Originally Posted by slickrick

You forgot to list the Texas war for Independence.

Originally Posted by oaklandplumber

Independence from who??

Originally Posted by slickrick

Mexico, We may have to have another one.

Originally Posted by oaklandplumber

REMEMBER THE ALAMO

Originally Posted by stillaround

A country like Israel cant be bogged down with too much concern over justification...If they have intel that something is happening they have to preempt to stay a nation or on the map. They wouldnt worry about the media coverage or "reactions". This country was attacked and harmed and fundamentally (before anything else) measured reactions were in order. At the same time Sadaam was defying everything we said and stand for and harbored terrorist/criminals...at a time that justified the removing of governments, heads of governments, countries or whoever gets in the way or harbors the enemy who caused or mocks or makes public contempt against the U.S. Bad timing to be a loud mouth raghead. WMD's or not...............
The war on terror is better off there than here...would California agree????
Look, car bombs in Arizona sparking the suspicion that terrorists are now aligned with cartels wreaking havoc here. Maybe they will head toward California 1st and settle by Oakland and all of a sudden you might want some "sons" to risk their lives to save yours.

Originally Posted by oaklandplumber

About the "terrorist " Iraq had nothing to do with fundamentalist they were against every thing sadam stood for and they would of challenged him for control of that country and he would never allow that so tying the two together in a sentence is the wrong thing to do.Was sadam a bad guy? yea.

Originally Posted by Redwood

Give it up they don't get it!
You might as well argue the point with a brick....

In pre-invasion Iraq the quickest way to have a head amputation would have been to be a terrorist or, a fundamentalist. Either of these would have been a threat to Saddam's absolute power over the country which he clearly had shown he knew how to handle. Iraq was and still is a deeply divided country where there are many factions that just don't get along. The closest comparison would probably be to describe them as tribes with the dominant ones being the Sunni, Shiite, and Kurds. Even withing those 3 major groups there are dozens of faction and the bottom line is they just don't get along...

Of course Saddam let them have their own little territories and leadership but if any problems started up he was quick to execute the offending leadership or, if a population was getting out of control apply a little chemical warfare on the population. This kept his grasp on power secure and kept any disruption in the order of the country to a minimum. Al-Qaeda would not have done well there and certainly was not a player in pre-invasion Iraq. Simply put after the First Gulf War Saddam's military power was very limited barely able to secure their border against Iran. The threat to other countries in the region was non-existent.

After 9/11 we went to war in Afghanistan against the Taliban who did support the Al-Qaeda terrorist operations which had attacked us on 9/11. This action was certainly justified and needed. However, at a critical moment in the mountains along the border of Pakistan our leadership had a schizophrenic moment and felt the compelling need to upset Saddam's apple cart and divert forces needed from fighting our real enemy to an imaginary one.

Bear in mind that the environment in Afghanistan is very tough to wage war in and the forces we were fighting against were once supported by us in a war with the USSR which broke the back of the Soviets sending them into an economic decline resulting in the Fall of the Iron Curtain. However, our leadership could not learn from this expensive lesson to the Soviets and at this critical moment we started diverting forces to go fight a war in a country that did not represent a threat to our country or, the region. This action allowed the Al-Qaeda forces to slip away across the border where they continue to operate crossing the border at will to launch attacks. Our "Friends" the Pakistani government doing little to cooperate in capturing them. Of course we no longer call them Al-Qaeda because it helps us have the illusion that when we attacked Iraq they all left to go fight us there so these warriors fighting against us in Afghanistan are now "Taliban Forces."

One thing for sure we missed a few things by our schizophrenic diversion into Iraq. We diluted our effort against our true enemy and allowed them to remain in operation. We upset Saddam's apple cart ensuring a long police action trying to maintain some stability in Iraq which we have now cut and run from which will probably allow the continuing unrest in Iraq to go on for many years and leave a military vacuum which neighboring countries such as Iran will probably want to fill. Iraq is loaded with insurgent forces and now after years of ineffective leadership in the country another faction is coming into play and they are criminal gangs. Oh shoot we are broke too and our economy is in shambles... Go Figure...

As I sit here wearing a set of headphones listening to Glenn Beck in the right ear and Thom Hartmann in my left ear with my head ready to explode I wonder if common sense will ever return to the majority of the American public and we'll come together in support of a government that is capable of pulling back on the stick to pull the jet we are riding on out of its dive and avert a smoking hole in the ground. It is clear that neither of the 2 major parties is interested in doing so and all they are successful at is polarizing our population into the 2 wrong directions.