I'd love to go back to 1943 or '44 and ask FDR and some of our finest WWII Generals those same questions you posing. And while you are at it, ask them what their timetable or withdrawl strategy or whatever it is you call predicting the future.

I wonder how they would answer. I'm pretty sure I can guess MacArthur's and Leshay's answers

There are so many responses, but you don't honestly want to acknowledge them. Your first three quotes, about taking the fight to the enemy, advancing freedom and sending AQ on the run have been repeated a lot since Sept 12. And for good reason. They have stood as true and consistent facts ever since, thanks to the steadfast leadership from the President.

I hear so many positive stories from Iraq and indicators of success there, and you have too, from the elections to their Constitution being ratified, schools and utilities being rebuilt, Iraqi army and police being trained.

Perhaps the main and most important indicator of our efforts have been tht we haven't been attacked at home since Sept 11. And that isn't because AQ no longer wishes us harm.

I just heard from bin Laden today that the reason we haven't been attacked was that he hadn't really been trying, but has decided to give it another try now. He explained it had nothing to do with our security efforts.

I also got a personal email today from Peyton Manning assuring me that the Colts hadn't really been trying against the Steelers last weekend, so their defeat didn't really mean anything and shouldn't count.

I believe both of them, don't you?

It took 5 decades and 5 administrations (or more, depending on how you count) to counter the threat of spreading and oppresive Communism.

But we did.

Since the War on Terror is a different conflict than the cold war and more complex with less dilineation then it will likely, in all reality, take longer.

That's right. It may take 50, 60, 70 years. Likely, none of us will see it's end. Like the fall of Rome or Ancient Egypt it is a major shift rooted in not generations but centuries of socialization and will require major shifts in governments, power balances, economies and their related factors to ultimately prevail.

The greatest single shortcoming in our society- and Bin Ladin understands this well- is a developing societal lack of resolve. When things get inconvenient the temptation is to revert to the 1920's brand of isolationism and put on a flapper costume, break prohibition, get liqoured up and forget our problems- or rather, their problems.

With the current mindset 9/11 was a sad and tragic inevitability. The lives lost were tragically squandered as a wake up call to a nation asleep at the global wheel. Basically, the U.S. needs to do two things:

1. Defeat terror.
2. Proactively become a better global citizen.

Both agendas are a very tall order. It doesn't happen overnight. Or even in the span of a decade.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

The war on terror is the war against al qaeda - against one organization (many small factions). It was only one organization that flew planes into the world trade center. I think comparing the war against al qaeda against the war on communism is a bit of an exaggeration. First, communism was a way to manage societies and economies. Terrorism is not. Communism was based on a doctrine and many communists did not want to destroy America. Terrorism has existed since the beginning of time. Defeating al qaeda is not like defeating communism.

I think we need to stop romanticising the so-called war on terror. It is not like communism, or WWII, or the nazis, or the crusades. It is a police action against criminals.

Now I never went to college, but the dictionary definition of the terms you use are:

Police - The governmental department charged with the regulation and control of the affairs of a community, now chiefly the department established to maintain order, enforce the law, and prevent and detect crime.

War - A state of open, armed, often prolonged conflict carried on between nations, states, or parties.

Which best applies to international conflict when a party invades our soil and kills our innicent civillians?

That's an easy one - let's just look at how the government treated a domestic terrorist:

Timothy McVeigh was convicted on June 2, 1997 in a United States District Court for the murder of eight federal employees who died in the explosion. The same jury on June 13th recommended that McVeigh receive the death penalty [1]. The Justice Department brought federal charges on those few deaths to obtain a death penalty against McVeigh; they could not bring charges against McVeigh for most of the murders because those deaths fell under the jurisdiction of the state of Oklahoma.

If Osama were captured, he would be tried on murder charges, not on war charges.

Next.

Communism is a blip on the historical screen compared to Islamic fundamentalist/zealots. To think that this will be a problem that is significantly changed in 70 years when it took around that long for Communism to be stamped out seems a bit ambitious....

---

f/k/a mclamb6

If you think what McVeigh did was the equivilant of what happened on 9/11, you're out of your mind.

And I really, really don't see a captured OBL serving out his time in the federal pen in Joilett, IL.

What McVeigh did was exactly what Osama did, just on a different scale. Both were terrorists, both had a moral agenda, etc. Osama would also be tried and convicted and sentenced to death like McVeigh. McVeigh did not serve out his sentence in IL either - it was Terre Haute Indiana.

They have stood as true and consistent facts ever since, thanks to the steadfast leadership from the President.

But what have we actually accomplished other than rebuilding parts of Iraq we destroyed? In all honesty, you talk about steadfast leadership and I'm talking about real results and I can't see any. OBL is still alive and threatening us, our soldiers are still being killed despite 2 "great" elections, we are still spending more than most countries GDP on a monthly basis etc.

I hear so many positive stories from Iraq and indicators of success there,Like and you have too, from the elections to their Constitution being ratified, schools and utilities being rebuilt, Iraqi army and police being trained.

We destroyed the schools and utilities in the first place but I will concede SOME good and nice things are being done, but what does this have to do with the war on terror? We are specifically talking about our fight against terror, and you keep deflecting it to our fight against being nice.

Perhaps the main and most important indicator of our efforts have been tht we haven't been attacked at home since Sept 11.

So, from 1994 - 2001, we must have made the same or equivalent efforts because al-Qaeda did not hit us then either. So, will you admit it was because of Clinton's steadfast leadership?

And that isn't because AQ no longer wishes us harm.


How do you know?

---

__________________________________________________

You sir, are my new hero! - Trifan 11/13/2008

Casey, you are a wise man - blueraider_mike 11/13/2008

Casey, This is an astute observation. - Slowbern 11/17/2008