Glenn Beck Presents: The Extremist Agenda - Page 3

Kerostasis · 11-21-2006, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheFatKidDeath

I don't see how any clearer it can be when our own National Intelligence Estimate concludes that the "Iraq war has made the overall terrorism problem worse." That is not a recipe for success against terrorism. Don't we go to war to reduce the size of our enemy rather than increase his numbers? The invasion of Iraq has accomplished exactly the opposite of it's intended goals.

Not quite. The Iraq invasion was never intended to reduce the numbers of our enemies. Well, not beyond the obvious one of the Iraqi government itself, which was previously our enemy.

Rather, the Iraq invasion was meant to start the long, slow, process of reducing the land area / population area available for our enemies to gather, train, plan and recruit. Success on that front is harder to measure, since no one is exactly sure how much access Al Qaeda and similar groups had to Iraq under Hussein. Further, we're not precisely sure how much progress we are making--a lot depends on who ends up winning Iraq's civil war, and what sort of government they set up afterwards.

The civil war will end eventually, and someone will come out on top. If they then build a free, open, and stable democracy, that permanently denies Iraq to the terrorists as a recruitment ground. Further, that presents a model to the surrounding countries, as Iraq will almost inevitably develop rapidly increasing wealth and personal freedom under the new government. Capitalism will no longer be "that thing the infidel Christians do way over there in America", it will be what your Muslim neighbors are doing, and making tons of money with. That becomes a very hard lure to resist, and presents the possibility of widespread revolution in the Muslim world, wiping out not just the terrorists themselves, but the very ideological basis they exist on.

THAT is the rewards of victory in Iraq. The tricky part is getting there.

**USN_Squid** · 11-22-2006, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheFatKidDeath

Many of the videos shown were produced AFTER the invasion of Iraq.

Quote:

Originally Posted by freekyE

Do any of you speak the launguage being spoken in the video? Do you know for shure it was translated correcty and there wasnt a "mistake"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by AMosely

One must keep in mind that the extent to which this propaganda is consumed and believed is limited to a fraction of the population of countries like Jordan, Syria and Iran.

This may be a little eye opener for some of you. Please take the time to watch the whole thing:

The Arab and Iranian Reaction to 911 Five Years Later

TheFatKidDeath · 11-22-2006, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kerostasis

Not quite. The Iraq invasion was never intended to reduce the numbers of our enemies. Well, not beyond the obvious one of the Iraqi government itself, which was previously our enemy.

Rather, the Iraq invasion was meant to start the long, slow, process of reducing the land area / population area available for our enemies to gather, train, plan and recruit. Success on that front is harder to measure, since no one is exactly sure how much access Al Qaeda and similar groups had to Iraq under Hussein. Further, we're not precisely sure how much progress we are making--a lot depends on who ends up winning Iraq's civil war, and what sort of government they set up afterwards.

The civil war will end eventually, and someone will come out on top. If they then build a free, open, and stable democracy, that permanently denies Iraq to the terrorists as a recruitment ground. Further, that presents a model to the surrounding countries, as Iraq will almost inevitably develop rapidly increasing wealth and personal freedom under the new government. Capitalism will no longer be "that thing the infidel Christians do way over there in America", it will be what your Muslim neighbors are doing, and making tons of money with. That becomes a very hard lure to resist, and presents the possibility of widespread revolution in the Muslim world, wiping out not just the terrorists themselves, but the very ideological basis they exist on.

THAT is the rewards of victory in Iraq. The tricky part is getting there.

Please join us back on planet earth.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,231320,00.html

Iraq is a disaster and is getting worse by the day irregardless of all the neo-conservative talking points.

Kerostasis · 11-22-2006, 07:27 PM

How does that show ANY relation to my points?

I said the civil war will end eventually, and that someone will win it. You responded by saying a bunch of people died recently. Can you say Non-sequitur?

TheFatKidDeath · 11-23-2006, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kerostasis

How does that show ANY relation to my points?

I said the civil war will end eventually, and that someone will win it. You responded by saying a bunch of people died recently. Can you say Non-sequitur?

The article goes directly to your point that "the Iraq invasion was never intended to reduce the numbers of our enemies" which is a nonsensical statement to begin with. The invasion has accomplished the opposite of the statement, refer to the article for the facts.

Beatnik · 11-23-2006, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kerostasis

The Iraq invasion was never intended to reduce the numbers of our enemies. Well, not beyond the obvious one of the Iraqi government itself, which was previously our enemy.

Rather, the Iraq invasion was meant to start the long, slow, process of reducing the land area / population area available for our enemies to gather, train, plan and recruit.

This quote has been endorsed by the Ministry of Revisionist History.

Kerostasis · 11-23-2006, 10:48 PM

So you don't like the real goal of the war. I can't imagine why--perhaps because it's more likely to actually work than the straw-man you set up?

But don't act like no one has ever said this before--Bush has been touting this as the overarching goal of the War on Terror since before we went into Iraq to begin with. Oh sure, there was rhetoric on WMDs mixed in there as well, because WMDs make better sound bites. But its not like Bush was trying to HIDE this or anything.

....and that article still doesn't go to any of my points. All it does is attack a point you think I should be making, but I'm not.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Glenn Beck	CingularDuality	The Sandbox	2	05-11-2006 01:38 PM

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links