"In a mostly party line 51-47 vote, the Senate signed off on a bill providing $123 billion to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It also orders Bush to begin withdrawing troops within 120 days of passage while setting a nonbinding goal of ending combat operations by March 31, 2008." Taken off of Yahoo newsline. I read this as projecting weakness for the majority of our political leaders do not have the balls to fight a war nor do they don't even have the gonads to end the battle in Iraq. A nonbinding goal gee talk about afraid to take responsibility. If the "end the war now" democratic leaders really feel that we should not waste another drop of blood in Iraq then why have a "nonbinding" goal as far away as March 2008 instead of bringing home the troops now by not funding the war. A nonbinding goal, what does that mean? Lets face it the Saudi's do not want us to leave Iraq now and the democrats are not going to go against the Saudi's so they just playing political games at the expense of the future of America and placing the American soldier in a horrible position. No reinforcements, no troop rotations? Giving the muslim world a political victory and making our allies feel stupid for supporting us. I say if bombs come out of Iran, bomb Iran. If bombs come out of Syria, bomb Syria. If a muslim leader encourages his people to kill us, take him and his follows out completely and without warning. Use the full might of the US military and not play games with on the ground grunts.
There are a lot of nitwits on both sides of the political aisle who don't want an immediate end to the war for a variety of reasons. But now there is no reason to stay other than to continue the endless blood feud. There are still a few dumbells around who believe we are going to convert the middle east into a collection of Jeffersonian democracies. What they don't quite have the intellect to understand is that the central organizing principle in the US is liberty, but the central organizing principle in the middle east is Islam. We can no more turn them into western style democracies through military occupation than they could turn us into an Islamic republic through military occupation of the US. We supposedly went to Iraq to dismantle the WMDs. That mission has been accomplished. We went to depose Saddam. That has been accomplished. We went to eliminate the Iraqi military threat to Israel. That has been accomplished. There is no central organized leadership over there to surrender to us. But the job is done and it is time to leave. All we need is a few political leaders with a foreign policy IQ above 85 to realize it.
I just can't bring myself to comment on any topic Andy posts. They go from the inane to the insane at lightening speed. I'm just going to watch him assassinate his own character. He's better at it than I could ever be. :rolling:
Really? Lets hear from the top saudi on this issue...the guy who dictates everything down to what socks the people in that country can wear: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/4670294.html Saudi king says U.S. role in Iraq illegal RIYADH, SAUDI ARABIA — King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia told Arab leaders on Wednesday that the U.S. occupation of Iraq was illegal and warned that unless Arab governments settled their differences, foreign powers such as the United States would continue to dictate the region's politics. In his speech, the king said: "In the beloved Iraq, the bloodshed is continuing under an illegal foreign occupation and detestable sectarianism.
Of course publicly the Saudis can not say they want Christian soldiers on muslim land. But use your common sense never mind any background information you may or may not have, Would it serve the Saudi's best interests that Iran a Shia nation take over Iraq. Would it be in the best economic interests of the Saudi's for a Shia nation to have the control of those oil fields which the most part are located in shia Iraq .Would it be in the best interests of the Saudis to have a Shia army poised to attack them right across the desert especially since Iran has stated that they wish to remove all of the Sunni gulf state nations and have mecca Shia. Now the question is, is it in the best interests of muslims to post any attack posts on those who comment on terrorism or terrorist nations in the arab world. For after all, how can the world become Islamic if people are willing to fight back Jihad.
I dont think there are any muslims on this forum to defend against the disgusting bile spewed from the mouths of some of the crusaders on this forum that would vilify and hang every muslims on earth...nobody here, as far as I can tell, has attacked any post condemning terrorism...maybe they have taken exception to people like Midas who is no better than those on the other side that paint all americans as...well...as bad as him...but no..I have never seen anyone here defend terrorists. Maybe you people will learn the difference, I wont be holding my breath.
The Saudi Royal family are a bunch of self-interested privilaged over-fed spoiled rich brats. The Saudi people are tired of the wealthy few going against what they are being taught about the "real" Islam. The royal family says what it has to in public and makes deals with the west to keep their seat of power. It is utter silliness to align them with either American political party without including the other. The Bush family does have an unusually close relationship with them but the relationship with American administrations is unbroken as far back as anyone can remember. Seeing what you want to see in the political arena is common practice in this country because we haven't, or haven't until recently, been forced to look at the real consquences of our leaders policies. I believe those days are quickly coming to an abrupt end. We won't have the luxury of picking the version of events that best fits our political leanings. There will only be one stark and irrefutable version of events that everyone will know is truth but realize at the same time that knowing the truth isn't the same as being able to do anything about it. I'm glad we still have the luxury to bend events to our preconceived ideas. It says we haven't fallen over the edge yet. Imagine the different world we'll leave for our children when we no longer are free to control our own destiny. If your inclination is to scoff at this outlook and bury your head in the sand, I think the Saudis can help you with that. They seem to have nothing but sand and a huge case of denial.
All religions have followers and flaws, some, sadly are worse than others... Unfortunately, when these flaws condone murder in the name of the religion, subjection of women, elimination of whole tribes, and extortion from those who are persecuted something must be done. It only takes a few misguided followers to label the whole religion one of terror and cult status. Those who blaspheme the name of Mohammed with murder and terror need to be eliminated for the sake of Islam if it is to survive. And if those who try to suppress this destructive behavior are labeled crusaders, then so be it for they are indeed on the edge of the sword.
See...I agree with what you say...and I dont think ANYONE who looks to put an end to terrorism as a crusader...I am opposed to terrorism and would like to see all terrorist dead (starting with every taliban member) I see people who go to the same extreme that is causing terrorism and labels ALL Islam evil as crusaders... I see those people as no different from those islamic extremists who typify all jews as evil or all americans as evil...the only difference between midas and a terrorist is that he hasnt taken the step to indiscriminately kill muslims (as far as I know). If that makes ME wrong so be it...that edge of the sword crap is whats wrong with this world.
But we're over there, they're not over here. Wouldn't the label "crusader" pretty much fit? Besides, name any major religion that hasn't participated in any number of those activies from time to time. You can't because they all have. Religion is the worst pox on mankind that he has ever been inflicted on himself. Saying one religion is worse that the other is closing one eye and choosing not to see with the other. Why do you think they call it Blind Faith?
The Twin towers hijack planes attack, The twin tower car bombing, the empire state building shootings, the brooklyn bridge shootings, the plot to blow up the bridges and tunnels of new york city, the plot to blow up the train station near madison square garden during the republican convention, the plot to gas nyc subways, the plot to blow up the computer system of wall street, etc....and that is just the most noted examples in NYC. But no one seems to remember the killing of Robert F. Kennedy, a democrat liberal, so why should I expect you to know what has happened in New York City never mind the rest of our nation or world. Now if you ever read one of the korans you would see it is not a religion misused for death, it is a religion of death. Just a modern version of Baal with some jewish and christian stuff thrown in as frosting. But the meat is death which is why Sunni and Shia will always be killing each other for their can only be one reglion, Islam, and only one way to follow it. Everything else is subhuman and an insult to Allah.
