Etech: So what you are saying is that is was all right for the Arabs(Saddam) to massacre thousands if not hundreds of thousands of other Arabs. It is only because infidels stopped that killing that the Arabs are upset?
Are you saying that all Arabs are upset? How many of the Arabs are going to attack US targets or is it just the terrorist organization Al-Queada which attacked the US before the US removed Saddam and would have continued their attacks in any case?
---------------------
I don't think this was addressed to me but I'd like to give my answer.
Question 1. I doubt it was ever all right with many, hopefully the great majority of Arabs, but it was all right with the people in power in Iraq and that power looked really good to a lot of other Arabs because they have this thingi about getting respect through might. It's a form of mental illness stereotypically characteristic of them, but not by any means particular to them. We are the same as witnessed by the war hooters we have here. But when Infidels kill Arabs, these power issues are somebody else?s ox and lots more Arabs will get wound up about that kind of killing. It's always easier to see the mote in the other guys eye than the beam in your own.
Question 2. Hopefully All Arabs are not upset. I'm sure many many, hopefully a majority are happy Saddam is gone, Many Iraqi Arabs at least since they were the ones who had to pay the price for his famous ruthless power reputation. I think most committed to terror will remain committed and many who hate the loss of status brought about by an American defeat of an Arab power may join up. Those who see that path as wrong will try to establish a better form of government and better way of thinking. The real question always was whether it was the best policy to remove Saddam by force and whether the reasons given were honest. The last issue is certainly no.
Dari: Another low point for the apologists is that they will demean an administration that is fighting a war against terrorism. While it's one thing for us to have a friendly argument on domestic affairs, it's sad that the apologists can't leave their opposition to the domestic stage when we're dealing with international terrorists that don't a damn whether or not you're a bleeding-heart liberal or conservative. A dead American is a dead American to them. Making illogical statement about the "reasoning" behind terrorist activities only leads the terrorists to believe that there is a rational conversation going on about their diabolical activities. You guys are giving them the legitimacy they so desperately seek, even if you don't realize it. Believe it or not, they do listen to our opinions.
-----------------------
This paragraph is full of inconsistent ideas and is difficult to approach since one doesn't know which illogic is foremost in the author's mind, which is the fundamental fly in the ointment. Your first point is just a rhetorical appeal to unity in war. Sorry, I don't support unjust wars because they fracture home front resolve. Fracturing home front resolve in an unjust war is the definition of patriotic duty. One cannot stand idly by and allow ones country to do evil. Next you claim the terrorists don't differentiate between those opposed to war against them and those who are. In the first place nobody I know is opposed to war on terrorism. War on Iraq was another matter. Secondly, why would I care if somebody would kill me if I did right or wrong. I do what is right because it is right. Screw what the terrorist thinks. But remember we are not talking terrorism when we are talking Iraq. Terrorism was a smoke screen for a New American Century. As for making "illogical" statements about reasoning I can only hope the parenthesis was supposed to imply false reasoning or unreasonableness rather than real reasoning, but you just stated that the terrorists don't give a fig about us, why would they somehow care what we think? And if you didn't mean unreasonableness then there could be no reasonable supposition that a rational conversation was going on to bolster their confidence, and no implied legitimacy. If they listened to our opinions, they wouldn't believe in terrorism, no? Terrorism is a mental illness, a profound psychosis that allows one to do that which is against all human religion and morality, to kill people who have never harmed you. It requires a profound detachment from reality. To look at reality is to know that everything is perfect just as God created it. The question, then, is what do you do with how you feel in a perfect world. Think about it.