[billbears]

Well first let's hope it's not the same 'solid' intelligence that told us about the plethora of invisible WMDs in Iraq. Secondly, until this nation of states is attacked, one can not undertake a pre-emptive police action to stave off possible attacks. Defensive measures should have and could have been undertaken to prevent said attacks. Four years later the government has done enough to bother little old ladies in wheelchairs, not to mention countless others who have had their privacy invaded by inept government contractors needlessly searching for plastic knives and nail clippers.

A conservative would ask if the government has wasted enough tax dollars bothering citizens of the respective states going about their business, surely they could have done it more efficiently before knowing specifically what they were looking for. Well that is unless you believe these inept government contractors sitting at the airports have actually done something to prevent another strike.

If you're asking do I believe in pre-emptive strikes, no I do not. It removes the arguments and defenses of a just war

[sheltonmac]

If you're asking do I believe in pre-emptive strikes, no I do not. It removes the arguments and defenses of a just war

Exactly. The Bush Doctrine is a prescription for perpetual war and will actually serve to create more terrorists than it eliminates. Unfortunately, there is no room for logic and reason in this debate. Emotion is king.

"My country, right or wrong." "You're either with us or against us." "You can't be for the troops and against the war." Their brand of "patriotism" isn't just a joke; it's one big cliché. They claim to be concerned for their sons and daughters in the military, yet call for a war against Islam and its more than one billion followers. They say our opinions don't matter because we haven't "served our country" (a very socialist concept), but ignore that requirement when Limbaugh and Hannity open their mouths in support of the war. They forget that our own country has offered its enthusiastic support for evil regimes (Saddam's included) when it was "in our interests." They also choose to believe that America can do no wrong (at least as long as Republicans are in charge).

Worst of all, they have no idea what terrorism is. The argument that started all of this was the ridiculous notion that "we're fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here." For some strange reason, they believe that terrorists from all over the world are dropping what they're doing and running to Iraq to take up arms against U.S. troops. Terrorists don't work that way. As we saw on 9/11, the terrorists we're up against are seemingly normal people, many of them with families, who blend in and strike when we least expect them. The only way to combat that kind of threat is to infiltrate their networks and flush them out through joint intelligence operations and good, old-fashioned police work. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: you can't fight (much less win) a Fourth Generation war with a Second Generation military.

I'd love to be able to respond to each inane post, but it becomes useless after a certain point. They have more straw men than I have matches, and their copy-and-paste tactics eliminate the possibility for any real debate or discussion.