The Anger Of The Left

[aharris]

Mike and Chopper

I think that the soldiers are doing the best job they can. I appreciate that they are willing to do the hard stuff for me. If the troops were pulled out tomorrow, God knows what would happen. I'm sure there would be chaos in Iraq.

Chopper, you are right. The 3000 are part of the equation too. I apologise for not including that number.

But put youself in the average Iraqi's place. You have an occupying foreign force in your country that has been ineffective in reducing the violence (more than 26,000 civilian deaths in the past year) or significantly improving my way of life. I'm sure I would be saying thanks very much but please leave.

Mike, you are making the assumption that the lack of incident on US soil is due to the occupation of Iraq. Perhaps it is due to the increased security at borders, or the increased focus by police forces on discovering "terrorist" cells in other countries. I'm hard pressed to see how having troops remain in Iraq maintains security back home.

Perhaps there have been no new attacks because the "terrorists" are satisfied with the effect they have had on the West. Higher prices, increased restrictions on travel, increased government powers, more isolationist policies.

You can't believe that "questioning policy" automatically equates with an attack on the brave men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Andrew

[Sizzler]

I call myself a liberal.

I can take the abuse.

In my opinion, it is the people from the right who lash out. They lash out, put down and blame others for actions they supported at one time, made by people they believed in at one time.

It is all about spin. They spin their anger back upon the people who can most honestly say "I told you so", and spew vitrolic hatred at anyone who disagrees with them. They are a pack of men happiest behind the scenes, away from real danger, who can pound the keyboards but not a real person.

I am really tired of the abuse being heaped upon me as a representative of, if not the truly out-there left, at least the large population of us who are slightly to moderately left of center.

[chopper]

Originally Posted by aharris

Chopper

But put youself in the average Iraqi's place. You have an occupying foreign force in your country that has been ineffective in reducing the violence (more than 26,000 civilian deaths in the past year) or significantly improving my way of life. I'm sure I would be saying thanks very much but please leave.

Mike, you are making the assumption that the lack of incident on US soil is due to the occupation of Iraq. Perhaps it is due to the increased security at borders, or the increased focus by police forces on discovering "terrorist" cells in other countries. I'm hard pressed to see how having troops remain in Iraq maintains security back home.

Perhaps there have been no new attacks because the "terrorists" are satisfied with the effect they have had on the West. Higher prices, increased restrictions on travel, increased government powers, more isolationist policies.

You can't believe that "questioning policy" automatically equates with an attack on the brave men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Andrew

First, I think that YOU are the one ignoring the "average Iraqi's place". That place included murder, kidnapping, torture, confiscation of private property, denial of basic civil rights by the Baathists before Hussein's deposal. It now includes murder, kidnapping, torture, confiscation of private property and denial of basic civil rights by al-Qaeda and Sunni terrorists and death squads. Of the "26,000 civilian deaths" of the past year, how many were due to Muslim terrorists versus how many were due to coalition action? Even the rabidly anti-American BBC lists the number as “hundreds” out of your estimate of 26,000 and reluctantly admits that most of those were killed trying to run coalition-manned checkpoints. A few were killed in collateral damage from coalition attacks; this is certainly regrettable but is unfortunately a part of warfare, especially when the enemy hides in hospitals, schools and mosques. The rest were killed by the terrorists. They were killed because the Muslim fanatics are being supplied with arms and replacements by the network of terrorist organizations around the world. I think the "average" Iraqi citizen is delighted to have us there. It's the murdering scumbags that you and rest of the Pelosi-Reid-Obama-Kennedy surrender crowd seem to support who want us out.

Second, if you think for a New York second that the Muslim fanatics are "satisfied" with the damage caused to date, you're smoking some really expensive stuff.

Third, there has been essentially no "increase security at the borders", which is why the conservatives are livid about the lack of enforcement and are attempting to get something done about it. It's the politicians pandering to the Mexican lobby (Democrats and Republicans alike) who are stopping any meaningful border security improvement. Incidentally, there is just as much concern about the ones coming in over the Canadian border as the ones coming in from the south.

Lastly, as has been said before on numerous occasions, the time for questioning the overall policy of attacking the terrorists is past. The appropriate time for that was BEFORE all of the Democrats (except Senator B. Hussein Obama, of course) signed on to the war effort by voting to support the President’s use of force. Now that we're into it, that discussion is not only moot but provides aid to the enemy in time of war. That's the definition of treason and THAT'S why conservatives believe that it "automatically equates with an attack on the brave men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan." The whole concept of support-the-troops-but-oppose-the-war is a crock of crap. You can't support the troops while proposing to hand the enemy the means to defeat those same troops. Telling the terrorists that we're pulling out in X-months will just make them hunker down and wait and in the end emboldens them to continue and increase their mayhem. When they come out after the coalition departs, the blood-bath will make the present situation look like kindergarden. Remember Pol Pot and the Killing Fields? 1.7 million deaths (20% of Cambodia's population) killed in 4 years when the US pulled out of Southeast Asia? I can't say for certain, but I doubt those 1.7 million folks would agree that things turned out the same regardless of who won the war. Does it have to happen here before you folks learn? Gees Louise, wake up and smell the coffee.

[Wayne Maybury]

Originally Posted by chopper

Incidentally, there is just as much concern about the ones coming in over the Canadian border as the ones coming in from the south.

I maybe mistaken but except for that one guy caught trying to get into the US to blow up something on New Years Eve several years ago, there has never been an incident of terrorists entering the US from Canada. Even the one that was caught had crossed back and forth across the Canada / US border several times before being nabbed and I believe that he had flown in and out of LAX with no problem.

I am not saying that there are no terrorists in Canada planning on doing as much damage as they can. I am saying that reports about Canada being a prime entry to the US for terrorists has never been proven. Canada and the US are both democracies and both countries have to deal with problems like individual rights and freedom to move around which make tracking and arresting terrorists quite difficult. Anti terrorists officiers in Canada and the US work in close cooperation with each other.

Closing the Canada / US border would be an economic and financial disaster for both countries. We just happen to be the biggest 2 way trading partners in the world with well over $1B of trade every day. By the way, Canada also happens to be the number 1 supplier of oil to the US.

Getting back to the original topic, people that are too far to the left or too far to the right make little or no attempt to listen to the opinions of others. They tend to think that they are always right and everyone that doesn't agree with them, is wrong.

Wayne