Ok, dummy....I guess I counted on you reading my question correctly, which is obviously too much for you. Those are all interstate conflicts, including the civil war in many ways. I was talking about domestic insurgencies and political movements. Again, name one domestic insurgency that was dealt with once and for all through violence alone. I didn't ask you to name any war, but well done, jeff. You are obviously a very intelligent guy....
And your second post kindof confirms my point. We can do things to prop up the yemeni government and help it fight off the houthis and do what needs to be done against al quaeda. When you're stupid about these things and don't think about the consequences of military action, you end up having a lot of problems. Go ask george dubya.
And stop with the insults, jeff. You're not very funny or clever at them to begin with and it just makes you look like a fool, especially next to your weaksauce attempts at logic. Clean my room, really? Is that the best we can do, jeff? What the fuck is that even supposed to mean? Try again, jeffrey...
Well, I would say Iraq is an example of triumph over an insurgency but the fighters in Iraq were not insurgents - most were foreign fighters crossing the border from Iran and elsewhere and the rest were jihadists, not patriots defending their country. If one is a big fan of the Liberal main stream media it is easy to overlook the fact that we actually won in Iraq because like all news they don't like it is swept under the rug. But I digress.
The fact is, Muslim extremists are engaged in a jihad to destroy "the great Satan" (us) and take over the world. They are prepared to fight for thousands of years if necessary and their entire culture is built around this one purpose.
The best plan we have at the moment is to choose strategic locations in which to sow the seeds of Democracy and hope the domino effect works as well as it has in the past (you should Google that term - you would learn something). In fact, it is primarily the spread of Western ways (sex) that is enraging them. (read Bernard Lewis)
The war we fought in Iraq was a success. Though much was done wrong, we learned a great many things from it - hopefully. One of our biggest problems is that we have idiotic rules of engagement that really hamper our troops while the enemy violates every law in the Geneva Convention.
Now, your boy Obama wants to hamstring us even further by giving enemy combatants trials and by bringing legal charges against the very men who are protecting us.
The Liberal media is one of the most dangerous enemies we have. They act as an intelligence source and a propaganda arm for the jihadists. They sensationalized the hazing at Ahbu-Grab making more of it than it was, they leaked critical intelligence information regarding our techniques that should have remained secret to the public and our enemies and they failed to report anything positive that was happening in Iraq, the list goes on and on.
In the end, the jihadists are at war with us and this will remain so until we destroy them or they destroy us. We do not have the ability to unilaterally decide to "end the war." All we have the power to do is to stop fighting back and that isn't a good strategy.
So, we have two choices, we either remain on the offense and take the fight to them, or we try to play defense and get picked apart a bit at a time. I vote for offense.
But getting back to the actual point of the thread; what happened to the wide spread Liberal belief that there is no war on terror? What happened to talking to our enemies and finding common ground? All you Liberals were so sure of your opinions just a few months ago - what happened?
