"how many stories about the war on terror that the media has gotten wrong so far,'

Name one significant news organization that was not engaging in the same war whoops as Kristol or Krauthammer. You are loathe to discuss the microcosm of Iraq because it is wrongheadedness come home to roost, and crow doesn't taste like chicken, does it?

Iraq is and was FUBAR in the extremus. Get over.
Admit it was a mistaken detour in the GWOT, and move on. Sour grapes will not sweeten with age, but rather turn to an acidic broth that is more difficult to digest with each day's paasing.

This then reinforces Bush's message that Iraq IS the major theatre of the war on terrorism, not separate as the Dems claim. The Dems cannot have it both ways. Thank you NY Times for reinforcing the President's message! That was your intention wan't it? NO? Too bad, you did.

I'd hate to think of where we'd be right now if Saddam, a strengthened Saddam, was still in power while we had to confront Iran and Hezzboh....plus its brilliant military strategy to have a base right smack in between Iran and Syria

If our time in Iraq has caused the spread of Islamic extremism, I'd like a list of new places that it's showing up that it wasn't showing up before, and a separate list of places where it's gotten noticeably worse (in number of participants and scale of events).

So far, every single estimate or "postdiction" has done neither of these.

JayTea it is permissable to completely ignore any posts for the next 72 hours by the moonbat left.

These guys/gals (think Semanticleo here) are in high dungeon because of the Clinton debacle this morning on FOX. They are not really this vitriolic but are completely going bonkers because their lip-biting hero looked like an ass.

They should realize this is not hard for him to do, it almost comes natural. Wag the dog, wag the finger, same old, same old.

"This then reinforces Bush's message that Iraq IS the major theatre of the war on terrorism, not separate as the Dems claim. The Dems cannot have it both ways. Thank you NY Times for reinforcing the President's message! That was your intention wan't it? NO? Too bad, you did.

Posted by: Florence Schmieg at September 24, 2006 02:29 PM

Excellent point!!!!

I would only add that if Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism (like the left continually says) then why should our presence there affect the mindset of potential terrorists?

Jay,

Your position requires ignoring a lot of people....Ex-Generals by the score, ex-intel people by the score, reports from the DOD and from our Intel offices.....at some point Jay.....

You say,

The first is that it seems that all reports like this all have the same general theme: everything we have done or might do will only make things worse. I never see any reports saying that "this will make things better" or "this will have no real effect." It seems that all roads lead to disaster. If we confront them, we will encourage more to join them. If we ignore them, we will embolden them to strike harder. And if we negotiate or capitulate, we will be seen as week and lead to more demands and threats."

By: Jay Tea

And in doing so you forget how no one was angry with us when we brokered peace Between Sadat (Egypt and Israel)......and with Jordan. Actually the most extreme elements were angered and killed Sadat but then it was they and their aggressive actions who lost faith and were marginalized.....War gets you more hate and more violence...peace and talking gets you peace.....one or another may be better in a given circumstance but by all means give PEACE A CHANCE , always stay strong and defend the homeland and only us force if its ABSOLUTELY needed and never use force for personal gain of your corporatist war profiteering buddies at the expense of the nation and of the world.

The evidence is seen through out history. We should not be repeating history.

If our time in Iraq has caused the spread of Islamic extremism, I'd like a list of new places that it's showing up that it wasn't showing up before, and a separate list of places where it's gotten noticeably worse (in number of participants and scale of events).

Iraq for one was not a hotbed of Islamic radicalism prior to this war. It was a hotbed of misplaced Arab nationalism, and was run by a thug. But it wasn't a

Pakistan has gotten much worse. Far-right Islamists now control 20% of parliament. Jihadis have stepped up in the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand. Bangladesh has moved farther to appeasing Islamists. These were all relatively moderate places.

I haven't access to the actual report, and probably wouldn't be able to properly interpret it if I did,

This says it all...

I'm glad I'm not the only one that noticed that.
The information that was released makes it sound like terrorists just started hating us when Bush came into office. That only infers that the eight years of Clinton, when we were attacked more, they loved us and all we need are Democrats in the leadership roles to end it..

No wonder the CIA were the only people that didn't know they Berlin wall fell.

islamist are far from "far-right"....they are for complete government control, a religious version of marxism

Why wouldn't you disagree with the NIE report, it throws a little cold water on the " freeedom is on the march, fighting them over there.. etc..." myopic US foreign policy that continually makes no attempt to consider reality.

Jay, don't feel bad, I know some old people who still don't believe NASA when they say that someone actually landed on the moon :)

So let me get this straight, you people are now saying that when you claimed all along that frat boy's war in Iraq has lessened the terrorist threat. What you actually meant, was that the terrorist were all there to begin with, and we just went there to fight them. Is that what you are saying? Because if it is, you are even bigger dolts, and more brain washed than I originally thought.

Clinton again huh Luke; it most be election season.

Why is no one bothered that the NYT has published another "Secret Document"? It's time that the leakers where found, put up against a wall, and shot (twice, first time in the balls, if they have any).

I don't care about how terrorist are treated in GITMO, whether Iraq had WMD's, or whether the French or anybody else likes us. I care that all of our buildings since 9/11 are still standing. I do however agree that we are wasting time in Afganistan and Iraq. When nations threaten the good old USA, we need to make an example of their leadership and then go home. If that doesn't work, then make a parking lot out of the whole damn place.

Another report that shows there is no Intel in the entire Intel community. Two questions for the idiots of the country:
(1)How many terrorists would we be facing if we did not 'fight' them? Hundreds of thousands?
(2)How may American would be dead in the streets of America if we had not went after them? Hundreds of thousands?

This report only proves why we are in trouble, too much education and not a speck or brains in the entire intel community and half of the no brains politicians will use the report to snow job the mental retards (democrats)of the country.

USMC Pilot:

Hopefully you are a retired pilot. God help us if folks like you actually are in command positions where real decisions are made.

The answer to both questions is that neither you, nor I, nor anyone else really knows. Try and stay factual and not wander off into the rhetorical wilderness.

If the NIE report, which I believe was released, as opposed to leaked, contained an estimate that supports the current policies, would that still mean the intel community is brainless?

And it's so nice to hear approximately half of Americans referred to a "mental retards".

Hugh:

It's time that you realize, that you either shoot the tiger, or get eaten. The radical muslims don't want to talk to you, they want to kill you.

Just because the United States is wealthier than most countries, doesn't mean we have to be ashamed of it. We should not impose our will on other countries, but should not accept them trying it on us. If the USA suddenly vanished from the earth it would not make any other soul on earth any better off, in fact many would be much worse off. I honestly feel that most liberals biggest problem, is that the have trouble with their good fortune, with so much missery in the world.

The difference in you and I, is that you will try to reason with someone trying to rob you, and I will just shoot his ass.

BTW - I am retired, and living the good life playing golf every day, thanks to the good old capalistic system.

USMC:

Thanks for the response. I agree with all your second paragraph except the last sentence.

I'm retired too. And I would shoot someone trying to rob me. I just wouldn't bomb his family into oblivion.

Hugh:

I don't recall saying bomb anyone's family into oblivion. However, if they get in the way, I would rather see them "bombed into oblivion" than yours. The best example of what I propose, is that we hear very little from Kadafi these days. Most of the leaders of the rouge nations don't mind sending some 20 year old idiot off to die, but would probably not want to volunteeer themselves.

It has always boggled my mind why we are so opposed to killing a foriegn leader, but don't mind turning a couple of thousand of his soldiers into cannon fodder.

Hey hughie I'm retired also. You don't have the frigging gonads to shoot anyone. The only thing you shoot off is your dumbass mouth. You, "mun-go", "preying mantis", "pucker puss (lee lee) and the rest of you from the Kos Kiddies ranch have got to be the dumbest pieces of pig shit on the earth if you really believe the crap you put forth. Ain't nobody that dumb even it you try to make us believe you are. (But it getting eaiser all the time.)

"Pakistan has gotten worse"

-- Desi

And Pakistan has nukes, unlike the phantom WMD that Saddam had.

**************************************************

Conservatives,

You launch a war based on lies, your war violates international law and your war kills 50,000 people, you establish a gulag complete with secret prisons, and torture camps (most prominent being Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib), in your perpetual "war on terror" you round up several hundred "enemy combatants" for incarceration then you release 40 percent of them, indicating that they should never have been picked up in the first place, and you call countries (not the governments of these countries, but the countries themselves) part of an "axis of evil."

AND THEN YOU WONDER WHY GOVERNMENT AGENCIES CONCLUDE THAT THE HATRED OF THE U.S. GROWS, THEREBY RAISING THE TERRORIST THREAT???

Get real, conservatives.

Herman,

"war stated based on lies." - A meme debunked and discredited so many times its actually surprising you still bark it.

"Violates international law" - Ummm, which one? Oh, you mean the 12+ years of UN sanctions and acts of war conducted by Iraq like trying to kill a former President, failing to yield to dozens of UN sanctions and targeting and shooting at UN aircraft including yours truly?

"Killed 50,000" - war is hell. People die. Maybe next time they will think twice before poking the big dog with a stick.

"Gulag comparison" -- sorry, when the hyperbole of comparing 14 detainees to 20 million deaths in a gulag kicks in you just seem like an idiot.

"Gitmo and Abu Ghrab" -- Gitmo was never a torture chamber and even the International Red Cross said the only abused people there are the guards. Like most of the press these days none of the stories of Gitmo have ever proven to be anything but false. As for Abu, go ask the current prisoners how bad the Americans were since the iraqi government took it over.

Get real Herman, the US was hated long before Bush or Gitmo or Iraq or anything else. The US was hated for being western, for not being Islamic, for not being poor and for a whole litany of things. Frankly, I think it's about damn time we stop apologizing for being the remaining super power.

Weasly little sycophants like you actually make me ill.

Herman - You launch a war based on lies, your war violates international law and your war kills 50,000 people...

USMC Pilot:

Hopefully you are a retired pilot. God help us if folks like you actually are in command positions where real decisions are made.

Posted by: Hug

I thought of that too. All do respect to his presumed honorable service but in truth I don't want people with that kind of attitude flying my bombers.

I'm a Pediatrician, a father, a husband , a son and a human being and when I see people tossing phases like lets make the place a parking lot around with so much machoism and such a cavalier attitude about what he really is asking that we do I have a real time considering them honorable decent people in any respect.

Haven"t read all the comments and this may be really redundant - if so - sorry - BUT it just makes me crazy that the press takes no responsibility for fomenting the junk they say is raising the level of terrorism......for example the Abu Fing Grab thing -- cmon.... how many times did they have to pound the world over the head to get their attention on that one -- and the other junk they're saying has increased this terrorist whatever -- WHAT .. are they really thinking that no one knows that the only ones pounding the drums and recruiting the kiddos are the FREE PRESS -- which by the way only truly exists here in the good old U S of A

God Bless America

I honestly feel that most liberals biggest problem, is that the have trouble with their good fortune, with so much missery in the world.

Posted by: USMC Pilot

I appreciate my good fortune of being born into this great country. But I realize this country and its policies are far from perfect and and my/ our "good fortune" has absolutely come to some degree at the expense of many others around the world. And because I have a conscious I want to hold my country up to an even higher standard then has been done in the past.

BTW - I am retired, and living the good life playing golf every day, thanks to the good old capalistic system.

USMC Pilot

If you retired out of the military you need to understand that it is a cradle to grave socialist environment.....its not based on the principals of Capitalism.

Now I'm not saying that's bad....I absolutely consider the people who are pushing for privatization of the military to be very scary and un-American people. But you need to understand that retiring out of the military DOES NOT qualify you as a product of Capitalism.

"Killed 50,000" - war is hell. People die. Maybe next time they will think twice before poking the big dog with a stick.

All macho pretension and misplaced metaphors aside, Iraqis had nothing to do with poking any dog with any stick.

They had the misfortune to be brutalized by Saddam for 30 years and then the worse luck to be "liberated" by Bush's incompetence.

Actually there is histoical precendent for what this "study" and the Left are claiming!!

On December 7, 1941 we "only" lost 3000 or so people. yet in FIGHTING Japan in the Pacific theater we lost over 106,000!!

So wait a minute! Japan "only" killed 3,000 Americans on 12/7/1941...yet we "sacrificed" 103,000 MORE in confronting them????

I guess we should have surrendered on December 8th, eh??

Can you cite the "international law" that was broken? With a link to the document please? Posted by: Marc

That's a great question Marc. And you might want to look into stories like this one for your answer. If you don't understand this let me know and I can explain it to you....THIS IS A VERY BIG DEAL FOR BUSH AND COMPANY.

Report: CIA mutinied at secret jails

WASHINGTON, Sept. 21 (UPI) -- Uncertainty of their legal status led to CIA interrogators refusing to work at secret U.S. prisons, the Financial Times reported.

http://www.newsdaily.com/TopNews/UPI-1-20060921-07413800-bc-us-detainees-cia.xml

These guys/gals (think Semanticleo here) are in high dungeon

They always feel like they are in the dungeon of the Bush administration...however, I think the word you want is "dudgeon", not "dungeon"...lol

"Hey hughie I'm retired also. You don't have the frigging gonads to shoot anyone. The only thing "you shoot off is your dumbass mouth. You, "mun-go", "preying mantis", "pucker puss (lee lee) and the rest of you from the Kos Kiddies ranch have got to be the dumbest pieces of pig shit on the earth if you really believe the crap you put forth. Ain't nobody that dumb even it you try to make us believe you are. (But it getting eaiser all the time.)"

Now ask yourself America; do you want to be on the side of the guy posting above, or the side of reason?

Marc,

muirgeo delves into the violations of international law by the Americans through means of torture. As to the legality of the war itself, a "pre-emptive" invasion that turns out not to be pre-emptive after all necessarily violates the UN Charter.

See http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/20030319.html

Since some here would seem to argue that ex-military and ex-intel guys are the only ones qualified to comment, I'll oblige you.

First, the NIE is an estimate. It isn't fact, it is a projection based on the best guesses that the intel community can make. They are, by nature, very pessimistic. They must take that approach since these documents are used by planners. We hope for the best, but we must plan for the worst.

Having said that, you need to understand that virtually any action will increase terrorism in the short term. If you leave Iraq, they will claim victory and then prepare to bring the war to our doorstep. If we stay, you will expose those elements of the populace who are inclined to extremism.

That does not mean this is a no win scenario. What is does mean is that we need to seriously review our policies with an eye toward reducing the tensions long term. Anyone thinking there is a quick solution (thinking quick as in 5 years or less) is delusional. Seriously delusional.

To the commenter who said everyone loved us after Camp David, you need a history class. That was demonized in the Middle East. You should recall that Anwar Sadat was assassinated by Muslim radicals for Camp David. The U.S. has been hated all over the world since we became a major power. It comes with the territory.

Anyway, this report was written and disseminated in April. Why is it coming out now? Quite simply because elements of the intel community are openly partisan. This should be much more disturbing to people than it appears to be. It is not uncommon for intel people to disagree with political leadership, but years ago it was not even thinkable to leak classified information from an NIE. If intel people are so "concerned", they have several legal options open to them to include contacting members of the Congressional oversight directly to complain. They don't have the option to just complain to the press legally.

In my opinion, they are more interested in politics than they are truth. If that doesn't bother you, it really should.

Let's see the NIE, instead of another anonymous leak/hit job by the Press.

Clinton: he's the peace-at-any-cost bong-smoking hippie pussy we always suspected he was.

Forgot to mention: if this is the same crowd providing intel that employed Ms. Plame-Wilson, I'd say prudence dictates we take a close look at anything they say.

Used to be the Libs. were scared of the CIA, now they've infiltrated it to the point they are simpatico. Scary.

A video for all of you:

George S. at ABC News explains the matter of the conclusions reached by government agencies regarding increased risk of terrorist attack. (hopefully the link works)

muirgeo delves into the violations of international law by the Americans through means of torture. As to the legality of the war itself, a "pre-emptive" invasion that turns out not to be pre-emptive after all necessarily violates the UN Charter.

The violation of the ceasefire trumps that.
-=Mike

Only the moron Republican'ts could possibly screw up the GWOT this badly. What an absolute disgrace.

muirgeo:

I didn't say I was retired out of the military. As with many socialist you seem to prove your point by starting with false assumptions. There might be somethings wrong with America, but they certainly aren't going to get fixed by the left.

It looks like Hugo had it right!

Here is the October 2002 NIE report:
http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/iraq-wmd.html

Ditto, USMC, if the thinking on the Left that a unilateral attack to defend America is "illegal," such that we would have to suffer a devastating attack with death on a massive scale, just to appease the flunkies at the U.N., and "world opinion," whatever that is.

I'm not troubled if I make the dictators in the U.N., Jacque Chirac, Putin, et al frustrated with U.S. policy.

It would help the Democrapic Party if they worried less about this clique, and more about their own people.

But that would mean the end of the delusion on the Left. Impossible at this stage. Hopefully, a reasonable, principled out-party will emerge to be a responsible party to check the Repubs.

“..got to be the dumbest pieces of pig shit on the earth..” posted by field

Coming from a bush supporter, that’s high praise.

Muirego, you left out something when you posted the things that you are. That one thing is idiot. I seriously doubt any caring parent would, if they knew who you were, would bring any sick child to some dimwit suffering from accute BDS.

muirgeo your link has zero to do with the legality of the war and only addresses certain events occurring within it. Nice try - you failed miserably.

Herman, sorry the UN charter, as already pointed out, was negated by the 1991 ceasefire agreement signed by Saddam. The US didn't need the UN to force Saddam to comply. Hostilties never stopped they only were stopped under certain conditions.

When they weren't met, near countless times, hostilities resumed. Also in the UN Charter BTW.

So, are some of the above posters actually arguing that radical Islam was on the DECLINE prior to the war in Iraq ??? ROFL. Uh huh.

I think the cancer analogy is fitting with the current war efforts. If treating a cancer patients were a political endeavor (like this war is), you'd have certain groups protesting that the chemotherapy was just making the patients sicker... which is true. They'd point out how the patient is unable to eat and losing weight.. and how the immune system is in worse shape now than before the chemo. They'd want to reduce the chemo to a more 'proportionate' level. Reducing the chemo to a more 'proportionate' level would simply put the patient through the ordeal of chemo without killing off the cancer.

"When they weren't met, near countless times, hostilities resumed. Also in the UN Charter BTW."
-- Marc

Well, Marc, the UN Secretary General himself, Nobel Peace Prize winner Kofi Annan, says that Bush violated international law. Let's just say he might be a little bit more knowledgeable about the UN Charter than you are.

And btw, not only does NYU Law Professor Dorf believe that the U.S. violated International law, but so does one Professor Boyle of the University of Illinois:

"On 19 March 2003 President Bush Jr. commenced his criminal war against Iraq by ordering a so-called decapitation strike against the President of Iraq in violation of a 48-hour ultimatum he had given publicly to the Iraqi President and his sons to leave the country. This duplicitous behavior violated the customary international laws of war set forth in the 1907 Hague Convention on the Opening of Hostilities to which the United States is still a contracting party, as evidenced by paragraphs 20, 21, 22, and 23 of U.S. Army Field Manual 27-10 (1956). Furthermore, President Bush Jr.'s attempt to assassinate the President of Iraq was an international crime in its own right. Of course the Bush Jr. administration's war of aggression against Iraq constituted a Crime against Peace as defined by the Nuremberg Charter (1945), the Nuremberg Judgment (1946), and the Nuremberg Principles (1950) as well as by paragraph 498 of U.S. Army Field Manual 27-10 (1956)."
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/law/2005/1222belligerent.htm

Well, Marc, the UN Secretary General himself, Nobel Peace Prize winner Kofi Annan, says that Bush violated international law.

Kofi also oversaw the biggest financial scandal in int'l charity history.

And the Nobel Peace Prize was given to Arafat, so mentioning that is hardly praise.

Let's just say he might be a little bit more knowledgeable about the UN Charter than you are.

You mean the same guy who attends conferences where they have maps made up where Israel DOES NOT EXIST?

Yeah, he has a solid clue.

And Prof. Dorf needs to realize that when a party violates any portion of a ceasefire, by definition, hostilities are no longer over.
-=Mike
...Dorf's ideas are SO moronic they can only be blamed on higher education

Building just a bit on Mike's post, I think what some people tend to forget is the current reactions we see from muslims the world over on many different events.
Cartoons of the prophet spark worldwide outrage, protests, riots, threats and death. A speech from the Pope, again seems to be heading that way. They ask that he resign (or in other cases that he be killed by the nearest muslim) while the president of Iran threatens to wipe another country off the map and blithley states the holocaust didn't happen.
This post could go on for pages and pages, and yet, it doesn't occur to alot of people that muslims being mad at us, trying to kill or convert us, is not all that surprising seeing that all you have to do is say something they don't like.

So people who believe that "we're creating more terrorists", would do well to remember..all it takes is a few words, a pencil or a movie.

:As a side note, I know I generalized here, but I simply don't feel like dancing around facts with pretty words. If the "moderate muslims" I keep hearing about actually said or did something every once and I while...they might be mentioned more.

Well, Marc, the UN Secretary General himself, Nobel Peace Prize winner Kofi Annan, says that Bush violated international law. Let's just say he might be a little bit more knowledgeable about the UN Charter than you are.

"Knowledgeable" and "honest" are two different things.

Hague Convention on the Opening of Hostilities

Hostilities were already "open" and had been for over a decade. This was a resumption of hostilities after a long, long series of provocations by Iraq. Even taking the offer/refusal at face value, it doesn't apply, since Hussein rejected the offer instead of waiting for it to lapse.

I'd hate to think of where we'd be right now if Saddam, a strengthened Saddam, was still in power while we had to confront Iran and Hezzboh....plus its brilliant military strategy to have a base right smack in between Iran and Syria

Right where he was: contained by US air power, no threat.

Unless, or course, you don't think the Air Force was doing its job.

Right where he was: contained by US air power, no threat.

Not really.

Not very contained, either, due to folks like yourself, who thought the UN sanctions would do something useful. Unfortunately, they did very little, due to the folks at the UN being so easy to bribe.

Once we got over the quaint idea of waiting for sanctions to work, we went back and finished the job that we started in the early 1990s.

astifaga:

Unless, or course, you don't think the Air Force was doing its job.

The problem was not the Airforce, it was the job (among other things..."scandals", namely).

Asti: another fact-free post by a Lefty.

What of: Salman Pak terror training camp, the Al Anser group operating in the North, Zarquawi given safe haven in Baghdad, Abu Nidal safe haven in Baghdad, contacts documented between Saddam and Al Quaeda, Dulfur Report noting Saddam's intent to reconstitute weapons programs, including nuclear, after "gaming" the U.N. a while longer.

This is what you call "contained?" Looks like a threat to me and most everyone pre-March 2003.

But these facts might disturb your fantasies, so I am so sorry about that. You really should pick up the Newspaper (not the NYT because of a little credibility problem they have over there, of course) and see what's going on in that big, complex world out there!

"...I'm a Pediatrician, a father, a husband , a son and a human being..." busy man and so much time to blog; interesting very interesting.

As you know, Sen Rangel put it this way, "...we may disagree among ourselves (paraphrased)...he's my President...this is my country..." "Ike" served, JFK Served, "The Gipper" served,Bush(41) served, Kerry served (then threw away other people's medals, gave himself combat awards etc.),
Bush(43)served (albeit stateside), Clinton dodged...GWB is our current President, it behooves us all to respect his position. Terrorist are vermon that scatter every which direction when they are "smoked out" like roaches & rats that are said to scurry about when the light is turned on; we just need to keep on turning on the light and smokin' them out; best they are noticeable and active than hiding in the dark; best they are relegated to "caveman" status and spoiled drinking water than be left to relish in their palaces...

Hey "field ni." sorry I left you off the list. Didn't mean to slight you. I will keep you in mind next time. (you don't suppose I hit a nerve there do you?)

muirgeo,
Asking a child to play doctor in the back of your van whilst sticking your finger in their bum does not make one a pediatrician.

jhow666; apology accepted. And for the record, please do not leave me off any list you are opposed to in the future.

If I found myself on the same side as you in any debate, I would probably call Nancy Grace.