From 9/11 to 11/4 How soon we forget.

[Woolly Bugger]

On the most recent anniversary of 9/11, both candidates walked side-by-side into Ground Zero, presumably to underscore some baseline commonality of purpose. This was appropriate, but it was also in some ways misleading.

The animating impulses of Mr. McCain's life have always revolved around the act of confrontation: against the traditions and methods of the Naval Academy; against his captors in Vietnam; against "special interests," especially those connected to his own party; against Saddam Hussein, Vladimir Putin and the general threat posed by radical Islam. Most, though not all, of these were fights worth having, and 9/11 is a reminder of what happens when they are avoided.

By contrast, Mr. Obama's candidacy rests on the promise of transcendence, though in practice that often seems like a form of slipperiness. He has campaigned on the theme that the old categories no longer apply: not of race or class, or of blue and red states, or of left and right. And in the matter of race, the transcendence Mr. Obama offers is genuinely wonderful.

But not everything is susceptible to transcendence. Terrorists will not be less dangerous by being contextualized in a matrix of threats that includes climate change and global poverty, or because they will be mollified by Mr. Obama's middle name. Nor will Iran be deterred from developing nuclear weapons because a President Obama will restore faith in "brand America."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122575970356795433.html

[fleming13]

I'm going shoppping!

-duct tape
-plastic sheeting
-ammunition
-canned goods
-dry goods
-join the NRA

Anybody need anything?  o-o

I hope I'm wrong, but I've long thought that if we keep the fighting overseas, it is good for Homeland Security.  If we pull out of either spot too quickly, I think we get attacked again.  Boy, I really hope I'm wrong on this.

[launchone]

I'm going shoppping!

-duct tape
-plastic sheeting
-ammunition
-canned goods
-dry goods
-join the NRA

Anybody need anything?  o-o

I hope I'm wrong, but I've long thought that if we keep the fighting overseas, it is good for Homeland Security.  If we pull out of either spot too quickly, I think we get attacked again.  Boy, I really hope I'm wrong on this.

Attacked by Iraq again?

[fleming13]

I'm quite aware that Iraq did not attack us.  I can't be the only person that thinks this way.  If we pull out of Afghanistan or Iraq and leave destabilized countries it would be easy picking for someone unfriendly to the US to come along and step in.  If that happens, and said organization is friendly to radical terrorists, we have another Afghanistan, eithier in Afghanistan or Iraq.  The reason for initially going in is trumped by the high cost of pulling out too fast, in my opinion.  If Terrorists can spin it as a loss, then it will impower their cause.  Keep in mind it does not matter how you or I interpret the pullout.  Only how they can spin it to support their cause.  If we leave the slightest amount of room for them to spin it as a defeat of the US we open the door for trouble.  Obviously we cannot hide in N America and hope they don't come here, they already have.  Which means we need to stay vigilant throughout the rest of the world.  If that means keeping them occupied somewhere else, I think that is what we need to do.  I hate paying for the war, esp when we have so many domestic problems.  However, I feel that it is something that we need to see through to completion.  We need to be "in it to win it."  Which means a longterm conflict.  Unfortunately, I don't think the majority of the country has the desire or understanding to maintain it long term.  This fight is not as simple as taking over a country.  That part was pretty easy.  Chasing down an enemy with no base, no home, no uniform, and no particular country to reside in is tough and takes time. 

[launchone]

I'm quite aware that Iraq did not attack us.  I can't be the only person that thinks this way.  If we pull out of Afghanistan or Iraq and leave destabilized countries it would be easy picking for someone unfriendly to the US to come along and step in.  If that happens, and said organization is friendly to radical terrorists, we have another Afghanistan, eithier in Afghanistan or Iraq.  The reason for initially going in is trumped by the high cost of pulling out too fast, in my opinion.  If Terrorists can spin it as a loss, then it will impower their cause.  Keep in mind it does not matter how you or I interpret the pullout.  Only how they can spin it to support their cause.  If we leave the slightest amount of room for them to spin it as a defeat of the US we open the door for trouble.  Obviously we cannot hide in N America and hope they don't come here, they already have.  Which means we need to stay vigilant throughout the rest of the world.  If that means keeping them occupied somewhere else, I think that is what we need to do.  I hate paying for the war, esp when we have so many domestic problems.  However, I feel that it is something that we need to see through to completion.  We need to be "in it to win it."  Which means a longterm conflict.  Unfortunately, I don't think the majority of the country has the desire or understanding to maintain it long term.  This fight is not as simple as taking over a country.  That part was pretty easy.  Chasing down an enemy with no base, no home, no uniform, and no particular country to reside in is tough and takes time. 

I agree, and after much consideration I am still deliberating whether or not we should leave. I truly do not know what is best

[fleming13]

Launch,

Our best hope on this is that he does not go too far either direction with his aids and cabinet.  If he wants to heal the devide it is going to need to be fairly centrist in their beliefs.  I'm just not sure that is possible given the folks who are in Washington.  I know I come off hard Rep, but I am a registered Ind and will stay that way.  I'm less interested in what we should have done and more interested in the best direction for this country.  Yeah, my guy lost.  Several of my pics are going home.  My only hope is that he does what is best for this country, not necesarily everything that is best for his party.  Know what I mean.  I'm hoping the filibuster proof Senate does not happen either.  Seems there are some races still open.  To tell you the truth either party that got that would concern me right now.  I don't think either side is responsible enough to handle that kind of control.  Buckle up and keep your hands and feet inside the ride at all times! 

[walt]

I'm quite aware that Iraq did not attack us.  I can't............<snipped for brevity>....  This fight is not as simple as taking over a country.  That part was pretty easy.  Chasing down an enemy with no base, no home, no uniform, and no particular country to reside in is tough and takes time. 

thought out and written well.... good job f13.

that of course begs the question which puzzles me, how to downsize in iraq and back into, well, as the brits used to say..... "the great game."

warmonger walt

[launchone]

Launch,

Our best hope on this is that he does not go too far either direction with his aids and cabinet.  If he wants to heal the devide it is going to need to be fairly centrist in their beliefs.  I'm just not sure that is possible given the folks who are in Washington.  I know I come off hard Rep, but I am a registered Ind and will stay that way.  I'm less interested in what we should have done and more interested in the best direction for this country.  Yeah, my guy lost.  Several of my pics are going home.  My only hope is that he does what is best for this country, not necesarily everything that is best for his party.  Know what I mean.  I'm hoping the filibuster proof Senate does not happen either.  Seems there are some races still open.  To tell you the truth either party that got that would concern me right now.  I don't think either side is responsible enough to handle that kind of control.  Buckle up and keep your hands and feet inside the ride at all times! 

I'm with you all the way. Filibuster-proof is not what I think is in the best interest of the country. Additionally, I am almost disgusted with how Pelosi has squandered her initial gravitas and momentum. I hope McCain will continue to be a grounded and powerful voice in politics. I am very concerned for our men in uniform and hope a reasonable compromise can be reached.

[fleming13]

Walt, unfortunately I think we downsize only as much as the Iraqis get of their butts and start taking responsiblity/control of their own destiny.  Leaving Iraq stable in the middle east will be something that you can't put a price on.  We don't have to get involved in all the other countries if Iraq is successful.  Hopefully they will start wanting more democracy for themselves and take care of it with only minimal involvement from the US.  If we stay involved I bet we bounce the numbers of troops back and forth between Iraq and Afghanistan for a while.  But make no mistake about it, for this to be successfull we will have a big presence in both areas for a long time.  But hey what are the World Police for.  :police: 

[launchone]

Walt, unfortunately I think we downsize only as much as the Iraqis get of their butts and start taking responsiblity/control of their own destiny.  Leaving Iraq stable in the middle east will be something that you can't put a price on.  We don't have to get involved in all the other countries if Iraq is successful.  Hopefully they will start wanting more democracy for themselves and take care of it with only minimal involvement from the US.  If we stay involved I bet we bounce the numbers of troops back and forth between Iraq and Afghanistan for a while.  But make no mistake about it, for this to be successfull we will have a big presence in both areas for a long time.  But hey what are the World Police for.  :police: 

Interesting article to that topic in Reuter's: http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE4A47OE20081105?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews&rpc=22&sp=true

[fleming13]

Thanks for the link.