Terrorism can not be permitted.

If you want to argue the point, go ahead, but you do not have to try to insult him. If crappy logic would disqualify someone from a Phd. then their are many who would not have one.

Whether guilty of being involved in 9/11 or not, Iraq had a rap sheet a mile long.

 

Frankie:

You are all over the place. You have not offered any solutions, but rather add a new topic to every post. All you want to do is complain about the US, and bait for more argument. Typical political rheotoric always criticize, never offer a solution, accuse the opposition of being a racist, prejudice, narrow minded, a war monger, and especially greedy, and then whine about someone personally attacking you. Your game is old man.

If this was all about Iraq's oil then why is the US banking the whole effort, and not asking Iraq to pay it back with future oil profits? That is really immoral huh?

 

plcscott

My position is quite clear.

Actually I have, may I suggest you read my posts again.

I have offered a solution. Read my posts.

Who did I call "narrow-minded," "racist," a "Warmonger" and "greedy?"

I note that your sense of fair play vanishes when someone who happens to share your views wrongfully accusing me of supporting terrorism?

Why are you not complaining about that? Just curious.

Show me where I said that this was all about Iraq's oil. It seems to me that you are setting up a straw man then attacking it?

 

Read your own Israeli Comments

Comments which seek to equate the actions of the Israeli's to those of the Palestinian terrorist do, in fact, aid and abet terrorists in their terror. The responses being made by the Israeli's are exactly what the terrorists want because it diverts attention away from the depravity of their own actions. Kind of like when a parent pays attention to a child throwing a tantrum, it just encourages them. Your assertion of, "Oh well, look what the Israeli's are doing", supports terrorism, period. That is how I dare.

 

Quite frankly I am sick of this whole "muddle" east thing. If we had a sound energy policy/plan we would be less inclined to interfere with middle-east affairs - face it, its all about the oil and we have an oil man at the helm and many politicians getting oil money.
Mission Accomplished is for Bush Sr. - see dad I did good !!!!
If you knock the hornets nest off the tree and dont have enough sense to move out - expect to get stung. Unfortunately these stings can be fatal.
In retrospect, this whole post 9/11 handling has been a complete failure - we do not have the two principals in custody or accounted for, Taliban is regouping in Afghanistan, no WMD found in Iraq, long standing allies "pissed" at us, world opinion and support against US, more threats by terrorists home and abroad, Iraq in chaos, US population divided and the 2004 election is being handed to the Democrats but they are clueless. We seem to be imploding with the present administration sucking as hard as they possibly can.
I'm done -- sorry.

 

Geno,

I agree with some of what you say but you are a little bit pessimistic I believe. Don't take everything the press says as the gospel. They thrive on gloom and doom. It sells paper and air time.

I agree we need a sound energy policy and that is food for another thread. However, our energy policy is really a problem of our own creation (we the citizen that is). There have been very good sound hybrid cars which while a little expensive are very competitive in price if you figure the tax break and fuel savings. Are they being bought? No, they sit in showrooms forever. Here in central Illinois they aren't such a good deal as they perform least effectively on highways but even in the cities no one is buying. We are buying gas guzzling SUV's by the droves. Nuclear energy powers 70% of France's electricity needs but here it is taboo. I am not commenting on the merits of that argument in that statement just noting it. Wind power is just not feasible. It would take 130,000 acres of windmills just to power the homes here in St. Louis and that isn't figuring in the industrial and infrastructure needs. Even then, the power would only be available about 30% of the time due to lack of enouch wind. We would still need our current coal and gas generated plants the other 70% of the time. We could better use the land producing food and really don't want the visual blight that many windmills would bring. The same faults of wind power also apply to solar. However, solar power has better potential as supplemental power if the panels are built into buildings at construction. Just need to work on getting them cheaper. Hydro (Water) power has its own ecological problems and is really out of favor these days.

It is not an easy question. Is this partly about energy? Yes, but our country cannot currently survive w/o a reliable and fairly priced source of energy. It imacts all of our daily lives from the time we get up to the time we go to bed, It powers our cars, our homes and our workplaces. It is not an issue without substance on our national agenda. It is one of the most important things we have to deal with every day. What we need is reasoned debate and not the hysterical rantings currently in its place.