> gMoney wrote: > is basically what we did. "Hey, let's go fight them over there......over > where? Hell I don't know...how about Iraq?" >
Which is certainly what Bush did. He used Iraq as ground zero for his Napoleonic fantasy; which, just as with Napoleon, has failed. Further the concept of "fight 'em over there" assumes that AQ just wants to kill Americans. Reasonable people can disagree, but I don't think that's the case. IMO, that philosophy fails because: (1.) AQ attacked America not necessarily to kill people, but to show that America is vulnerable and can be hit. i.e., it was a recruiting & propaganda tool primarily and an impact tool secondarily. (2.) Propaganda was needed because America *was* perceived as invincible, especially following the fall of the USSR and the Gulf War. Therefore by keeping sacrificial soldiers in the field for AQ (and others) to attack we are further erasing the concept of our super power status. (3.) You don't win wars by fighting on your enemy's timeline and reacting to his plan - you win by hitting the enemy where they're weakest when they least expect it. The fact that it's taken us 5 years to defeat a force that we ourselves allowed to come into the country, i.e. clean up our own mess, is not a good harbinger. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;192386516;25150098;k Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:260968 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
