'The War Is Not Over'

'The War Is Not Over'

There are 276634 comments on the Los Angeles Times story from Sep 12, 2006, titled 'The War Is Not Over'. In it, Los Angeles Times reports that:

WASHINGTON - President Bush led the nation on Monday in marking the fifth anniversary of the Sept.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Los Angeles Times.

Henry

Bleicherode, Germany

#287009 Mar 18, 2013
bibleSays wrote:
.
Revelation's FALSE PROPHET = Pope of Rome
http://youtu.be/Co9oADUSi08
.
The Pope of Rome what a clown! Of course he is multi rich billionair!
Henry

Bleicherode, Germany

#287010 Mar 18, 2013
Democracynow org wrote:
<quoted text>
Romans 3:23
23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Romans 6:23
23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
John 3:16
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
This sounds real cracy Well it is just cracy religion!
Foxy is Foxy

Indianapolis, IN

#287011 Mar 18, 2013
Revelation's DEAD THREAD = the war is not over.

Put the coins in eyeball sockets of the war. RIP.

Foxy is Foxy

http://youtu.be/8kNwvIEQsg0

don't click on that!!!!!!!!!!
ABs

Aiken, SC

#287013 Mar 18, 2013
Syria fired three rockets into Lebanon today, as it threatened to do last week. The jet-fired rockets hit empty buildings in the border town of Arsaal, CNN reports. Syrian officials claim armed terrorists have infiltrated Syria from Lebanon, and the UN has voiced concern over the growing tension and cross-border fire. No injuries have been reported from today's rocket attacks.

Wait a minute...I am confusikated here...a muslim nation firing on a muslim nation. Once united allies against Israel and now enemies of one another...how does one keep up with who your friends are in the muddle east?
ABs

Aiken, SC

#287014 Mar 18, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Ans.
01 & 02. No need to apply "old oil", let us just move on.
03. As per Quran, Muslims "are allowed" to retaliate in equal manner of what harm is done to them (otherwise it would be a "Non natural" law)…… but they should not exceed the harm and if they forgive it would be better (the last line is for people who have high degree of persistence and perseverance)
04. President Obama came to power promising "change" after GWB the Great had done extreme damage to USA both financially and economically.
But he was to "know " that President of USA is not 'as free and as powerful" as people think him to be. He is like a puppet who is being controlled by very powerful puppeteers.
So "nothing" changed in USA, US is still solidly behind Isreal, US army is in Iraq, US army is in Afghanistan, GITMO is there, US is ready to fight Yemen, Iran, Syria…
As if GWB the Great is still ruling USA, so people decided to "re-elect" him for another term.
And in 2016, we will get "another puppet" in White House to dance at the tune of those puppeteers!!(to keep people happy!!)
Comrade, what section of the Quran states that? "As per Quran, Muslims are allowed to retaliate in equal manner of what harm is done to them"...where is that written? I try to keep up on all my various fictional readings and don't recall ever reading that one...please advise, thanks.
two2tango

Pottstown, PA

#287015 Mar 18, 2013
MUQ wrote:
Rogue Gallery!!– MUQ
10 years on, authors of Iraq invasion stand ‘discredited’
WASHINGTON: They were the men who were to remake the Middle East, but 10 years on, the alliance of politicians and neoconservative thinkers who launched the Iraq war are a discredited band.
1. GEORGE W. BUSH:
As US president and commander-in-chief of American forces, George W Bush bears ultimate responsibility for launching the war to topple Saddam Hussein, an act he perhaps hoped would secure his legacy.
Now 66, and apparently happy to pursue his artistic endeavors in a Texas retirement, the high point of his public life came after the 9/11 attacks when he stood at the ruins of the World Trade Center and defied America’s enemies.
The image of him as a resolute leader with a bullhorn might have lingered longer had he not, two months after the start of the 2003 Iraq war, appeared on the deck of an aircraft carrier under a “Mission Accomplished” banner.
The mission was far from accomplished and Iraq haunted the rest of his presidency, even after his 2004 re-election, bleeding America of men and wealth even as his justifications for the invasion fell apart.
While the Republican leader’s American conservative base largely turned its back on him because of his uncontrolled spending, Iraq ultimately became the main factor discrediting him before a world audience.
2. TONY BLAIR:
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair admitted last month in an interview with the BBC about his support for Bush going into the Iraq war:“I’ve long since given up in trying to persuade people it was the right decision.”
Even more than that of his close US friend, the Labor leader’s entire legacy has been tarnished by a conflict that a majority of Britons opposed even when it was still claimed that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.
As the most successful left-wing elected politician in British history, always more popular abroad than at home, Blair had hoped for a rewarding post-office life as a consultant after stepping down in 2007.
He did earn lavish fees from international contacts, and some recognition for his work as a Middle East peace envoy, but public appearances in his homeland are often marred by noisy protest.
While he still insists committing British troops was the right call, the 59-year-old admitted last month that the situation today in a still-violent post-Saddam Iraq is “not nearly what it should be.”
03. DICK CHENEY:
While Blair seems pained that the public won’t accept his justifications for going to war, former US Vice President Dick Cheney shows no sign of having any doubts about the decision to fight.
“If you want to be loved, go be a movie star,” he snorts in a documentary movie due for release entitled “The World According to Dick Cheney” and based around a four-hour interview with the unrepentant 72-year-old hawk.
In Bush’s first term, Cheney wielded vast influence as the gatekeeper to information reaching the Oval Office, but saw his influence wane in the second term when even the president began to question his judgment.
But, according to the film, he still refuses to believe Saddam did not have active programs to develop weapons of mass destruction.
This is what happens when everyone is focused on Dick. And his companies like Haliburtion, Blackwater etc.
two2tango

Pottstown, PA

#287016 Mar 18, 2013
People forget about Tony Blair and the support/approval from England. But without a major US ally signing off the invasion and occupation in full this probably wouldn't have happend.

I'm disappointed but not surprised by the big island's ignorance of their own history loosing colonial rule over countries for centuries at this point.

A war for the characters on the big island gives the princes/royalty resume time ie military experience. Get's them into the belly of their "gold" supply-black oil that is.

But the big island has always been about maintaining the status quo ie royalty, monarchy and class system. The big island is also a big nanny state include surveillance cameras all over the place. To justify the nanny state they need a boogyman: a war to fight. You figure they would be tired and learned their lessons from the IRA era.
Spocko

Oakland, CA

#287018 Mar 18, 2013
The simple fact, which gun-a-holics like to ignore, is that none of the rights protected to “We the People in the Bill of Rights” are absolute. With regard to the Second Amendment, I highly doubt that anyone would argue that people should be able to own rocket-propelled grenades or shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles, although those are "arms" that can be used by individual people, and could be used by a well-regulated militia. While we need legislation banning weapons of war from our city streets, it's increasingly apparent we need another bit of legislation, and the sooner the better. And that's one that would mandate that every t-bag member of Congress along with their gun-a-holics constituents sit down with a sixth grade civics teacher and learn how the Constitution works.
MUQ

Qatif, Saudi Arabia

#287019 Mar 18, 2013
two2tango wrote:
People forget about Tony Blair and the support/approval from England. But without a major US ally signing off the invasion and occupation in full this probably wouldn't have happend.
I'm disappointed but not surprised by the big island's ignorance of their own history loosing colonial rule over countries for centuries at this point.
A war for the characters on the big island gives the princes/royalty resume time ie military experience. Get's them into the belly of their "gold" supply-black oil that is.
But the big island has always been about maintaining the status quo ie royalty, monarchy and class system. The big island is also a big nanny state include surveillance cameras all over the place. To justify the nanny state they need a boogyman: a war to fight. You figure they would be tired and learned their lessons from the IRA era.
The Big Island was the Biggest Tyrant of its time....that has shrunk to the size of "poodle" to another Big Tyrant of the day.

Let us see when the current Big Tyrant goes down the historical drain.
MUQ

Qatif, Saudi Arabia

#287020 Mar 18, 2013
News you will not see or hear on CNN and FOX News

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/arti...

Obama: The Warrior King

BY MICAH ZENKO (Contd.)

Most analysts and journalists have focused on President Obama's expanded scope, intensity, and institutionalization of targeted killings against suspected terrorists and militants. However, perhaps the enduring legacy of the Obama administration will be its sustained, rigorous effort to shape and define-down the idea of war. Consider in March 2011, during the NATO-led intervention in Libya, when a reporter asked White House spokesperson Jay Carney, "What is this military action?...Is it a war?" He replied, "It is a time-limited, scope-limited military action, in concert with our international partners." When pressed for more details, Carney added:

I'm not going to get into the terminology. I think what it is certainly not is, as others have said, a large-scale military -- open-ended military action -- the kind of which might otherwise be described as a war. There's no ground troops, as the president said. There's no land invasion.

After the war in Libya ended with the extrajudicial killing of Muammar Qaddafi, Obama bragged that U.S. involvement "only cost us $1 billion as opposed to $1 trillion," and "not a single U.S. troop [was] on the ground...not a single U.S. troop was killed. That, I think, is a recipe for success in the future." Thus, the strategic objective of military intervention is to minimize the quantifiable costs, not to develop a plausible strategy that achieves some desired outcome.

Similarly, White House senior counterterrorism adviser John Brennan defended drone strikes in April 2012 by comparing them to "deploying large armies abroad" and "large, intrusive military deployments." Soon afterward, when Carney was asked if the Obama administration relied on the same "loose definition of the declaration of war that President Bush did" in its use of drone strikes, he noted: "Using some of these tools is preferable when you are concerned about civilian casualties than, say, launching a full-scale invasion by land." (Perhaps unconsciously, senior administration officials always antiseptically refer to drone strikes as "targeted strikes" by "tools of national power" and not targeted killings of people by drones

This is all part of a systematic effort to remind Americans about the strategic error of invading Iraq, and to create the impression that counterterrorism strategies must incorporate kinetic force. Given the false dichotomy between 170,000 troops in Iraq and drone strikes, who would oppose the latter? Moreover, this implies that military operations involving less than a full-scale invasion or ground troops (which conveniently omits U.S. special operators or private military contractors required) is not considered a "war."

This characterization also assumes that war can only occur when it reaches some predetermined threshold of immediate human or financial costs. The president's "recipe for success in the future" is for military operations that are low-cost and low-risk (in the short-term, as it turned out in Libya) for Americans.
MUQ

Dammam, Saudi Arabia

#287022 Mar 19, 2013
AB wrote:
Comrade, what section of the Quran states that? "As per Quran, Muslims are allowed to retaliate in equal manner of what harm is done to them"...where is that written? I try to keep up on all my various fictional readings and don't recall ever reading that one...please advise, thanks.
Ans.

There are many passages in Quran where Allah allows Muslims to retaliate in equal measure….. but "advises them to forgive" as a better course, I will point out a few:

A The Recompense for an injury is an injury equal thereto (in degree): but if a person forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from Allah…(42:40)

B. Nor can goodness and evil be equal. Repel (evil) with what is better: then will he between whom and you was hatred become as it were your friend and intimate.(But) No one will be granted such goodness except those who exercise patience and self restraint….(41:34-35)

C. "….there is law of equality, if then any one transgresses the Prohibition against you, you transgress likewise against them but (always) fear Allah…" (2:194)

There are many more verses in Quran to this effect.
VoteVets org

Brooklyn, NY

#287025 Mar 19, 2013
Iraq/Military-Industrial Complex/The Ruling Class
http://tinyurl.com/28ubsjy


Eisenhower warns us of the military industrial complex
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

--------

What I Knew Before the Invasion
http://tinyurl.com/dtpyy November 20, 2005
By Senator Bob Graham
I, too, presumed the president was being truthful -- until a series of events undercut that confidence.

In February 2002, after a briefing on the status of the war in Afghanistan, the commanding officer, Gen. Tommy Franks, told me the war was being compromised as specialized personnel and equipment were being shifted from Afghanistan to prepare for the war in Iraq -- a war more than a year away. Even at this early date, the White House was signaling that the threat posed by Saddam Hussein was of such urgency that it had priority over the crushing of al Qaeda.

In the early fall of 2002, a joint House-Senate intelligence inquiry committee, which I co-chaired, was in the final stages of its investigation of what happened before Sept. 11. As the unclassified final report of the inquiry documented, several failures of intelligence contributed to the tragedy. But as of October 2002, 13 months later, the administration was resisting initiating any substantial action to understand, much less fix, those problems.

At a meeting of the Senate intelligence committee on Sept. 5, 2002, CIA Director George Tenet was asked what the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) provided as the rationale for a preemptive war in Iraq. An NIE is the product of the entire intelligence community, and its most comprehensive assessment. I was stunned when Tenet said that no NIE had been requested by the White House and none had been prepared. Invoking our rarely used senatorial authority, I directed the completion of an NIE.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/...
ABs

Aiken, SC

#287026 Mar 19, 2013
Spocko wrote:
The simple fact, which gun-a-holics like to ignore, is that none of the rights protected to “We the People in the Bill of Rights” are absolute. With regard to the Second Amendment, I highly doubt that anyone would argue that people should be able to own rocket-propelled grenades or shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles, although those are "arms" that can be used by individual people, and could be used by a well-regulated militia. While we need legislation banning weapons of war from our city streets, it's increasingly apparent we need another bit of legislation, and the sooner the better. And that's one that would mandate that every t-bag member of Congress along with their gun-a-holics constituents sit down with a sixth grade civics teacher and learn how the Constitution works.
Feel better now, francis?

Good for you...now just breathe...

Any input on how we get guns out of the hands of those that aren't suppose to have any under today's mammouth mountain of legislation? Do you think more useless legislation will make that happen?
ABs

Aiken, SC

#287027 Mar 19, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Ans.
There are many passages in Quran where Allah allows Muslims to retaliate in equal measure….. but "advises them to forgive" as a better course, I will point out a few:
A The Recompense for an injury is an injury equal thereto (in degree): but if a person forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from Allah…(42:40)
B. Nor can goodness and evil be equal. Repel (evil) with what is better: then will he between whom and you was hatred become as it were your friend and intimate.(But) No one will be granted such goodness except those who exercise patience and self restraint….(41:34-35)
C. "….there is law of equality, if then any one transgresses the Prohibition against you, you transgress likewise against them but (always) fear Allah…" (2:194)
There are many more verses in Quran to this effect.
So then what is it you are implying? Are you saying that muslims have options blessed by allah and that the less a muslim does to retaliate the better off he or she is in the eyes of allah? I am not following yourpoint here, comrade. So if I as a muslim retailiates in equal measure to someone that has done me wrong and you as a muslim does not retaliate against someone who has done you wrong, do we both get to go to the same eternal after life place?
Spocko

Oakland, CA

#287028 Mar 19, 2013
ABs wrote:
<quoted text>
Feel better now, francis?
Good for you...now just breathe...
Any input on how we get guns out of the hands of those that aren't suppose to have any under today's mammouth mountain of legislation? Do you think more useless legislation will make that happen?
Mammoth Mountain
http://www.mammothmountain.com/
VoteVets org

Brooklyn, NY

#287030 Mar 19, 2013
ABs wrote:
<quoted text>
So then what is it you are implying? Are you saying that muslims have options blessed by allah and that the less a muslim does to retaliate the better off he or she is in the eyes of allah? I am not following yourpoint here, comrade. So if I as a muslim retailiates in equal measure to someone that has done me wrong and you as a muslim does not retaliate against someone who has done you wrong, do we both get to go to the same eternal after life place?
My Two Cents.

Proverbs 25:21-22

21 If your enemy is hungry, give him food to eat;
if he is thirsty, give him water to drink.

22 In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head,
and the Lord will reward you.
hojjoj

Rochester, PA

#287031 Mar 19, 2013
youtube.com/watch... …
Dramatic Irony is Hard
MUQ

Dammam, Saudi Arabia

#287032 Mar 19, 2013
ABs wrote:
<quoted text>
So then what is it you are implying? Are you saying that muslims have options blessed by allah and that the less a muslim does to retaliate the better off he or she is in the eyes of allah? I am not following yourpoint here, comrade. So if I as a muslim retailiates in equal measure to someone that has done me wrong and you as a muslim does not retaliate against someone who has done you wrong, do we both get to go to the same eternal after life place?
The thing is simple, you are allowed to retaliate in equal measure, this is your right.

But if you forgive and do not retaliate....Allah will reward you for the generosity.

This way it is "more tuned" to human nature. For common folks they can retaliate in equal measure...but those who are in higher moral category, they can forget.

At another place Quran says "Eye for eye, ear for ear, nose for nose, tooth for tooth and for injury equal injury, but if some one forgives and pardons, it would be counted as an act of charity for them..."

Interpret scriptures in their simple meaning, do not try to pry hidden meanings and argument only for the sake of argument.

There would be no end for such discussions.
MUQ

Dammam, Saudi Arabia

#287033 Mar 19, 2013
News you will not see or hear on CNN and FOX News

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/arti...

Obama: The Warrior King

BY MICAH ZENKO (Contd.)

Not factored into the equation are the impact on the people living in the affected countries (and the global hatred for drone strikes) and "secondary and tertiary effects out here that one day you have to live with," as former CIA director Michael Hayden recently said (most notably the growth of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula over the last two years from "several hundred" to a "few thousand" members). The bottom line: if Americans are detached from the repercussions, or shielded by executive branch secrecy and a disinterested Congress, it is not war.

Developments have only further confirmed my November prediction that America will never again have a peacetime president. If America is not engaged in a perpetual war, how else could the White House believe it has the legal authority to authorize an "informed, high-level" government official to order the targeted killing of a U.S. citizen who is not provided the due process protections mandated by the Constitution?

Given how U.S. policymakers describe national security threats, and privilege military responses to them, it should not be surprising that the United States finds itself in a state of perpetual war. Isn't this why we spend $633 billion on defense and $75.4 billion on national and military intelligence, not to mention the 134,508 U.S. servicemembers deployed around the world (not including 68,000 in Afghanistan)? War is not only the D-Day invasion of Normandy or Operation Desert Storm. Don't let anyone -- even a Nobel Peace Prize laureate -- tell you otherwise.

MANDEL NGAN/AFP/GettyImages
ABs

Aiken, SC

#287037 Mar 20, 2013
President Obama arrived in Israel today for his first visit to the country since taking office, the AP reports, calling the itinerary "laden more with symbolism than substance." Foremost on the agenda: Iran's nuclear program, the Syria conflict, and the Israel-Palestine peace process. Obama is meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu today, and Netanyahu is expected to ask for a "red line" for Iran to ensure military action is taken if the country gets too close to developing an atom bomb, NBC News reports. Israel is also concerned about Syria's conflict creating instability in the border zone between the two countries.

Obama will also be visiting the Palestinian Authority and Jordan for the first time this week, before flying home Saturday. But his meeting with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is not seen as "positive," a PLO official tells Reuters, and Obama is not expected to make much progress in restarting stalled peace talks. In fact, some don't expect him to make much progress on anything. "This seems to me to be an ill-scheduled and ill-conceived visit," says the president of a Tel Aviv-based think tank. "On the Iranian situation, Israel and the USA don't seem to have anything new to say to each other. On Syria, the Americans don't have a clear outlook." The White House itself has attempted to lower expectations for any breakthroughs. Politico catches a lighter moment as Obama arrived this morning, in which he jokes, "It's good to get away from Congress."

Always the jokester...not bad for someone with NO CLEAR OUTLOOK...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Baghdad, Iraq Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News MATTIS: The Iraq war was a 'strategic mistake' Tue Stephany McDowell 1
News ISIS leader Al-Baghdadi is sleeping in tunnels ... Nov 18 tomin cali 1
News What to Know About ISIS Leader Abu Bakr al-Bagh... Nov 16 Stephany McDowell 1
Somewhere in Japan, There Is Imperial Headquarters Nov '16 elephant1941 1
News ISIS leader al-Baghdadi makes rare statement Nov '16 MuslimTrapper 2
News Trump Makes Pitch to Black Middle Class, Casts ... Oct '16 tomin cali 1
Copy NEVADA - USA (Jan '16) Oct '16 Tony 10
More from around the web