CharlesCS CharlesCS

Lots of passion, zero solutions

Lots of passion, zero solutions

It seems that the Democrats are siding with the average American when it comes to what to do with Osama Bin Laden and Al-qaeda. The will of the people is to take action and get rid of Osama and Al-qaeda where ever they are. Democrats such as Barak Obama and Hilary Clinton have been catering to the crowd by making statements such as “If you have a target like Osama you take him out” said by Obama or “OK we gotta go get Al-qaeda” said by Hilary. Great, I’m glad they want what I want, even better they want what Bush wants. The main goal on Bush’s war on terror is to rid the world of Osama and Al-qaeda. Truth be told that is more of a dream than a possibility, it’s just not gonna happen; but they can be slowed down and shrunk, both beneficial goals.

Now don’t get too excited that I sound as if I am siding with the Democrats here. Let’s get the whole picture here. Let’s see the truth behind the stance of people like Obama, Hilary and others. Yes they want Osama and Al-qaeda caught and/or eliminated like most Americans want, but where is the how? How do we do it? How do we capture Osama if he is believed to be hiding in the mountains of Pakistan? How do we capture him when the Pakistani Gov’t has not allowed the US military to cross the Afghan border into Pakistan? Do we invade Pakistan? Do we bomb the hell out of those mountains regardless of who we hit? Please, someone tell me how do we solve this problem. The Democrats seem to have the passion to want what the people want, but lack the solutions as to how to do it, or do they? Think about it, the reality is that the only way to succeed in giving the American people what they want, to go after and take out Osama and Al-qaeda, is to do everything Bush did in Iraq. We will have to send a small army (because we don’t have the man power according to many) to invade Pakistan (repeat history anyone, I thought invading was a bad thing) against the Pakistani Gov’ts wishes (be arrogant and ignore the international laws?) and pound the hell out of those mountain (more “collateral damage”) till they give up. Did I miss anything?

Let’s face it, the Democrats (and Republicans, they are no saints either) are all words and zero actions. Right now they are more concerned with passing legislation to make radio talk shows more balanced and making illegal immigrants legal in 24 hours ignoring those who have waited for years and have endured the painful and expensive process to become legal immigrants the legal way; issues I find hard to believe the average American is insisting must be taken care of. Well actually, let’s give them the benefit of the doubt that they are taking a bit of action. The Democratic Presidential Candidates all agree we need to bring our troops home, most before the end of the year. But wait, doesn’t this contradict the idea of “If you have a target like Osama you take him out” and “OK we gotta go get Al-qaeda”? How do we “take out Osama” or “go get Al-qaeda” when our soldiers are going home? How do we fight terror when we want our soldier’s home? How will our soldiers feel knowing they left the Iraqi people to die at the hands of these militants and insurgents and even Al-qaeda?

We have become a nation of cowards, a nation of ignorant people, a nation of teenagers who want Daddy Gov’ts money and for Daddy Gov’t to pay our bills but don’t want Daddy Gov’t to invade our privacy; even if it’s for our own safety and security. We have become a nation who cannot commit and does not know how to finish what we started.

It seems that my articles are always full of questions; and chances are the replies will either be filled with answers from the opposite side or a bunch of excuses, insults and out of topic answers from the main party in question. The Democrats seem to wanna side with (a line from Col gene) “the vast majority of Americans” on todayis issues but always leave me with a lot of questions as to how they plan on taking care of the issues. Anyone can point out a problem; the trick is to have a solution. For now I would rather go with a party that has solution, even if not so good ones, than a party who only acknowledges the problem but lacks solutions.

What say yee(spelling?)?
12,908 views 32 replies
Reply #26 Top
I love to answer questions. My solution to Iraq is

A. Announce we are leaving!
B. Hold a conference with any nation interested in "post USA occupation" planning. Invite, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Qatar, U.A.E, Kuwait, but don't turn down anyone who wants to talk.
C. Spell out situation in Iraq and let each nation speak on its views, let Iraq make agreements with it's neighbors and figure out what it wants to do, who's help it wants to ask for, who's help it needs, how it wants to do things.
D. Let the conference vote on how long we need to stay yet, 30 days, 60, 90, 120. But keep it under 6 months.

E. Leave and let the region handle their own fucking problems.

"Here you give up before you even try"

We have been in Iraq going on 5 years. It was known to the world we would be going in since 2002. It's not news to the UN, or to the neighbors in the region. As for giving up before we have even tried, you can either agree or disagree that there is no military solution to the problem, but it has been tried for half a decade. Some of the goals of the invasion have been met, few if any of the pre-post war stuff will see the light of day while we occupy Iraq, the terrorists, and insurgents have made that clear. The legit members of the government have failed to act work out the problems that have created and kept the insurgency alive.

"You claim what needs to be done but give no plan as to how."

See the above.

"How do we kill them? We chase them?"

Who's the enemy in Iraq? The terrorists? How many are from AQ? Foreign fighters? Lots of these, what are their goals. Setting up post-US withdrawl, connections both political and strategic alliances inside the countries factions. How about the Iraqi's killing each other and shooting us up in the process? They are pissed that their lives suck. Is that a surprise? They are also angry at the rampant unemployment and living conditions. It's a spiraling cycle of violence and chaos that we cannot solve by just sitting on Iraq.

How about the guys setting up roadside bombs and trying to hit us where we are thought to be weak? Some are terrorists, some are foreign fighters, some are Iraqi's pissed about the way things are going. What's clear is the majority are not AQ!

"We bomb the countries they are hiding in?"

We have supposed that UBL and the taliban and AQ has been hiding out in the mountainous region of Pakistan, since 2001 or before! Yet we have yet to setup shop there, we chose to base in Afghanistan and rid the tailban and then work with the Pakistanis to rid AQ from the mountains. It's time for us to go into the mountains and take care of AQ ourselves, the Pakistanis didn't lose WTC 1&2, we did.

The goal in Iraq was only in part to engage terrorists, fact is, evidence of their existence in Iraq was shaky and sparse, and a lot of it was BS. Ridding Iraq of WMD, taking it from Saddam, and taking Saddam out of power were the goals, so he could not develop a program to make Nukes, and then sell it to terrorists.

"We need, as a country, to make a choice. If we accept the danger, do we a) wait for them to attack us, check every person, with no regards to invading the personal space, who enters the country, or do we b) go after them by either asking the countries they are hiding in to help or force them to help."

Yes we do, we need to make a choice whether or not we are going to allow terrorists to dictate how we treat people from other nations who are not convicted of crimes of war but are detained in our prisons anyway without trial.

We further need to choose to treat these criminals, terrorists, whoever, with the basic human rights that we have fought and died for in the past to secure for people, civilians as well as enemy combatants. Choosing to ignore international laws, denying people liberty without due process and a trial is fueling the flames of those who use media and twist reality to shape their message of hate and destruction. Their ability to recruit is shaped by our image as a torturer, an opponent of Islam, of a massacrer or civilians.

Just because the enemy will use shock tactics to cause us to fear them, and violate the laws we have created for war, cutting off our heads, and targeting civilians doesn't make it right for us to be, caging people like animals, to denying them the right to practice their religion, and continuing to occupy Iraq. All of this gives the terrorists the political, ammo to continue to recruit, and make it a battle of us oppressing "them".

This should be a battle of right versus wrong. Of people committing criminal acts which on the scale they are willing, equate to acts of war, but just because it is a war we shouldn't pull out the ability of freedom living people to try suspects of terror crimes and punish them according to those laws. It doesn't mean we should hold people for years without evidence without charging them with crimes or war or terror.

"We need to accept or deny that we are in danger of a group of people determined to do us harm, be it physically, financially or mentally. Once we chose acceptance or denial we then chose what next action to take."

We shouldn't deny the danger of terrorists and their aims, but we shouldn't throw the entire Muslim population of the world into that lot. Nor should we be performing the job of security and government in Iraq as an occupier which is what we are doing, and how we are being seen by the rest of the world. If it is clear that we intend to leave and are leaving, things will change. The insurgency will come to a head, and stand or fall, Iraq will stabilize, foreign fighters will have nothing to fight for because Iraq will be a truly sovereign nation fighting for their own freedom against terrorists, insurgents, criminals, anyone who would attempt to deny the the government of the people their ability to rule their land.

If we allow anyone into this country we check their papers, verify they aren't wanted as criminals or suspects, terrorists, or dangers to society, duh! That's what we aren't doing right now, millions of people are coming in from all directions because, our borders are not borders, they are open and revolving doors with nobody but a guard watches on duty for 10 minutes of the day.

Really, we need to get a hold of illegal immigration and smuggling of people into our country. We need to deport criminals to authorities in the nations they come from. We need to build a wall between the USA and Mexico because Mexico is corrupted and not a willing and able partner in stopping this situation. To the north we need more agents to patrol the border, and monitor who comes in, who leaves, we need to unite with the Canadians because they are in a similar situation, a developed modern country with alliances to the United States. A lot of Canadians don't see themselves as a target to terrorists but they are.

"If we deny we are in danger and decide to go one with normal life. How do we handle a situation if they did attack while we were distracted, ignoring them?"

Nobody is denying the danger, but it shouldn't be overstated, we have a problem in this country with making a war on everything, and allowing the media to feed us fear whether its bullshit or not. Lots of times it is. Lately it's been the cheese bombs which were thought to be an attempt to smuggle C4 lol, before that the flying imams, before that, anthrax, the dc sniper shootings. All of this was tied to terrorism. The first thought when the Columbia shuttle blew up by most Americans was "those fucking terrorists" but really tragic as it was, it was a hole in the shuttle.

People die of terrorism and there are terrorists who would love to destroy the world, but you can't just wish it to happen. Our country and intelligence service has been on this now for a solid decade and progress is being made making the reporting and scope of our knowledge about these bastards more and more accurate. The media is way behind the curve, happily willing to blow anything that happens out of proportion or link it to terror. Sure it's possible something big is going to happen, "Gut feeling" but what does that all mean?

FEAR you cannot defeat it, you can just control it. I think we are finally getting control of our fear realizing what we need to do in the coming years.

A great man said that we have nothing to fear but fear itself. Certainly if you are going to fear, at least go with something a little more statistical relevant then terrorism.

When I said "TERRORISTS will both not be impressed or DETERRED. The only way to stop them is to kill them." I meant it because it's true. Nothing we are doing in Iraq is helping us, shape the views of the world looking at us into a positive view. People, not terrorists, see a country that went against the rest of the world invading Iraq, they see us as an aggressor, both there and in Afghanistan, they see a daily barrage of violence from Iraq, Muslims being killed by Muslims. People also see and hear terrorist's using the Koran and Islam for their own perverted agenda on their local news. They read up on it, and what the extremists say about us.

They read from places like this, about Americans and it's hard to understand, for them, how we can be fighting a war just against extremists, and not against Islam. Especially when so many civilians are dying daily in Iraq. Consider they also get news from fewer independent sources and a lot of their news is as biased or more so then our own "journalistic defenders of American freedom" Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC.

I think it would be a different story if we leave, and it is seen that the violence stops, which is possible, or that it continues which is likely but doesn't involve us. That takes away the recruiting tool AQ has right now against us. It also takes away their battlefield, granted it may give them more focus on us at home, but that's a possibility not assured.
Reply #27 Top
It seems like the only war that matters is "The war on Terror in Iraq."
Reply #28 Top
Not really, I care about the war on Capital Hill just as much. Now if you looking for a Civil War, look no further than Congress and the Senate. Talk about hypocrisy when criticizing the dilema between the factions in Iraq when our own politicians can't get along even between their own party. Just look at Hilary and Obama, they should either be put in a UFC ring or sent to Ninja Warrior to decide who's better.
Reply #29 Top
Perhaps you've been under a rock bud but the only concern on the elected people's minds in this country about 50% of the time is how to get reelected. Saying and doing anything to that effect is their goal. Not solving our problems.

I think we should change our system in favor of a single 5 or 6 year term, where nobody gets reelected. With the pace of change in our society 8 years is an eternity, and considering the last few terms about the 6th/7th year of a presidency nothing gets accomplished while they still collect the same wage in Washington I think we could do far better without the constant election cycle we have to put up with every 2 years or so.

Charles I'm curious as to why you haven't had anything to say in rebuttal to my plan for leaving Iraq. Was it not detailed enough for you? Was it not feasible or logical? Did it sound too much like, the "cut and run" bs line of GWB?

Just curious as to what your plan for Iraq is if you have one. Share it.
Reply #30 Top
Charles I'm curious as to why you haven't had anything to say in rebuttal to my plan for leaving Iraq. Was it not detailed enough for you? Was it not feasible or logical? Did it sound too much like, the "cut and run" bs line of GWB?


Hmmm, let me look back and see what you are referring too and I'll get back at you on this.
Reply #31 Top
I love to answer questions. My solution to Iraq is

A. Announce we are leaving!
B. Hold a conference with any nation interested in "post USA occupation" planning. Invite, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Qatar, U.A.E, Kuwait, but don't turn down anyone who wants to talk.
C. Spell out situation in Iraq and let each nation speak on its views, let Iraq make agreements with it's neighbors and figure out what it wants to do, who's help it wants to ask for, who's help it needs, how it wants to do things.
D. Let the conference vote on how long we need to stay yet, 30 days, 60, 90, 120. But keep it under 6 months.

E. Leave and let the region handle their own fucking problems.


Well, before I respond to the quote let me say that I actually had a response, or at least started to respond to it. The problem was I use Firefox as a browser, gotta love all those add-ons you can get. Well I have an add-on called Cool Iris that allows me to open a link without actually clicking it, kinda like a preview of the link. The problem is if the pointer moves away from the preview window it closes itself. It has a feature to keep it locked in place but it always resets to unlocked when I close Firefox. Because of this all that I had written was lost in response to this quote was lost and I was angry, angry enough to wait a while before I wrote it again but ended up forgetting about it. But here it is now.

With that said, now to the quote:

I actually like the idea. I think we have done just about enough in that country and it’s time for others who could benefit from this new Gov’t to get in and get their hands dirty if they wish to benefit from it. Even though this is an Arab, Muslim and Middle Eastern country, I think there should be more countries added to that list other than Arab countries. I do believe countries like Russia, China, Spain, England, Africa and some other of the surrounding countries (even Israel) deserve to be part of this conference since they are all part of this land and their countries are not divided by a large ocean as we are to them.

I still think that considering all the money spent, all the lives lost and all the dislike we have created towards us, we still deserve to be part of it as well. Maybe not so closely connected or a Puerto Rico-like relationship, but at least something of which we can say we deserve as well, considering what we put into it.

Agreed, once settled, no more than 6 months, but we should keep (as I said above) a relationship that would have a meaning towards all the money we spent, the lives we lost and the people who are mad at us now. I don’t think we should go to a country, claim to wanna help it, do what we can to make it better (or seem better anyways) and then leave and say it was all done out of our hearts, no one does anything for free now a days. They should however, learn to deal with their own problems and like Israel, we can be there if they need us, kinda.

Was it not detailed enough for you?


Not at all, it was pretty good, though more specific details could have probably made it better.

Was it not feasible or logical?


Actually it is, with a few minor details as I pointed out in my response above.

Did it sound too much like, the "cut and run" bs line of GWB?


Hell, if this was anything it was not cut and run. It was a planned exit with someone else picking up where we left off as oppose to just walking away and letting the vultures take over. By having this kind of conference it puts the other countries in the light and does not necessarily allow them to just come in and claim “this land was abandoned and now belongs to me”. They will be (in a way I guess) forced to hold their end of the decisions because the rest of the world will (hopefully) be watching.

Not bad at all. One out of the bunch is better than none, right?
Reply #32 Top
"Because of this all that I had written was lost in response to this quote was lost and I was angry, angry enough to wait a while before I wrote it again but ended up forgetting about it. But here it is now."

I have Firefox too, and I know the feeling.

I wish Windows would automatically copy what you are typing and store it on a second clipboard so that anything you inputted via keyboard that day could be recalled. I'm sure it would be a huge security risk for businesses, but not necessarily for a personal user.

"I actually like the idea."

Me 2!

"I do believe countries like Russia, China, Spain, England, Africa and some other of the surrounding countries (even Israel) deserve to be part of this conference since they are all part of this land and their countries are not divided by a large ocean as we are to them."

I agree. Anybody who wants to help stabilize and secure this place. The UN isn't/wasn't interested after we invaded or during the "war" but individual countries working with the government of Iraq rather then us should be involved with the Iraqis.

Israel complicates things because the Israeli question in the middle east continues to be unanswered on its own in the eyes of those countries who don't acknowledge Israel. However, If Iraq chose to acknowledge Israel that would be one more country that could put pressure on those who still do not.

"I still think that considering all the money spent, all the lives lost and all the dislike we have created towards us, we still deserve to be part of it as well. Maybe not so closely connected or a Puerto Rico-like relationship, but at least something of which we can say we deserve as well, considering what we put into it."

LOL the 51st state right? That was my thinking when we invaded that we were going to break down their country only to build it up again, but I really think our cultures are too different to integrate like that considering the different climates, cultures, neighbors, way of life, and geography of the region. It is up to the Iraqi's how close they want to be to us.

"They will be (in a way I guess) forced to hold their end of the decisions because the rest of the world will (hopefully) be watching.
Not bad at all. One out of the bunch is better than none, right?"

Where is President Bush's grand exit strategy. Hint : His strategy is to occupy Iraq for the coming decades and pump the oil out and refine it in Texas. The only thing that matters is Iraq being on our side and pumping oil into the world market.