"SgtMinor" <Sarge@the.old.folks.home.invalid> wrote in message
news:qKKdnV6NLemPBJvbnZ2dnUVZ_v-tnZ2d@comcast.com...

Stan de SD wrote:

"SgtMinor" <Sarge@the.old.folks.home.invalid> wrote in message
news:NqadnWq0pbCrc5jbnZ2dnUVZ_o2vnZ2d@comcast.com...

Stan de SD wrote:

"SgtMinor" <Sarge@the.old.folks.home.invalid> wrote in message
news:qtidnTiXuohZe5jbnZ2dnUVZ_sfinZ2d@comcast.com...

Stan de SD wrote:

"SgtMinor" <Sarge@the.old.folks.home.invalid> wrote in message
news:FradnfEOdvfSeJjbnZ2dnUVZ_rvinZ2d@comcast.com...

Stan de SD wrote:

"Otis Willie PIO The American War Library"

<themilitarytoday@pacbell.net>

wrote in message news:sj1uv25f4she4uqt541o5st6lf0ktdrinj@4ax.com...

Report, US Spends More On Military Than Diplomacy To Fight

Terrorism

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7006787184

{EXCERPT} All Headline News Los Angeles, CA (AHN) - A report

published

Sunday showed that the Bush administration allocates billions of

money

on military spending but is holding its.........

Show us where diplomacy has ever convinced terrorists not to attack

innocent

people. Bush is far from perfect, but at least on this one, he's a

hell

of a

lot smarter than the goo-goo idiot liberals who think we can

"negotiate"

with people whose religious beliefs justify lyind and deception

when

it

is

directed against the non-believer. :O|

Yes, let's try war. I've hear such good things about it. We fought

the

war on poverty and now we have more of it. We fought the war on

drugs,

and now drugs are stronger, cheaper, and more plentiful. I'm

betting

the war on terrorism will be equally successful.

War worked against the Nazis and the Japanese, as well as against

other

aggressors. Show us where negotiating with terrorists has worked - go

ahead.

Those two war were against COUNTRIES, not concepts. Show me where a

war

against an idea was successful - go ahead.

"Concepts" have followers, and organizations/nations that provide

military,

financial, and logistical support. Kill those people, and the problem

is

mitigated.

Make sure you kill their relatives too, and all their friends, of

course.

Just like a typical left-wing idiot, you had to throw in stuff that has
nothing to do with the discussion. But tell us again, what success have

we

had in negotiating with Islamic terrorists?

Why do you insist on name calling?

I called you an idiot because you were acting like an idiot, with your
comments about killing friend and relatives.

I never made any claims for
diplomacy in any of my posts, although I know it has worked - with the
IRA, for instance, or in South Africa with the ANC - yet you insist on
connecting me with that position.

Negotiation doesn't work with a people who are convinced that they will go
to heaven for killing infidels, especially when they are willing to kill
themselves in the process.

What I did do was make fun of the idea that causing death and
destruction is a solution to a social problem.

Number One: we're not out to solve a "social problem". We're out to deal
with a deadly threat. Secondly, you seem to have this typically selective
interpretation of "death and destruction" that is predominant among
liberals, that is dependent on political agendas. It doesn't seem to be
"death and destruction" when Islamofascists fly airplanes into buildings,
use suicide bombers, or behead aid workers, and it's not "death and
destruction" when Saddam gassed Kurds or had people thrown into wood
chippers. But suddenly it becomes "death and destruction" when the US
military shows up. Total, utter *****.

Wars don't work, Stan.

Yes, they do - far better than your "negotiation". We have been negotiating
with the Palestinains and the Arabs for 30+ years to try to end the violence
in the Middle East. Camp David, Oslo, and numerous other agreements. We have
even given aid to the Palestinians, and pressured Israel into retreating
from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. What has it gained? The people we
have negotiated with will only be happy with the complete defeat of the US,
of Israel, and the west.

Just about every nation that has started one (your examples of the Nazis
and Japanese are perfect examples) has lived to regret it.

Those were wars of AGGRESSION, and the ONLY reason they regretted it, was
because back in the 1940's, even people who were liberal left-wing
socialists realized that sometimes you need to take up arms to fight back.
They realized that people would get killed - but they also understood that
people would get killed if we did nothing, and that the eventual
consequences would be far worse. Nowadays, our society has been
indoctrinated by individuals who formed their intellectual and moral outlook
on the world while smoking dope in college back in the 1960's. Islamofascism
and it's attendant terrorism are on the rise simply because they know that
most of the western world is too *****-whipped and morally confused to fight
back...

Terrorism is a problem best solved through solid police work and
diplomacy.

Pure crap. Terrorism is solved by identifying those causing it, killing
them, and going after their military, financial, and logistical support
network.

It never hurts to understand your enemy's position.

We understand their position. They want to kill us. What part of
"self-defense" do you NOT understand?