The Religious Right & Their Thought Process

[Payton]

I discussed the threat of war with a Born Again & a die-hard Catholic, and am still stumped on why they feel that war w/ Iraq is the cure-all answer.

They both agreed that if the US doesn't strike first, we we will be attacked by terrorist. I then asked them if they thought there would be retaliation from our war efforts? They both became enraged with this question.. just saying we must attack first (but no answer to my question.)

Ok..Ok..fine. Bombs away.

Let's assume that the U.S. goes in, takes out Saddam & his regime. Then what?

Doesn't this just prod & fuel the jihad nutballs even more?

Who do we attack next? Iran? North Korea? Syria?

What if this big stick waving doesn't work?


Is the US going to systematically attack every country that we feel has evil in it?


There are terrorist cells in every country in the world.


Really..the question is, where does this stop?

The Born Again became flustered w/ my peppered questions and finally replied --- "It doesn't matter if nuclear bombs are dropped. I know I am going to a better place, for this is hell on earth."

I wonder if Bush (a Born Again Christian) also feels this way.

 

[Jazz]

Without getting into the religious right issue, the question 'when will it stop?' presupposes that a successful action will have no affect on other regimes attempting what Saddam is. However, since we were undertaking no such action and September 11, 2001 still happened, it is obvious that inaction is no answer. But I don't have time right now to further dive into this.

 

[PatPatriot]

Get some facts into your thinking.
Fact: we were attacked violently on 9/11.
So we are not attacking first.
Fact: Under UN resolutions irag was supposed to disarm in 1991 with in 90 days!!!!
In 1991 a cease fire was installed until he disarms..cease fire only!When people say premptive they are being disengenuis.
Irag does harbor terroist including alqueda.

 

[KMAN]

Payton - We are going to be attacked again...period! It doesn't matter if we attack Saddam or not. These nutcases don't care about anything accept killing people who don't agree with their religious beliefs.


I believe Bush said we are fighting a war against terrorism the day after 9/11. That tells me that we are going to continue this war until all of terrorism is eliminated.


KMAN

 

[Banned4Life]

"Religious Right" and "thought process" is an oxymoron.

Hell, "Religious Right" is an oxymoron!

==========
"To announce that there must be NO criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President Right or Wrong, is not only UNPATRIOTIC and SERVILE, but is Morally TREASONABLE to the American Public."

Former Republican President, Theodore Roosevelt

 

[Jazz]

Look, posting political quotes is all well and good but they are absolutely meaningless to me, from anyone, because you can always, ALWAYS find some quote by someone of influence to buttress whatever position you've dredged the quote up for in the first place.

Quotes are nice, they can be fun, sometimes they can even be instructive. But unfortunately they are weakest when used in the place of a real discussion.

I could care less what people said 70 years or more ago - different times, different situations, different feelings. I care now what the realities of the situation are, and I personally prefer to deal with that.

 

[Payton]

Patriot,

Did Iraq attack us on 911?

Or are we attacking because Iraq harbor's terrorist. If that was the case, we have a very long list of countries to attack.

 

[Payton]

KMAN

Eliminate terrorism? Not possible.

Refer to my last two sentences.

See ya in the next mushroom cloud!

 

[Banned4Life]

I forgot I still had that quote in my sig file. I thought they disabled the sig feature but I guess they forgot to disable it for this new forum.

==========
"To announce that there must be NO criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President Right or Wrong, is not only UNPATRIOTIC and SERVILE, but is Morally TREASONABLE to the American Public."

Former Republican President, Theodore Roosevelt

 

[radiofreecostarica]

Fact: we were attacked violently on 9/11.

sure, but not by Iraq.
This is for oil and regime change as well as for maping out a new Middle East, make no mistake about it.

See also: Bush's speech to the American Enterprise Institute.

[This message was edited by radiofreecostarica on 03-10-03 at 08:20 PM.]

 

[grantt]

Thanks for your expertise Jazz. I can see you prefer the Gaza Strip life long tit for tat approach. nice. You are not attacking the people who attacked you on 911 nor a country that is a nuclear threat, nor the country that posses the greatest threat. You are attacking the easiest oil rich nation you can find. Period.
Maybe someone can come in here and state where Iraq has done anything to the U.S.

 

Fact: we were attacked violently on 9/11.
So we are not attacking first.
More Factual : We were not attacked by Iraq on 9/11 or any other date in history.

Fact: Under UN resolutions irag was supposed to disarm in 1991 with in 90 days!!!!
More Factual : Citing UN resolutions as a cause for war, certainly implies that this would need to be under the jurisdiction of the UN.

Irag does harbor terroist including alqueda.
More factual : So does Iran, Syria, Ireland, Philipines, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, USA, Columbia, Indonesia, Palestine, Isreal, etc ...
Terrorism is not specific to a country, a religion, a region or a race ... it exists throughout the world, include good ol' USA.

 

[PatPatriot]

Lander it is a fact that irag has given aid and comfort to al queda.Iragy bio cook books were found in caves in afghanistan.
Disarming irag does come under UN jurisdiction the 17th resolution (1441).Which calls for IMMIDIATE compliance and disarmament signed on to by 15-0 countries including Syria that includes serious consequences if non compliance or material breach.USA is the only one holding up to the UN agreement.
BTW, there was never a peace treaty with irag just a cease fire agreement which irag has violated for 12 years...(premption is a democratic term) continuation is the proper term.
And yes in fact we will be going after all those countries.
Thanks for helping me with my argument.

 

[PatPatriot]

Friday, March 7, 2003 1:57 p.m. EST

CIA's Woolsey Tells Court: Iraq Involved in 9/11

Former CIA Director James Woolsey offered bombshell testimony this week in a lawsuit brought by the families of World Trade Center victims that implicates Saddam Hussein in the 9/11 attacks.

The one-time Clinton administration intelligence chief described what he said was a conspiracy between al-Qaeda and Baghdad. As evidence he offered accounts from Iraqi defectors who have described a Boeing 707 jet parked on the ground at the terrorist training camp Salman Pak. The plane, the eyewitnesses insist, was used as a hijacking school prior to 9/11.

Since 1995 Saddam's most elite terror operatives had allegedly used Salman Pak to train al-Qaeda recruits to overcome U.S. flight crews using methods employed on 9/11, according to London's Observer newspaper. In November 2001, dozens of other reports, including several in the New York Times, covered news of Saddam's Salman Pak hijacking school based on the defectors' accounts.

"I believe it is definitely more likely than not that some degree of common knowledge between [al-Qaeda and Iraq] was involved here," Woolsey told a Manhattan federal court on Monday, according to the New York Daily News.

He compared the relationship between Baghdad and Osama bin Laden's terror network to two Mafia families "who hate each other, kill each other from time to time but are still capable of working together against a common enemy," according to testimony quoted by the Associated Press.

At the very least, Saddam Hussein is guilty of aiding and abetting the activities of al-Qaeda, Woolsey contended.

He also offered evidence suggesting that Baghdad had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks.

A July 21, 2001, article in an Egyptian newspaper, headlined "America, an Obsession with Osama bin Laden," indicated that Baghdad knew what was coming less than months later, the former U.S. intelligence chief told the court. The report, written by an Iraqi, predicted bin Laden would target both New York City and the Pentagon.

Woolsey noted a line in the story warning that bin Laden would "strike America on the arm that is already hurting," explaining that the phrase was likely a reference to the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.

No Iraqi journalist would write such a report without his government's knowledge and approval, Woolsey testified.


Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
Al-Qaeda
Saddam Hussein/Iraq

 

Lander says : "More factual : So does Iran, Syria, Ireland, Philipines, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, USA, Columbia, Indonesia, Palestine, Isreal, etc ..."

Patriot says : "And yes in fact we will be going after all those countries."

Patriot,
Since you did post your reply at 2 AM, I'll assume that you just returned from a long night at the gay bar & had 1 too many drinks in you.

Now, get some coffee, re-read my post & then re-think your reply

 

[KMAN]

Grantt, Lander, Radiofreecostarica - Can you please prove this war is for oil? Do me a favor and turn on Fox News and listen to the other point of view. The Liberal media only tells you what strengthens their position. Listen to these people from Iraq who talk about their family being killed because they protested against Iraq. Do you realize that if the US was like Iraq all of you Liberals would be on Death row, if not executed already. I can't believe how ungrateful you can be. We have people in the Middle East fighting so the US can be safe from a dictator who murders his own people and you guys are against it.


I heard on the radio that we get much more oil from Mexico and Canada than we do Iraq, so why don't we just attack Mexico? I doubt they would give us much resistance.



Thanks,
KMAN

 

antt, Lander, Radiofreecostarica - Can you please prove this war is for oil?"
Who said that??

"Do you realize that if the US was like Iraq all of you Liberals would be on Death row, if not executed already. I can't believe how ungrateful you can be. We have people in the Middle East fighting so the US can be safe from a dictator who murders his own people and you guys are against it."

1. We are safe from Saddam. We always have been. He has never attacked us, but this will mark the 2nd time we've attacked him.

2. I should be grateful for this war? Grateful that innocent children will be slaughtered "in case" Saddam decides to someday attack us? Grateful that we have the largest deficit in US history? Grateful that this war is costing us tens of billions of dollars that could go towards humanitarian aid, education, & health care? Grateful that the US is on the verge of dividing the US. Grateful that despite the fact the US sees the UN fit to make the rules they still see the UN unfit to enforce their rules ... hypocracy. Grateful that we are ignoring NK who is threatening nuclear strikes against us because Sadam is a "grave danger" (somehow)?

3. The US was founded on dissent & rebellion - remember the little thing called the Revolutionary War? The only anti-American thing I've seen in this thread is by those saying we should we "liberals" should silenced ... afterall you wouldn't be here without dissent.

btw - I'm not liberal. Get your lies straight.


I heard on the radio that we get much more oil from Mexico and Canada than we do Iraq, so why don't we just attack Mexico? I doubt they would give us much resistance.

 

[KMAN]

Hold it, Hold it, Hold it.

I just figured it out.....It took me long enough but I finally did it.

All of those in favor of the war, relax, these posters like Lander, Grantt, and RFC are just posting to get us all riled up. They don't actually believe what they say. You know how Peter Brown and Scott Wetzel (Sporting News radio) act, right? One person takes the opposite side just to get people to call and email. It makes the show more popular. If they both agreed the show wouldn't be near as interesting.

I can't believe it took so long to figure this out. Who know's maybe they even work for the Rx. That way the number of posts increase.

I know this is true because I have asked several times for facts backing up there claims and have yet to see any.

Once again, those of you Anti - Saddam Hussein, Pro-America people, relax, we are in good shape.


KMAN

 

Hold it, Hold it, Hold it ... I just realized that when KMAN is incapable of intelligent debate he resorts to sarcasm ...

... surely this normal for a person that is so open to hearing alternate opinions?

 

[PatPatriot]

Hey, Lander i did not go into the gay bar because i saw your car there.
Yes there will be a war on terrorist in all those countries listed that are state sponsers of terrorism purpetrated against US intrest.