So many confuse Natiuonalism with Patriotism. What I see at this site is blatant, single minded Nationalism. I served during the Vietnam war, I support the rational use of force, I support honesty and integrity, and I support all of our troops. However, support of the troops should not be confused with support for the war in Iraq, or support for the policy that placed us in this war.
There has been no demonstrataion of a nexus between terrorism and this war - the degree of terrorist activity in Iraq is the result of our being there; i.e., the terrorism wasn't there prior. And please, don't say that I a support Saddam Hussein or his regime - it was horrible, but there are also many other horrible regimes throughout the world, and we don't take unilateral and unprovoked action against them. We should not have gone to Iraq, and now that we are there and the stated reason for doing so has been shown to be false, we should withdraw as soon as possible.
Will there be chaos in Iraq? Sure, but probably no worse than it is now. The administration reports that the insurgency is not representative of the Iraqis, and that almost all Iraqis are on the side of democracy. If this is, then our withdrawal will not have a great effect on their progress. What a withdrawal will do is spare other people from having their children put in harms way, when such is not necessary.
We are not protecting our country from terrorism by being there, and I would say that we are honoring our troops by taking all necessary action to withdraw them from a war based on bogus reasons, rather than stubbornly staying there as an act of Nationalism (i.e., our country, right or wrong).
Yeah. Before we showed up Iraq was the freaking garden of Eden, linos and lambs and all. Thank God the people in charge are thinking a little farther ahead than you.
By the way - thank you for serving in Vietnam. I detest the way you (at large, and you specifically if it applies) were treated when you came home. May it never be so again. If Windy Cindy's son had come home alive and well, she would be bashing his service in person. She is the type of trash who spits on vets.
we should withdraw as soon as possible. Will there be chaos in Iraq? Sure, but probably no worse than it is now.
You must be getting your news from the MSM. You are believing what THEY, mostly writing from safety behind the wire, want you to; not what our troops, with boots on the ground, are telling us.
Wow... what to say... If you served in Vietnam I bet you were one of Kerry's soulmates.
Rational,
this was not a vitriolic post, and so, I will not reply in an angry vitriolic way.
But, I believe that you are ignorant, and your ignorance is a danger to our troops, and the citizens of this country. But ignorance is a condition that is not fatal and can be cured with education.
Now, first off, I must ask you WHY you think the President went to Iraq? Do you believe the President is a blood thirsty tyrannical emperialist? Was he trying to conquer a land and a people to enslave them for our purposes? As a sense of "nationalism"? Was he thirsty for oil? Where is the oil?
I write you as one who is NOT ignorant of the situation in Iraq. Whose family has been there and seen with their own eyes the joy of a people who were allowed to vote for the very first time, people who risked their lives to do so; and the horror of innocent people having their heads hacked off while hearing the shouts, "allah is great!".
I am a person who is not ignorant about the war on terror--but instead have been involved in it in a way that not many Americans are. Involved so that you don't have to be.
Now, I want you to get a globe. Find Iran. What is the country on the left of Iran? What is the country on the right? Where are our troops? Where were our troops in the year 2000?
You say that terrorism was not in Iraq before the war. The children raped in the rape rooms might tend to disagree with you. Kurd survivors might tend to disagree with you. The men hung on hooks in the "interrogation" rooms might tend to disagree with you. But, setting Saddam's terror aside for a moment, let's admit that you are correct, in that there are more OUTSIDE terrorist coming into Iraq. Would you rather they were here?
Now, where do you suppose they would have attacked the United States, if we were not in Iraq? Do you think that they are just angry at us for being in Iraq---so angry at us that they feel they must cut the heads off innocent humanbeings? Do you really think that they would not have cut anyone's head off, if we would not have attacked Iraq? Why did the terrorists mutilate and drag the bodies of our troops through the streets of Mogadishu, when we were there handing out food? Why did terrorists kill innocent humanbeings on 9-11? The terrorists in Iraq come from Iran, Syria and other countries who have often been at war with Iraq themselves! Their mission has nothing to do with us removing Saddam from power in Iraq. They want to destroy us in the same way Muhammad destroyed those who did not believe in his 'visions'.
"It is not for any Prophet to have captives until he hath made slaughter in the land" (Surah 8:67).
It is our religious belief that they can not tolerate, not anything that we have done.
These terrorists would part your head from your body, right in your own home, if we were not there. Libya would still be involved in terror, if we were not there. Iran would send a nuclear missle on our cities, if we were not there. We NEED to be there.
The volunteers in our military, over there, are fighting for our lives and our freedom. You are ignorant. Blissfully ignorant of the truth and the enemies of the United States who are using a grieving mother as a lightening rod, hoping to castrate the United States Military so that they may destroy us.
I take it you prefer double-minded thinking? Also, please first define "nationalism" and then give evidence thereof.
I served during the Vietnam war...
My younger brother is in Afghanistan and was nearly killed in March and he will be there another 5 months. And your point is...?
I support the rational use of force, I support honesty and integrity, and I support all of our troops.
Well, I suppose it goes without saying that we here at Free Republic support the use of force only in the most irrational way possible, we prefer dishonesty even when honesty would help us, we hate integrity, and we support only our favorite troops, i.e., those who are the coolest-looking or have the neatest nicknames, look best in spandex, can play a mean guitar, or can turn their eyelids inside out and make the best artificial armpit f@rt sound.
However, support of the troops should not be confused with support for the war in Iraq, or support for the policy that placed us in this war.
Then neither should support for John Kerry last Fall be confused with support for him becoming president.
There has been no demonstrataion of a nexus between terrorism and this war...
FALSE. Apparently you plug your ears and hum really loud when this "nexus" is demonstrated over and over.
Hussein was harboring and supporting terrorists -- from Abu Abbas (the guy who hijacked the Achille Lauro and threw Leon Klinghoffer overboard) to Al Qaeda -- since the 1980's. He supported Zarqawi and his AQ splinter group in the north, which subsequently put together a plot to gas Jordanian police HQ and the American embassy in Jordan with chem weapons that was foiled by Jordanian intel in April 2003. At Salman Pak there was the shell of an airliner where terrorists practiced hijacking. Before he was toppled, Saddam was sending $25,000 to each Palestinan family that sent a child into Israel for a suicide bombing. Hassan al Turabi, leader of Sudan in the late 1980's and early 1990's, brokered meetings between Hussein and his underlings and Al Qaeda leaders. The list goes on and on and on and on and on (See "The Connection" by Stephen F. Hayes - Harper Collins).
All of the above is paramount, far above whether not WMD were found in Iraq -- and they were in small amounts, as was a just-in-time delivery system designed to very quickly manufacture such weapons the moment inspectors left (read the final reports by David Kay and Charles Duelfer, the UN inspectors). Nobody complained in the days after 9/11 when Bush stated that any state that harbored Islamic terrorists was our enemy and that they would pay the price. Everybody was fine with that idea then but apparently he wasn't supposed to really mean it after everyone's emotions of the moment died down. The Oprah-fication of America continues...
You are probably trying to narrow the definition of "nexus" (which is to say 'connection') to mean that if Saddam was not sitting right at the table planning 9/11, then there is no connection. This is roughly equivalent to saying there was no connection between the ships of the fleet that attacked Pearl Harbor and the rest of the Japanese Navy.
The degree of terrorist activity in Iraq is the result of our being there; i.e., the terrorism wasn't there prior.
This might have something to do with why the degree of terrorist activity in the USA is near zero -- in terms of actual terrorist events. Better to fight them there than here. Here we have to jump through all kinds of legal hoops designed to make the bad guys win. There they continue to funnel their jihadi "soldiers" directly into a meatgrinder like sticks thrown into a woodchipper. Iraq is a quagmire all right -- for them. The US military serves as both the bait and the trap.
And please, don't say that I a support Saddam Hussein or his regime - it was horrible, but there are also many other horrible regimes throughout the world, and we don't take unilateral and unprovoked action against them.
This is childish, nyah-nyah, nyah-nyah, nyaaaah---nyaaaah logic. Because we are not taking on all the bullies of the world at once, we are hypocrites if we take on ANY of them -- equivalent to saying that you are a hypocrite if you give money to any charities because you're not giving to ALL of them.
We didn't even take on every bully in WW2 -- we even allied ourselves with one of them, Stalin. Should we not have done that either?
We should not have gone to Iraq, and now that we are there and the stated reason for doing so has been shown to be false, we should withdraw as soon as possible.
I repeat: Any state that harbors Islamic terrorists and terror organizations is fair game.
Will there be chaos in Iraq? Sure, but probably no worse than it is now.
There was very little chaos in Nazi Germany after Krystallnacht. The amount of "chaos" is beside the point. Who wins before the chaos ends IS the point. I'll give you a hint who won on Krystallnacht -- it wasn't the Jews...
The administration reports that the insurgency is not representative of the Iraqis, and that almost all Iraqis are on the side of democracy. If this is, then our withdrawal will not have a great effect on their progress.
No great effect at all...no more than letting a child drive a car solo without learning where the brake pedal is first.
What a withdrawal will do is spare other people from having their children put in harms way, when such is not necessary.
If you think that withdrawal "will spare other people from having their children put in harm's way", then you do not understand the nature of the enemy we face.
We are not protecting our country from terrorism by being there, and I would say that we are honoring our troops by taking all necessary action to withdraw them from a war based on bogus reasons, rather than stubbornly staying there as an act of Nationalism (i.e., our country, right or wrong).
What were your bogus reasons for saying the war was "based on bogus reasons" again?
Calling the Iraq Campaign a "war" is bogus. It is but one theater in a larger war on Islamic terrorism -- further evidence that you do not understand the nature of the enemy we face.
We ARE in fact protecting our country from terrorism by being there because the only way to defeat our enemy is to drain the swamp that breeds them. Democratizing the Middle East is our only hope: if we fail, they will eventually get their hands on nukes and either kill or enslave us all. Tell your female friends and family to start sewing up their radiation-proof burkas...
You said, "we should not have gone to Iraq". I guess the deaths of our military men and women during Desert Storm should have been for nothing? Allow the same man who caused them to have to go to war, just get away with his crimes? We should have just let Saddam get away with that too, and not be forced to comply with the very agreements that ended that war?
From your perspective, the UN Resolutions meant nothing, and Saddam should not have been held accountable for his non-compliance? Just ignore the UN Resolutions that allowed Saddam to return to power after Desert Storm?
How can you support our troops when you do not support their mission? Are you aware that it is your lack of support for their mission is emboldening the terrorists in Iraq and elsewhere? You, people like you, and the MSM are making their jobs more difficult! If you want them to come home soon, then shut up, and stop helping our enemies.
I know some soldiers who would be pretty dang irritated (and I think they would probably use stronger language) if they were talking to you right now. They do not believe we should pull out of Iraq and let it fall into the hands of the terrorists after all they have fought and died for during Operation Iraqi Freedom. You say you honor our troops? Then let them do their jobs, let them finish their jobs, so their comrads will have NOT died in vain.
A military mom.
Because you're looking through blinders clouded with your own personal anti-war agenda.
But I still honor and appreciate your service in Vietnam. Now how about helping make sure these kids don't get treated the way many of your colleagues were? Thanks.
They never really respond do they?
Part in parcel I suppose of being a troll.
What color is the sky in your world?
Please do understand we've all heard your argument and seriously disagree. We too have thought it through and come to an opposite conclusion.
You've had some excellent responses to your post made nearly 10 hours ago.
Care to come back and discuss with us?
When you accuse a website of blatant, single-minded nationalism, it's only polite that you respond to thoughtful replies.
Gawd, I love Nationalism. Especially when it is blatant and single mindedly Supporting Our Troops.
How is it that you support our troops as you say you do? You do not support what they are doing. So I ask again, how is it you support them? Only if they come home from an unfinished job?
You seem to have a conflicted idea of what is actually happening in Iraq. Read and dig it out for yourself rather than listening to sound bites. Good luck to you then.
"I served during the Vietnam war"
Oh, you mean a VN-era type.
RationalCitizen - you don't quite get it, do, ya? LOL.
You don't hold a candle to true VN Veterans!
I know losers, who say it too.
Like the neighbor down the road. Total lying loser. He will never, ever in a million years get certified.
True vets with disabilities: www.hadit.com.
We are not protecting our country from terrorism by being there, and I would say that we are honoring our troops by taking all necessary action to withdraw them from a war based on bogus reasons, rather than stubbornly staying there as an act of Nationalism (i.e., our country, right or wrong).
Man do you desrve a zot, if I ever saw one.
ALOHA RONNIE;mhking;Vets_Husband_and_Wife;68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub;MeekOneGOP;jmstein7;Interesting Times;Angelwood;SandRat;Ragtime Cowgirl;
BillF;Righting the Left;Alamo-Girl;JohnHuang2;All;Chieftain;mhking;Tu Dia;jrlc;Calpernia;bitt
Hey guys!
pardon me...it may take a minute.
Saddam had training camps for terrorists off and on, he was funding terror directly in Israel at 25k a bomber, he tried to assassinate one of our ex-Presidents.
Just on that stuff alone you get a good start of the nexus you were looking for RC.
I don't see any documentation of your position. - Translation: what makes you such an expert? Although I do not agree with what you say I will woefully respect your right to say it. It is just this sort of statement that can demoralize our troops and weaken our position. Some would even call it treason. But let's not mince words...
I can't speak for all the troops, but I certainly don't need the support of a dirty, lousy quitter. A Viet Nam vet should know better than to advocate withdrawl and abandonment of the people who depend on us now, more than ever. Whether you agree with why we got in there or not, it's WAY too late for us to pull out now. We'd be signing their death warrants if we picked up our toys and went home.