StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Please, for the sake of a good survey, don't vote if you are not American.

What do the American voters feel about Mr. Bush's 'War on Terror'?

Its well worth doing and if we acutal go about it Intellgently(That more then anything else is the hard part) it can be done

We are face with almost a Rebel Allance esk situation here to make a comparsion

As Ysard Issard obsevered the current situation is akin to fighting fires

One can douse every single flame or one can deny the fire fuel

Is this a sign of the Americans gettign all elitest and shit. ur very arrogant to declare a war on terrorists when infact you goverment set up numerous terrorist groups from the IRA to Al'Quieda

I think the US needs to get back on track. I supported it before Bush started in one Iraq. He was going after real terroism. I didn't agree with all his methods but in general was a skeptical supporter.

Now, I'm not for it. Bush is using it to go after people he personally doesn't like. He slipped up and revealed his real reasons when he said "They tried to kill my dad". He has every reason to be pissed but I don't like the idea of going to war to even a personal score.

I don't know if it's winnable or not, but certainly worth pursuing. American foreign policy is imperialistic in nature, and frankly I'd be scared to see anybody do onto us what we have done on to people around the rest of the world. Gotta keep the heathens in their place, I say.

Muad'Dib wrote:Is this a sign of the Americans gettign all elitest and shit. ur very arrogant to declare a war on terrorists when infact you goverment set up numerous terrorist groups from the IRA to Al'Quieda

AFAIK, we did not set up either Al Quaida or the IRA. There have been elements in the US that assisted them (especially wrt the IRA), but I'm not aware of actually starting them.

And even if we did, wouldn't at least be a good thing to fix the mistake and crush them?

phongn wrote:

Muad'Dib wrote:Is this a sign of the Americans gettign all elitest and shit. ur very arrogant to declare a war on terrorists when infact you goverment set up numerous terrorist groups from the IRA to Al'Quieda

AFAIK, we did not set up either Al Quaida or the IRA. There have been elements in the US that assisted them (especially wrt the IRA), but I'm not aware of actually starting them.

And even if we did, wouldn't at least be a good thing to fix the mistake and crush them?

Some people would blame us either way. So we might as well fix them.

We support Iraq to smash Iran
We supported Al-Quadia to hurt the Soviets


There is ryhme and reason for everything

Now after the Shit Clinton put us through we are finaly correcting our mistakes(Don't you remeber? It was Clinton who stoped North Korea's Nuclear Weapons Program along with Jimmy Carter in 94! Heck Jimmy even won a Nobel Peace Prize for it )

I fully support the war on terror, living here in NYC and I was here for 9/11 I can fully say that there is not enough we can do to exterminate these roaches and restore some peace and stability. Is it a coincidence that there have been no major terrorist attacks against the US since 9/11? The strategy of preemptive strikes is PRECISELY what we need to deter more terrorist attacks, any particular reason why we should wait for American blood to be spilled before we strike?

So I'm with Bush all the way. And I just LOVE the crow that those folks are eating about North Korea when Bush talked about his axis of evil. How they snickered and laughed about that statement. What is it about othe nations that they can't recognioze that there are evil regimes out there, regimes that only mean us harm?? Oh that's right, they can afford to be bitchy about it because they live under an umbrella of American security.

Muad'Dib wrote:Is this a sign of the Americans gettign all elitest and shit. ur very arrogant to declare a war on terrorists when infact you goverment set up numerous terrorist groups from the IRA to Al'Quieda

I can't believe Muad'Dib had the audacity to suggest that America should not be upset over 9/11 and the various other terrorist attacks that it has suffered. In fact, it sounds like he is justifying the actions of the terrorists. There isn't anything that I can say to convince you of your folly (if you are really so demented to believe that trash you just spewed). The US has every right to fight terrorists and destroy them. What is your suggestion for dealing with them??? Do you support them???

As I see it, what choise do we have. We are the big guy's on the block and no matter what we do we will be the target for the disgruntled in the world weather we had a part in their despare or not(and mostly not).
A war on terrorism is winnable but like Bean said, it has to be fought using intellegence(general not spy stuff although that will be needed as well). We can not hunt down every single nutjob with a death wish around the world nor can we do it just here in America. We have to go after the infrastructure that enables these people to be dangerous. Yes a bunch of people with guns are dangerous but the real dangerous ones are the ones with millions if not billions of dollars with access to weapons, computers, transportation and other niffty things.
Not all of the war need be combat, some can be done with common sence law enforcement both here and around the world, not facist law enforcment but common sence. Diplomacy is also important to assist and even compell some of our so called friends to help erradicate the conditions that help terrorist not just survive but flourish. But we must not fool our selves to think that we don't have to fight some of these places that terrorists uses as havens. When force is warrented we must step up to the plate and start a swinging.
This doesn't mean Iraq per se, but I do think that eliminating Iraq would help the terror situation in a whole host of other ways to include setting an example for the other nations that harbor terrorist or help them in one way or another. Help douse the Irsreil, Palenstinian conflict by removing money and support to the terrorists in that region. And in general calm the region down so the law enforcement and diplomacy efforts could make more of a head way in the ME.

Mr Bean wrote:We support Iraq to smash Iran
We supported Al-Quadia to hurt the Soviets

We supported the Mujahideen, which IIRC would later become the Northern Alliance. We did not support Al Quaida.

Stravo wrote:I fully support the war on terror, living here in NYC and I was here for 9/11 I can fully say that there is not enough we can do to exterminate these roaches and restore some peace and stability. Is it a coincidence that there have been no major terrorist attacks against the US since 9/11? The strategy of preemptive strikes is PRECISELY what we need to deter more terrorist attacks, any particular reason why we should wait for American blood to be spilled before we strike?

So I'm with Bush all the way. And I just LOVE the crow that those folks are eating about North Korea when Bush talked about his axis of evil. How they snickered and laughed about that statement. What is it about othe nations that they can't recognioze that there are evil regimes out there, regimes that only mean us harm?? Oh that's right, they can afford to be bitchy about it because they live under an umbrella of American security.

I FULLY support Stravo on this one.

Stravo wrote:I fully support the war on terror, living here in NYC and I was here for 9/11 I can fully say that there is not enough we can do to exterminate these roaches and restore some peace and stability. Is it a coincidence that there have been no major terrorist attacks against the US since 9/11? The strategy of preemptive strikes is PRECISELY what we need to deter more terrorist attacks, any particular reason why we should wait for American blood to be spilled before we strike?

So I'm with Bush all the way. And I just LOVE the crow that those folks are eating about North Korea when Bush talked about his axis of evil. How they snickered and laughed about that statement. What is it about othe nations that they can't recognioze that there are evil regimes out there, regimes that only mean us harm?? Oh that's right, they can afford to be bitchy about it because they live under an umbrella of American security.

Maybe the fact that there have not been terrorist strikes in the US is related to the fact that increased security is making their movements more difficult.Or maybe more simply they are already preparing the next strike.
So there are good chances that it may well be a coincidence.
One thing that has not ceased to amaze me is that so many americans believe that people willing to kill themselves if they can bring some westerners with them are going to be deterred by your military toys.
Your incapability to cope with this simple fact is... well I have no words.
And please can you bother to explain me why Korea would be part of an axis of evil? Does the simply fact to posses nuclear weapons means that they have some organic alliance with Iran and Iraq?Unless for you selling weapons to everyone who pays with hard cash means having an alliance,which is a curious concept.In such a case I can only wait for the moment when you will scream in horror hearing from your president that Pakistan has a complete nuclear arsenal and is ruled by a dictator.

I can only wait for the moment when you will scream in horror hearing from your president that Pakistan has a complete nuclear arsenal and is ruled by a dictator.

A Good Dictator as they go however Pakistan/India sitatuion is a unique one as they could give a flying fuck what the rest of the world thinks they each want the other dead

Piett is a perfect example of what I'm about to talk about.


If America does nothing but protect it's interests, the member nations of the UN bitch and moan about unilateral attacks, selfish America, America opposed to world peace, etc. etc.

If America steps in to allievate conflict in other nations, the member nations of the UN bitch and moan about bully-boy America, imperialistic America, the Imperium Americana, etc. etc.

Damned if we do, damned if we don't. Frankly, if we get bitched at either way, kill the bastards.

Mr Bean wrote:We support Iraq to smash Iran
We supported Al-Quadia to hurt the Soviets


There is ryhme and reason for everything

Now after the Shit Clinton put us through we are finaly correcting our mistakes(Don't you remeber? It was Clinton who stoped North Korea's Nuclear Weapons Program along with Jimmy Carter in 94! Heck Jimmy even won a Nobel Peace Prize for it )

The US never supported Al Quadia. We supporter its founder, yes before he started the orginzation. He's never liked Americans by all reports, but he only turned terrorist after the Gulf war.

Withdrawn, Replace it with

"We supported People Vaugly Like Al-Quadi"
Happy?

Cyril wrote:Piett is a perfect example of what I'm about to talk about.


If America does nothing but protect it's interests, the member nations of the UN bitch and moan about unilateral attacks, selfish America, America opposed to world peace, etc. etc.

If America steps in to allievate conflict in other nations, the member nations of the UN bitch and moan about bully-boy America, imperialistic America, the Imperium Americana, etc. etc.

Damned if we do, damned if we don't. Frankly, if we get bitched at either way, kill the bastards.

YES, I'm glad to see someone else thinking like I do.

Cyril wrote:Piett is a perfect example of what I'm about to talk about.


If America does nothing but protect it's interests, the member nations of the UN bitch and moan about unilateral attacks, selfish America, America opposed to world peace, etc. etc.

If America steps in to allievate conflict in other nations, the member nations of the UN bitch and moan about bully-boy America, imperialistic America, the Imperium Americana, etc. etc.

Damned if we do, damned if we don't. Frankly, if we get bitched at either way, kill the bastards.

You have not addressed my points.HOW ON EARTH ARE PEOPLE WILLING TO KILL THEMSELVES GOING TO BE DETERRED BY A YOUR PREEMPTIVE STRIKE AGAINST IRAQ?
Simple, they are not.The only thing that will stop them is A BULLET IN THEIR HEADS.Thet do not give a damn shit about you attacking this or that state.The four terrorists in Iraq will have probably left the country or gone into hiding by when you will enter in it.But it seems a to be concept that you americans find hard to process.
So as the Duchess say, "since we have the biggest stick, let use it". It will not eliminate the terrorists,but who cares, the important is blowing up something.Maybe with a lot of luck one terrorist or two will be caught in the process.
I have supported the war in Afghanistan,but the war in Iraq is going to be the most stupid thing that Bush has done so far.The only possible justification for it is that Saddam is a dictator.But since you are currently supporting dictators (Musharraf) that does not really count as a justification.
But please go,pray that the whole Iraqui army will lower its pants down without making a stand in Baghdad,so that you will get an other zero casualties war, and start to loot the country oil reserves as the Duchess (and many at Washington) is suggesting.But then do not complain about the results.

As a Canadian I am still allowed to vote on this poll.

What I think is really stupid about the War on Terrorism is that even though the IRA has been internationally recognized as a terrorist group since 1922, the US supports IRA, not directly but they do allow Americans to financially support the IRA.
Why is it that when Bush and Blair talked about the WOT, as soon as the Brits joined the coalition, the IRA said they were willing to negotiate, and all. Without American money, the couldn't continue. But again, the Americans are now contributing to IRA, financially, completely against the WOT.
If they really want to end terrorism, they should go to Ireland and Northern Ireland and wage war against the IRA.

What I think is really stupid about the War on Terrorism is that even though the IRA has been internationally recognized as a terrorist group since 1922, the US supports IRA, not directly but they do allow Americans to financially support the IRA. Why is it that when Bush and Blair talked about the WOT, as soon as the Brits joined the coalition, the IRA said they were willing to negotiate, and all. Without American money, the couldn't continue. But again, the Americans are now contributing to IRA, financially, completely against the WOT. If they really want to end terrorism, they should go to Ireland and Northern Ireland and wage war against the IRA.

That's capitalism; the US Government has no control over it. If that sort of things pisses you off, go bitch at the French.

Cyril wrote:

What I think is really stupid about the War on Terrorism is that even though the IRA has been internationally recognized as a terrorist group since 1922, the US supports IRA, not directly but they do allow Americans to financially support the IRA. Why is it that when Bush and Blair talked about the WOT, as soon as the Brits joined the coalition, the IRA said they were willing to negotiate, and all. Without American money, the couldn't continue. But again, the Americans are now contributing to IRA, financially, completely against the WOT. If they really want to end terrorism, they should go to Ireland and Northern Ireland and wage war against the IRA.

That's capitalism; the US Government has no control over it. If that sort of things pisses you off, go bitch at the French.

The French?
Why them?

Ted wrote:The French?
Why them?

Frenchs are probably a symbol of the evil EU socialism:roll:

Admiral Piett wrote:

Ted wrote:The French?
Why them?

Frenchs are probably a symbol of the evil EU socialism

According to yankee's, probably.