9/11 response
As most of you know, my friend Luke has a blog. He has written a post about 9/11 and this is the response that I tried to post on it, but it wouldn't let me. I encourage you to read everything that he has said and then my response and form your own opinion. Click here to read what he has written.
Luke,
You make some good points, but exaggerate a few of them. Saddam was never an enemy of Osama. Al Queta has been known to have connections with Iraq before Sept. 11th. Going after Iraq without finding Osama doesn't make much sense. Why haven't we gone after him? Because he is hiding out in Pakistan. We are bound by friendly relations with Pakistan and UN crap so we aren't able to search there. He is no longer in Afghanistan. We could have gotten him during the Clinton administration - but we didn't want to upset any Muslims by going after the terrorists who killed 17 servicemen aboard the USS Cole. Clinton was working on the peace agreement between Israel and Palestine. We saw how well that went.
Do I agree with the war in Iraq? Yes and no. Is the world a better place without Saddam? Anyone who says "no" is an idiot. Should we have gone in when we did? Probably not. We should have finished the job the first time we went in.The idiots that also say that we should pull out now have no respect for those who have given the ultimate sacrifice during this conflict. Should we leave the unstable government of Iraq now, within a max of 10 years, it will be back to the way it was and all will be for nothing. (Oh, and anyone else who says that we went in their for oil will get punched in the gut. If we did, would we still be paying around $3 a gallon? You are an idiot if you still think that's a reason. France, I'm talking to you!)
We won't go after North Korea because they can bomb the hell out of us. They are close enough that they are one of the few countries that have that possibility. With supposed nukes as well. (The first step we are trying to make is imposing sanctions on them via the UN.) Might want to avoid losing California to a nuclear blast. (But, that would get rid of a lot of our nation's problems, now that I think about it...) Next stop should be Iran and then on to Pakistan if they don't let us look around for Osama and other assholes hiding in caves over there. After we take out those two, we can point a finger to the Sudan and other places in Africa and say "shape up, or your next" and they will calm the hell down. It is then and only then that North Korea will be an option. Should we go after them, South Korea will go along with us, for sure. Japan and China, due to proximity to the evil that is North Korea, will probably help as well. With a stronger grouping of nations backing us, we can take out a great deal of the thorns in our side that you discuss in your blog. However, this is in an ideal world. One that we don't live in. Do I see this happening? Probably not.
What has happened in 5 years? Our government has pulled the wool over our eyes and given us a false sense of security by not allowing Pepsi on the flights that we have to take our shoes off for. We have a color-coded alert system. We have done nearly nothing to secure our airports, sea ports or borders. Yet we can all tell what color the terror alert is thanks to the scroll on the bottom of Fox News.
Don't get me wrong, I think Bush has done what he could... to a point. He doesn't really want to rock the boat - especially when his buddies across the street are looking at mid-term elections. I think that the congress is dragging their feet and will continue to do so with it being an election year. These assholes need to stop thinking about getting re-elected and start doing what is right for our nation. That is one of the biggest problems with our system. Each time the ball gets moving, they get concerned about what Mr. Joe Culdesac might think about an armed guard on every plane or a big freakin' fence on our South AND North borders with an armed guard every mile. Where will the spending come from? Will it seem egocentric? Shouldn't we focus more on lower emissions from semi-trucks?
We may be living in a post-9/11 world. However, we aren't acting like it enough. Who is to blame for that? Everyone AND no one.
Luke,
You make some good points, but exaggerate a few of them. Saddam was never an enemy of Osama. Al Queta has been known to have connections with Iraq before Sept. 11th. Going after Iraq without finding Osama doesn't make much sense. Why haven't we gone after him? Because he is hiding out in Pakistan. We are bound by friendly relations with Pakistan and UN crap so we aren't able to search there. He is no longer in Afghanistan. We could have gotten him during the Clinton administration - but we didn't want to upset any Muslims by going after the terrorists who killed 17 servicemen aboard the USS Cole. Clinton was working on the peace agreement between Israel and Palestine. We saw how well that went.
Do I agree with the war in Iraq? Yes and no. Is the world a better place without Saddam? Anyone who says "no" is an idiot. Should we have gone in when we did? Probably not. We should have finished the job the first time we went in.The idiots that also say that we should pull out now have no respect for those who have given the ultimate sacrifice during this conflict. Should we leave the unstable government of Iraq now, within a max of 10 years, it will be back to the way it was and all will be for nothing. (Oh, and anyone else who says that we went in their for oil will get punched in the gut. If we did, would we still be paying around $3 a gallon? You are an idiot if you still think that's a reason. France, I'm talking to you!)
We won't go after North Korea because they can bomb the hell out of us. They are close enough that they are one of the few countries that have that possibility. With supposed nukes as well. (The first step we are trying to make is imposing sanctions on them via the UN.) Might want to avoid losing California to a nuclear blast. (But, that would get rid of a lot of our nation's problems, now that I think about it...) Next stop should be Iran and then on to Pakistan if they don't let us look around for Osama and other assholes hiding in caves over there. After we take out those two, we can point a finger to the Sudan and other places in Africa and say "shape up, or your next" and they will calm the hell down. It is then and only then that North Korea will be an option. Should we go after them, South Korea will go along with us, for sure. Japan and China, due to proximity to the evil that is North Korea, will probably help as well. With a stronger grouping of nations backing us, we can take out a great deal of the thorns in our side that you discuss in your blog. However, this is in an ideal world. One that we don't live in. Do I see this happening? Probably not.
What has happened in 5 years? Our government has pulled the wool over our eyes and given us a false sense of security by not allowing Pepsi on the flights that we have to take our shoes off for. We have a color-coded alert system. We have done nearly nothing to secure our airports, sea ports or borders. Yet we can all tell what color the terror alert is thanks to the scroll on the bottom of Fox News.
Don't get me wrong, I think Bush has done what he could... to a point. He doesn't really want to rock the boat - especially when his buddies across the street are looking at mid-term elections. I think that the congress is dragging their feet and will continue to do so with it being an election year. These assholes need to stop thinking about getting re-elected and start doing what is right for our nation. That is one of the biggest problems with our system. Each time the ball gets moving, they get concerned about what Mr. Joe Culdesac might think about an armed guard on every plane or a big freakin' fence on our South AND North borders with an armed guard every mile. Where will the spending come from? Will it seem egocentric? Shouldn't we focus more on lower emissions from semi-trucks?
We may be living in a post-9/11 world. However, we aren't acting like it enough. Who is to blame for that? Everyone AND no one.
posted by John Mc. @ 9/12/2006 08:51:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home