"thunder" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 17 Jul 2004 18:08:48 -0400, NOYB wrote:


I don't care who is in charge come January. If 9/11 was
state-sponsored, then attacking that country is our right and our
responsibility.

"Our right and our responsibility?" Interesting words to describe going
to war. It is our responsibility to bring those that attacked us to
justice, if that means attacking a country so be it, but I wouldn't call
it "our right."



Pre-emptive attacks are self-defense. And, yes, they're "our right".



It's sad that you let partisan politics stand in the way of that fact.

It is not partisan. It is trust. This administration led us to war for
false or faulty reasons.

No. The administration gave you a sound reason based on some not-so-sound
intelligence provided to them by our and other country's intelligence
agencies. However, they didn't give you a "false" reason. Besides the WMD
issue, there are 4 or 5 other solid reasons why we should have gone into
Iraq.


Credibility and competence are the questions.
800 young men and women have died for their mistakes.

Whose mistakes?

Yes, I want bin
Laden's head. I also want a President who wants it, not one who said, "I
don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's
not that important. It's not our priority." - G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

It's not that important in the whole scheme of things. Hell, we might
already have his head for all you and I know. When was the last time a
videotape of him surfaced? He was popping up left and right for about 4
months after 9/11...and then...nothing for the next 30 months. The war on
terror is a lot bigger picture than bin Laden. If we got him 4 months after
9/11, the liberals would be screaming that we accomplished our objective and
that we should bring our troops home.

Our primary objective was to knock the Taliban out of power in Afghanistan,
disrupt the terrorist training camps there, and install a US-friendly gov't
which would allow us to station troops on the Iranian and Pakistani borders.
Mission number one accomplished.

Our second objective was to drive Saddam from power in Iraq, reestablish the
oil flows to the West (so we're not held hostage by only Saudi oil), and
install a US-friendly government which would allow us to establish US bases
on the Iranian, Syrian, and Saudi Arabian borders. Mission number two is
90% accomplished.

Our third objective is to diplomatically pressure Saudi Arabia and Pakistan
to crack down on the Islamic fundamentalists in their respective countries,
and then drive the terrorist-sponsoring leaders from power in Iran and
Syria. Mission number three has just begun. Should Bush get re-elected, I
predict that mission number three will be accomplished within 2-3 years.

By the end of Bush's second term, there will be no governments left in the
Middle East which would dare fund, sponsor, harbor, or otherwise support
terrorist groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, al-Qaeda, etc. At
the very least, there will be no "new" nuclear powers there. It will take
at least a generation to get rid of the hatred that is being taught in the
madrassas, but it'll be a lot easier with US-friendly governments in place.


The fact that he has the vision (and the balls) to pursue such a plan is
exactly why I'm voting for Bush.