Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@citlink.net> wrote in
news:412FDCE9.9CEDD6C9@citlink.net:

BOB wrote:

Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@citlink.net> wrote in
news:412FC47E.F70B0104@citlink.net:

BOB wrote:

Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@citlink.net> wrote in
news:412EDADC.6DEC11A1@citlink.net:

BOB wrote:

Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@citlink.net> wrote in
news:412EC436.FF1FE42F@citlink.net:

BOB wrote:

Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@citlink.net> wrote in
news:412E6ACB.9DED8288@citlink.net:

BOB wrote:

Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in
news:Xns95516D8E1CA8APQ@alaska.local:

BOB <SD> wrote in news:Xns955081678CB37SD@153.80.109.11:

Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in
news:cgim2t$oku$1@news1.usf.edu:

BOB <SD> wrote in
news:Xns95505D3482AC4SD@153.80.109.11:

Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in
news:cgiagr$468$1 @news1.usf.edu:

BOB <SD> wrote in
news:Xns9550557743441SD@153.80.109.11:

Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in
news:cgi4dv$nvl$1@news1.usf.edu:

"The North Koreans made it very clear, politely,
that they want Mr. Kerry to win the election."

-- A former US diplomat who was recently in
Pyongyang.

Figure out who the bad guys want to win and vote
for the other guy.

In that case, consider that groups like Al Qaeda,
the Taliban and other terrorist organizations want
Bush to win since he is helping their cause.

If you consider having their ranks killed off help
their cause.

But their ranks are growing...more and more each day.

By killing the fucks at every opportunity? Kind of
hard to follow an agenda when two-thirds of your
leadership is either dead or at Camp X-ray spilling
their guts.

You neocon wingnuts love the killing, maiming and
suffering parts don't you? It's pretty obvious in your
rantings like the one above.

Unlike you who would prefer to do nothing in the face or
terrorism.

This is an obvious lie since you don't even know me.

Unlike Clinton,

Clinton again? Give it a rest why don't you. Why is
it you Bush bootlickers and lapdogs have such a weird
fixation on Clinton that you can't let it go?

As opposed to you who has an obsession with Bush?

Nope. When Bush is finally gone from the scene, you won't
hear another peep from me about him. And good riddance to
bad rubbish.

who only talked about fighting terrorists, Bush has
actually gone about exterminating them.

Along with lots of innocent men, women and children who
had nothing to do with terrorists, terrorist activities
or terrorism. That kind of makes Bush a terrorist in
his own right.

Actually, it doesn't.

Actually, it does. You are just too ashamed or too stupid
to admit it.

So you would claim that every war-time president in the
history of AMerica is a terrorist?

Not my claim. Yours.

It's not a claim, it's a question, and an unanswered one at
that.

You implied that I would claim something that I didn't.

It's a question asking what your claim is... and you still
haven't answered it.
Will you be answering it any time soon?

I stated my position clearly enough and repeated it again just
below.

Here is what I said
earlier about Bush's killing innocents:

"Along with lots of innocent men, women and children who had
nothing to do with terrorists, terrorist activities or
terrorism. That kind of makes Bush a terrorist in his own
right."

Sounds clear enough to me.

That statement can be applied to any war in the history of the
country. So would you claim that every war-time president in the
history of America is a terrorist in his own right?

Note the question mark.

Noted and ignored. Again, my position is already clear.

I was referring to Iraq and Afganistan. Where is the proof
that they were involved with 9/11?

Iraq? I see Al Qaida and the Taliban referenced. Why are you
trying to add Iraq? They are an entirely separate situation.

Then why do you suppose America attacked Iraq?

Why do *I* suppsoe it?... because the Bush administration had a
bug up their ***** about it and they (erroneously) believed that
the whole "war on terror" deal gave them an opportunity to oust
Saddam. IMO, if we weren't going to push a button, then we
should've committed every available soldier to Afghanistan. Iraq
wasn't a priority.

Fair enough. We are "almost" in agreement here. I also think
Afganistan was a mistake but that is my own opinion.

What do you believe would've been the proper response to 9/11?

Find the people actually responsible (that are still alive) and bring
them to justice, without invading other countries and harming innocent
people.

So you don't believe that the only people responsible were the 19
hijackers.

Yes, I do. But they are all dead. *If* there are other collaborators who
are not dead, and I emphasize "if", then read what I wrote above.

Who else do you believe was responsible?

I don't even know *if* anyone else was involved. Do you?

Work to eliminate the root cause for the hatred that fuels terrorist
activities against America and other nations.

Political rhetoric, to say the least.

Not political rhetoric but common sense in my opinion. And I think that
other people who are smarter than I am might agree with me.

Many have said that the root
cause for the hatred is our support of an Israeli state. Should we have
withdrawn our support of Israel?

Who is "many" and how many are "many" and why do you think those "many"
have any credibility?

What do you believe is the root cause and how would you work to
eliminate it?

Arrogance for one. Conceit might be another. Using force to get our way in
the world could be a third. Who knows? Why don't you ask the people who
don't like us. Diplomacy and a change in attitude and actions could help to
eliminate some of it.

Strengthen our defenses against terrorist attacks wherever and
whenever possible.

I agree. We should strengthen our defenses against any kind of attack
at every opportunity.

Improve our foreign relations (diplomacy?) with our friends and allies
as well as with those who we might disagree with or those who disagree
with us. That might be a start...

How would you accomplish that? A substantial "donation"? An apology (if
so, to whom and for what)?

Already answered above.