The Long War

[Pudlugger]

May 08, 2007, 0:55 a.m.

To the Shores of Tripoli

By Fred Thompson

From the Halls of Montezuma to the Shores of Tripoli.
We fight our country’s battles in the air, on land and sea.
First to fight for right and freedom, and to keep our honor clean;
We are proud to claim the title of United States Marine.

That’s from the Marine Corps Hymn, of course, and you can thank me for not singing it. When I was a boy, a lot of America kids knew that verse — and probably a few more. I hope they still do, but I get the impression that might not be the case.

U.S. Marines patrol the street in Ramadi, 115 kilometers (70 miles) west of Baghdad, Iraq, Sunday, April 8, 2007. U.S. forces have tried just about everything to quell the Sunni insurgency in the capital of blood-soaked Anbar province, and after years of some of the fiercest street fighting of the war, something finally appears to have worked: Ramadi, at least by Ramadi standards, is calm.

That’s one reason I’d like to spend some time talking about the heritage this song represents. Another reason is that the lyrics hold a history lesson critical to America’s future. I realize a lot of you already know this material, but indulge me for the sake of those who might not.

The very first line written for the Marine Corps Hymn, about the shores of Tripoli, refers to America’s first foreign war. After the Revolution, U.S. ships were sailing the world in search of trade without British protection. With no real navy to protect our merchants and travelers, American vessels and citizens were being targeted for looting, enslavement and ransom. The enemy was the so-called Barbary pirates — agents of the North African provinces of the Ottoman Caliphate.

Ransom and protection money were demanded and paid. Stories of terrible treatment of American men and women in the dungeons of North Africa were well known. Behind it all, the country was having a pro- and antiwar debate.

On the one hand were those who took the “no blood for trade” approach. They had legitimate concerns about the cost and political impact of maintaining a standing military. They favored negotiations and payments rather than fighting. For a long time, their side was winning the argument. In 1786, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams even went to London to negotiate directly with the envoy from Tripoli.

Several historians and writers have reminded us recently of the ambassador’s nearly forgotten answer. Fortunately, Jefferson prepared a written report for the government and left other records of the incident. Here’s a description from The Atlantic Monthly in 1872:

Disguising their feelings as best they could, they ‘took the liberty to make some inquiries concerning the ground of the pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury.’ The ambassador replied that it was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave.” He claimed every one of their guys who was “slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise.


This answer may have helped sway the debate to the side of those who favored military response over further attempts at diplomacy. Some believe it had a personal impact on Jefferson himself, though higher and higher ransoms probably helped too. Congress finally acted, creating the U.S. Navy in 1794. This included approval for the construction and manning of six frigate warships, including the USS Constitution — which is afloat and commissioned to this day.

Still, though, congress refused to act directly against the Barbary pirates for years. Eventually, between 10 and 20 percent of U.S. revenues would be paid annually without ever buying actual safety for Americans. In the end, Thomas Jefferson acted on his own, sending forces into harm’s way. America entered into its first and protracted foreign war. From beginning to end, in fact, the conflict lasted approximately 14 years. I couldn’t tell you, by the way, if the Barbary wars were ever described as a “quagmire” or “lost.”

I won’t describe here the taking of Tripoli by courageous American soldiers. And I sure don’t have time to talk about America’s eventual victory over the forces of that era’s religiously justified terrorism. I would though encourage you to read about it for yourself. It’s a great story and it holds an important lesson about the nature of the world.

Sometimes folks around the world mock Americans for not having more of a sense of history. They might be right, but I think it is often for a good reason. Americans are a people who look to the future instead of the past. We hope and believe that things can and will get better. We are more than willing to forgive our old enemies and move forward together in peace. So we tend to forget the bad things we left behind.

Unfortunately, some of our enemies feel differently. They neither forgive nor forget. Listening to the messages of al Qaeda’s leaders, you understand that they see their old defeats in very personal and contemporary terms. They are in a “long war” against us, even if we don’t know it. And they’re committed to winning it.

© ABC Radio
National Review Online - http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NWMxOGU3YWM1ZjIyMzMxNGFhMmUzMzJmYTViYjk4Y2U=

[mistanice]

You can't defeat an idea with military force.

[BILLYFRED0000]

But you can defeat the guy with the idea. And that is the general
point. The fundamental flaw in your statement is that an idea is valid. When in fact these terrorist use the Koran to support their mission. They do not fight a holy war. They fight a terroristic kill them because they are infidels war. That means that we can either let them continue to kill us or take the fight to them. I prefer to kick their ass.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Originally posted by BILLYFRED0000
But you can defeat the guy with the idea. And that is the general
point. The fundamental flaw in your statement is that an idea is valid. When in fact these terrorist use the Koran to support their mission. They do not fight a holy war. They fight a terroristic kill them because they are infidels war. That means that we can either let them continue to kill us or take the fight to them. I prefer to kick their ass.

Well, go buy a gun, hop on an airplane, boat, or hot air balloon and go kick some Muslim ass and not endorse sending our troops over there to fight for something that you believe in.

[mistanice]

So the way I see it is an endless game of "i'll go kill you before you come kill me." They have their ideas, which we disagree with and vice versa. All in all, I see no end in sight. Pulling out of Iraq does seem unreasonable now that the bloodshed has escalated. We're having record breaking deaths in the past 2 months. Terrorist will breed terrorist and we will breed the defenders(or offenders) whichever way you look at it. What is it that we're trying to instill in them? To stop targeting Americans? I wish our troops luck as well as our politicians.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by BILLYFRED0000
But you can defeat the guy with the idea. And that is the general
point. The fundamental flaw in your statement is that an idea is valid. When in fact these terrorist use the Koran to support their mission. They do not fight a holy war. They fight a terroristic kill them because they are infidels war. That means that we can either let them continue to kill us or take the fight to them. I prefer to kick their ass. the fundamental flaw in yours is that you think we can convince those poor masses who flock to the fundamentalists to stop killing themselves. sure we can kill off a few thousands of em, their are millions and millions of them, poor and EASILY influenced by what APPEARS to be a caring soul. but its just another cycle of terrorist producing propaganda. while globalization exploits the poor's labor, fundamentalists exploit the poor's mind. i hope the IRB approves my suggestion as a dissertation to study MODERATE muslims and find out their views on radical fundamentals. because they cry out against every mistake of ours, yet I don't hear those same cries when 100+ muslims are killed by their own brothers

[BILLYFRED0000]

Originally posted by DDBooger
the fundamental flaw in yours is that you think we can convince those poor masses who flock to the fundamentalists to stop killing themselves. sure we can kill off a few thousands of em, their are millions and millions of them, poor and EASILY influenced by what APPEARS to be a caring soul. but its just another cycle of terrorist producing propaganda. while globalization exploits the poor's labor, fundamentalists exploit the poor's mind. i hope the IRB approves my suggestion as a dissertation to study MODERATE muslims and find out their views on radical fundamentals. because they cry out against every mistake of ours, yet I don't hear those same cries when 100+ muslims are killed by their own brothers

Now you show your lack of understanding. The reason it is the way it is is because of despotism. The leaders control the schools and teach their children to hate us. We have only to change the environment and the next generation changes with it.
It is really that simple. Perfect example was the Samurai bent of the Japanese military and their leaders. They believed they deserved the best and were owed whatever existence they required as did Hitler and his Reichstag. The fanatic muslims differ only in tactics. Not in strategy. They preach they are superior and because they are they have the right to do to us whatever they want. Plain and simple. Cut and dried. IN the end it is either take the fight to them or let them pick and choose when they want to fight us. I prefer to kick their ass.

[Ray_BearKat]

Originally posted by mistanice
You can't defeat an idea with military force.

sounds like a V for Vendetta line...:thinking:

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by BILLYFRED0000
Now you show your lack of understanding. The reason it is the way it is is because of despotism. The leaders control the schools and teach their children to hate us. We have only to change the environment and the next generation changes with it.
It is really that simple. Perfect example was the Samurai bent of the Japanese military and their leaders. They believed they deserved the best and were owed whatever existence they required as did Hitler and his Reichstag. The fanatic muslims differ only in tactics. Not in strategy. They preach they are superior and because they are they have the right to do to us whatever they want. Plain and simple. Cut and dried. IN the end it is either take the fight to them or let them pick and choose when they want to fight us. I prefer to kick their ass. lmao, lack of undestanding? despotism? its a religious doctrine, not a regime. you know the difference correct. for instance Hussein a secular DESPOT. those running the madrasas are not despots, they are EXPLOITERS, they do not FORCE the people to hate us they teach them to hate us, lack of education and ignorance make it easy. WE make it easy, our policies have made it easy. are you seriously comparing a samurai to a muslim fundamentalist? HITLER!!! buddy the strategy couldn't be more different. Hitler and his minions preached racial superiority, the muslims preach RELIGIOUS fundamentalism, which Hitler denounced. The Japanese Samurai fought for their Shogun and later an emperor who was the living embodiment of a god. lts real easy for you to preach taking the fight to an enemy as you sit at home, but beware of what you wish for because as history has proven these people, this region this fight will outlast us and probably any existing country. As long as the fundamentalists continue to make this a holy war, all they have is their religion and all 3-4 billion of them will meet us in Meggido. Nothing short of thermal nuclear war will silence them. perhaps that is something you suggest?

[DDBooger]

and mr. tough talk, my family and friends are fighting this war, and i don't condone cutting and running, but I don't condone sending generation upon generation to defeat a people who equate this to their survival.

[BILLYFRED0000]

Originally posted by DDBooger
lmao, lack of undestanding? despotism? its a religious doctrine, not a regime. you know the difference correct. for instance Hussein a secular DESPOT. those running the madrasas are not despots, they are EXPLOITERS, they do not FORCE the people to hate us they teach them to hate us, lack of education and ignorance make it easy. WE make it easy, our policies have made it easy. are you seriously comparing a samurai to a muslim fundamentalist? HITLER!!! buddy the strategy couldn't be more different. Hitler and his minions preached racial superiority, the muslims preach RELIGIOUS fundamentalism, which Hitler denounced. The Japanese Samurai fought for their Shogun and later an emperor who was the living embodiment of a god. lts real easy for you to preach taking the fight to an enemy as you sit at home, but beware of what you wish for because as history has proven these people, this region this fight will outlast us and probably any existing country. As long as the fundamentalists continue to make this a holy war, all they have is their religion and all 3-4 billion of them will meet us in Meggido. Nothing short of thermal nuclear war will silence them. perhaps that is something you suggest?

YOu miss the simple by pouring out much. Try this. The religious fundamentalism teaches that they are superior to the infidels.
Hitler said his race was superior. The Samurai said their existence and philosophy were superior. The key phrase is SUPERIOR, AS IN WE ARE YOUR BETTERS AND YOU BETTER GET USED TO IT. It is the same cloth woven with different strands. IN the end it is the same. It is just that simple. The only proof of these people is that they can be defeated and controlled if the will is there. But there are too many pansies in this country who do not understand the true nature of fanaticism and isolation. IN the end if we isolate ourselves we will be surrounded.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by BILLYFRED0000
YOu miss the simple by pouring out much. Try this. The religious fundamentalism teaches that they are superior to the infidels.
Hitler said his race was superior. The Samurai said their existence and philosophy were superior. The key phrase is SUPERIOR, AS IN WE ARE YOUR BETTERS AND YOU BETTER GET USED TO IT. It is the same cloth woven with different strands. IN the end it is the same. It is just that simple. The only proof of these people is that they can be defeated and controlled if the will is there. But there are too many pansies in this country who do not understand the true nature of fanaticism and isolation. IN the end if we isolate ourselves we will be surrounded. actually no, they don't teach that they are superior to infidels, they preach that we live sad, meaningless lives because we do not praise allah and value OTHER things. no not at all. race which the germans and japs believed they were superior and attempted to enslave, humiliate and exterminate other races on that basis. and yes they can be defeated and controlled, lmao, SADDAM HUSSEIN showed us how!!! with an iron fist!. sad state of affairs is people of your ilk think we can kill the fundamentalism out of them, sadly we'll just make more and more and more. and more and more and more of our boys will continue to go off and die for one reason that becomes another that yet becomes another and in the end for someone ELSES freedom. I understand the fundamentalists just fine! when the easily influenced are offered an alternative education besides worshiping the koran, we'll see changes. until then, you are sorely mistaken if you think this war's end is in sight.

[BILLYFRED0000]

Originally posted by DDBooger
actually no, they don't teach that they are superior to infidels, they preach that we live sad, meaningless lives because we do not praise allah and value OTHER things. no not at all. race which the germans and japs believed they were superior and attempted to enslave, humiliate and exterminate other races on that basis. and yes they can be defeated and controlled, lmao, SADDAM HUSSEIN showed us how!!! with an iron fist!. sad state of affairs is people of your ilk think we can kill the fundamentalism out of them, sadly we'll just make more and more and more. and more and more and more of our boys will continue to go off and die for one reason that becomes another that yet becomes another and in the end for someone ELSES freedom. I understand the fundamentalists just fine! when the easily influenced are offered an alternative education besides worshiping the koran, we'll see changes. until then, you are sorely mistaken if you think this war's end is in sight.

If you really believe that is what they teach then discussions with you are pointless. It is not the truth. It is what moderates are taught. Not the fanatics. The fanatics are right in line with the Nazi's.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by BILLYFRED0000
If you really believe that is what they teach then discussions with you are pointless. It is not the truth. It is what moderates are taught. Not the fanatics. The fanatics are right in line with the Nazi's. jesus, you are right in line with dick cheney! and discussions with you are ENTIRELY pointless. you couldn't be more off if you threw a dart to determine the connection. buddy not only did I study Nazi germany and its mysticism from its infancy in the weimar republic up until its end, but I can see for myself. they aren't fighting us because they believe they are superior, do you think they believe that living in a mudhut! lol. The closest thing you are to correct is within Iran's confines. THey have this mystical belief of returning to the times of the Persian empire. Truth be told it will be the very religion that they attach themselves to that will never allow that to happen. You can't progress within a religion that preaches regression to a antiquated system

[BILLYFRED0000]

Originally posted by DDBooger
jesus, you are right in line with dick cheney! and discussions with you are ENTIRELY pointless. you couldn't be more off if you threw a dart to determine the connection. buddy not only did I study Nazi germany and its mysticism from its infancy in the weimar republic up until its end, but I can see for myself. they aren't fighting us because they believe they are superior, do you think they believe that living in a mudhut! lol. The closest thing you are to correct is within Iran's confines. THey have this mystical belief of returning to the times of the Persian empire. Truth be told it will be the very religion that they attach themselves to that will never allow that to happen. You can't progress within a religion that preaches regression to a antiquated system

Do not equate my research, study, personal time and considerable intelligence as dependent on any one elses opinions to arrive at my own conclusions based on true evaluation and not emotional diatribes. Ad hominem is always the last resort of a lost position.
The main fallacy is your equation of superiority with physical existence. They are superior spiritually and that is all that matters to them. Martyrdom is a out branching of that. They are just better no matter what. Nobody has ever explained to them that this is contradictory to what Mohammed taught in scripture.
ONe quote, "If a man comes into your camp and eats of your salt you may never harm him". Translation, he may be an infidel but you don't just kill him.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by BILLYFRED0000
Do not equate my research, study, personal time and considerable intelligence as dependent on any one elses opinions to arrive at my own conclusions based on true evaluation and not emotional diatribes. Ad hominem is always the last resort of a lost position. so is reaching to make a point ;)

Originally posted by BILLYFRED0000
The main fallacy is your equation of superiority with physical existence. They are superior spiritually and that is all that matters to them. Martyrdom is a out branching of that. They are just better no matter what. Nobody has ever explained to them that this is contradictory to what Mohammed taught in scripture.
ONe quote, "If a man comes into your camp and eats of your salt you may never harm him". Translation, he may be an infidel but you don't just kill him. they are superior spiritually? you base their actions on that! Martydom is a sacrifice made in service to allah, hence the reward in heaven. yes i know the pacificity of Islam, and its pervesion is what we have now!

[BILLYFRED0000]

Originally posted by DDBooger
so is reaching to make a point ;)
they are superior spiritually? you base their actions on that! Martydom is a sacrifice made in service to allah, hence the reward in heaven. yes i know the pacificity of Islam, and its pervesion is what we have now!

You know it the moderates know it and the fanatics know it. They
just brainwash kids with the you are superior and going to heaven and there you have it. I did not say they were. I said that they teach and believe that they are. The truth is irrelevant.
They then teach that we are evil and an abomination and they have every right to destroy us or convert us and they will not stop till they have done on or the other because that is what keeps them in power.

[DDBooger]

http://www.geocities.com/martinkramerorg/FundamentalistPower.htm
much of this perverse islam has been a answer to western ideals and imperialism in their eyes. Reverting to the time of Islamic power through strict fundamentalism seems to be their idea on how to circumvent the inevitable spread of western ideals into their countries. THEY HATE the idea of secularism more than conservatives, in fact they'll kill themselves to stop it!

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by BILLYFRED0000
You know it the moderates know it and the fanatics know it. They
just brainwash kids with the you are superior and going to heaven and there you have it. I did not say they were. I said that they teach and believe that they are. The truth is irrelevant.
They then teach that we are evil and an abomination and they have every right to destroy us or convert us and they will not stop till they have done on or the other because that is what keeps them in power. well bro, i respect your opinion, but in my mind its just an answer to the question, can muslim societies operate in western culture. The fundamentalist don't believe so, so they'll fight us till we leave our the culture of their countries reverts to a Taliban style regime. IMO

[BILLYFRED0000]

Originally posted by DDBooger
http://www.geocities.com/martinkramerorg/FundamentalistPower.htm
much of this perverse islam has been a answer to western ideals and imperialism in their eyes. Reverting to the time of Islamic power through strict fundamentalism seems to be their idea on how to circumvent the inevitable spread of western ideals into their countries. THEY HATE the idea of secularism more than conservatives, in fact they'll kill themselves to stop it!

It only began that way. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. The radicals can issue fatwah's anyway they want and get a response. They are not beholden to a fear of secularism as much as they are afraid of their loss of power. See Pharisees and Saducees in Jesus time.

[BILLYFRED0000]

Originally posted by DDBooger
well bro, i respect your opinion, but in my mind its just an answer to the question, can muslim societies operate in western culture. The fundamentalist don't believe so, so they'll fight us till we leave our the culture of their countries reverts to a Taliban style regime. IMO
But that is also about power. Not about religion. IF they require a strict fundamentalist dogma then it means they are willing to pervert the thing they claim is most important to them, their religion. ONce they pervert it, it is about power and politics and the continuation of the same. If we reach them they lose and they know it.

[BILLYFRED0000]

And to answer your question about Muslim societies? I merely point to our own country and the Muslims that freely worship and operate here. I Know a few good ones but they will not speak out against the fanatics. Out of fear I believe.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by BILLYFRED0000
But that is also about power. Not about religion. IF they require a strict fundamentalist dogma then it means they are willing to pervert the thing they claim is most important to them, their religion. ONce they pervert it, it is about power and politics and the continuation of the same. If we reach them they lose and they know it. power and politics dont necessarily suggest a SUPERIORITY ideal which you say drives them. perverting the religion is a means to an end in these countries who have floundered under democratic "DESPOTIC" regimes. it is actually the lesser of two evils in choice.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by BILLYFRED0000
And to answer your question about Muslim societies? I merely point to our own country and the Muslims that freely worship and operate here. I Know a few good ones but they will not speak out against the fanatics. Out of fear I believe. true, but I want to know empirically is it fear of public chastizement, shame or is it deeper, do they secretly hope for our failure in the middle east. Our Policies with the Israelis have hurt our image in the moderate world as well. we give israel blank checks, right or not, its hard to gain support when we work this way diplomatically. sometime we have to reign in our doggies

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by BILLYFRED0000
It only began that way. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. The radicals can issue fatwah's anyway they want and get a response. They are not beholden to a fear of secularism as much as they are afraid of their loss of power. See Pharisees and Saducees in Jesus time. no actually its still that way, when we gave the palestinians the right to vote(western ideal) they voted for a muslim dominated govt(hamas). Iraq will turn out the same way, the shia are very religiously devout. call it a inferiority complex! ;) however with big brother(iran) standing behind them, don't be surprised to see a Shia surge in control and perhaps COMPLETE control if we pull out early! YIKES:eek:

[BILLYFRED0000]

Originally posted by DDBooger
true, but I want to know empirically is it fear of public chastizement, shame or is it deeper, do they secretly hope for our failure in the middle east. Our Policies with the Israelis have hurt our image in the moderate world as well. we give israel blank checks, right or not, its hard to gain support when we work this way diplomatically. sometime we have to reign in our doggies

Yes but Iran and Syria give Hamas, the PLO, hezbollah, etc blank checks and no one seems to care. Our policy has mostly been to protect a nation surrounded by those whose only thougt is to wipe them off the map. ONce again an issue of religious perversion. Particularly since they share Abraham as the father of their races. Sorry, you won't ever get me to believe that we have done anything wrong by Israel except for the normal diplomatic mistakes made by all countries in the course of international relations.

[BILLYFRED0000]

Originally posted by DDBooger
no actually its still that way, when we gave the palestinians the right to vote(western ideal) they voted for a muslim dominated govt(hamas). Iraq will turn out the same way, the shia are very religiously devout. call it a inferiority complex! ;) however with big brother(iran) standing behind them, don't be surprised to see a Shia surge in control and perhaps COMPLETE control if we pull out early! YIKES:eek:

That is why we cannot leave. Iran is fighting us by proxy for control of Iraq and it's resources.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by BILLYFRED0000
Yes but Iran and Syria give Hamas, the PLO, hezbollah, etc blank checks and no one seems to care. Our policy has mostly been to protect a nation surrounded by those whose only thougt is to wipe them off the map. ONce again an issue of religious perversion. Particularly since they share Abraham as the father of their races. Sorry, you won't ever get me to believe that we have done anything wrong by Israel except for the normal diplomatic mistakes made by all countries in the course of international relations. didn't say that, I said "right or wrong" wasn't trying to convince ya partner! i too side with the israelis' i have lots of great books about them, 67 and 73 wars. I find them to be fascinating. and rest assured, they are very well protected. the best hardware money can buy and protection form the united states as well as firm protection in the UN from NOT holding them accountable for having a nuclear weapon and doing so with the iranians and previously the iraqi's. If the muslims were smart they'd stop preaching the eradication of jews which makes it so easy for us to contest their posession of nukes.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by BILLYFRED0000
That is why we cannot leave. Iran is fighting us by proxy for control of Iraq and it's resources. very possible and if we leave most likely! many feuds still remain with the sunni iraqi's. that iran-iraq war has left big scars in Iran, this would be sweet revenge. Though it would never happen. the type of mobilization and movements necessary for a full scale invasion of iraq by iran would leave them high and dry. Unless they DRASTICALLY improved their airforce, less then 10% of the attacking forces would be left. it would be a turkey shoot for our boys sitting off shore. depending on self propelled sams of course, they have gotten a hold of lots of tech from mother russia and the chinese

[BILLYFRED0000]

Yes I agree. And they are not to be feared as much as you think.
During the cold war they got help from us and the Russians with advising and training. Now they rely on their own training and it is strictly not up to par. Gulf war is perfect example. The Brits, italians, And our AF did all the heavy lifting. Same on the ground.
All those arab countries did was take what we gave them.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by BILLYFRED0000
Yes I agree. And they are not to be feared as much as you think.
During the cold war they got help from us and the Russians with advising and training. Now they rely on their own training and it is strictly not up to par. Gulf war is perfect example. The Brits, italians, And our AF did all the heavy lifting. Same on the ground.
All those arab countries did was take what we gave them. no i don't think they are too be feared conventionally, hell, i hardly think that about anyone aside from the chinese, and thats based only on numbers and a improving missile tech.(wonder how they got it:rolleyes: ) but what the current war has taught the muslim world is you can nullify our conventional superiority by bringing it to ground level. NOT fighting fairly. its basically a Guerilla version of the Powell doctrine! :)

[BILLYFRED0000]

Originally posted by DDBooger
no i don't think they are too be feared conventionally, hell, i hardly think that about anyone aside from the chinese, and thats based only on numbers and a improving missile tech.(wonder how they got it:rolleyes: ) but what the current war has taught the muslim world is you can nullify our conventional superiority by bringing it to ground level. NOT fighting fairly. its basically a Guerilla version of the Powell doctrine! :)
The real issue is not them not fighting fairly. It is more about our fear of collateral damage. We do not want to destroy Iraq. However, IMHO, taking Baghad to the ground would probably take care of most of the issues in the country.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by BILLYFRED0000
The real issue is not them not fighting fairly. It is more about our fear of collateral damage. We do not want to destroy Iraq. However, IMHO, taking Baghad to the ground would probably take care of most of the issues in the country. lol yes perhaps you are right, but that would make us into the very thing we went there to change. DESPOTS. we are better than that, we aren't like other conquering armies of old. I'd like to believe we still stand for something good despite the scandals (abu ghraib, rape and murder) isolated incidents but magnified by the press and thrown in the face of every muslim by al jazeera.

[Pudlugger]

Originally posted by DDBooger
lol yes perhaps you are right, but that would make us into the very thing we went there to change. DESPOTS. we are better than that, we aren't like other conquering armies of old. I'd like to believe we still stand for something good despite the scandals (abu ghraib, rape and murder) isolated incidents but magnified by the press and thrown in the face of every muslim by al jazeera.

Okay, I have to interject here. We brought down Hitler and Japan by taking down their cities using carpet bombing incendiary bombs and finally A-Bombs. We utterly destroyed the enemy and peace ensued. Today we are so PC that this could not happen and that is why we have not won a war since 1945. Remember those old films showing GIs with flame throwers? We don't use them anymore, they are too cruel. Landmines, phosphorous artilliary shells, napalm, and anti-personnel cluster bombs are also being marginalized by the UN and international peace pimps. If we go in on the ground we should do what the Army and Marines do best and that is to break things and kill people period. Only after that can we sort it out and get peace in this war.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by Pudlugger
Okay, I have to interject here. We brought down Hitler and Japan by taking down their cities using carpet bombing incendiary bombs and finally A-Bombs. We utterly destroyed the enemy and peace ensued. Today we are so PC that this could not happen and that is why we have not won a war since 1945. Remember those old films showing GIs with flame throwers? We don't use them anymore, they are too cruel. Landmines, phosphorous artilliary shells, napalm, and anti-personnel cluster bombs are also being marginalized by the UN and international peace pimps. If we go in on the ground we should do what the Army and Marines do best and that is to break things and kill people period. Only after that can we sort it out and get peace in this war. yes but both germany and japan were entirely mobilized for war, factories and such. according to gen. petraeus, we are dealing with a few thousand at best. obviously lack of precision weapons made it necessary for saturation bombing in WWII. we are 10x more accurate today. and the purpose up until the end wasn't to kill all, but to cripple the economy so that they lost the capability to fight. common strategy, why the russians moved their factories behind the Urals. firebombing toyko and german cities actually produced more casualties then the A-bomb initially(not after, with radioactive fallout). both populations were commited to the war. and as the General states this insurgency is being run by a few. you on the other hand want them to kill all, civies included. so where does that fit in with bring democracy and stability to iraq? if that is your answer thank god people like you and your ilk are not in power. collateral damage is one thing, for instance using a mosque as a arms depot or central hideout. but systematic eradication of all within city of millions. Real american:rolleyes:

[Pudlugger]

Originally posted by DDBooger
yes but both germany and japan were entirely mobilized for war, factories and such. according to gen. petraeus, we are dealing with a few thousand at best. obviously lack of precision weapons made it necessary for saturation bombing in WWII. we are 10x more accurate today. and the purpose up until the end wasn't to kill all, but to cripple the economy so that they lost the capability to fight. common strategy, why the russians moved their factories behind the Urals. firebombing toyko and german cities actually produced more casualties then the A-bomb initially(not after, with radioactive fallout). both populations were commited to the war. and as the General states this insurgency is being run by a few. you on the other hand want them to kill all, civies included. so where does that fit in with bring democracy and stability to iraq? if that is your answer thank god people like you and your ilk are not in power. collateral damage is one thing, for instance using a mosque as a arms depot or central hideout. but systematic eradication of all within city of millions. Real american:rolleyes:

I'm not advocating total destruction of the city but yes I am advocating rules of engagement that free up the military to take out the enemy especially when they hide in mosques, "holy sites" (seems everything is a holy site) and behind non-combatants. If we had gone into Falujah with those roe we wouldn't be chasing down al Sadr today. My point is that WWII was won because our generals did what had to be done and the political leadership understood this and allowed them to prosecute the war aggressively. Please don't put words in my mouth. I don't want to "kill all" but I do want the soldiers to be able to aggressively pursue and destroy the enemy.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by Pudlugger
I'm not advocating total destruction of the city but yes I am advocating rules of engagement that free up the military to take out the enemy especially when they hide in mosques, "holy sites" (seems everything is a holy site) and behind non-combatants. If we had gone into Falujah with those roe we wouldn't be chasing down al Sadr today. My point is that WWII was won because our generals did what had to be done and the political leadership understood this and allowed them to prosecute the war aggressively. Please don't put words in my mouth. I don't want to "kill all" but I do want the soldiers to be able to aggressively pursue and destroy the enemy. perhaps next time choose your example more carefully. the firebombing of cities during wwII killed more civies then military personnel. while at that time it was necessary because we lacked tech to single out what we wanted to hit. however,

Originally posted by Pudlugger
Marines do best and that is to break things and KILL PEOPLE period. Only AFTER that can we sort it out and get peace in this war.
maybe next time you should clarify in order to prevent being spoken for ;). i agree with using intense pressure and aggressive means, we have become TOO reliant on tech. but truth be told these marines are just as good as those of yesteryear, if given the opportunity(with great loss sadly) they could turn a city upside down. fact of the matter is BOTH political sides are scared of casualties on that scale, and what you advocate would not only create massive collateral damage but we would suffer larger losses then we have been used to, perhaps larger even then vietnam standards. urban warfare is an ugly thing, and you don't get voted in to office with thousands of boys coming home in draped caskets unfortunately. this isn't a democrat thing, its a political thing. I hope we stay and if not finish the job, at least leave iraq in stability, god knows i don't want my kids fighting this war 20 years from now!