Though depressing, I guess it’s good to know that conservatives are now too stupid to distinguish between being an antecedent cause of an event and being morally at fault for it…….

You are an idiot.

Rudy, kick his ass. What a dumbass.

Their presence there over the last 12 years has been a source of enormous difficulty for a friendly government. It’s been a huge recruiting device for al Qaeda.

Paul Wolfowitz agrees with me!

[Wolfowitz to Vanity Fair in 2003]:

“There are a lot of things that are different now [that the U.S. occupies Iraq], and one that has gone by almost unnoticed – but it’s huge – is that … we can now remove almost all of our forces from Saudi Arabia. Their presence there over the last 12 years has been a source of enormous difficulty for a friendly government. It’s been a huge recruiting device for al Qaeda.

“In fact if you look at bin Laden, one of his principle grievances was the presence of so-called crusader forces on the holy land, Mecca and Medina. I think just lifting that burden from the Saudis is itself going to open the door to other positive things.

“I don’t want to speak in messianic terms. It’s not going to change things overnight, but it’s a huge improvement.”

DannoJyd wrote:
gmcjetpilot, You just submitted so many straw man arguments and inaccuracies that I could write a book in refuting these, but I’ll keep this short.

Islamic extremists have given America problems since Jefferson was President, Ron Paul only succeeded in getting conservative political activists energized, and those democrats who actually believe there are terrorists wanting to kill Americans offer NOTHING on dealing with the WOT except for the surrender option.

Your effort was wasted. Maybe you could sell that in France?

I love it when people write good replies. Yes I was being a little ironic, but the fact is there is not a good reason that we where attacked. Its evil. As humans we want a reason to make sense of the senseless. Who cares what they say or any politician says, especially presidential candidates. The are all big bags of wind, all of the, Dems included. Blaaa blaaa blaaaa. I don’t know Ron Paul but I am sure he is an idiot, but at least he reads. Most of the other stuff is sound bites and rhetoric.

However surrender is a stupid word for you and the GOP to use. You sir are the traitor and embolden the terrorist. What are we surrendering? Iraq? It does not belong to us. Are we being forced out? No we WON, we did everything we set out to do and more. VICTORY MY FRIEND!! It is the Iraq people that don’t want to stand up. We have reached diminishing returns. Mission accomplished. A strategic re-deployment is NOT surrendering. We are not giving up. We are not pulling out of the region. This stupid sound bite BS in this case really is as bad as RON PAUL or Reed saying we LOST. You need to shut you all with the surrendering thing. That is just plan retarded. That is what Hannity says on Fox. Or the “slow bleed”. Hey that is what we are doing. Lets save the 9 billion a month and 100 soldiers for better things. Al Qaeda is not all powerful and we are in the right and have the most power in the world. We will win. Stop being a chicken little, little girl. We are going to win, just not all in Iraq.

Top 5 Reasons Why I dont like Ron Paul:

5. Hates The Government That He is Part of
4. Thinks We Can Rationally Deal With Terrorists
3. Blames America First
2. Isolationist
1. Truther

I am currently at -35 diggs and dropping.

Islamic extremists have given America problems since Jefferson was President, Ron Paul only succeeded in getting conservative political activists energized, and those democrats who actually believe there are terrorists wanting to kill Americans offer NOTHING on dealing with the WOT except for the surrender option.

Your effort was wasted. Maybe you could sell that in France?

Oh Rudy! You are going to try to ride the 9/11 coat-tail all the way baby! Good luck with that. America is not buying. (Did you know Rudy did nothing in his 8 years as NY mayor to fix all the known problems from the WTC bombing in 1993, like no common radio communications or joint agency and department drills, coordination for high rise fires. Their plan was 30 years old. He also ignored advice to put the NY command and control center in the WTC. Doha! Real winner, not to mention 6 marriages between him and wife #3 and Bernard Kerk, cop and mob graft taker who Rudy recommended to Bush for homeland security chief. Nice, if he wins you can bet he will have great nominees and appoints not based on competence by politics like Bush: Dick “last throes” Cheney, won’t last 6 months Rumsfeld, I forgot (70 times) Gonzalez, bank-head with no banking experience Wolfowitz, Great Job Katrina Brownie-FEMA, John (I hate the UN) Bolton……. (the list is long).

Also Rudy has a lisp that drive me crazy and gosh he is ugly. He sounds a little retarded. Can you imagine Rudy saying the state of the union, like Elmer Fudd saying the Gettysburg address. I love Rudy trying to explain and all the stuttering. He’s a real confidence builder. Plus his cross dressing, gay loving, gun hating will be a real winner with the right wing wacko’s.

Rudy was almost giddy with joy he got to talk about terror and not abortion to Hannity. So that is all it takes to win the Republican nomination is be in denial, say a few obvious things like they hate us, with no understanding of the reality of the Arab world, while spewing nationalistic BS. Wow you are easily pleased. He should have slammed his fist down and said to Paul, you sir are no patriot, you are a coward and a Nazi appetizer. That always gets the republican base riled up, invoking the N word. No Nazi you Macaca, but the other one works too for republicans. Hire Imus! Our favorte racist.

The theory they attacked the USA because of jealously of our “Freedoms” or religion and woman (as Rudy said) is BS.

I get the Ron Pauls point, Don’t go into war so carelessly. Hummmm sounds like good advice. Ron Paul is also right about WHY they attacked us.

The reason Osoma Bin Ladin gave was the USA set-foot onto their precious land with military force in Desert Storm, EVEN THOUGH WE ARE THE GOOD GUYS HELPING Kuwait! It does not matter, Arabs did not want us there and still don’t.

There’s NO rational explanation for 9/11. The reason is very clear: radical, fanatical, Islamic fundamentalist, aka Religion!!!! OK that is what its all about.

This macho Bush in a flight suit idea of, F.U. where Team America, and where here to help whether you like it or not, is wearing thin in the world. I am just stating fact. Its the continued arrogance and denial of the US government that does what it wants unilateral and messes it up to high heaven and makes no apology that makes the world hate us! Ron Paul is right.

Fair or not (I think not but they are irrational) Bin Laden’s reason, because we went into Iraq in 1990 with the Desert storm. Western folks (infidels) in the heart of Mesopotamia, Islam, is an insult. Also the way we destroyed the Arab army was also a source of shame, that they must avenge. It does not matter to them we where helping Kuwait, the good guys, which we are.

THESE PEOPLE HOLD A GRUDGE AND WILL FIGHT YOU FOR A 1000 or 2000 YEARS. Its in their DNA to hate an enemy forever. There is no forgiveness in the Arab Muslim world, only permanent hate for non Muslims. We can try to wipe them off the face of the earth or try to protect our self with strategic attacks, intel, isolate and suppress them and most important NOT BUY THEIR MOTHER F-ing OIL, but “hanging out in Iraq” is not a winning plan.

No matter how long we stay they will never love us. Some people don’t want American Democracy; deal with it. They look at our ways and would rather live in dirt floored huts and pray three times daily to Allah. More power to them. We should NOT try to change them under some faults pretence like we care. We care about the OIL they are living over, that is it. Be real.

First WTC bomb Feb 1993, so there was BLOW back. It was never jealously for “Our Freedom”. These people don’t care about freedom, they thrive in an oppressive religious fundamental world. That’s what they love and to hate Americans and Jews. The idea we can change them by attacking, invading and occupying is the greatest blunder of all time. I confess my ignorance back in March 2003, but the administration knew and was advised. What did The Decider do? Ignore all advice like Rudy, McCain and Mitt will. The Lock Step pandering partisan politicians will do what it takes to get the JOB, The White house, for their big fat ego’s place in history.

A lack of understanding by our government and these so called Presidential Candidates is the real threat. Let the Arabs have their OIL. We need political, economic and world condemnation and pressure to put them back in the stone ages; bombs not needed if they have no food and money to wage war. The problem is Bush told the world F.U., we’re Team America damn it! Great, but that is why even moderate Arab countries like Jordan now hate us. We need to STOP people hating us not making more and helping terrorist recruitment’s.

Once Rudy got his big ZINGER in, than all the other little boys with their bright shinny faces wanted to pile on, with their hands up going ohhh, ohhh, ohhh pick me Mr.Carter, so they can get their sound bite. PATHETIC.

The GOP will use 9/11 and fear mongering to get into office, but the american people are not buying it. It worked in 2004 but Bush has worn that pony out.

The secret is out, Republicans are clueless and no better equipped to handle terrorism than the Democrats. Case in point the last 4 years of GOP control. What is scary these debate idiots bring up Jack Bowers of “24″ like he is real. They don’t live in the real world. They’re like big kids with huge gigantic egos.

The Republicans want to make the Al Qaeda sound like the most powerful enemy to ever exist to scare people, basically doing the terrorists work. The Dems may not be better but NO one can be worse then the Bush gang, but at least they sound like they are thoughtful and thinking, not just pulling some BS scenario out of “24″.

So I will just pull a few good quotes that have been floating around …

…

Richard Dawkins manages it every day.
Keljeck on May 16, 2007 at 5:11 PM

Nice one

BAA-ZING!

But in all seriousness, it is impossible.

The primary reason is because they hate our culture, the incitement to kill is because we are there

Keljeck on May 16, 2007 at 3:55 PM

Is it possible to hate something that isn’t there?

The primary reason is because they hate our culture, the incitement to kill is because we are there (which would also arrive if they were here), and the reason it happens more is because we let Radical Islam take a stronghold.

Any disagreements?

If that wasn’t your intent, and you were merely speculating about possibilities, I don’t think we have much of a disagreement.

I was just speculating about possiblities. If you read closely I never said what you thought I said. Now as to my “it leads me to believe” that is true, I do believe there are more people willing to use terrorist tactics now than there were before the Iranian Revolution. Now is this because of our presence or because Radical Islam gained prominance?

I say a mixture of both, but if Radical Islam loses prominence the attacks will go down definately.

Al Queda is not only spinning the reasons as hatred to us, but they are using the hatred against us to recruit. Now is it possible that there is an increased amount of Jihadists because of our visiblility?

Fair enough, that’s just a question. Then this:

If we moved troops back, would the numbers of terrorists potentially die down?

Also just a question. But when asked “What evidence do you have that the numbers have increased,” you replied (emphasis mine):

Attacks have been becoming more and more common. That leads me to believe there are more people willing to blow themselves up.

Did you mean “That leads me to wonder if” instead of “That leads me to believe”? Typically, when one says one has been “lead to believe” something, he is at least expressing an inclination towards believing it. If that wasn’t your intent, and you were merely speculating about possibilities, I don’t think we have much of a disagreement. It is indeed conceivable that confronting Islamists has enabled them to recruit more fighters than we’ve managed to kill. It’s also conceivable that we’ve killed more than they’ve been able to recruit. Many who advance the isolationist argument (and I don’t presume to accuse you of such), however, take the former proposition as a given, and scoff at the latter. I’ve yet to see any actual evidence that terrorist recruitment is outstripping terrorist losses (or vice versa).

Leaving behind a power vacuum and hoping for the best is irresponsible and can have grave consequences. 9/11 was one of the consequences from our hands-off approach back then, it can be argued.