So why make up all the bullshit reasons like calling this 'Iraqi Freedom'? So you don't get the protest faction to swell to incredible numbers and lynch the president who's fearlessly leading our noble mission?

I ask again, aren't a million dead people in the Congo civil war a tad bit more of a human rights violation than having an asshole as a dictator?

People want to be lied to, Porker. I think you have spent enough time dealing with whores and talking with mongers to understand this basic fact.

Most people simply can't handle the truth. Our foreign policy is very sound (I already answered your question with points 1 - 4 above, btw), but telling the truth to the masses would be as effective a strategy as a hooker telling the truth to a prospective client.

" but this war did nothing to resolve any of the terrorist threats facing the U.S. At this point, the danger to the U.S. is probably higher than it's ever been because of the resentment and hatred the war has stirred up among Arabs."

LuckyJackson I agree with you on this 100 percent.

Now we aree facing lots of Asamas
Our goverment claims that it has stopped numerous terrorist attacks and thats great.

But like the White people we are we expect them to attack at our highest security level.
Any sign of terrorist talks and we jump 6 levels and put out a wide alert. This sends these guys into hibernation mode.

But 9-11 proves these guys are not your average joeblows they are highly trained guys that will strike when we least expect it.

If anything we should expect an attack when we least likely expect it.

milktuff

I agree with LJ and MM 99.9 percent. The chance of terrorism has probably increased.

"If anything we should expect an attack when we least likely expect it. "

That sounds like like Yogi Berra... we should expect it when we don't expect it.

The U.S. doesn't care about N. Korea at this point. Best proof of that fact is their turning over the whole situation to the U.N. Security Council. Everyone knows how much Bush and company respect and lend importance to the work of that bunch.

North Korea's irrelevance to the U.S. is directly proportional to the nastiness of their periodic outbursts. Their game is to get some support, in various forms, in order to stay in power. The most important form of support in N. Korea's eyes is a free hand to continue starving their population without interference from the outside. The average N. Korean citizen should be so lucky as to have America attack so that they could be re-united with the prosperous south.

Unless there's a big change in the political situation, it ain't gonna happen because that's China's baliwick. As well, the level of understanding among Korean citizens on both sides of the border is too low to make it worth the U.S.'s trouble.

Thirty thousand American troops sitting on their border defending their asses and South Korea was still the scene of some the most vociferous anti-American protests. Go figure.

Kendricks....ah forget it. It ain't worth stickin your arm in a bowl full of shit trying to get a $2.00 watch back.

"People want to be lied to"

Maybe for foreign policy, but not when it comes to sex. I wonder if most Republicans agree with or disagree with what you appear to be saying. Am I stating this accurately?

"Justification of this Iraq War was based on lies, but the lies were necessary because the general population would not accept all of the true reasons for going to war, at least some of which included profits for the US and US companies."

Your 10:44am post is probably the closest you've come to my perception of this war. Our biggest disagreement, however, regards the lying when it comes to foreign policy and how we view people that risk American lives based on those lies. Obviously, in your view the government lying to the people in this case is acceptable, but how about when the governent lies to you to keep a closer eye on you, to take away your civil liberties, or to take advantage of say, illegal immigrants?

As for war concerns, this particular segment might be over, but the concerns that have bothered some of us will linger for a long time.

Some Republicans are pushing to remove the temporary provisions of parts of the Patriot Act which will expire in 2005. I'm not sure where I stand on this. While I support giving the government more power to go after terrorists, the potential for abuse is very high.

The bigger concern, however, is Arab reaction to US occupation of Iraq. Osama's motivation stemmed from the US presence in Saudi Arabia, and we all know how Arabs feel about Israel. Billions of Arabs pissed off watching the US "steal Arab resources" (how they will perceive it, not how I feel) isn't something to not be concerned about.

Can we "democracize" the Middle East? I sure hope so cause I think the world would be a safer place, but from what I've read of the track record there, it doesn't look too optimistic. I still have hope, though.

What? You don't think that people want to be lied to when it comes to sex? What do you think the average monger wants to hear:

A. "Ooooh, baby, I want to fuck you so bad!"

B. "I will tolerate you putting your dick inside of me, since you are willing to pay me for the privilege."

Obviously, people want to be lied to when it comes to sex.

As far as being safer from terrorists, you guys need to learn to think more than 15 minutes into the future.

If we do not clean house in the middle east, guys like Osama will be free to plot against us, and have virtually unlimited cash and resources to do so. By hitting these fuckers where they live, we destroy their ability to put together major strikes.

Right now, the major terrirost groups are too busy trying to not get caught to put anything big together.

The best defense is indeed a good offense. Let's keep on kicking ass.

MikeyJackson,

If 9/11 was not a sucker punch, what was it?

Porker,

I cant say I entirely disagree with your sentiments, but I dont understand any attempt to look for equivalence with the Congo, Rwanda or anywhere else. I agree they are huge abuses of human rights and dignities. But we should be happy that at least in one country we got rid of a heinous dictator. Do you think the Iraqui children freed from the kiddy prison or the people dancing in the streets of Baghdad really care what our motivation for removing saddam was?
I doubt it. They just wanted to breathe a little freer.

From the celebration that I have been seeing on the tube it seems pretty obvious that a big chunck of the country was ready for Saddam to go. They seem to be in disbelief that he is gone but joyfully delirious that he is. I think their actions speak loudly. I think that alone makes it worth it. Forget all of the economic or geopolitical elements. Consider the human element. I think support for Saddam was very shallow and was mostly support based on fear. I bet a majority of iraquis are happy he is gone.
Of course the UN, the Eurotrash, and the pacifist weenies in the US would prefer that the Iraquis remain under Saddams tyrannical rule. They would prefer that 60-70,000 a year continue to die under his regime. They would prefer that he continue to agitate the arab world with his anti-americanism and his dollar for suicide bombers. Oh they may say they never supported Saddam, they were just opposed to a violent solution to the problem. But their continued appeasement of Saddam and their preffered path of nonaction effectively supported Saddam and increased the time that Iraq had to suffer his whims.

On that note, I must say that the Iraquis are celebrating Saddams demise and not necessarily our presence. In just a few weeks they will realize that we are an occupying army. And the agitators in Syria, Saudia Arabia, etc will make sure of that. The worst is yet to come. The hardest part is yet to come. I predict we will lose more troops over the next 90 days trying to nation build than we have have in 3 weeks of combat. I hope I am wrong.

21 days to capture Baghdad. Its not over yet, but its still pretty damn amazing. I wonder what all the naysayers have to say now. Remember the prediction of 500,000 dead, 5,000 US casualties, The oil fields torched, Regional war, oil at 80 dollars a barrel. Quagmire, blah, blah, blah. I am not seeing much of that. What do you guys think

Dogster and company,

You are certainly right about the Arab world being against us. But I dont think it is going to lead to more terrorism longterm. As I noted before, my father worked over in that neck of the woods. He is not an Arab expert by any means, but he may have more insight than most on the board. He has been saying for years that the only thing the Arab world understands is force.

They despise weakness. Osama grew bolder and bolder in the absence of a strong response from the worlds greatest diplomat, Bill Clinton.

The arabs understand a good ass kicking and grudgingly respect the victor. Well we are giving the Iraqis a good ass kicking. They will hate us, but they will also respect us. I predict that long term this will go along ways to subduing radical Islam. I sincerely hope I am right and you are wrong.

Now I guess we can set back and watch jamesbr conspiracy unfold. Every conspriracy has a grain of truth. It should be no time at all before Halliburton dominates the middle east. Ben did you load up on their stock?

BatsterwhotoaststhefallofSaddam

Well said Batman. The pacifists and appeasers can go find a nice hard hairy cock to suck, because they have become less than irrelevant. The USA is large and in charge, and has proven it has the will to do whatever is necessary to stay that way.

Not only do Arabs understand nothing but force, they have been in dire need of a good, hard ass kicking for years.

Appeasement and protest only make them bolder. Like dogs, they need to be smacked around and taught to fear their masters before they can fully understand their place.

KendrickswhosalutestheUSAanditskickassmilitary

(Message edited by kendricks on April 09, 2003)

I was being sarcastic and referring to Clinton. Some people think it was wrong for him to lie to cover his cheating and protect his presidency, but do not question whether the govenment lies to us about stated reasons for going to war. Most people against the war and a good number of people in support of it, including you and I as it appears, do believe that a decent portion of the government's stated justification for going to war is based on lies.

As well, we think you should think more than 15 minutes into the future, like your "The war is over, naysayers shut up, let's celebrate".

Following your logic to its conclusion would probably mean the overthrow of the entire Middle East. You don't think they're going to twiddle their thumbs while we're doing that, do you?

Also, how many terrorist groups were based out of Iraq?

I'll take your non-response to the "Justification..." quote as your acceptance that it is an accurate representation of your view.

I'll take your non-response to the government lying as your acceptance that you trust the judgemnt of the government when it's ok and when it's not ok to lie to the people.

I often ignore asinine statements simply because they do not warrant a response. Interpreting this as agreement would be in error.

Much of our government's domestic policy is completely off base. It is good and healthy to question the motives of lying politicians when they are screwing us over.

This type of dissent is good, and makes for a better country. This is much different from public dissent which emboldens our enemies during armed conflict. You are comparing apples to assholes.

Anyway, all of the truthniks are so hopelessly naive, they are really not even worth conversing with. Welcome to the real world, gentlemen. Expecting to hear the truth during press conferences is like expecting a whore to tell you the truth when she is trying to get a hold of some of your cash.

Sorry, I forgot - a lot of you actually DO think that hookers are honest with you!!!

Also, there is no need to overthrow the entire middle east, so long as they stay in line, as most of the arab countries do. As far as terrorist groups based in Iraq, we cannot afford to risk Iraq becoming another Afghanistan. Prevention is good.

Following your logic, there is no need to use a condom when fucking whores, unless you have documentation that she has an std. This is not sound thinking.

Bat, was 9/11 Iraq's sucker punch?

Hopefully, we'll be able to get things in order quickly, otherwise the celebrating will evaporate as looting and other costs set in. Saddam may have been brutal, but a lot of Iraqis will have lost sons and fathers in this war to US/British soldiers. I'm not sure how that will play out in the Iraqi mind even if the end result is a better life for the country as a whole. An occupying US force may be hard to swallow, especially one that is highly profiting while the average Iraqi is still struggling.

I wouldn't say "hardest" as we might get lucky. I would say "riskiest". What will our response be if we start seeing terrorist attacks on US interests in Iraq? More troops and more US presence? News reports I've read said terrorist group ranks are swelling in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and other countries. If groups from these other countries attack, and the respective governments are unable to stop them, do we extend the military campaign across more borders?

"...500,000 dead, 5,000 US casualties, The oil fields torched, Regional war, oil at 80 dollars a barrel..."
You must be quoting extremists. I don't even think Jamesbr touched this. A lot of what some of us have been arguing about is justification of the war and the potential consequences of it.

I also sincerely hope you are right (Bat) and we are wrong regarding the Arab response, because the price may be enormous. There was a recent attack by Israel, though. I don't think the history of that conflict bodes well for our hopes.

I'll take your non-response to the statement that "Following your logic, there is no need to use a condom when fucking whores, unless you have documentation that she has an std" as your acceptance that it is true.

You often ignore statements that point out when you contradict yourself or have made asinine statements in the past, of which you have no shortage of.

Our elected representatives are idiots when it comes to domestic policy but brilliant when it comes to foreign policy. O...K..., Sure... So we understand other people better than ourselves...

At least I agree with you that a lot of guys mistakenly believe hookers are honest with them.

"Following your logic, there is no need to use a condom when fucking whores, unless you have documentation that she has an std. This is not sound thinking."
Now THAT is a really asinine comparison. You must be drunkenly giddy from the violence.

If you want to use a prostitute analogy, it should be more like this.

Kendricks: If Prostitute A gives you an STD, bludgeon Prostitute B to death using your friends' weapons because she probably has an STD too and this will prevent Prostitues C-Z from giving you or your friends more STDs. Tell everyone that you want to protect them from Prostitute A's drug abuse.

No, Kenlogic is not whacked out and delusional.

"Drunkenly Giddy With Violence"

I like it! That would make a great bumpersticker, or even a name for a band.

Sorry to nitpick, but you shouldn't end sentences with prepositions. The phrase "of which you have no shortage of" should be shortened to "of which you have no shortage".

With respect to our government's disparate abilities with foreign and domestic policy, it should be no surprise that people excel in different areas. I know women who give great blowjobs, for example, who couldn't solve a quadratic equation or perform hexadecimal division if their lives depended upon it.

Anyway, it is really hard for me to get upset over these petty quibbles, with so much wonderful news flooding the airwaves! What a great fucking war!!!

I am indeed glad that pinche Saddam was likely buried under 6 feet of concretein that bombing attack. I am also rather amused that you idiot taxpayers paid 80 BILLION fucking dollars to achieve that. BIEN HECHO!!! I bet you wish, Kendricks, that the good ol' days of CIA 'spy vs. spy' 'poison in Castro's mistress's cold creme' could have achieved such a feat with much less expense or fanfare. Unfortunately, you'll be paying 80 bill. over and over and over again in your quest to 'kick ass' all over the world. While cringing everytime you see a brown guy that hasn't shaved recently wearing a backpack. As the rest of the world has been trying to tell us for a long frickin' time, you reap what you sow.

And YEAH, it's OK to call me a traitor. I definitely have a love-hate relationship with MY country at the moment. Under different circumstances that would supposedly make me a patriot.

Oh, and I guess now it's time to return to the "Where's WALDO, err, uh, I mean Bin Laden" clusterfuck?

80 billion is a bargain for the enjoyment I have gotten from this war! The way our gov burns through cash, what difference does it make? I'd rather see my cash go into 2,000 pound bombs to rain down on Saddam's ass than some welfare mother's steak and shrimp dinner.

As far as Afghanistan goes, that has been a huge success. We have gutted bin laden's merry little band of pranksters, foiled their evil plans, killed or arrested many of them, and sent the rest running for their lives. You don't really think they planned to stop with the 9-11 attack, do you?

(Message edited by kendricks on April 09, 2003)

Batster,

I objected to "sucker punch" because it was used to suggest that this war was being waged against someone who'd attacked America without warning. And that as a result of this war, America would be safe. That's obviously wrong.

Today is a day to congratulate the U.S. I've always maintained that my only reason for supporting the war was for the sake of the people of Iraq. The images on the television seem to bear that out. The U.S. military deserves to be proud. They're obviously competent, but we already knew that. They deserve a pat on the back and a big thank you from the rest of the world.

Y'all diss JamesBR, but I gotta say that his 'W's grandpappy was Hitler's banker' links were a shitload more interesting than all the 'OOH, I shot ANOTHER load watching that tank get stuck in the sand' posts.

And the war would have been a LOT less entertaining if it wasn't for 'friendly fire' and 'pilot error', now wouldn't it?

You don't really think they planned to stop with the 9-11 attack, do you?

No, next up is the SEVEN-11 near you.

Or would that be a conflict of interest to attack such a target? Sorry, Amous. Maybe you're part camel jockey...

"Don't call me gringo you fucking beaner, stay on your side of the godDAMNED river, don't call me GRINGO you BEANER"

Wow, I guess drunken expats can really get bitter when their former homeland has wildly successful military campaigns. What a fascinating case study.

You can get drunk drinking one beer and 5 kahluhahas and 6 (or 7) Don pedros?

Oh, and maybe the milk was sour too...

You're too good to argue with a drunk?

Current Caliente odds as of 4:22 PDT:

"N.Korea, 6-5"
"Iran, 13-10"
"Cuba, 3-1"
"Libya (thanks, Dude, forgot about QaDAFFY)", 5-1
"France, 13-2"
"Japan (euphoric nuke recall) 15-1"

(Message edited by porker on April 09, 2003)

Who the hell is Porker talking to? I think he got into the muscatel a little early. LOL

Do you really believe that the US government would not have stopped 9/11 if they could have? There is absolutely no doubt that they fucked up the intelligence big time. There is no doubt if they were more awake they could have stopped it. But that is quite different than saying "they let it happen". Which of course is what you are implying.

I guess you may be right though. Maybe there was a conspiracy. Lets look at this a little closer. The Clinton administration knew Bin Laden was connected to the World Trade center bombing in 93. They knew he was responsible for the Embassy bombings in Africa. They did not go after him. Sudan offered Bin Laden on a plate. Clinton/Gore turned it down. The Clinton admin knew that Bin Laden was responsible for the Cole bombing in Yemen. They lobbed a couple of scuds into the Afghanistan camps just to make it look like they were doing something, but not after giving Bin Laden a chance to escape. The intelligence agencies had been murmuring for years that Bin Laden was up to something big. The first whisperings about crashing planes into buildings came out in 95. Five years before Clintons watch ended. Clinton and Gore had lots of time to do something about it and they didn't. Why not. Ooh I think it was a conspiracy! Maybe Gore was supposed to win the election in November 2000. And he wanted a tragedy like 9/11 so that he could show the world what a great fucking president he could be. And if by some fluke the Idiot Bush could win the election, or somehow steal the election, Bush would only have 9 months to clean up 8 years of intelligence fuckups. So there was little chance he could stop 9/11 from happening and then the democrats could blame Bush for all of it.

Sound pretty preposterous? Not any more preposterous than saying Bush let it happen so he could attack Iraq. All those conspiracy theories are Bullshit.

D'art,

Was 9/11 an Iraqi Sucker Punch? No. But Saddam made no bones about his hate for the US. There have been more than enough connections made between his regime and Islamic/Arabic terrorism. The only people who do not see that are those who choose not to(Just like there are still people who deny the Holocaust ever occurred).

Less than 5 weeks ago, your hero, Bill Clinton, wrote in the Guardian that the risk of letting Saddams weapons fall into the wrong hands outweighed any risk of taking him out. I wonder what "wrong hands" he was reffering to? Maybe the Iraqi girl scouts? Muslims for World Peace? Hans Blix? Obviously he meant terrorists. Clinton also said 5 years ago, referring to Saddams weapons, "someday, Somewhere, I guarantee he will use them". Why wait for it?

If a doctor finds malignant cancer he does not usually talk about it for years on end and consult with plumbers, janitors, and pastry chefs to decide what to do about it. No. He takes action. He either nukes it or cuts it out. Unless he is too afraid to operate because if he fucks up he gets sued and loses his practice.

So no, 9/11 was not Saddams sucker punch. But why the hell should we wait around and wait for a 9/12. Bush saw a malignant cancer. So did Clinton. The difference is Bush decided to operate.

This was the only logical course of action. Name one other. If your other choice is unending diplomatic negotiations( that have not worked during 12 years), ask the Iraqis celebrating in the streets how many more years they wanted Saddam around.

I will agree with you on one point though. The US has to stop the looting and disorder immediatley. It is to no ones advantage to allow caos. I realize that it may be hard to contain years of pent up rage, but they should do something soon. They should funnel all that rage into a useful pursuit. I think they should tell the Iraqi people that Saddam is in Syria with their money. Give each of the delerious bastards an RPG and an AK-47 and bus them to the Syrian border.

An alternate activity could be to load up a couple of C-5's with the most outraged of the bunch and ship them over to San Fransisco and turn them loose on the anti-war crowd. Let the peaceniks explain to some crazy ranting Iraqis why the US was wrong, why Bush is a Hitler, and why they did not want Saddam deposed. LOL.

Hardest part is coming up. I think its going to be ugly. I am afraid of winning the war and losing the peace. And if Bush lets the friggin UN do anything, he will lose the peace.

Batsterwhojoinsjacksoninsalutingthemilitary

I am a shitty multi tasker. I dont have enough brain cells to pick my nose and type at the same time. I just realized I meant to say Clinton lobbed "cruise missiles" into Afghanistan, not scuds.

And also maybe my timeline is off. Maybe the Cole bombing happened on Bushs watch. Any one remember?

Porker,

Are you looking forward to Semana Santa as much as I am? Just one of the benefits of living and working in Mexico. I am looking forward to 5 glorious days on the beach.

Carry on.

Batstertheilliteratepontificator

I, for one, am looking forward to the next glorious victory, maybe in North Korea, just before the elections. After that, there's always China, parts of Europe, finish off the Middle East, hey, this is fun!

China? What YOU been drinking, Explorer? I thought we only picked on sick, vomiting patsies? After all, THAT is the American way. Lest they have half a pulse and wanna fight back (and shit) like Vietnam.

Batster, you seem to be the only one here (including Kendricks) that thinks that Iraq posed a danger to US. WAKE UP!!!

And re: (dos) Semana(s) Santa(s), OH YEAH, I's ready to descansarme. Unfortutnately the only beach I can afford after pissing away all my meager earnings in MOnterrey congalas is the sandy dunes of the Chihuahua desert!

Wow, Porker, these years of constant alcohol abuse and self loathing have really taken their toll on you. You used to have a brain. Seek help, before you fall so far you are never able to get back up again.

Here is a great picture for you guys: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/030408/168/3qpqh.html

What a beautiful day!

Yup. Only thing I'm missing is some "gulf war syndrome" cooties. Then I'd REALLY be fucked up! And probably start spanking my monkey while watching billions of dollars of bombs being dropped on 3rd world desert countries that can't defend themselves because we stopped selling them weapons when they didn't play 'nice' with them.

Gee Porker, relax and have another wine cooler.It will ease your guilt over poor Saddam loosing his job.Of course there will be more terror attacks.9-11 wasnt the first nor will it be the last.The only difference in us will be the way we respond.When they punch us in the nose,we punch them back ten times.Its the old attrition thing.That is how you defeat them.You cannot sit around wringing your hands because the rest of the world thinks we are bad guys.What you do, is treat them with respect,until they hit you,and then you pick up a big stick,AND BEAT THE FUCK OUT OF THEM.

Explorer has been drinking too much, porker. Besides China is now much more open.

Porker, since I really do pity you, I deleted the response I just wrote. Seek help, man, and get your life back together. You will have a whole new outlook, and won't have to hate the USA for being strong and successful.

You should also read the "Art of War" link I posted earlier. If you had a basic concept of military strategy, you would understand why US policy is what it is. Bush, Cheney, Franks, the guys in the field, et al. really did a hell of a job, despite their idiot detractors.

Clearly, might makes right.

I agree, Kendricks. Look what giving up the partying lfestyle and finding GOD has done for our fine President.

Gee Porker,

He has a ranch in Texas, in great physical health, most powerful man in the world. Seems giving up the booze and kri kri has benefited him allot.

What gets me are those people who are either

a) amazed that we won

b) all puffed up because we won

or

c) changed their opinion about the appropriateness of the war because we won.

Guys, the only question about the war was how long it would take. I was surprised that it took so long, Iraq had a no-army. The military victory has nothing to do with the reality that America now has the policy that we can attack whoever we want whenever we want, and screw the rest of the world, we will get them sooner or later.

Anyone who doesn't see the end of this particular game is blind.

This has been fun, guys, but now that the war is over, I have a new cause - electrocuted dead cow parts!

Kenny,

I think the war is just starting.


Porker,

Myself, Kendricks, Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, the prime ministers of Australia and 18 European countries, Joseph Lieberman, George Bush, most of the Senate and Congress, and 55% of all Americans believe Iraq was a threat. WAKE UP!!!

Explorer,

I am not amazed about Military victory. I am amazed that we took Baghad within 21 days at a cost of 100 dead Soldiers and not too much damage to the city. I just saw a report that Baghdad ambulance drivers are reporting that in three weeks of bombing they estimate they handled between 1500-2000 dead including civilians and troops. Granted thats 2000 too many, but still not bad in light of the predictions of 500,000 dead that the UN was spouting. 2 days of looting and Arson have damaged the city damn near as much as the bombing.

As far as being puffed up, maybe just a little.LOL. But I am really worried the worst is yet to come. 90 days from now if we have not suffered another 250 casulaties I will really be happy.

Batstertsalutesthetroops

Ben, he's still an asshole.

Batster, how much sleep did you lose exactly over the dangerous Saddam? Let me guess, you thought he had a secret stash of superscuds carrying some chemical agent that he was going to sneak into Cuba or somewhere and push the button? And re: a pair of LIARS and their lackeys in Congress looking for reasons to start wars, well, you can believe what they want, but I thought people saw how stupid 'read my lips' coming from politicians was a long damned time ago.

If Blair and Bush had the balls to stand up and say that they were going to war because they thought Saddam threatened ISRAEL I might have listened. But threatening US? You ARE joking, aren't you? If you were ever scared of Iraq, you should be a shitload more scared now, as I keep saying, about the guys with explosive backpacks.

Nah, nah, Kendricks was afraid of Iraq!

Kendricks' next big fear: Mexico!

Blow it out your ass, explorer. You were the moron who was afraid that the big bad arabs would destroy us if we dared move in and kick saddam's ass!

You guys really have trouble with simple concepts. You can acknowledge that someone is a threat, as in, the land he controls could replace Afghanistan as a base for terrorist groups and the cash flow he has from oil sales could finance terrorists, without being "afraid" of them.

It is a simple matter of kicking their sorry asses before they have a chance to sucker punch them.

Anyway, since most arabs have never had an original thought in their life, cutting the head off of terrorist groups is all you really need to do to prevent waves of suicide attacks.

"Anyway, since most arabs have never had an original thought in their life, cutting the head off of terrorist groups is all you really need to do to prevent waves of suicide attacks."

So, how is that working for Israel?

Kendricks sez:

"You were the moron who was afraid that the big bad arabs would destroy us if we dared move in and kick saddam's ass! "

I think you read that in a dream.

It's pretty convenient to label people you don't like as terrorists so you can have an excuse to invade their country. Evidence or lack thereof being damned. Modern day McCarthyism?

Porker sez,

"It's pretty convenient to label people you don't like as terrorists so you can have an excuse to invade their country."

Porker, are you and Tom Daschle the only ones left on this plant that think we could have used diplomacy to get rid of a regime that has been torturing and killing thousands of people for years?

Did you happen to notice the Iraqi people in the streets of Baghdad and other cities bashing pictures and statues of Saddam?

ITS OVER and the "asshole" as you call him is winner and still champion.