PDA

View Full Version : The threats to this country are real


Whizzer
06-05-2004, 04:39 PM
Okay, from here there is the admission I did not feel we should have invaded Iraq with no change on this point and that time is past.

That being said, I am keeping an open mind and feel the threat to the safety and security of the United States Of America is not something everybody who is loyal to this country, can take for granted. We can no longer place our heads in the sand and make believe the threat of terrorism will go away. IT WON'T !!!!!

The Taliban and the fundamentalists who hate this country are real and unforgiving. They are smart. They are playing the media and the way the rest of the world looks at us.

This country is in a danger never before seen. We are under attack not only from outside forces, but from people who rally behind politicians and others preaching there are injustices and other ways to solve these threats. Politicians will say what the public want to hear so they can be re-elected and the people will feel good, for awhile.
The question is, what other way might have worked??
We didn't attack Afghanistan first. Nor did we provoke bombings of the USS Cole, U.S. embassies, Marine barracks, night clubs, innocent civilians not believing in Taliban teachings, the attack of the Olympics in Munich, etc.
ANd this is just for starters. Thes attacks by the Muslim fundamentalists have been taking place almost since the beginning of religion.

Because these attacks and deaths took place over extended periods of time lulled most into a false sense of security and took away the thought of eminent dangers.

As a nation, we are aiding the Taliban by self-destructing from within.
If people do not wake up to the dangers facing us today, this could be the end of the greatest nation in the world. Ever.
THIS THREAT AND DANGER WILL NOT GO AWAY BY ITSELF!!!!
IT MUST BE DEFEATED BY EVERYONE .

Are you scared yet ???
If not, you damn well should be. Consider how many freedoms we enjoy here. We have Muslim and Islamic Mosques here, with Synagogues, Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox Churches in the same neighborhoods. To the liberals or those who feel their rights have been violated during this time of war, keep thinking how unjust this nation is.
While doing so, also try to picture the entire scene all over again with one mosque, one religion, one newpaper, one school brainwashing your children with lessons you do not believe in with one religious rooted government ruling the entire world and you have no choices other than the ones they offer.

Leaving Iraq now is not something this nation can do. The United States, right or wrong, must finish what it started to do. How well the new Iraqui govenment performs will tell us whether the job was done properly.

Neither George Bush or John Kerry are overpowering role models of leadership. They both have warts, but it seems Bush plans to continue the course understanding the threat while Kerry plans to............do what ???? Bring everybody home ?? End the war ?? Apologize on bended knee ?? And if so, to whom ?? To the same SOB's that planned and executed the attacks of September 11?? What safety measures does Kerry intend to utilize in the war against terrorism ??

A part of the terrorism is right here with people who benefit every day from past wars to preserve our freedoms, yet are voicing their concern for reasons less important than the safety and security of this nation.

Are they the same ones who will run when the going gets tough. But run where ?? They could run to Canada and abandon the United States, and watch the U.S. fall. Then the Taliban or terrorists will take over Canada. After the fundamentalists take over Canada, the liberals can try to run to Mexico. By that really isn't an option, because by that time, with the U.S. and Canada fallen, Mexico is only a matter of time.

None of us want to think this nation is at risk, but it is.
It becomes at greater risk when people do not support the president, whether you like him or not. The option is support him now and throw the bum out of office after the war is over. In the mean time, support the president, support the troops, support the foundations of this nation, support its principles, even if it means going against the principals you strongly believe in to aid the battle against terrorism until things get to the point where there can be a comfort zone.

There most likely will be another terrorist attack on our shores. Be ready. Be supportive and under no circumstances should any of us "let the other guy do it".
We should all do it together.
When the dust settles, then we can go back to the whining, *****ing and complaining about the injustices in the government.
Because if we don't, there will be no more freedoms, and with no more freedoms, we will be afraid to complain.
History tells us when freedom of speech or expression are taken away, the penalty for personal expression is death. The choice is, we can die now trying to keep our freedoms it or die later trying to express them.

No apologies for this post. It is on the podium. If you want to kick butt, take your best shot. Please keep in mind, the threat of terrorism is real. We are in danger. Make personal sacrificse today so you can enjoy tomorrow. Not just for ourselves, but for our grandchildren. :salute:

Truthfully, I'm scared, not for me but for my children and grandchildren. I love this country for what it has given to me and the others who have stepped on the shores of this great nation, the United States of America. Do not let cokmplacency or the feeling of injustices either perceived or real, let this wonderful gift slip away.

End of preaching by Da Whizzer. :salute:

Mopardh9
06-05-2004, 05:48 PM
:cheers: :cheers: :cheers: Well said! :salute:

DE_Wrangler_2
06-05-2004, 05:54 PM
I can't argue with a thing in your post, Whizzer. I only have one question to ask those who are screaming so loudly about us not having any friends in this war. How can you say you "support our troops" and at the same time call for United Nations take over and for Busch's head on a platter? That kind of talk is not supportive of our troops simply because it does not support of our efforts to save our country from the greatest threat ever to come to us............ever!! You just don't put your trust in the hands of people and nations who have their own interests ahead of ours.

Mopardh9
06-05-2004, 10:42 PM
Did i miss something in Whizzers' post...i didn't see anything about the UN?

chuck
06-06-2004, 11:52 PM
good post Whizzer, some of the points you made i agree with, some i dont. First off this looming terrorist attack we have coming i think it would be better to try and stop the attack before it happens instead of concentrating on what were gonna do after it happens and how life is gonna be after it happens. Second its a KNOWN FACT Iraq and 911 are in no way way connected so the "SOB's that planned and executed the attacks of September 11" never have been in Iraq never will be in Iraq. remember our troops went to Iraq because we knew they had WMD and they were a threat to our safety. you said it in the first sentence "I did not feel we should have invaded Iraq" you know they where never a threat to America.

How could any true American not support the troops?
saying even if you dont agree with what is going on you must support the president because its wartime is crazy, if the president had made better choices most of the troops would be home with us right now. we are just giving muslims more reason to hate us with what is hapenning in Iraq right now, thats not maknig us any safer

Just like all yall I hope things get better when the new government takes over but the people of Iraq will try and over throw it first chance they get so American troops are gonna be there for a while.

Mopardh9
06-10-2004, 10:59 AM
We need to have a presence in the Middle East, without it terrorism will continue to fester. I just don't understand why most people can't see this!? Where has all the unrest come from in the last ...oh say 4000 years? The Middle East, that's where! People have been fighting in that area since before Christ, it is that "good vs evil" thing. By ignoring the root of the problem, which is religous persecution IMO, the world will continue to see terrorism in this area, which will in turn filter out into other parts of the world, like it already has, as is evidence of the violent attacks in the United States, Spain, and other parts of the world. Why is it a bad choice to leave our troops in Iraq? Why was it a bad choice to send them in the first place? Don't answer because people might die, that is just avoiding the real essence of the conflict. In order to help these people in Iraq, freedom has to come first,democracy then follows. The more freedom that is enjoyed by middle east countries the less the terrorism has a chance to grow and spread. The people of this region do not know what freedom is, they know only repression, violence, and terror. If the Middle east is allowed to continue on the track it is on, terror will only continue to grow and manifest itself into something that will not be stopped. Why not go right to the root of the problem and attack it where it lies? Instead many feel that we should just sit back and wait, is that good logic? Pull all our troops out , just let "them" take care of the issues at hand. Yeh ok ......maybe that sounds like a good idea on the surface ...save some US Troops lives, but you know what all those troops believe in what they are doing. They believe in the USA, they believe that they are helping these people, and they believe they can make a difference. It is high time that we as a country united believe that we can make difference in the world. If we don't.....well we just might wake up one morning and not have our little comfort zone we call home.

chuck
06-11-2004, 11:24 PM
America has had a presence in the middle east the past 13 years in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates and terrorism still festered, you don't have to tell me who the president was I already know.

Please remind me which terrorist attack in any part of the world originated from IRAQ cause I cant recall one. thats why American soldiers should not be in Iraq thier not nipping terrorism in the bud

the root of the problem is Isreal and Palistine yes they have been fighting for god knows how long and probaly wont stop till there is no more enemy left to kill. You have one side with all the latest weapons and stuff like apache helicopters to shoot missiles at old men in a wheelchairs while the other side is using rocks and people dumb enough to blow thier self up. Guess which side gets thier weapons from America? Thats why the American government is hated by muslims all over earth

Using hindsight with all we have seen up to this point in Iraq would you say Bush sent our mothers,fathers,sons daughters,brothers and sisters to Iraq to (A)give theese people freedom and democracy that they dont want,B to unseat a tyrant with WMD that was a threat to America, or © simply steal three trillion dollars in crude oil my answer is C

Whizzer
06-12-2004, 01:34 PM
There is a word that ably describes a disappearing trend in this nation.
The word is respect and a battle is being waged in this country by some who bash this nation in a way lacking of respect.

Where has respect gone ?? Why is it disappearing ??
Why do people speak from duplicate identities to bolster their point of view ?? Have they so little respect for their own opinions they must try to bolster them while hiding when they are already in hiding??
Already in hiding since nearly everyone on this or any forum uses a false identity.

If so, it is not a lack of respect for their opinion but a lack of respect to themselves.
Has their self-esteem been reduced to the point where a person feels so insecure of themselves and their opinions they must post behind duplicitous identities, giving away self- respect in the process??

The strength of this nation lay with the youth, for they are the future leaders and those with growing hopes and dreams of success in their ensuing years by becoming lawyers, business people, doctors, police officers or reporters. In any profession, people who hide behind different identities are lying, not just to you and me but to themselves.

Knowing some people resort to duplicitous identities, how can any topic of discussion be taken seriously, whether it be about a NASCAR driver, the Presidency of the United States or a discussion on Iraq ??

Just a little speculation for readers to ponder.

Mopardh9
06-12-2004, 06:54 PM
LOL yeh i knew who it was too. Hey Chucky if you believe that Bush is trying to steal oil then you need to get you head out of you butt and wake up! I'm not going to be nice here in this post...people like you really need to exit the country if you feel it is being run so poorly. I supose you would rather have the poor excuse for a candidate John Kerry running this country? As for your choices, i would select both A and B. Makes me sick to here people actually talking like this. This only divides this country...the radical extreme leftist agenda...pure BS!! :bslfag:

chuck
06-12-2004, 11:19 PM
I've always showed respect to every person I meet in real life and on the internet untill they disrespected me at that point I would just ignore them. whizzer I welcome you to prove I am a alias of any other poster on this site untill then please stay on the subject.

If it is the job of America to spread freedom and democracy around the planet I can name ten countrys that would welcome america with open arms and I'm sure you could name ten more countrys that would also love for America to come and help them, but they are not sitting on three trillion dollars in oil.

I could then name four or five countrys that have tested or said they have nuclear weapons in the past five years. sending troops to disarm them would truely be a suicide mission so lets be glad disarming threats to America is not the agenda.

I'm still waiting for someone to the answer the question of which terrorist attack in any part of the world originated from Iraq? and yes I'm trying to be nice unlike some people, you see at a young age I was taught treat others the way you want to be treated, its a good rule to live life by

DE_Wrangler_2
06-12-2004, 11:44 PM
I believe the Iraq war was preemptive in nature. There was not, and it was never said that there was, any terrorists directly involved in 9-11 originating from Iraq. The war was carried out because of Iraq's willingness to use WMD's and Saddam's logistical and financial support of terrorism in general.........also every intelligence source in the world was telling us that he did, in fact, have WMD's. With those as facts (and, at the time, they were facts) there was no way a responsible leader of a targeted country could wait until something happened.........that would be suicide. It's really time for folks that just hate Bush to wake up and smell the horse manure being spread by enemies of this country. Keep your head in the sand, Chuck, and someone is going to come along and shoot your ass off while you're not looking.

Whizzer
06-13-2004, 02:35 PM
Not every intelligence source in the world was telling us Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. The United Nations team could not and Hans Blix entire team cast serious doubts of existing WMD's in Iraq and felt if there were any WMD's they had been hidden in Syria. A possibility that still exists.

The basic "intelligence" on Iraq having WMD's came from one unreliable source, a disgruntled former loyalist to Saddam. There was no way to prove or disprove the accuracy of his information and subsequent "intelligence" was sketchy at best.

President Bush invaded Iraq on the premise Iraq had WMD's, and to rid the country of Saddam Hussein, believing the world would be a better place. There is little question President Bush did what he truly felt was the right thing to do at the time for the future of this nation and the future of Iraq by helping them become a nation of democracy rather than a nation led by religious fundamentalists.

The Iraquis with foresight feel the United States is doing the right thing.
The Iraquis who are uneducated and impatient fail to see what the future might hold and will succumb to the terrorists, facing the same fate as Afghanistan did under the Taliban.

If the entire situation falls into place as hoped by President Bush, it will not be by design but circumstance.

Whizzer
06-13-2004, 02:58 PM
Intended to place one additional thought. Why would the invasion against Iraq be considered a "pre-emptive" strike?? That reasoning came about after the fact.
The United States had made a successful and dominant retaliatory strike against Afghanistan and this nation had good, solid, world-supported reason to invade that country.

Totally different than the supposition expressed prior to or reasons offered post-invasion of Iraq.

DE_Wrangler_2
06-13-2004, 04:17 PM
Originally posted by Whizzer@Jun 13 2004, 07:58 AM
Intended to place one additional thought. Why would the invasion against Iraq be considered a "pre-emptive" strike?? That reasoning came about after the fact.
The United States had made a successful and dominant retaliatory strike against Afghanistan and this nation had good, solid, world-supported reason to invade that country.

Totally different than the supposition expressed prior to or reasons offered post-invasion of Iraq.
You are correct about the U.N. and Hans Blix not supporting the "intelligence" about Hussein's WMD's........my bad. But most every other intelligence agency in the world supported what we "knew". I'm not arguing that the "intelligence" was faulty........obviously it was. Bush and his administration had to go with the "best guess" at the moment.........intelligence is not an exact science (especially when it comes to the Middle East). That part was a mistake. But, if you are going to err, then "you'd be better off to err on the side of caution" (a pretty well known statement).

However I don't believe you are correct on the timing of "preemption".

June, 2002 from PBS's Frontline (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/iraq/etc/cron.html). A news source not particularly friendly to the Bush Administration.

In a graduation speech at West Point, Bush cites the realities of a new post-Cold War era and outlines a major shift in national security strategy -- from containment to preemption.

"Our security will require all Americans to be forward-looking and resolute, to be ready for preemptive action when necessary to defend our liberty and to defend our lives."



It's a pretty long but educational read.

Mopardh9
06-14-2004, 12:12 AM
And what is wrong with striking back? We were struck first, were we not? This what i don't understand,the US takes a hard line against terrorism and all of a sudden we are the bad guys. Oh yeh WMDs were found in Iraq, twice in fact in the last 2 months. SH had them, moved them,and the residual evidence is there that WMDs were in fact in IRAQ. Think about the time factor....Sadaam had plenty of time to move them out of the country. Also if you listened to the Presidents' speech at the Air Force Graduation he clearly stated that we must lead the fight for freedom around the world, that we must strike out against the terrorism and terrorists that threaten our country. I see nothing wrong with that at all, after all if we sit by and do nothing like Clinton did, we will just be setting ourselves up for another 911.

Whizzer
06-14-2004, 01:47 PM
This nation had already retaliated against Afghanistan and as a result was rated highly by other world leaders. Once the U.S. took the role of aggressor of Iraq based on piddly information of WMD's, we became, to many, the bad guy.

The finding of residual evidence was based on trace amounts of WMD's found in the location and was determined to have resulted from WMD's Iraq destroyed ten years ago. Trailers and other items offered as evidence to support the claim of WMD, when found, were determined to have residual amounts of chemicals that could have been used in acceptable applications and the production equipment contained was not of the type to manufacture chemical WMD.

To re-establish our credibility as a world power, we need to find undisputable and non-controversial solid proof to wave under the noses of the ones who stood back while the U.S. and Great Britain invaded Iraq, before being exonerated in the eyes of the world or other doubting Thomases.

As far as I know, to date, nothing of this nature exists.

Mopardh9
06-14-2004, 08:08 PM
Whizz listen to Hannity , they have found evidence of WMDs again today, but as usual the mainstream media won't talk about it. What i meant to say in the previous post about the residual evidence......it proved they were there bottom line. Also in the last 2 months Sarin gas was found in Iraq and a roadside bomb was partially dentonated that contained a WMD. This was in and out of the news so quickly that most people didn't hear about it. I get this information from listening to Hannity, Rush, and Savage. Also websites like: www.worldnetdaily have published these articles. The mainstream media being, ABC, CNN,CBS,NBC, and even PBS all want a liberal in office, their reporting is so biased it makes me sick. I won't even watch CBS anymore due to their negative stance on our President. I know they have the right to express their opinions, but when you trash your president like they have it is going over the line.