First line of Buchanans article:
The Frum-Perle prescription would ensnare America in endless conflict.
What the hell does he think we've involved in the the past 200 plus years----marble games? Trouble is we were pushed into most of the past conflicts and lost millions of men.
Seems to make sense to me to start dictating the events of the war instead of reacting.
!
For the discussion re: Osama refer to my post.
Re: Pre-emptive wars. They are the most dangerous precedent this nation has embarked upon.
If Al Q. is the org. that attacked the US then the US should have commited the resources and manpower to "bring them to justice" as the moron in charge keeps spewing out. Instead of invading countries the US should have spent the money and men to find the org. that sponsored the attackers. Of course, that may mean digging into Saudi Arabia's part in this situation.
At one point the idiot that call himself the Pres. stated that Osama was no longer relevant. For two years Osama's name was not mentioned. Then when pressure came in that regard a Spring Offensive was announced. No Al Q. captures but Pakistani troops did kill and harass border tribes people. A debt to Pakistan was set aside for their assults. In my view BushCo has been a huge failure in protecting the US. Some say that since no attacks or even small events have occured within the US that BushCo has done a great job. This is pure bull propaganda. Anyone that thinks a terrorist org or a few of it's members couldn't have attacked in the US, is seriously devoid of intelligence. Even the Govt. of the US states an attack could occur at any time. It is obvious that whoever the terrorists are, they haven't wished to attack the US...yet.
Radical says:
Re: Pre-emptive wars. They are the most dangerous precedent this nation has embarked upon.
Give me two good plausible reasons why pre-emptive wars are the most dangerous precedent this nation has embarked upon----other than the fact it puffs you up and makes you a legend in your own mind. Please provide historic or scientific evidence ----- not just rhetoric.
!
You don't know who I am. I may be a legend in other people's minds instead of my own. You assume and make an ass of yourself.
Historic evidence, yes.
Scientific? Since you seem to deem yourself above room temp IQ, explain that.
I am not required to explain didly to you. Do your own research and counter what I have stated.
Radical
If you want anyone to take you seriously you should act--well-----less Radical. I didn't take you seriously from the beginning and my first impression was correct. Bye
