Terrorists claim victory in Spain

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Ned


I look forward to Kerry endorsing Zapatero and annoucing a unilateral pullout from Iraq to match Spain's.

What is even more rich in B.S about Zapatero's statement is saying the "New Kerry adminstration". First off the election hasn't yet happened. I bet even the leftists can agree with me here that was pretty irresponsible.

Yep, Kerry truly hates the Iraqi people.

[Ned]

GePap, I think you demonstrated that laying out a positive plan for fighting terrorism can gain support from even Republicans if it makes a lot of sense. Simply second guessing a president without offering a vision or a plan is extremely devisive and hardly productive. We should be united in our fight against terrorism, IMHO.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Giancarlo


Calling me a communist sympathizer is like calling Ronald Reagan a leftist.

He was once. And Nancy Reagan has explixitly said she and Ronnie Raygun did not want to have his face on the dime, as that would be an insult to FDR, which they view as a great president.

What you say isn't relevant. But what is relevant is this: If we send troops in mass it would look like we are taking over.

Oh Fezzie-wezzie: given your title as greatest debator here, obviously now you must retreat to the mountain and never speak again, for you can not let the infadels listen to your sweet lyrical arguements....

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by GePap


He was once. And Nancy Reagan has explixitly said she and Ronnie Raygun did not want to have his face on the dime, as that would be an insult to FDR, which they view as a great president.



Oh Fezzie-wezzie: given your title as greatest debator here, obviously now you must retreat to the mountain and never speak again, for you can not let the infadels listen to your sweet lyrical arguements....

Nope, nope. I win this argument. My words in itself is evidence to prove my argument and I win against your fallacious statements.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by GePap
My main problem with this admin. vis a vi terrorism is that for all their TALK the fact is we have to spend massive amounts of more money on imporving counterterrorism, on making Afghanistan secure and now Iraq secure-the fact is, the sacrifices the American people must make are much greater than this amdin. is even willing to ask of them-for all their talk about them being tough on terrorism.

I prefer Kerry to Bush on terrorism not becuase I think Kerry can all of a sudden change everything overnight in terms of getting agencies to cooperate in the US, but becuase he
1. talks about increasing internal anti-terorrism funding
2. Americans are NOT ready to make the sacrifices necessary-that being the case, a more cordial international relation with our allies will help us coordinate our meager resources better with the meager resources others are willing to invest to improve our bang for the buck.

I doubt that any administration would be honest about the costs of truly improving security here in the US and until europe feels truly threatened by AQ I doubt they will cooperate. Perhaps Madrid will change that.

[GePap]

Originally posted by SpencerH
Not at all, counter-terrorism wasnt my area, but unlike you, I actually have experience in the intel world.

And? You did not actually either make any positive comments about what bush has done concerning intel or make any comments on my statements. So, again, and?

Brilliant! Maybe I should go back home where I belong too!

I doubt they would want you back-but ask BC anyway.

What? You'd rather I call you pap than snaketongue?

Given that I don't really give a crap about what "pap" means in the land of Spenciepoo, I prefer it to snaketounge since it is shorter and sounds more like my call name.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Ned
GePap, I think you demonstrated that laying out a positive plan for fighting terrorism can gain support from even Republicans if it makes a lot of sense. Simply second guessing a president without offering a vision or a plan is extremely devisive and hardly productive. We should be united in our fight against terrorism, IMHO.

Gepap makes points that we can agree with. My disagreement with his 5 point plan (aside from my skepticism of any coalition) is that it puts us in a defensive posture (i.e. homeland security). I prefer to fight the war on their land, and in order to do that we either get covert-nasty or wage war. I believe most americans would prefer open war but aren't willing to pay the price to do so. Until we choose one or the other, we'll only have half measures.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Giancarlo


Nope, nope. I win this argument. My words in itself is evidence to prove my argument and I win against your fallacious statements.

You and Imran have a lot in common, Fez.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by GePap

And? You did not actually either make any positive comments about what bush has done concerning intel

Maybe because it hasnt come up in this thread. My concerns with the intel lapses have been posted in other threads. In short, I dont think enough has been done to re-org the major players but I recognize that they have different roles to play in our security.

or make any comments on my statements. So, again, and?

Your 5 point plan? see above

I doubt they would want you back-but ask BC anyway.

They might not at that

Given that I don't really give a crap about what "pap" means in the land of Spenciepoo, I prefer it to snaketounge since it is shorter and sounds more like my call name.

Wonderfull!

[Ned]

Originally posted by SpencerH


Gepap makes points that we can agree with. My disagreement with his 5 point plan (aside from my skepticism of any coalition) is that it puts us in a defensive posture (i.e. homeland security). I prefer to fight the war on their land, and in order to do that we either get covert-nasty or wage war. I believe most americans would prefer open war but aren't willing to pay the price to do so. Until we choose one or the other, we'll only have half measures.

Still, there are lot of positive features in GePap's plan. It would be nice if the Kerry would deliver his plan for fighting terrorism just like GePap did, with no criticism of past actions. If his plan had merit, it would gain support.

[SpencerH]

DP

how the hell did that happen?

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Ned


Still, there are lot of positive features in GePap's plan. It would be nice if the Kerry would deliver his plan for fighting terrorism just like GePap did, with no criticism of past actions. If his plan had merit, it would gain support.

The problem is there's a big difference between what you'd like to see happen and what you can get done. We cant even get a national ID card through congress! We're not allowed to use security cameras to take everyones picture who enters an airport and checking it with databases. This list goes on and on...........

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by SpencerH


So you advocate re-arming the CIA (metaphorically speaking) and letting them actually conduct nasty covert ops again?

Who is using Che's PC?

I'm thinking more along the lines of the FBI and Interpol. The CIA aren't police. As far as the CIA snuffing terrorists, no problem, as long as they are terrorists and not some political organization. I may not like the jihadists, but as long as they're talking and not doing, we should leave them alone.

[Ned]

Originally posted by SpencerH


The problem is there's a big difference between what you'd like to see happen and what you can get done. We cant even get a national ID card through congress! We're not allowed to use security cameras to take everyones picture who enters an airport and checking it with databases. This list goes on and on...........

Spencer, I fully support a national ID card. I wonder where the opposition is coming from and why?

[Ramo]

It's an assault on civil liberties and an attack on "illegal" immigrants.