Author Topic: It Explains Why We’Re Going To War, AND WHY WE’LL KEEP GOING TO WAR. (Read 1055 times)

JBA · « **on:** September 07, 2004, 10:01:27 AM »

http://www.nwc.navy.mil/newrulesets/ThePentagonsNewMap.htm

I saw this guy on TV the other day. Sounded like he was making since so I looked about this article, Haven’t read it all yet but some very interesting points of view.

Once I've read all of it I’ll Have a more informed Opinion on this later. Thought I'd give you all a look at the same time.

He spoke about pushing the terrorist back to levels seen in the 70's, that is their reach is only to southern Europe, no that that is good but it illustrates that the war is working and has been successful thus far, and will continue to be.

Dowding · « **Reply #1 on:** September 07, 2004, 10:11:45 AM »

Off topic

JBA · « **Reply #2 on:** September 07, 2004, 10:13:27 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dowding
OFF TOPIC

AKIron · « **Reply #3 on:** September 07, 2004, 10:14:06 AM »

Off topic

Dowding · « **Reply #4 on:** September 07, 2004, 10:26:26 AM »

Off topic

AKIron · « **Reply #5 on:** September 07, 2004, 10:28:41 AM »

Off topic

slimm50 · « **Reply #6 on:** September 07, 2004, 10:31:20 AM »

Very interesting post JBA. Thanks.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #7 on:** September 07, 2004, 10:34:24 AM »

Interesting read JBA. Thanks.

Sandman · « **Reply #8 on:** September 07, 2004, 10:39:19 AM »

Hmmm... weren't there an insane amount of aircraft hijackings in the 70's?

Dowding · « **Reply #9 on:** September 07, 2004, 10:43:42 AM »

Off topic

AKIron · « **Reply #10 on:** September 07, 2004, 10:55:38 AM »

Off topic

Gh0stFT · « **Reply #11 on:** September 07, 2004, 11:08:48 AM »

interesting read JBA, in short:
writer speaks about the usa and theyr way to the new world order.
Mostly 3rd world countrys are the problem, and the us is the only country
who can solve this global problem (mainly with firepower).
Not much talk about the rest of the world and what they can do, or do
all togheter.

R
Gh0stFT

Charon · « **Reply #12 on:** September 07, 2004, 11:13:48 AM »

It sounds pretty much like the neoconservative preemption doctrine that I believe is at the core of why we invaded Iraq in the first place, with WMD being the public excuse used to sell the war. Now, the neoconservative doctrine raises some interesting questions. Maybe the course of action in Iraq is justified for the reasons stated in the article, maybe not. It would have been nice, though, if that had been the focus of debate instead of WMD or the fact that many Americans, 70 percent in NY for example, "somehow" came to the belief that Saddam had a direct link to 9/11.

Charon

AKIron · « **Reply #13 on:** September 07, 2004, 11:18:30 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Charon
It sounds pretty much like the neoconservative preemption doctrine that I believe is at the core of why we invaded Iraq in the first place, with WMD being the public excuse used to sell the war. Now, the neoconservative doctrine raises some interesting questions. Maybe the course of action in Iraq is justified for the reasons stated in the article, maybe not. It would have been nice, though, if that had been the focus of debate instead of WMD or the fact that many Americans, 70 percent in NY for example, "somehow" came to the belief that Saddam had a direct link to 9/11.

Charon

I don't believe the invasion of Iraq was ever a subject for "debate".

cpxxx · « **Reply #14 on:** September 07, 2004, 11:21:41 AM »

Oops Skuzzy got in before me. My reply unnecessary now and deleted.
But Gscholz your comment was factually and proveably inaccurate.