously, as has been proven time and time again, Iraq aren't allies of the group that attacked us.

Might need to re-check the info, as links between Al Qaeda and Iraq existed as far back as 1991. There is a reason why they never caused problems in Iraq.

-=Mike

Were they allies of the group that attacked us at the time of the attack? Not according to the 9/11 Commission, who completely dismissed the idea.

 

Oh, wait, you're a conservative, I'm sure you've got some conspiracy theory about commission members attending liberal movies or something....

 

-Xias

Because in the conservative world, Republicians really want to hurt their own party!

Whether or not they were actually involved in 9/11 doesn't mean they weren't allied in one way or another, nimrod. Even if 9/11 didn't have any Iraqi involvement, that doesn't dim the fact that Iraq was big into helping terrorist groups and other dangerous extremists in the Middle East.

 

Eh, wait, you're a yuppie. You don't actually know how the real world works, so what's the use in trying to explain anything to you.

 

-Powerplay

... Damn, you are just so friggin' familiar...

Thank you!

[Guest GreatOne]

You know considering this REAL BRAVE MAN (credit: Bill Maher) Bin Laden has about 200,000,000 caves to hide in and hasn't been seen anywhere but on VHS for the last three years, I wouldn't be so hard on our troops who ARE there for not finding him.

 

I mean hell just imagine the bitchfits the left would have if we just started bombing the hell out of Afghanistan again cause he won't come out and show himself.

[Justice 0]

But that's an idiotic comparison, because Italy and Germany were CLEAR allies of Japan. Obviously, as has been proven time and time again, Iraq aren't allies of the group that attacked us.

Might need to re-check the info, as links between Al Qaeda and Iraq existed as far back as 1991. There is a reason why they never caused problems in Iraq.

-=Mike

Were they allies of the group that attacked us at the time of the attack? Not according to the 9/11 Commission, who completely dismissed the idea.

 

Oh, wait, you're a conservative, I'm sure you've got some conspiracy theory about commission members attending liberal movies or something....

 

-Xias

Because in the conservative world, Republicians really want to hurt their own party!

Whether or not they were actually involved in 9/11 doesn't mean they weren't allied in one way or another, nimrod. Even if 9/11 didn't have any Iraqi involvement, that doesn't dim the fact that Iraq was big into helping terrorist groups and other dangerous extremists in the Middle East.

 

Eh, wait, you're a yuppie. You don't actually know how the real world works, so what's the use in trying to explain anything to you.

 

-Powerplay

... Damn, you are just so friggin' familiar...

Thank you!

... Huh? Did you quote the right person here?

 

*Remains confused*

[Guest Frank_Nabbit]

Was I the only one who thought this was going to be a anti obesity story after how the article started?