Do you agree with the following statement made by one of my colleagues?
"Democrats rigorously maintain that Clinton did everything in his power to fight terror...however now they throw up every road block that we need to fight it today...audio and financial surveillance, the Patriot Act and aggressive interrogation. They can't have it both ways. Now they say that our proactive attack of terror is breeding more terrorists. When we went to Europe to fight the Nazis did we create more Nazis? Under their twisted logic...we are not
supposed to do anything because it will anger our enemy. These people are truly psychotic."
I absolutely do, althought I don't think that they are ALL psychotic(!)
2006-09-26 05:04:16 · 16 answers · asked by EDDie 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
You are right, Joe Lieberman is not psychotic, and he is one of them(although it is questionable now)
You know, there are times in History, when it is best to be a Chamberlain, but not today. Today's strategy, in my humble opinion, is to be 100% Churchill.
Look at Israel, they are trying to appease their enemy for decades now, and look where it got them. They only got more terror coming their way.
2006-09-26 05:16:12 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nazis and terrorists are not the same thing; the premise starts off on very disingenuous grounds.
The quote also ignores that western powers (and American companies) built and supported Hitler and the Nazis to a point - it was seen as a safer counterbalance to the threat of Communism.
Did Clinton do everyhnig in his power? Probably. Keep in mind, from 1994 on, Republicans actively obstructed everything he did - or tried to do.
"They can't have it both ways" ??? They can't have what both ways? Unimpeded invasions of privacy is the only way to fight terrorism? The person quoted here is hardly the person to call anyone ELSE 'psychotic' -- it's time to buy a mirror.
"Twisted logic?" again, the person quoted has yet to exonerate him/herself from that category.
"we are not
supposed to do anything because it will anger our enemy" ??? Says who? Where does this come from? Getting back to Nazis, it reminds me of Goebbles - twisting 'facts' so far into progaganda of the most sinister kind.
2006-09-26 05:27:19 · answer #2 · answered by kent_shakespear 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Frankly, no.... Nazis don't equal terrorist. That's a HORRIBLE explanation.
Terrorists are brought into that group by ideas. They are recruited out of their hate. When we bomb a village.... the people in that village get angry, and the religious terrorists in the village tell them that they can get back to America... AND go to heaven!
I'm not saying don't fight terrorism, I'm just saying that the way we're fighting it now (killing a lot of innocent civilians too) isn't working. There are more terrorists now than ever and that increases with our decreasing foreign policy.
I hate terrorists, I do. The thing is, that they hit us hard.... and look at us. We're almost destroying ourselves. We're more divided than ever thanks to polarization. The far left and far right now are so biased that it hurts. Inter-party trust is way down. Airport security is at an all-time high (understandably), etc.. etc...
And we STILL can't find one man in the desert?
To summarize, no one said don't do anything because it will anger the enemy. That's TWISTING my words. It's just a matter of fighting this war right. This isn't like fighting Nazis. Nazis had an army and were from a country. Terrorists are from anywhere. They aren't as easy to get rid of. Think about it.
{EDIT}
"he could have done more concerning Ladden but was to busy in the sack with lewinsky and getting recalled"
At the time Bin Laden was just another terrorist in the Middle East.. No one really knew much about him or cared. Did you know about him? What did you do? Why didn't you send a happy letter to Clinton telling him that in the future, Bin Laden will attack the world trade centers. Stop blaming Clinton for Bin Laden.
2006-09-26 05:12:02 · answer #3 · answered by ? 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Of course Nazis are the creation of Adolf Hitler. Trying to stay on the rational side of the present problems though, Bill Clinton hasn't been President for over 6 years now. I hope a pray everyday now that our current administration will lead America away from the current fear that we live in. Our economy is suffering from the cost's of our present military being deployed as it is. I don't see anything being done other than it already is until the new Congress is elected in November, so only time will tell.
2006-09-26 05:11:54 · answer #4 · answered by Kemo Sahbe 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Agreed!
2006-09-26 05:17:42 · answer #5 · answered by battle-ax 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I disagree. I'd rather have my freedom than safety. The point of America is to be free. Not to have your freedoms taken away for an illusion of safety in an atmosphere of fear. We had both freedom and safety for decades before our freedoms were taken away. There is no reason to take them away now. The war is not here. Just fear.
2006-09-26 05:12:26 · answer #6 · answered by Kharm 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Where did you get that ridicules quote from bill o'reilly? You're a moron, the Nazis attacked france and poland, Iraq attacked no one!
2006-09-26 05:37:43 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
It's not about a "war on terror". It's REALLY about THIS!...
http://www.strayreality.com/Lanis_Strayreality/iraq.htm
2006-09-26 05:22:09 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
AGREE!! That is the first statement I have read today that makes any sense. Great argument! Thanks for that - it is good to know that there are some individuals with sense left in this country.
2006-09-26 05:43:10 · answer #9 · answered by Fortune Favors the Brave 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
he could have done more concerning Ladden but was to busy in the sack with lewinsky and getting recalled
2006-09-26 05:09:51 · answer #10 · answered by aldo 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋