Author Topic: Winning or losing the war on terrorism? (Read 820 times)

Raider179 · « **Reply #30 on:** April 28, 2005, 11:09:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Lizking
Raider, you are probably young, and you may have still been ****ting yellow in 1991, but read up on your history, Son. Saddam invaded and pillaged Kuwait in 1990, so everything since then is strictly because of his actions.

Sorry but I see it as when we go somewhere like Iraq and drives tanks into Baghdad I call that starting it. Pretty sure the Iraqi's were on defense. You can say Saddam this and Saddam that but there were lots of reasons that never seem to get brought up. Such as it being a perfect place for U.S. bases in the middle east. Ensuring that the oil supply won't be interrupted. Protecting the Al-Saud (sp) family. Being in position to defend Isreal/Saudi Arabia from overthrows/war.Oh and dont forget killing Terrorists aka insurgents. And last but not least for helping us forget about not being able to find whatshisname? oh yeah Osama.

But you can blame Saddam for forcing us to defend ourselves. If you want to talk about why we really went, maybe you should read a little more yourself.

Masherbrum · « **Reply #31 on:** April 29, 2005, 12:48:15 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by RTSigma
Lets see...

I'm not dead.
USA is still here.
I can vote.
I can be whatever religion I want.
I have a job, my family, a girlfriend.
My friends are here.
Aside from acts of nature, I have no threats.

Yeah we're winning.

I can and DO own a handgun as well.

Karaya

Torque · « **Reply #32 on:** April 29, 2005, 01:18:44 AM »

gas is kinda expensives, it's a draw

Sox62 · « **Reply #33 on:** April 29, 2005, 01:38:06 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skydancer
Its wars that make terrorists!

Oh,BS.

Terrorists find their own reasons to commit their acts.They have never needed a war to justify anything they do.

What war caused the Lockerbie bombing?What war caused the disco bombing in Berlin?What war caused the restaurant bombing in Madrid Spain in 85?What war caused 9/11?

-tronski- · « **Reply #34 on:** April 29, 2005, 02:24:49 AM »

Depends who you ask about whos winning or losing...many have different goalposts

Tronsky

Nilsen · « **Reply #35 on:** April 29, 2005, 03:13:06 AM »

For those of you that claim that we are winning the war on terrorism.... how many attacks a year is an acceptable number? below 10 and its won? 1? 50? 100?

There must be some kind of goal before its "won" right?

Get real people, its can never be won. It will be an ongoing fight forever.

Skydancer · « **Reply #36 on:** April 29, 2005, 03:34:44 AM »

Just like the war on drugs?

The war on crime?

Now we have a War on terror!

We are living in the safest times ever and we have three wars going on

And before you get all jumpy and scared have a little think about how dangerous life was say 60 years ago, 100 years ago, 200 etc etc.

Now see how safe we all are.

Gh0stFT · « **Reply #37 on:** April 29, 2005, 03:45:01 AM »

Potential threats are virtually limitless.
War on Terror are to go on for a long time, actually i dont see a end at all.

Skydancer · « **Reply #38 on:** April 29, 2005, 03:52:48 AM »

Its a bloody obvious way to keep military spending high when the Cold war is dead and gone though isn't it?

ASTAC · « **Reply #39 on:** April 29, 2005, 07:02:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skydancer
Its a bloody obvious way to keep military spending high when the Cold war is dead and gone though isn't it?

The only spending that is high is directly related to war operations..other than that..the Navy is trying to drastically downsize..they are gutting us out again.

VOR · « **Reply #40 on:** April 29, 2005, 08:08:30 AM »

Ideologically, winning the war on terror is impossible. Numerically, it is possible but unpopular.

Nilsen · « **Reply #41 on:** April 29, 2005, 08:18:22 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by VOR
Numerically, it is possible but unpopular.

And because it is unpopular, new terrorist will be recruited.

VOR · « **Reply #42 on:** April 29, 2005, 08:28:32 AM »

Very true Nilsen, or at least until the recruiting pool is low enough to make the idea unpopular.

Westernization is the answer IMO. The ME is going to change, like it or not, into something more malleable by the western powers. The downside is that it will take a generation or two to really see a noticeable effect since it is going to change from the bottom up instead of from the top down. The trick to pulling it off will be keeping the microwave oven mentality from actually convincing everyone that it should have happened in the last 4 years or that it might even happen in the next 10.

lazs2 · « **Reply #43 on:** April 29, 2005, 08:34:35 AM »

yep... if we now have 500 more terrorist attacks than we did 10 years ago but 489 of em happen in one little country that is a war zone...

I'd say we were winning.

skyprancer... do you know what the word "obvious" means? or is "bloody" some kind of modifier?

lazs

Krusher · « **Reply #44 on:** April 29, 2005, 08:37:09 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Lizking
Fishu, that is the stupidest line of reasoning I have heard

agreed.