Al-Qaida A@@hole Behind London Bombings Now Fertilizer

No kidding.

Because we ARE winning the war on terror.

Dan, you have no credibility for two reasons:

1. we already know from your posts you're a pantywaist and a pussy, so any opinion from you regarding the merits of strength vs conciliation/capitulation are prejudged to arrive at the French-like reply to a threat. Your overpowering bias thus means, at the outset, that you have no credibility in any discussion involving the psychology of modern terror.

2. You assume that everyone agrees that the US started "it," that we created all the terrormurderingfuckwads, and that our policies (in short, to promote free trade and democracy) are the justification for which the terrormurderingfuckwads fight - those same policies, by the way, which (instead of breeding terrormurderingfuckwads) have helped make wealthier societies throughout half of asia, the former soviet bloc, and just about anyplace in the world with better than US$10k per capita GDP.

But most Americans don't agree the terrormurderingfuckwads are right, or somehow justified in their "cause" and that America is wrong. The only people who believe that shit are the eurotrashTM and euroweeniesTM, or UKtrash such as yourself.

I guess they must have missed THAT memo when they were planning the 9/11 attacks.

Yeah. It's all our fault for not cleaning up the mess the virtuous Sovs left.

Proof?

Because for 8 years now, the US hasn't had a terrorist attack on its soil.

Which is strange, because prior to this whole 'war on terror'....there were 9 terrorist attacks against US interests in the past 9 years.

Don't worry folks, if Obama is elected he'll go out of his way to make us seem like "nice guys" to the rest of the world, ensuring our downfall (and the rest of the Western World too.)

Poor imitation. A more accurate one would be:

"Absolutely, NO FUCKING GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE."
"Fuckin' Fags and their 'weddings'. They should all be deported to Iran and see how they like it there."
"Fuck those socialists. If you can't make it on your own, then you deserve to die."
"They want to interrupt my 3 car, 2.5 Children, and white-bread life? Fuck them!"

And now for the left-wing imitation:

"How does HE have more stuff than me? The FUCK!? Give it to me!"
"Violence NEVER solves ANYTHING! Stop it before I beat the fuck out of you!"
"The terrorists just need hugs."
"Everyone should be treated equal. We are all the same. The only special people are fascists. Fuck them."

Not exactly Bock.

Charlie Wilson wanted to give the Afghani's money and resources to rebuild their country after helping them defeat the Soviets.

I'm not saying it was your responsibility, or your fault for what happened....but in a situation like that, pouring a few billion into a crumbled country might have helped out in the end.

^ See? If we hadn't provoked them, the Sovs would never have tried to liberate Afghanistan.

Passive support is still support.

Ridiculous.

Arming and training the Afghani's was the reason the Soviet Union was defeated in the first place. There was NOTHING wrong with that.

The problem was that after the fact, Congress refused to approve any more funds for reconstruction.

Learn your history, dammit.

The problem then was pretty much the same problem as now. You can throw off a dictator who's able to make the trains run on time but you have to spend a lot of time and energy keeping the result stable while it rebuilds.

Just spending the money wouldn't do any good then just like it doesn't do a lot of good now. Turning a firehose on a seedling will just kill it. You've got to build it up slowly.

Too bad you're lying your ass off about the US arming and training Bin Ladin.

And if you hadn't provoked them, they would have never invaded Afghanistan, and in essence they would have never suffered a pretty big blow to their military machine.

IMO, there was nothing wrong with helping out the Afghani people....I'm sure you know as well as I do how much they suffered at the hands of the Soviets.

What I feel was wrong.....was the fact that the US turned a blind eye to everything once the Soviets left.

EXACTLY what the Democrats and certain Republicans want to do right now in Iraq.

Have you noticed how especially on subjects such as this the left will almost always place blame on the US. Which is basically what is being done here by at least one or two people.

Hell at one board, I recall one of the lefties claiming that it was the Republicans fault that Bill Clinton did Monica.

Perhaps.

Which is why I agree with the invasion of Afghanistan, and actually 'staying' there to rebuild the country.

Same with Iraq.

I bet Slick didn't even pay them for the hookup.

Nah, politicians like movie stars are downright cheap and are almost always looking for freebies.

Whilst I'm not prepared to subscribe to Dan's "you're creating 100 more terrorists" without any proper authority to support the assertion, I do think he's right that some of you get carried away with the notion that we're winning the war against this shitbags every tiem we happen to snuff one of them out. Frankly, we're only just beginning and if the Bush Administration was half as effective as some people make out there would be far more stories of noteworthy shitbags being killed or going to jail and far less complaining about Gitmo holding hundreds of relatively useless non-entities. I mean, for fuck's sake how good can they be if OBL is still out there 6 and half years after 9/11????

As for creating "100s" of terrorists, this is obviously an absurd figure, but its undeniable that the cack-handed way the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been generated more terrorist activity. Plain and simply if the war on terror was to be effective Iraq should have been much further down the list and Bush would have been far better remembered as a President who planned in detail before going in, armed with an exit strategy and then some. It could have been done so differently and if it had there would be less shitbags around today to fight and more resources to fight them with.

let's see now..
how many were perpetrated by US citizens?

you're calling the ATF a terrorist group? I can get behind that statement.

Well, considering the quality of the product provided...

Maybe.

I'm talking more about terrorist attacks carried out by Islamic terrorists.

It's idiots like you who think that "going after 1 terrorist creates 100" and by that bullogic we should JUST SIT THERE AND TAKE IT.

Actually to make it easier let's all just convert ot Islam and start kissing the carpet in the direction of Mecca. Hey if it makes them stop it's worth it, aight? I mean, actually fighting them would be dumb, since, like, 100 of them would be made for every one we kill.

You are an idiot, and a traitor to western civilisation.

Nah. It hasn't mattered one jot the way the ventures into Afghanistan and Iraq have been handled. There always has, and will be a groundswell and sympathy for the 'Islamic crusade' in the Middle East and other Islamic countries (bar Turkey).

The only way that things will ever change is through mass education of the poverty stricken, and abolishment of theocracies, which let's be honest, ain't gonna happen in our lifetimes.

The way I see it, is the West has to learn that you're never going to successfully supplant Islam with either MacDonalds, Hollywood or by rolling in the tanks, nor are you going to get the natives to stop practicing Islam.

The muslims need to understand that while western countries are generally welcoming of them practicing Islam within their borders, they do not want, need or will tolerate any efforts to turn said nations into Islamic countries, and the fact that it's not the west's - more specifically America's - fault that a vast majority of Asian muslims live in poverty.

Easy peasy

Oh, I agree. What I am saying is that it's reasonable to assume that the wars have increased the number of turds in the anti-infidel brigade, even more so by the way it was handled, but I am by no means saying, nor have I ever said, that without them there wouldn't be a whole load of shitbags out there.

On the contrary, what I am suggesting is that had the war been planned properly and begun a few years latter we simply may have been more effective in removing some of the shit inside and outside of or borders with greater resources, and, possibly, more support from the international community drawing on the post 9/11 goodwill. Its common sense that better planning for the war and an interim intelligence conflict with greater support from the international community would have left us in a better position then we are now.