"Donal" wrote in message


Hasn't Al Qaeda been mortally weakened by the defeat of Saddam?

Al qaeda has been weakened, but only because they've been kept busy
shoveling ignorant, uneducated dupes (suicide bombers) and money into Iraq
to torment the US and the new Iraqi ruling council. You might have noticed
that they've not accomplished anything in the USA since 9/11, beyond the
ongoing frustration and expense incurred by our gummint.

Surely, your victory in Iraq means that the world is now safe????

Would you feel safer if Saddam were still in power? If so, why would you
feel less safe now?

Max

Actually, they've accomplished a lot of their goal. They've forced us
to reduce our Civil Rights, they've forced us to have to remove our
shoes before we get on a plane, they've effectively put targets on
the backs of every American living or travelling abroad. I'd say we're
a lot less safe. Saddam had little to do with it either way.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
link.net...

"Donal" wrote in message


Hasn't Al Qaeda been mortally weakened by the defeat of Saddam?

Al qaeda has been weakened, but only because they've been kept busy
shoveling ignorant, uneducated dupes (suicide bombers) and money into Iraq
to torment the US and the new Iraqi ruling council. You might have
noticed
that they've not accomplished anything in the USA since 9/11, beyond the
ongoing frustration and expense incurred by our gummint.

Surely, your victory in Iraq means that the world is now safe????

Would you feel safer if Saddam were still in power? If so, why would you
feel less safe now?

Max

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message


Actually, they've accomplished a lot of their goal. They've forced us
to reduce our Civil Rights,

Wrong. The Bush administration did this. It was not necessary, and not an
appropriate response to terrorism.

they've forced us to have to remove our
shoes before we get on a plane,

If this really bothers you, Jon, you should seek counseling.

they've effectively put targets on
the backs of every American living or travelling abroad.

In theory, perhaps. In reality, highly unlikely. I'm unaware of any
Americans traveling abroad (excluding Iraq) who've been victims or close
calls of terrorism.

I'd say we're
a lot less safe. Saddam had little to do with it either way.

That was my point. How did ousting Saddam make us less safe?

Max

You're right about the Bu**** administration.

I don't need counseling, I need more foot powder.

It was the attack on Iraq that makes us less safe. Getting
rid of Saddam was a good thing and might have gone well,
but Bu**** screwed it up.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message


Actually, they've accomplished a lot of their goal. They've forced us
to reduce our Civil Rights,

Wrong. The Bush administration did this. It was not necessary, and not
an
appropriate response to terrorism.

they've forced us to have to remove our
shoes before we get on a plane,

If this really bothers you, Jon, you should seek counseling.

they've effectively put targets on
the backs of every American living or travelling abroad.

In theory, perhaps. In reality, highly unlikely. I'm unaware of any
Americans traveling abroad (excluding Iraq) who've been victims or close
calls of terrorism.

I'd say we're
a lot less safe. Saddam had little to do with it either way.

That was my point. How did ousting Saddam make us less safe?

Max

"Maxprop" wrote in message
link.net...

"Donal" wrote in message


Hasn't Al Qaeda been mortally weakened by the defeat of Saddam?

Al qaeda has been weakened, but only because they've been kept busy
shoveling ignorant, uneducated dupes (suicide bombers) and money into Iraq
to torment the US and the new Iraqi ruling council. You might have
noticed
that they've not accomplished anything in the USA since 9/11, beyond the
ongoing frustration and expense incurred by our gummint.

That's a very interesting point of view. You have manage to sum up, very
succinctly, the arrogance that is generating so much hostility to the Bush
administration.

Your post demonstrates, very clearly, that you place a much lower value on
the lives of innocent Iraqi people, than you do on innocent Americans. You
seem to obtain a degree of satisfaction from the fact that your President's
actions mean that Al Qaeda is active in Iraq.

Shame on you.



Regards


Donal
--





Surely, your victory in Iraq means that the world is now safe????

Would you feel safer if Saddam were still in power? If so, why would you
feel less safe now?

Max

"Donal" wrote in message

"Maxprop" wrote in message

"Donal" wrote in message


Hasn't Al Qaeda been mortally weakened by the defeat of Saddam?

Al qaeda has been weakened, but only because they've been kept busy
shoveling ignorant, uneducated dupes (suicide bombers) and money into
Iraq
to torment the US and the new Iraqi ruling council. You might have
noticed
that they've not accomplished anything in the USA since 9/11, beyond the
ongoing frustration and expense incurred by our gummint.

That's a very interesting point of view. You have manage to sum up, very
succinctly, the arrogance that is generating so much hostility to the Bush
administration.

Your post demonstrates, very clearly, that you place a much lower value
on
the lives of innocent Iraqi people, than you do on innocent Americans.
You
seem to obtain a degree of satisfaction from the fact that your
President's
actions mean that Al Qaeda is active in Iraq.

Shame on you.

Shame on you for making this insipid leap of illogic. Only your extreme
anti-US bias could lead you to such a one-sided conclusion.

You sarcastically asked if al qaeda had been weakened since the fall of
Saddam. I gave reasons why the organization had been weakened, but made no
morality judgments whatsoever toward the innocents being slaughtered in Iraq
vs. those in the US. Al qaeda's prime target is and has been the US and its
citizens, by its own admission repeatedly. Beyond attacking US soldiers and
US contractors in Iraq, it has been ineffective in that regard. That
translates to weakened. Now, if you'd care to discuss my feelings toward
ANY needless victims of al qaeda, including OTHER coalition soldiers,
civilians of OTHER countries, and the innocent Iraqis you mentioned, that's
another matter entirely.

And shame on you for attempting to place blame for terrorism on the US or
anyone other than Islamic extremists.

Max

Right only approaching 1000 US solders have died and 1000s more
have been wounded. It seems to me that it's approaching 9/11. And,
I haven't even mentioned other foreign troops or innocent Iraqies.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Donal" wrote in message

"Maxprop" wrote in message

"Donal" wrote in message


Hasn't Al Qaeda been mortally weakened by the defeat of Saddam?

Al qaeda has been weakened, but only because they've been kept busy
shoveling ignorant, uneducated dupes (suicide bombers) and money into
Iraq
to torment the US and the new Iraqi ruling council. You might have
noticed
that they've not accomplished anything in the USA since 9/11, beyond
the
ongoing frustration and expense incurred by our gummint.

That's a very interesting point of view. You have manage to sum up,
very
succinctly, the arrogance that is generating so much hostility to the
Bush
administration.

Your post demonstrates, very clearly, that you place a much lower value
on
the lives of innocent Iraqi people, than you do on innocent Americans.
You
seem to obtain a degree of satisfaction from the fact that your
President's
actions mean that Al Qaeda is active in Iraq.

Shame on you.

Shame on you for making this insipid leap of illogic. Only your extreme
anti-US bias could lead you to such a one-sided conclusion.

You sarcastically asked if al qaeda had been weakened since the fall of
Saddam. I gave reasons why the organization had been weakened, but made
no
morality judgments whatsoever toward the innocents being slaughtered in
Iraq
vs. those in the US. Al qaeda's prime target is and has been the US and
its
citizens, by its own admission repeatedly. Beyond attacking US soldiers
and
US contractors in Iraq, it has been ineffective in that regard. That
translates to weakened. Now, if you'd care to discuss my feelings toward
ANY needless victims of al qaeda, including OTHER coalition soldiers,
civilians of OTHER countries, and the innocent Iraqis you mentioned,
that's
another matter entirely.

And shame on you for attempting to place blame for terrorism on the US or
anyone other than Islamic extremists.

Max

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

Right only approaching 1000 US solders have died and 1000s more
have been wounded. It seems to me that it's approaching 9/11.

Soldiers are not innocent civilians, Jon. Or were you having difficulty
making that distinction?

And,
I haven't even mentioned other foreign troops or innocent Iraqies.

Other foreign troops are not innocent civilians either. As for innocent
Iraqis, I'm betting a lot of them weren't *innocent.* As for the truly
innocent ones, it is most unfortunate. Living in a war zone isn't healthy
for bystanders. I grieve for any innocent civilians killed by terrorism or
war.

Max

Really? They're not innocent, when they were put in harms way for
no good reason? The small children, old people, and women of
Iraq weren't innocent victims? Wow, you're quite a humanitarian!
But, living in a war zone, a war started for no good reason, hey
that's just tough luck.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

Right only approaching 1000 US solders have died and 1000s more
have been wounded. It seems to me that it's approaching 9/11.

Soldiers are not innocent civilians, Jon. Or were you having difficulty
making that distinction?

And,
I haven't even mentioned other foreign troops or innocent Iraqies.

Other foreign troops are not innocent civilians either. As for innocent
Iraqis, I'm betting a lot of them weren't *innocent.* As for the truly
innocent ones, it is most unfortunate. Living in a war zone isn't healthy
for bystanders. I grieve for any innocent civilians killed by terrorism
or
war.

Max

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message ...
Really? They're not innocent, when they were put in harms way for
no good reason? The small children, old people, and women of
Iraq weren't innocent victims? Wow, you're quite a humanitarian!
But, living in a war zone, a war started for no good reason, hey
that's just tough luck.

Max, According to the IDIOT jonathan, it would of been better to
just let Saddam kill another 250,000 + of his guilty people. Not to
mention the other 100,000 that he was nice to and only chopped off
body parts.

Joe







--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

Right only approaching 1000 US solders have died and 1000s more
have been wounded. It seems to me that it's approaching 9/11.

Soldiers are not innocent civilians, Jon. Or were you having difficulty
making that distinction?

And,
I haven't even mentioned other foreign troops or innocent Iraqies.

Other foreign troops are not innocent civilians either. As for innocent
Iraqis, I'm betting a lot of them weren't *innocent.* As for the truly
innocent ones, it is most unfortunate. Living in a war zone isn't healthy
for bystanders. I grieve for any innocent civilians killed by terrorism
or
war.

Max