Hello,

Having worked at the WTC site after the attacks, there are no words to describe the devastation that was inflicted upon the city I love. New Yorkers are frequently harsh about their city-it's a shame it requires something like this for us us realize how much we love her.

I support the war in Afghanistan 100 percent. The Taliban were ruling that country and they supported the terrorists who planned and carried out the attacks.

However, the war in Iraq is another matter. I know Saddam is a monster, but it appears we are trying to be the world's policeman again-just like in Vietnam. Not only did we invade Iraq until false pretenses, weapons of mass destruction, but we left the enemy in our rear as we raced to Baghdad to find Saddam. We have an inadequate amount of troops to do the job right. Our invasion has only opened the door to incursion by Iran-the real threat-and have displayed a total ignorance of the history and demographic conditions of the Middle East.

Now we find ourselves in a damned if we do and damned and if don't position. We are damned if we stay-with our inadequate force-and damned if we leave.

Now the great hypocrit, Hillary Clinton, who voted for the war states we should pull out. Unfortunately, this would be a tragic mistake. President Bush refuses to give Iraq the amount of force necessary to succeed.

Thanks to our blundering opium production is at an all time high in Afghanistan and professional people who can afford to leave Iraq are doing so in great numbers. By the time we leave Iraq it will be bled dry and our enemies will declare victory. No more Junior Presidents.



Jerry Lewis

Lithium, You have to remember that this hanous crime was planed long before it was executed. That means that the 19 hijackers were in the United States before Bush even took office. That means that the previous administrations had even more time to prevent this. Yes, I mean Clinton and Bush Sr. We are in it now, back our troops. The only way to win this war is to get just as nasty as those we are fighting.

Just some food for thought. We all know the bad guys wanna kill as many Americans as they can. We also know that a hell of alot of them are trying to kill Amerticans with tanks, APCs, cannons, grenade launchers, and M16's in Iraq. Now I'm former mil, and my wife is active duty. We both knew the risks of joining. We'd both rather fight the bad guys in Iraq, where no inocent Americans will get killed. I know that sounds harsh, but all those little IED making bastards would be trying to figure out ways to get here, if they weren't fighting there. Better to hold a war in someone else's back yard, and not your own.

Ok, Hellfighter took a break- but for all the masochistic fans of his legendary biblical length posts, now another - a rehash of former points, with some fresh input on the heels of yesterday's election. I'm guessing a hornet's nest will be stirred up again here- amicably of course ;-


Those bad guys are killing not just americans, but everyone who wants to see Iraq turn into a nation of democratic free-will; ie, kill everyone else who doesn't have psycopathic murderous tendencies like themselves. They kill Iraqi police [over 100 in October], soldiers. officials- they set of maximum effect explosives in market places to mow down people/kids/old folk by the dozens who are simply just going out to buy dinner.

Now I'm back in this resurrected thread. More due to what with the shakeup in the election yesterday.

Like I stated, I was for the move to go into Iraq- not out of the misguided, presumptive notion sadamn was involved in 911 but out of fear reports of wmd was worth the gamble- particularly since sadamn played poker with the world and not allowing full inspection to once and for all prove to everyone there were no wmd threats as put forth by the neo-cons and devious iraqi dissidents at that crucial opening stage. While I personally don't agree with the war being for oil argument [simply because there would be no war if sadamn had let in the UN inspectors to see there was no wmds there- like Wellington wouldn't havefought a battle of Waterloo if his Prussian allies didn't promise to come and crucially help him beat Napoleon], one might be suspicious with the increase of airstrikes on Iraqi radar/AA positions in the months before thw war... something was in the air.

I made my point how I was optimistic that up to taking Baghdad, the military did their job expertly, but then Bush and coy blew the advantage and initial welcome by in fact showing there was ineptness in not having a temporary infrastructure set up to smooth a secure transition to a post-sadamn leadership in Iraq. Rumsfeld and his casual grinning demeanour blowing off the first initial criticisms of insecurity at that time disturbed me. Then it was infuriating to see the show of bravado by the neo-cons when the real innocent death toll started to significantly mount-> iraqi police recruits continuously massacred while waiting to sign-up, locals in fear of mob rule in the streets due to a near-total disbandment of Iraqi military, and then a very slow adoption of super armoured vehicles for US troops due to the same air of smugness by Rumsfeld not conceding there was indeed a problem -more innocent young and old heroes dying/maimed. Then in their cockyness neo-cons babbled about invading Syria, and Iran! more backyards/more innocent lives. Keep in mind too that Rumsfeld offered to resign early on in the war and Bush wanted to hear nothing of it. I'm just hearing now Rumsfeld is resigning - too little too late.

All indications are, that yesterday's election results point to a vote against Bush's policy. Although the more extreme elements of repubs put me off, I find the democrats a bit laughable considering themselves competent when they still haven't put forth a good exit strategy for Iraq. No discussion comes up concerning the reality. While dispensable pee-on suicide bombers endlessly flood into Iraq, the Talibums are resurging their influnce in Afghanistan- a crucial point I've noticed nearly ignored by all US major news networks. Can't imagine that the real terrorist hierarchy aren't breathing a sigh of relief now that we've taken our eye of the ball - the 'real' area we should've finished mopping up. It's like the classical military strategy to send a feint somewhere far away to divide the opponents forces and weaken their effectiveness on both Fronts. Well we're all hoping to see a constructive coalition adopted between the repubs and democrats [and Liebermann]. as it stands in my opinion too many innocent soldiers and civilians are dying with the indecisive attitudes of both partys.... 'stay the course' won't work since the enemy have unlimited pee-on volunteer martyrs, and the democrats need to start itemizing what the exit strategy is otherwise we'll end up 'staying the course' with no other valid options available.

Sure, I agree about taking on war-mongerors in their backyard.... but not starting a dust-up [let alone endlessly protracting it] with war-mongerors in the yard of folks who themselves aren't the war-mongerors. Let's get back to mopping up Afghanistan totally and 'inspiring' Pakistan to totally root out the al-kooka leadershi* - the real global threat.

my political party shall remain anonymous. i will say this: if an elected president will secure our borders and WHEN NECESSARY kick the punk a$$ of any nation or group that threatens our blessed homeland, AMEN to that ! be it dem or republican, if you protect USA, God bless you.



if you think that by 'leaving terrorists alone' will decrease or stop their mission you are SADLY mistaken. God bless our Freedom Fighters.



Bush WILL put a missile in your nugget if you F with america. Be GLAD or go buy Arabic for Dummies....



Send some rice, corn, and medicine to the starving and send some shock and awe to the disillusioned ones who think they can mess with the USA.



just my opinion which by the way was secured by the blood of the brave men who lost their lives in past confilcts.

I wonder if that's the battle hymn for the insurgents and assasins in Iraq too.....








The people have spoken- wars people believe in are win-nable; 70% of Americans don't want their kids in that war- neither do many of the GENERALS! If you're willing to spend the next 70 years of your life patrolling Baghdad, go register- that war between factions isn't going to end on the West's terms. So what if you win by flodding 300,000 top quality US troops- As soon as you leave [due to the crippling budget that would cost] the same old crap starts up again.
So now you go sign-up and do 3 or 4 tours under Mr.Bush's policy of patrolling and bearing the brunt of fighting while Iraqi soldiers hold back. Where's the line-up of patriotic, doomsday prophesizing, fire-breathing neo-cons and hard-right repubs who are willing to stand in for the young american men and women soldiers - and older soldiers doing multiple tours dying and wounded by assasination tactics and ..... where are you?

i'm right here. expressing my freedom of speech. and yes, i bet that is their battle hymn. i'm for peace, but sometimes it's not an option.



whatever you think is fine with me. i'm also of the belief that only GOD can judge me... so please don't try to argue points with me. I believe what I believe. You're certainly welcome to your beliefs. i will not attempt to sway you from yours. I think Bush has balls and I support him. I take it you don't like him. ok, we'll have to agree to disagree.



that's where 'I am'.

LOL, I enjoy the debates- taking apart each others points is healthy- sometimes we inadvertently see things from a totally new angle. And I guess we all have our own versions of how we're judged and if there is a judgement day once we're done as expired goods - that's all personal faith-unless you've been there and back and know something most of us don't know.