SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Win Smith who wrote (85169)9/17/2008 9:44:59 PM
From: Cogito  Respond to of 541658
 
>>I don't know exactly where you're going here, but hardly anybody objected to going after al Qaeda in Afghanistan, which would fit the description of going after them there rather than here.<<

Win -

I think our invasion of Afghanistan was more an example of going after them where they were. We didn't have the option of fighting them here, anyway.

As for Iraq, you make a very good point.

>>If you think about it, it's really pretty offensive to the Iraqis we were supposed to be setting free to turn around and say we had this grand plan of making Iraq a terrorist magnet, so we could fight "them" "there" rather than "here".<<

It's not just offensive, it's unconscionable. How many Iraqis were killed by terrorists who weren't there before we created the chaos that gave them cover?

- Allen



To: Win Smith who wrote (85169)9/18/2008 7:52:01 PM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 541658
 
which would fit the description of going after them there rather than here

The other catch phrase, as I recall, was "drain the swamp." Perhaps you find that one more apt.

If you think about it, it's really pretty offensive to the Iraqis we were supposed to be setting free to turn around and say we had this grand plan of making Iraq a terrorist magnet, so we could fight "them" "there" rather than "here".

Indeed.