Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Tora Bora
Can you imagine what we'd hear from the right if Obama had been president at that time? I guess it's true of us all-- make excuses for our guys and attack the other side. It's not helping us to get anywhere in solving our problems. I think we need to look at what happened and judge it fairly. In this case, the past is not past.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
We not only should judge it, we should learn from it.
I would bet that if I did something dastardly and then skipped town, the U.S. would find me within the blink of eye, and they wouldn't need to drop 700,000 tons of ordnance to do it; but then the U.S. would not have an opportunity for such a grand global performance by pursuing and subduing me.
I don't understand why we are still proliferating another Viet Nam that will amount to nothing but death and an economic drain, when the U.S. is looking for just one guy. If the U.S. really wanted Osama bin Laden, it would fall back on good ol' fashioned American know-how: Texas Bounty Hunters.
U.S. Military Deaths in Iraq = 4371
U.S. Military Deaths in Afghanistan = 939
U.S. Military Wounded - 31,582
The U.S. is paying a high price for just one guy.
Looking back in time, it seems that we let bin-Laden escape Tora Bora so a boogie man was still lurking in the bushes to foist war with Iraq on *We the People*.
A M, I saw that the other day that someone said if we gave Dog the Bounty Hunter the resources to get Bin Ladin he would be in DC in hand cuffs next week. Kind of funny.
But we are not trying to get just one guy. Al Qaida means "The Base" it is a movement. Yes Bin Ladin is the main guy, but we need to take out more than just him.
And Dion if he is so easy to catch or kill then why hasn't the new President brought him to justice yet? Thats right the new President does not believe in the War on Terror and it is not a threat. At least until Christmas day it wasn't.
War on terror had nothing to do with attacking Iraq; so I'd say Bush wasn't too worried about it either. I hate that term. How do you fight a war on tactics? We could have taken out Hussein if we had wanted without invading Iraq and I think most people know that. Somebody wanted an occupation of Iraq and it did benefit that desire to not get bin Laden. That's a fact whether they thought of it or not when they let him go at Tora Bora. or rather didn't try to do what they could there to get him.
I agree we should call it the War on Islamic-fascism because that is what it really is. Or we could call it the War for the Preservation of the American Way. The War on Terror was a quickly thought up term that seemed appropriate on September 12, 2001 and it did not offend anyone or at least very many people.
Ingineer66, Need some DeMint with your tea? Sorry, I saw the opening and had to take it.
Today, Obama doesn't have OBL cornered in Tora Bora. OBL being cornered and lost was during GWBush's presidency. Just like the 911 terror was during GWBush's presidency. Let's not imply GWBush's failures throughout his eight year reign is partisan prattle. No, the failures of GWBush are more historical in nature at this point in time. If I factually express GWBush's performance from time to time, I shouldn't need to explain Obama's stance on the subject. The Democratic party nor Obama is liberal enough for me to claim.
Though, I loved candidate Obama, President Obama has not fulfilled the desires I envisioned. Obama is taking the center position. The Two-party system in America has no home for a socialist like me. And that's if we want to even say the two-party system is anything but bought and paid for by corporations.
I think fighting terror cells with a standing army is idiotic.
Dion, I have to ask what is a socialist doing in New Jersey? Between the crime bosses and the chemical plants, you are in one of the most capitalistic states in the union. Have you considered moving to a country that has a multi-party parliamentarian system?
I will agree that fighting terrorist cells with regular army troops is folly. Fighting the Taliban to keep them from controlling a country and forming a government that supports terrorism is a different story though.
So ingineer, you plan to fight wars all around the world wherever you find a government you don't like? What were you planning to use to pay for that? And if the majority of people in this country should decide to vote in socialist philosophies, I think you are the one you might want to move. Most of Europe has a socialist system and they have opted for it. IF you believe in democracy, than you better accept that it could happen here too. I didn't much like how it was going with the Bush mentality leading the country; so it's not hard to see how unhappy you might be at that prospect. What country were you planning to move to that hasn't gone to thinking we have to be more community minded and less the individual ruels?
Socialism and capitalism co-exist in many countries. NJ is broke and borrowing much like our Federal government. Touting America as some Capitalist Valhalla is comical when you think about all the *red* we're in. And who do we owe our money to... communists! I'm not fond of totalitarian communism but you've got to hand it to the Chinese, they are kicking our capitalist butts. Or maybe a more legitimate description, our trusted corporations have sold the USA to China. Capitalism has kicked our butt.
Back to bin-Laden. OBL wanted the U. S. military out of Saudi Arabia and GWBush capitulated to the terrorist after the 911 attack. OBL also wanted to bankrupt America and that is happening as the U. S. military play whack-a-mole with terror cells. Throw in the cost of our *Nation Building* and we may as well schedule USA's bankruptcy hearing for next month. And these *Nations* we build through occupation, don't you think we'll just create more terrorists. Empathy is wonderful for these exercises.
Rain . . .
Are you not being pretty hard on ingineer? He looks at history and notes that socialism and communism have not been particularly successful. Why then should we welcome a political administration hell bent to throw out our vastly superior THOUGH DEEPLY FLAWED representative government?
Americans have a heritage of seeking individual freedom to advance by our individual merit. The concept is not particularly bad. Of course, it is tempered with an increasing level of corruption within our elected bodies. Can that not be fixed one by one rather than throwing our entire heritage and the foundation stones of our governmtnt on the trash heap?
And what exactly has resistance to socialism or communism to do with wanting war? I don't quite follow you there.
And what led you to believe that the vast majority of Americans are anxious supporters of the far left socialist philosophy? From all of the polls I see it is only a very small and radical minority of our population.
Dion is right. There are many governments that mix socialism with capitalism, and it seems to work pretty well. Frankly, I think America is one of them. At the present time we are trading our freedoms for more government control. Why is it so wrong to resist?
Happy New Year.
Dixon
The response was to him saying something that always triggers my irked button-- if you don't like it leave. Why should we have to leave if we see value in the government overseeing health care? We didn't leave when we didn't like much of anything Bush did and we worked instead to change it. That's what the right should do. If we are wrong and most Americans see it otherwise, they will vote out those who did this and end any help for the working poor for health care.It's how the system works. I don't mind that even if I wish people weren't so easily manipulated by catch phrases. I just don't think it's right to say we should leave if we don't like it unless you are prepared to do the same thing. AND where could anybody go that isn't more social program minded than we are?
Did any of you on the right actually read the article on what happened at Tora Bora? What would you have said if Obama had been president then? That is the question that I think you need to answer for yourselves if not here. You know you would have said he sold us out, and yet you didn't and don't say that about Bush.
Did you read Dion's comments about if communism is such a failure, why are we borrowing from them? We don't have pure capitalism here and you know if you pay any attention to how our system works. His comments on that were excellent.
Nobody wants to move to China or anywhere else. We, right or left, love this country and we want to see it live up to its potential. Sometimes a person feels a loss of faith it can happen but we will all keep working toward it whatever our ideas about how that works best.
And what I am saying about the wars is that we cannot go around the world changing every government we consider to be totalitarian with our guns. I have said it before and will say it again. The Taliban were at one time our friend during the Soviet Occupation. They didn't change. We have these changing views which end up justifying wars that the people who support them also do NOT want to pay for.
Rain . . . Thank you. Now I understand where you were coming from. I don't care for the "like it or lump it" stuff either.
Dixon
For the record I did not tell or even suggest to Dion that he leave the United States because of his socialist views. I only asked if he has considered moving to a place that openly recognized the socialist party as a significant player in elections. Perhaps Michigan or Pennsylvania or California come to mind if not a different nation. If we keep going to a more and more socialist government then maybe I will move. And most of Europe and Asia that had moved toward socialism are now moving away from it because it has been an economic failure.
I realize that we do not have strict capitalism without any socialism here in this country and I am not suggesting that I am a strict libertarian that believes the government should do nothing for its citizens but national defense.
Yes we are borrowing money from Communist China, but not because they are a communist country, it is because they have figured out that the way to make money is by acting in capitalist ways. They have the money right now because they do not have the minimum wage or environmental laws or union thugs that we have in this country. And all of those anti-business items are major tenants of the Democratic Party.
We are not occupying Iraq or Afghanistan. It would take hundreds of thousands more troops in each nation to do that. And we are getting out of Iraq, I heard the president say so.
And Rain if Obama would have been president when OBL slipped through Tora Bora I would have said the same thing that I said when it happened under Bush. That we screwed up in the name of trying to appease the anti-war crowd and let other groups fight our fight.
If Bush would have told the Pakistanis or the Afghanis to go to hell that we were going to ride in and kick ass and take names, you would have been calling him a loose canon cowboy that had no respect for our allies.
Ingineer, whatever you meant by what you said, what you said was, "Have you considered moving to a country that has a multi-party parliamentarian system?" which clearly was not another state. And I have heard that enough times to feel it's not a fair thing to say. Glad it was not what you intended.
There is nothing to indicate that this country is heading toward socialism. The government does not own the means of production and the few companies it has taken an interest in has clearly been temporary until they pay back their debt to the US for bailing them out. It was not done to own the means of production but to save jobs.
If you decide to move elsewhere, if we start providing say health care to all citizens, where would you think you could go that doesn't do that?
As for the evil unions, so you'd like to do your job for less? Say maybe $10 a day and figure out how to live on that? Unions are not the government and they have done things I do not like one bit like high state government pensions which Oregon is currently ready to tax the successful businesses more for paying somehow. The rest of us don't have pensions equal to the salaries we drew while working; so why should government employees? Don't give me this they settled for lower salaries while working. Many couldn't get jobs in the private sector doing what they do. And they'd have been at more risk for being laid off every time the economy turned down.
Unions have done a lot to give the middle class what it has today but not to worry, as they have been decimated by the pressure from the right, the cost of living has gone up and wages have not. Eventually the working guy won't have what he has had. He won't get vacations. He won't get overtime. As individuals how do we demand that without the pressure that we can bring to bear as a group. It won't be government's fault when that happens. It will be the inability of people to band together to demand living wages for their jobs.
Not to say the power of the union has never been abused but I would bet you'd be doing your job for a lot less money right now with no unions. Most of us would. That day is apparently coming all too soon.
What Dion was saying was that if communism is such a failure how come China is rising in power to become probably the next world power? Incidentally I don't want to live in China, so don't suggest it. Some time back Bill Gates said that once upon a time he'd have said a young person who wanted to get ahead should pick a US university. Now he'd say go to China to school as they were better. Because we had the most benefits as a nation, some of them because of where we settled, we can't assume that will last forever. We have abused those benefits and not the least of which was the war in Iraq that was put on the tab. It's a hard thing to get past.
Finally, there was nobody saying to Bush at Tora Bora don't get Obama. He had no one to appease by letting someone else do it. Where did you hear that he did that to appease the antiwar people? It's amazing how you blame someone else for everything. Whose fault is that we didn't pay for that war as we went?
Incidentally Oregon has brought to the ballot the issue of taxing businesses more and individuals who make more than $250,000 a year more to pay off some of its problems (including those high pensions). I am voting no on both even though I have nothing personally to gain by doing so; but you don't get ahead by killing the golden goose to get more eggs. In my opinion, when you overly tax business, I know they can go elsewhere and will. I am not against capitalism and a free market. Too bad we don't have one. But I know business needs some regulations and that is government's place. Things like pollution are only fixed when government steps in. Unsafe working conditions have been changed by the demands of unions. As individuals, we have to recognize we are stronger together.
The state comment was a little tongue in cheek. Dion had said that he was a socialist and that the two-party system in America has no home for him. The socialist party does not hold many elected offices in this country. Other countries have true multi-party systems where socialists may get elected and have some influence in the parliament.
According to the study, the most important tool for small businesses to succeed in 2010 is search engine marketing, while email marketing, public relations and social media cited as crucial for success.23.8% of all small businesses reported that search engine marketing was the tool most needed for their business to succeed in 2010.
www.onlineuniversalwork.com
Post a Comment