• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

The War

Status
Not open for further replies.

TScott

Curmudgeon
Apr 19, 2002
3,353
161
78
Arizona
Visit site
✟26,974.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Politics
US-Democrat
On December 7, 1941 the US fleet was attacked at an island outpost in the Pacific. The attack sank several of our ships and killed over 2,000 of our people. The US responded by declaring total war on the attackers. The government and the people, regardless of politics became galvanized with the sole purpose of pursuing a war that would only end when those that dared to attack us were utterly defeated. Every aspect of our every day lives was focused on that end. Three and a half years later, at the cost of hundreds of thousands of our soldiers, sailors and airmen, and an industrial effort that the world had never seen, our enemy was subdued, never to attack us again.

On September 11, 2001, one of our greatest cities was attacked. Several of tallest building fell, killing over 3,000 of our citizens. How did we respond this time? Our people were certainly galvanized in our resolve to go after our attackers.

We knew exactly where they were, and one of our Los Angeles class attack submarines lay in the Gulf of Oman waiting for orders to attack the enemy bases with her cruise missiles. She waited for nearly 30 days.

The men and women in our military could hardly wait for their chance to avenge the attack on 9/11. Later that winter we invaded Afghanistan and when we had our enemy cornered in the mountains of Tora Bora, our soldiers were chomping at the bit, ready to go in for the final kill. They knew it wasn't going to be easy, but they were utterly confident in the outcome. Why shouldn't they be-they were the best trained, best equipped fighting force the world had ever seen. They waited while the leadership of the country decided to arm the peasant militias of the areas, and have them do the dirty work. They simply took the hum-vees, guns and rockets home, while the enemy escaped into Pakistan and Iran. Then the military re-focuses to the sideshow in Iraq. A country that had no involvement in the attacks on our country. The head of the anti-terrorism unit of the NSA commented that the attack on Iraq after 9/11 would have been comparable to an attack on Mexico after Pearl Harbor.

We were told that one of the root causes of the attack was that our internal security agencies did not communicate well. It was found that the attackers and their intentions had been discovered by branches of the agencies, but that the information was lost because there was no system in place to share and collate the information so that the appropriate agencies could be alerted to the danger. That was over four years ago, folks, and guess what? After over a billion dollars spent on new, FAILED systems, we are no closer today to solving that problem than we were on 9/10/2001.

This is a National disgrace, and all Americans should be outraged over it, regardless of your party affiliation. Instead of appologizing for these failures we should be demanding remedies, not just lip service, but actual fixes-if the agencies can't handle it then contract it out.

The department of Homeland Security has turned out to be an expensive joke, as evidenced by the disaster in New Orleans. But it is really no joke, is it? Right after the attack on 9/11 the President told us that this was an attack on freedom, then he proceeded to dismantle our liberties with the so-called Patriot Act, practically acknowledging victory to our enemy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: k

ballfan

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2005
2,697
12
78
NC
✟25,568.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The government and the people, regardless of politics became galvanized with the sole purpose of pursuing a war that would only end when those that dared to attack us were utterly defeated. Every aspect of our every day lives was focused on that end.



There's the key. We have today a political element in this country that opposes that strategy. We don't pull together and haven't since day one.
 
Upvote 0

Lucent

For the Birds
Mar 3, 2004
430
10
46
Texas
✟622.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
I'll give you the intelligence point. They didn't have the resources to get the info that we needed, nor were they organized properly. It still needs work.

Afghanistan should have been toasted by October, so I'll agree with you on the delays. Unfortunately, the delay was required politically to get all the support behind us that we wanted.

Iraq is a strange animal. The original reasons for the war in Iraq have sort of shifted to something else. However, having spent some time there, I wholeheartedly believe that it is a good thing that we went, and that we will be there until the job is done.

These wackos that are coming out of the woodwork are making themselves easy targets for our forces. These are not only the bad guys that were in country at the start of operations, but a whole lot of nut jobs from neighboring countries, too.
 
Upvote 0

CCGirl

Resident Commie
Sep 21, 2005
9,271
563
Canada
✟42,370.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
ballfan said:
[/font]


There's the key. We have today a political element in this country that opposes that strategy. We don't pull together and haven't since day one.

This is because they KNOW the US and UK are in Iraq for illegitimate reasons :help: , unlike Japan.
 
Upvote 0

CCGirl

Resident Commie
Sep 21, 2005
9,271
563
Canada
✟42,370.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
Lucent said:
These wackos that are coming out of the woodwork are making themselves easy targets for our forces. These are not only the bad guys that were in country at the start of operations, but a whole lot of nut jobs from neighboring countries, too.

Tell me you wouldn't join a resistance group if the US was occupied by foreign troops.
 
Upvote 0

ballfan

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2005
2,697
12
78
NC
✟25,568.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
CCGirl said:
This is because they KNOW the US and UK are in Iraq for illegitimate reasons :help: , unlike Japan.


They might think they know but actually they're as much in the dark as Che was.

Anyway its like I said. There is political opposition and we haven't pulled together. Thats why it takes longer than it should.


Is bringing down a brutal killer illegitimate? Is giving a people freedom illegitimate? What would Che think?
 
Upvote 0

AirPo

with a Touch of Grey
Oct 31, 2003
26,363
7,214
62
✟184,357.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
ballfan said:
[/font]


There's the key. We have today a political element in this country that opposes that strategy. We don't pull together and haven't since day one.
That's why I think that Bush should go down in history as The Great Divider
 
Upvote 0

ballfan

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2005
2,697
12
78
NC
✟25,568.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
AirPo said:
That's why I think that Bush should go down in history as The Great Divider


We were attacked. Its not Bush in opposition to the total defeat of our enemies. Its the liberals that oppose the strategy we used in WW2. They don't want to pull together towards total victory. Whats worse its for purely political reasons.
 
Upvote 0
Aug 29, 2005
34,371
11,479
✟214,435.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
AirPo said:
That's why I think that Bush should go down in history as The Great Divider
Absolutely!

How do we remember our presidents?

I did not have sexual relations with that woman...

Read my lips, no new taxes

I'm not a crook

Ask not what your country can do for you...

We should live our lives as though Christ were coming this afternoon

I am a uniter, not a divider
 
Upvote 0
Aug 29, 2005
34,371
11,479
✟214,435.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
ballfan said:
We were attacked. Its not Bush in opposition to the total defeat of our enemies. Its the liberals that oppose the strategy we used in WW2. They don't want to pull together towards total victory. Whats worse its for purely political reasons.
Look around....it isn't 1942 anymore

Bush is dividing everything. Dont blame liberals, Bush has the power.
 
Upvote 0

ballfan

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2005
2,697
12
78
NC
✟25,568.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
JustOneWay said:
Look around....it isn't 1942 anymore

Bush is dividing everything. Dont blame liberals, Bush has the power.


Did you read the OP?

First line.

"On December 7, 1941 the US fleet was attacked at an island outpost in the Pacific."


As he went on to say, we pulled together to defeat our foes. Thats not the case now. Liberals pull in some other direction. A political one trying for political gain.

Bush is the President. Perhaps liberals should consider uniting and supporting him. It worked in WW2. It would probably work again.
 
Upvote 0

Maynard Keenan

Well-Known Member
Aug 21, 2004
8,470
789
39
Louisville, KY
✟35,085.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
ballfan said:
We were attacked. Its not Bush in opposition to the total defeat of our enemies. Its the liberals that oppose the strategy we used in WW2. They don't want to pull together towards total victory. Whats worse its for purely political reasons.

"Terrorism" isn't a tangible enemy like "Japan." Anyway, we were attacked by Al-Quida, then we went to war with Saddam Hussein. Are we supposed to pull together for "total defeat" of everyone we don't like? Or everyone we are told is a threat? Everyone who MIGHT be a threat? How many more nations must we invade before "terrorism" is totally defeated? It was obvious that the nation of Japan was coming at us to destroy us. To protect ourselves, we destroyed them. Their ally Germany was helping them in their attempt to basically dominate the globe. Therefore it was obvious that Germany was an immediate threat to us (not to mention all of our allies.) Iraq, however, was not an obvious imminant threat. We don't have warplanes bombing our bases. We don't have ships approaching our shores. We don't have enemy armies on the march. We have small groups of people worldwide that are essentially a mutated mafia more than an army. Wars and nation takeovers are not an obvious response and not obviously necessary. The Taliban actively supported the attcks on us, so we near-unanimously went in and destroyed them.
 
Upvote 0

OhhJim

Often wrong, but never in doubt
Aug 19, 2004
4,483
287
68
Walnut Creek, CA
✟6,051.00
Faith
Non-Denom
TScott said:
That was over four years ago, folks, and guess what? After over a billion dollars spent on new, FAILED systems, we are no closer today to solving that problem than we were on 9/10/2001.

Unless we have a terrorist attack tomorrow, you are wrong. I submit that we ARE closer to solving the problem, as evidenced by the fact that there have been no successful attacks on American soil.

Althought I don't support the war, you can't deny that there have been no attacks in America since we started invading Middle East countries. Nothing succeeds like success.
 
Upvote 0

TScott

Curmudgeon
Apr 19, 2002
3,353
161
78
Arizona
Visit site
✟26,974.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Politics
US-Democrat
ballfan said:
Bush is the President. Perhaps liberals should consider uniting and supporting him. It worked in WW2. It would probably work again.
No. Immediately after the attacks there was complete unity. Virtually unanamous support in both houses of congress to go after the perpetrators. Virtually unanamous support among the people. We were truly united and the president had a tremendous opportunity at that time. The opportunity was squandered, and there is no other way that you can look at it. In 1942 we had leadership that was able to completely galvanize the population behind the war effort.

But, unfortunately that is all water under the bridge and as outraged as we may become over it, we can't change a thing about it. The opportunity is passed now, and because of the diversion in Iraq, the president cannot get the kind of universal support he got right after the attacks. What can be done though, is to fix the problem with our national security agencies. In 3 1/2 years after Pearl Harbor the US built a gigantic war machine and utterly defeated the nation that attacked us and now, 4 years after 9-11 we can't even fix a computer glitch! All our government has done is add more bureaucracy to compound the problem even more. The reasons we were blind-sided in 2001 are still there. They have not been fixed and in some ways have been exacerbated.

When you hear that 6 months after the attack the INS approves a visa extension for Mohammad Atta, an event that evidently made the President choke on his coffee when he read about it, you know that there are real problems.
 
Upvote 0

TScott

Curmudgeon
Apr 19, 2002
3,353
161
78
Arizona
Visit site
✟26,974.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Politics
US-Democrat
OhhJim said:
Unless we have a terrorist attack tomorrow, you are wrong. I submit that we ARE closer to solving the problem, as evidenced by the fact that there have been no successful attacks on American soil.

Althought I don't support the war, you can't deny that there have been no attacks in America since we started invading Middle East countries. Nothing succeeds like success.
That is just the complacency that the enemy is looking for. How much time lapsed between the WTC truck bomb and the 9/11 attack? Eight years, right? Why do you think these people are in a hurry? Their mindset is that there is no hurry. Let everyone feel good and safe like OhhJim, then hit them again.
 
Upvote 0

Alarum

Well-Known Member
Nov 5, 2004
4,833
344
✟6,792.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Politics
US-Democrat
ballfan said:
Did you read the OP?

First line.

"On December 7, 1941 the US fleet was attacked at an island outpost in the Pacific."


As he went on to say, we pulled together to defeat our foes. Thats not the case now. Liberals pull in some other direction. A political one trying for political gain.

Bush is the President. Perhaps liberals should consider uniting and supporting him. It worked in WW2. It would probably work again.
Of course FDR might have run into some serious opposition if he decided to invade Mexico. Afghanistan had everyone's support. It was the brain-damaged decision to invade Iraq that lost it.
 
Upvote 0

12volt_man

Well-Known Member
Jan 8, 2004
7,339
260
✟9,150.00
Faith
Christian
CCGirl said:
Tell me you wouldn't join a resistance group if the US was occupied by foreign troops.
Would these foreign troops be here to remove a brutal dictator who killed and tortured members of my community? Would they be rebuilding our infrastructure and providing clean water for us? Would they be building schools for our children, even the little girls? Would they have made it possible for us to vote freely for the first time in generations? Would they be training our police and military to keep us safe while they are formulating a plan to leave, so that we wouldn't be unprotected in their absence?

If so, I would probably be like most Iraqis and welcome them.
 
Upvote 0

12volt_man

Well-Known Member
Jan 8, 2004
7,339
260
✟9,150.00
Faith
Christian
Alarum said:
Of course FDR might have run into some serious opposition if he decided to invade Mexico. Afghanistan had everyone's support. [Childish insults omitted]

Why do you believe that we invaded Holland in WWII? They didn't do anything to us. Were we right or wrong to do this?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.