about the war on terrorism?where to buy abortion pill ordering abortion pills to be shipped to house buy abortion pill online

That sounds about right Nikster.

Bush just wants to be all big and bad like his daddy (Bush Sr. brought us Desert Storm, remember? The war the liberated the oil in Kuwait. Oops..I meant the people). He has appearantly forgotten that Bush Sr. only lasted one term. Hehe.


I personally think that his REAL motivation for the whole 'war on terror' was to make everyone forget how he 'won' the election. *ugh*

What do I think?

I don't think it can ever be actually won, but the chances of certain kinds of attack can be affected with appropriate action. I happen to think Bush and Blair are doing the best job that can be expected.

Oh, and Nixter, isolationism is the least realistic thing to hope for. All that does is allow the world's enemies to swell to maximum size before the inevitable happens. Hitler wouldn't have gone any farther than Poland if it wasn't for isolationizm being his best ally.

Peace is worth hoping for, but don't expect it to just land in your lap. Sometimes it has to be fought for. Sometimes the world politics is no more complicated than managing schoolyard bullies. Ignoring them fuels them.

But, the whole "mind our own business" point of view does not work, but naturally neither does butting in to everything. There-in lies the fine line. But what I'm sick to death of is America being blamed for everything. When there's inhumanity anywhere, everyone blames us. When we try to fix it, everyone blames us. We leave it alone, everyone blames us. We get it done right, the thanks we get is the bill for reparations. We try to mind our own business again, the outcries of America ignoring more plight around the world accuses us of not caring. When we finally try to do the right thing, we're accused of taking too long or going too fast.

I'm sick of everyone coming to us for their problems, rage, pleas, begging, attacks, blame, etc.

The world could work a lot harder ignoring us like they claim we should them. God knows how much of my tax dollars go to representing the interests of the least grateful corners of the earth.

A funny thing I've always noticed about the kind of respect America never gets is when Americans go abroad we're expected to do things their way, but when anyone comes to America we're STILL expected to do things their way.

It's becomming too acceptable to snub America I think. Every imperfection is drug out into the light and shamed at full strength, every good is shrugged off as "the least they can do".

SO, what do "I" think about the war on terror? I think when it's finally time for the rest of the civilized world to take a stand beside the one that's always come to their aid it becomes clear just how thanked we're not and how we'll just have to take care of business for our own good.

But regardless whatEVER we do... we'll get the blame.

We start?

We?

Look, this is not a NEW war. This is the conclusion of the last one that Saddam started.

Saddam invaded a peaceful country. Nato says to get him out. We do. We accept his surrender. His surrender (as legislated by NATO) applies that if he's expected to stay in power he must not have W.M.D.'s. Later on, he gets all Mr. Tough Guy and kicks out Nato and it's inspectors. At THAT point, Clinton (the REAL idiot) should have levied Nato to inforce it's own rule of law. Not until 9-11 does it become clear that we cannot ignore any more threats and that Nato no longer has the luxury of ignoring Iraq's defiance of it's law. Hussein was ruling (as far as Nato's own conditions of his surrender) illegally. Bush, being a non-idiot is making Nato live up to it's own clout. And if Nato is too mamby-pamby to do it... well, you get the idea.

So, since this is basicly speaking taking care of a convicted thug who's broken his own probation and the cops are too weenie to take care of it, somebody else has to. And just because Hussein had the fortune of getting a second chance instead of being taken out of power the first time around doesn't mean WE have to face the inaccurate label of "starting this one".

...but of course... NOBODY can blame poor little Nato... cute widdle ting.

And another "of course", if we turned a blind eye to Hussien and his defiance of the civilized world, America would STILL get the blame when he turned the western hemisphere into one smoldering crater.

Thank God we have Bush.

Oh, and yes, it is too late now. We have no direction to go now but forward. And sitting down and saying "I'm out" at this point is suicide.

But, we're in no danger of really agreeing with each other on this. As you said that it's ultimately wrong to fight violence with violence, you probably don't think we had any business using force to rescue Kuait from raping and murdering either, so that's as close as we're likely to agree.

As Mark Davis, a national talk show host said, "anyone who's categorically writting off the war as wrong is just putting on blinders of moral over-simplification that does not work in the real world." Well said. Not only does it not solve anything concerning our global enemies but in fact is exactly what they are counting on.order abortion pill http://unclejohnsprojects.com/template/default.aspx?morning-after-pill-price where to buy abortion pillabortion pills online abortion questions cytotec abortion

Oh yeah, and about the nuclear weapons in Iraq, I have only one question:

What happened to the underground bunkers Saddam Hussein hid in during the Gulf War?

I agree with you yet again. Within 24 hrs. of the ground war in Iraq, they surrendered. And I also think that anyone that should happen to help him should be exiled along with him, millions of mistreated people against a few Hussein supporters is a big difference!on line abortion pill misoprostol dose abortion medical abortion pill online

*Breaks ten-foot-pole in half and walks away...*on line abortion pill misoprostol dose abortion medical abortion pill onlinewhere to buy abortion pill ordering abortion pills to be shipped to house buy abortion pill online

I pretty much agree with what JediUnit has to say. The world has become too intertwined to simply ignore aggressive leaders. Who can defend a man like Saddam who tested chemical weapons on his own people? That's a crime against humanity.

I will certainly acede that World politics is a messy business and that we have supported allies in the past who are now our worst enemies. But we are here, now. And decisions must be made in regards to crazy people who can do major damage to other parts of the world. There is no excusing the act of war that was taken on Sept 11th.where to buy abortion pill http://blog.bitimpulse.com/template/default.aspx?abortion-types buy abortion pill onlineabortion pills online abortion pill online purchase cytotec abortion

I agree whole-heartedly that North Korea is a bigger problem. But, it's a simple matter of picking our battles and the order we should take them in. It'll be a WHOLE LOT easier taking care of the big problem when it's basicly the only one left. Iraq first. Korea second. It's a common war college sentiment to go for the weakest link first. Simple logic.

Also, just because we're taking care of big, more visible problems abroad doesn't mean anyone's claimed to have taken care of all the domestic ones. The deal about how Iraq and other radical countries fit into the anti-terrorism campaign is that "you can't eliminate all the threats, but you can take care of the biggest ones." The deal is we can't weed out the terrorists that are here now and laying low and we can't do anything about the weapons they may already have, but what we CAN do is what we MUST do... to separate the ultimate weapons from the kinds of nutty leaders of countries that can manufacture WMD's from the terrorist would love to get their hands on them. Terrorists can't exactly make WMD's on their own, they require the kinds or resources only an entire countries economic power can produce. No crazy leaders, no WMD's for the terrorists.

Simple.

But don't be surprised if Korea DOES get involved in the action against Saddam simply on the pretext that they know they're next and won't want to do it alone. To that risk, Powell said, "no problem. We've taken care of two theaters in one war before, we can do it here too with complete success as well."

Sounds like a "bring it on" to me. I couldn't agree more.

We live in a time that pretty much nobody can wish away global threats anymore. Maybe you and I can "break our ten foot poles and walk away" but the United States as a whole simply cannot and expect to exist much longer.

The truth the anti-war folks need to face up to is there's far worse things that can happen than to be forced into a war that we know is eventually unavoidable. Far worse things.

Thank God almighty the one's that are calling the shots for us are doing what needs to be done and not what we wish could be done because we just wish the world was a more peaceful place, but it's not. The difference between "need" and "want" is nearly the same distance as "right" and "wrong."

Oh, and I don't doubt that Bush looks mamby-pamby to Iraq and Korea. Who cares? They better be more careful how they paint a picture of the one that will eventually clean all their clocks concidering how they'll make themselves look in the end. No matter. This isn't a war of "how we look". The meaning will become clear to them soon enough though.