If capturing Saddam didn't make the U.S. safer, what would?

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
For sake of argument, we'll stipulate that Dean is correct that capturing Saddam did not make the U.S. safer.

What do you think WOULD make the U.S. safer?

Here's your chance to get out your POV. Please keep everything factual and realistic, and only specific policies and objectives.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Putting more focus on Afghanistan and al Qaeda to capture bin Laden and cripple al Qaeda.

Turning over Iraq to a U.N.-led force, or even better, to forces led by Islamic countries. Demonstrating that the U.S. is no longer in the driver's seat and is moving as quickly as possible to get out of the Middle East.

Quit being Isreal's "bitch" as others have put it.

(BTW, while I don't think capturing Hussein made us safer, it certainly is a strong psychological plus for most Iraqis. Hopefully that translates into our troops in Iraq being safer.)
 

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
Impose a solution on Israel and the Palestinians forthwith.

Strongly encourage democractic/reform movements in the key states of Saudi Arabia and Egypt., right now we aren't really doing anything of the kind.

that would be a good way to start.

 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,677
136
What Bowfinger said, along with spending some money on civil defense infrastructure and training, better coordination between the various agencies. I don't think we can eliminate the threat of terrorism entirely, but we can work to limit our losses, undercut terrorist support and recruitment with the right kind of policy abroad.

Not with the neo-conservative neo-colonial policymakers we have today, however. Iraq didn't have anything to do with the WoT, until we invaded...

While the DoJ seems to be doing a good job at keeping them contained, domestic terrorists are probably the greatest threat. Awful quiet about it, though- these guys are just past the edge of Dubya's core constituencies...

http://www.dneiwert.blogspot.com/2003_12_14_dneiwert_archive.html

Down the page, under the heading "Armed to the Teeth"- a compendium of recent DoJ actions....

Compare that to the # of Islamic terrorists arrested in the same period of time, and you'll get my point...
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
69,543
4,968
126
Al Queda! They attacked the US, Saddam never did. It would seem a simple solution, but perhaps it is still too complex to those in charge?
 

Ferocious

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2000
4,584
2
71
Here's your chance to get out your POV without any interference from the conservative side.
Why restrict the audience to some Dems?

How about allowing responses from true Republicans, true conservatives, most Libertarians.....and most other non-NEOCONS.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
It's too late, every arab is gunning for us. I would hate to get lost in an egyptian alley right now.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Originally posted by: sandorski
Al Queda! They attacked the US, Saddam never did. It would seem a simple solution, but perhaps it is still too complex to those in charge?
Have you seen proof of that? I mean Al Queda?

 

Corn

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 1999
6,389
29
91
Moonie, try smooching the next mugger that crosses you path.

;)
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
How about allowing responses from true Republicans, true conservatives, most Libertarians.....and most other non-NEOCONS.
Feel free to respond or offer your own POV. I just wanted there to be a chance some positions to be brought to the table first, and so the the conservative side didn't rush in and pre-emptively control the thread from the outset. The Democrats seemed to be the primary mover of the "Saddam capture != safety" position, so i wanted to give them first crack.
 

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
3
0
Why did we just raise the Terror Alert Colors??

Madrasas
Wahabism
Radical Islamic Fundamentalism
Al-Qaeda
Taliban
Mullah Omar
Osama bin laden

^^^ALL Things that Iraq was NOT^^^
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,677
136
" Why did we just raise the Terror Alert Colors?? "

To remind everybody about how much safer they are, of course...
 

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
3
0
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
" Why did we just raise the Terror Alert Colors?? "

To remind everybody about how much safer they are, of course...

But capturing Saddam makes Osama go away... doesn't it?
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
69,543
4,968
126
Originally posted by: dahunan
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
" Why did we just raise the Terror Alert Colors?? "

To remind everybody about how much safer they are, of course...

But capturing Saddam makes Osama go away... doesn't it?
Yes Dahunan, there is a Santa Claus! ;)
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,216
126
I am afraid we are screwed. I believe we will be attacked at some point and will lash out blindly like we did at Iraq. I have no idea what manifestation that will be, but I have every reason based on past history and no confidence that those responsible will be the targets. A huge amount on resourses and manpower were diverted to some perepheral attack against Saddam. If this money and manpower were devoted to the elimination of Al-Queda, perhaps we would be safer. As it is, we are not. I challenge anyone to show that Saddam was IN FACT a threat to the US. Not "well one day he might could have" That is lame.

Al-Queda on the other hand is.

What to do? Well that depends on what people are willing to trade for security.

There are solutions to this. The book about "me" gives a fairly good plan. We can make it better though, with implanting chips for location and doing away with the concepts of rights or privacy entirely. Safety can be virtually guaranteed. I would rather face Al-Queda.

A long run solution?

Perhaps the cessation of the attitude of "The US should do this, the US should do that". meaning forcing our set of worldviews on others. This does not mean isolationism, but the concept of enforcing democracy on others is ridiculous. Why are people obligated to be like us? They arent. However we are not forced to let someone attack us. If we are CONSISTENT in allowing others the option of self determination, then in a few generations, perhaps some of this hate will abate.

Short of that? We are screwed, and will just have to do the best we can.
 

arsbanned

Banned
Dec 12, 2003
4,853
0
0
If capturing Saddam didn't make the U.S. safer, what would?
Blow more stuff up.

But seriously, I don't see how capturing Saddam WOULD make the U.S. safer.

It's too late, every arab is gunning for us. I would hate to get lost in an egyptian alley right now.
Just don't forget your Canadian patches.

Originally posted by: sandorski
Al Queda! They attacked the US, Saddam never did. It would seem a simple solution, but perhaps it is still too complex to those in charge?



Have you seen proof of that? I mean Al Queda?
Didn't al Jazeera (all terror network :D) have footage of Osama and Co. bragging about their exploits?

What, Atta actually was a member of IOOF and not al Quada? Huh. Good to know.
OK, back to planet Earth now.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
69,543
4,968
126
Originally posted by: arsbanned
If capturing Saddam didn't make the U.S. safer, what would?
Blow more stuff up.

But seriously, I don't see how capturing Saddam WOULD make the U.S. safer.

It's too late, every arab is gunning for us. I would hate to get lost in an egyptian alley right now.
Just don't forget your Canadian patches.

Originally posted by: sandorski
Al Queda! They attacked the US, Saddam never did. It would seem a simple solution, but perhaps it is still too complex to those in charge?



Have you seen proof of that? I mean Al Queda?
Didn't al Jazeera (all terror network :D) have footage of Osama and Co. bragging about their exploits?

What, Atta actually was a member of IOOF and not al Quada? Huh. Good to know.
OK, back to planet Earth now.
Careful with the quotes.
 

ReiAyanami

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2002
4,466
0
0
Putting more focus on Afghanistan and al Qaeda to capture bin Laden and cripple al Qaeda.
easier said than done. saddam was hiding reasonably well but a whole lot easier to get access to his urban settings.

osama is deep in the mountains and the moment he senses us near he'll just cross over to the pakistan side of the border. putting out soldiers in a vast mountain range to search around for a cave would put them at great risk to sniper or improvised explosives [mines]. it would be pointless to generically say "put more resources here and there" as the best approach is to depend on our technologically advanced satellite feeds to search the mountains for suspicious activity as they have always been doing or wait for a very good lead like we did with saddam

in other words, we are pretty much doing the best we can in afghanistan, as surely the liberalites will berate committing more troops to the afghanistan region anyway. but yeah where is the UN when u need em
 

arsbanned

Banned
Dec 12, 2003
4,853
0
0
Careful with the quotes.
Anyone following the thread will know who I was quoting.

In any case, now that's it's lost in the abyss of endless quotations in your post I don't think you'll have to worry about anyone branding you a heretic or anything.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,677
136
I think we need to do a lot more in Afghanistan- not because of OBL, who'd be a fool to set foot into the country. Pakistan is actually much safer- no US troops, and the beloved patriot govt has *never* actually ruled the border regions... the existing border is a fictional remnant of the British empire, who didn't actually control the region, either.

Prior to the Soviet invasion, the Afghans were closer to democracy and westernized thought than any time before or since. After 25 years of strife, much of it as our proxies, the place is a nightmare. If we want to convince the Islamic world that we're the good guys, we need to do a lot of work there, put our money where our mouth is, so to speak...

As it is, Warlord rule hasn't convinced anybody that we give a damn... or that the Taliban are gone forever, either.
 

Kadarin

Lifer
Nov 23, 2001
44,302
10
81
Originally posted by: dahunan
Why did we just raise the Terror Alert Colors??

Madrasas
Wahabism
Radical Islamic Fundamentalism
Al-Qaeda
Taliban
Mullah Omar
Osama bin laden

^^^ALL Things that Iraq was NOT^^^
I agree. You have to attack the problem posed to the entire Western culture by radical Islamist Fundamentalism, which includes Wahabism and going after the madrassas. The question is regarding how to do so. Islamic civilization itself seems to lack the impetus to lift itself out of squalor to improve the human condition..
 

MonstaThrilla

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2000
1,652
0
0
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
Originally posted by: dahunan
Why did we just raise the Terror Alert Colors??

Madrasas
Wahabism
Radical Islamic Fundamentalism
Al-Qaeda
Taliban
Mullah Omar
Osama bin laden

^^^ALL Things that Iraq was NOT^^^
I agree. You have to attack the problem posed to the entire Western culture by radical Islamist Fundamentalism, which includes Wahabism and going after the madrassas. The question is regarding how to do so. Islamic civilization itself seems to lack the impetus to lift itself out of squalor to improve the human condition..
Regarding how to do so:

You provide a bright shining example to the Islamic people of the advantages of civil liberties and democracy. America needs to become the "city on the hill" that John Winthrop described upon landing in the New World and Ronald Reagan later echoed in the 1980's that led to the decline of communism. The reason the Berlin Wall fell, and the Soviet Union crumbled, was not just because of our country's superior military. It was because people on the other side of the Iron Curtain wanted to be like Americans. They saw by our example how personal liberties and democratic government would make their lives, their children's futures, better. Right now, we're not providing such an example. And only a change in leadership will fix it.
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,489
0
0
Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
Originally posted by: dahunan
Why did we just raise the Terror Alert Colors??

Madrasas
Wahabism
Radical Islamic Fundamentalism
Al-Qaeda
Taliban
Mullah Omar
Osama bin laden

^^^ALL Things that Iraq was NOT^^^
I agree. You have to attack the problem posed to the entire Western culture by radical Islamist Fundamentalism, which includes Wahabism and going after the madrassas. The question is regarding how to do so. Islamic civilization itself seems to lack the impetus to lift itself out of squalor to improve the human condition..
Regarding how to do so:

You provide a bright shining example to the Islamic people of the advantages of civil liberties and democracy. America needs to become the "city on the hill" that John Winthrop described upon landing in the New World and Ronald Reagan later echoed in the 1980's that led to the decline of communism. The reason the Berlin Wall fell, and the Soviet Union crumbled, was not just because of our country's superior military. It was because people on the other side of the Iron Curtain wanted to be like Americans. They saw by our example how personal liberties and democratic government would make their lives, their children's futures, better. Right now, we're not providing such an example. And only a change in leadership will fix it.
So what went wrong with the last leadership, if your scenario is correct? We had 8 years...and yet...
 

MonstaThrilla

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2000
1,652
0
0
Originally posted by: alchemize

So what went wrong with the last leadership, if your scenario is correct? We had 8 years...and yet...
Ah, here comes the Clinton finger pointing.


Clinton obviously failed in addressing the problem of Islamic Fundamentalism. No administration in US history has yet to successfully deal with it...
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY