1--The reason why Japan attacked America is because Japan was an expansionist dictatorship. Japan saw the U.S. as its only real threat in the Pacific-which was true. They knew that as they expanded, they would eventually come in contact with the U.S. and be at war. This was a sneak attack, and not at all comparable with our war against Iraq or The Taliban which were both preceded by months and months of warnings, threats, cajoling, and promises to attack if certain reasonable requirements were not met.
2--FaithinKarma--we have found chemical and biological weapons brucella and Congo-Crimean hemorrhagic fever, ricin, sarin, aflatoxin and long-range missiles in Iraq. We have found barrels and barrels of HIDDEN fertilizer (not packed for landscaping projects). ARE YOU AWARE OF THIS? We KNOW that the Iraqis were attempting to purchase Uranium from Niger. ARE YOU AWARE OF THIS? IF this is true--and, indeed it is--how can you state with a straight face that there was no weapons program? There obviously was a program, FIK.
It's interesting to note you are going to "spin" Bush's statements of faith in God to a negative. I don't profess to really know what Bush was exactly thinking at that moment. . .but, if someone has FAITH in God, and they believe they are doing what is morally correct, then they may make a statement such as the one Bush made. No, I honestly do not believe he meant that he speaks God's words. . .but, I do believe he meant that he feels he is doing the Right thing, the Correct thing. And, he probably looks to God for guidance. Personally, I admire that--despite the fact that I am not a Christian.
You said, that Bush himself has said that DESPITE no WMDS he was still right to go to war. Absolutely. The Iraqis obstructed the UN's weapons investigators so that they couldn't fulfill their mission. To concerned people, the only purpose to obstruct would be to hide. They also shot at our planes constantly! The first Gulf War did not end with a Peace Treaty. It ended with a Cessation of Hostilities predicated on Iraq's complying with specific non-aggression requirements. Firing on our aircraft EVEN ONCE was a breach of the Cessation of Hostitilites agreement which meant that a state of war again was in force. This Gulf War is actually an EXTENSION of the first Gulf War. We've had justification to attack Iraq almost since the week that the first Gulf war "ended" because Iraq continually fired at our airplanes in the no-fly zone. That is considered an Act of War. For whatever reason prior, we had chosen not to respond. ANy argument that states that the U.S. was NOT justified to go into Iraq and overthrow Saddam is fundamentally flawed because Saddam was NEVER in compliance with the Cessation of Hostilities agreement of the first Gulf War. That, in itself, actually makes our bombing retaliatory--not even pre-emptive. But that's another argument in itself.
This is very similar to what is Iran is doing now, and it's fairly well-accepted that they ABSOLUTELY have an active weapons program. And now that the 9-11 commission (that total waste of time body) has identified the Iranian intelligence as being involved with Al Quaeda prior to 9-11, the question is: who's next? Iran or Syria. . .my guess? Iran. Would that be a crime in the eyes of the liberals if we took out Iran's nuclear facilities as Israel took out Iraq's in 1981? If Israel hadn't bombed Iraq's in '81, we'd already have had a nuclear war already between Iraq and Iran.
Why is the peace movement in Israel dead. . Why is Peace Now even more marginalized now than before? It's because Israel has to deal with existential concerns, i.e., the very existence of the state. The terror attacks by the Palestinians against Israeli civilians --resulting in the constant violent and appalling deaths of innocent women and children asleep in their beds-- put the State at such a risk by destabilizing it by terrorism, the people generally rejected the appeasement approach of the left and far left. Israel clearly understands that one cannot negotiate in a rational manner with people that want nothing other than your deaths and the destruction of their way of life. That is exactly the same situation that we are now in after 9-11. It's just that many Americans and most people in Europe don't understand this. How does someone negotiate with someone whose goal is to kill you, period? That is the context in which preemptive strike policy is absolutely necessary because if the people who only want to kill us and see the destruction of our way of life get their hands on nuclear weapons, they will use them. And, if they do, all this silly argument from the appeasers and the lefties demanding negotiations and appeasement will be shown to be as empty as they are. But, by then, we'll all be dead so it won't matter anyways. This is our world, FIK. 9-11 caused a fundamental change in how we as a nation and we as a people have to conduct ourselves. We are now facing the same kind of existential threat that Israel has faced since 1948.
People on the left, people in Europe are desperately in denial. They want to go back to the way things used to be on 9-10. Guess what? Those days may NEVER come back. But, if they do, it won't be in our lifetime or our children's or our children's children's lifetime. That is a fundamental truth that all reasonable people need to understand and accept. If we're successful in Iraq, which is very much in doubt, in building a democratic society there, the world and the middle east will be a much better place. Iraq is the BEGINNING.
I could go on and on and on as you've already seen. Even if you disagree, it doesn't matter. Let's try to get past all these little points. Let's bring this argument to its very core. And there is ONLY one question--and from that question, everybody splits from there. How you stand on that question is the fork on the road for everything else.
The core question is, "what does 9-11 mean"? If you believe that 9-11 signals a core, fundamental paradigm shift in how the world works, and the way we have to live our lives and operate our domestic and our foreign policy, you are probably a Bush supporter and on the Right side of the fence. If you believe that the United Nations will solve all the problems of Islamic fanaticism, protect us from our enemies, and rationally convince fanatic murderers to cease and desist, and you think that this is a potentially correct approach, you are probably on the Left and a Kerry supporter. The truth is, one side is ABSOLUTELY correct and the other is ABSOLUTELY incorrect. If we adopt the position of the side that is incorrect, the result of that decision could very well result in complete annihilation in our country and way of life. That is why this election may be the most important election in American history.
This isn't melodrama. 9-11 told us how serious are enemy is, how capable they are, and how absolutely driven they are to our destruction. The lessons of the current day are there for all to see. If we choose to ignore those lessons, it certainly is at our peril.
Just wanted to be clear on it.
