But didn't he just admit that terrorism and Iraq have nothing to do with each other?

I am not anti-war but don't beat this drum when you refuse to take care of the Troops there and when they return. Rumsfeld if you know what you were doing things would be better. I sent my life long membership to the VFW back just for speak there.Anyone veteran who allows someone who demand cuts in benefits to speak is no longer a veterans org. If your a veteran org. you stand up to people like Cheney,Rumsfeld because they cut your bothers and sisters benefits. By the way our President did say Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and that now is a fact.

Armand - connection between Iraq and 9-11, not Iraq and terrorism or Iraq and al Qaeda. get it straight.

This administration gets more disgusting every day.
They send young people off to die for no reason and equate those that disagree with them to Hitler.
It's absolutely disgusting.

HERE'S AN UPDATE ON GEORGE W.BUSH'S WAR ON IRAQ

Aug.30,2006

*A roadside bomb kills 24 in Baghdads largest,and oldest marketplace.
*An explosives rigged bicycle blows up near a Army recuiting center in Hillah,killing 12 people.
*A Marine from the 1st Armared div.1st brigade is killed in Anbar Province.
*Family of 5 killed in Buhriz.
*36 people killed,45 injured after explosion in Diwaniyah.
*Suicide bomber kills 3,and injures 11 in Arafa.
*5 bullet ridden bodies turn up in Suwayrah.
*4 yr. old girl is killed,her mother injured after Ministry Commandos fire on their car on Samarra.
*In Baghdad 3 police officers are killed,and 14 are injured when twin roadside bombs strike a police patrol
Etc........Etc..........Etc.........Etc..

Yep....George W. Bush's nation building is going along just fine.

Please remember that our fighting men,and women are just doing their jobs.
They had nothing to do with getting us into this fine mess.

Tough war talk from chickenkawks who have never seen combat. These are our fearless leaders.

Yep, Once again the people in the White House stoop to the low of labeling anyone who disagrees with them. It's the same refrain, albeit a little different language each time. Those disagreeing with the White House are called unpatriotic, uninformed, against freedom and now fascist sympathizers. Come on guys, give us a break. At least start a new line of defense each time. It's getting old. And doesn't it ever dawn on them that they have no real answer to the people against them? It's the clearest sign that they know they are wrong, that we shouldn't be doing the things we're doing.

Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld continue to play us for fools. They admit that Saddam had no connection to the events on 9/11. In addition, not one single suspect in the bombings in London, Madrid, and the attempted airplane bombings was Iraqi. Yet despite all of this, they all continue to claim that our continued involvement in Iraq is part of the struggle against all of these non-Iraqis that are attempting to attack the US and our allies.

LOAD UP ON GUNS

BRING YOUR FRIENDS

IT'S FUN TO LOSE

AND TO PRETEND

The wing nuts will never respond to post like the one from John E,that's reality,and they don't like reality.

This is one they'll love,since 9/11,the top 34 Defense CEO'S have been paid close to 1 billion dollars.

They don't like to discuss the dead and the maimed,but they will defend the money CEO'S make off the dead and wounded.

Please, nothing from John E., has anything to do with reality. I am finding it curious though that the Tribune Swamp censors seem to be censoring posts by conservatives, especially my comments noting the racist dialogue from John E and Raving Loon (really, calling Juanito a bandito and burito is hardly language your weird leftists should be dishing, especially when you keep telling us conservatives we're members of the KKK).

Much of the actions taking place in Iraq are those by terrorists, the same terrorists you lefties say don't exist. I know you folks have a hard time with reality, but they are the same terrorists who fly planes into buildings, try to bomb 10 airplanes, try to bomb Sears Tower, bomb London's subway twice, Madrid's commuter rail, Bali nightclubs, the USS COle, etc.

And Sharon, I think the left has done a great job in throwing out labels too: neo-con, Darth Cheney, President Dumb-Dumb, Nazis (geez, I don't know how many times the likes of John E and Raving Loon and their ilk have done that), KKK (yes, Sharon, that is what John E calls all conservatives), and names even worse. Seems to me I'ver alleged protestor after alleged protestor with signs linking Bush to Hitler, calling Bush the world's greatest terrorist, calling Bush a mass murderer, etc. etc.

I'm sorry, is that too much reality for y'all??

Little Johnny D,quit sniveling about the censors and have a debate about the war you love.

Un-like you, Juanito's a big boy,he can take care of himself.

If this blog's getting to tuff for you,there's one on the Disney web site you might try.

PS,you're really stating to ramble,you worry me,you're not the "Hammond Sniper" are you?

Does anyone think of what would have happened if we DID NOT invade Iraq after years of Saddam Hussein's thumbing his nose at the UN's demand to allow inspections? The UN would have (and almost did) become nothing but a "debating society." Any country could then totally ignore anything that came from the UN and face absolutely no consequences. Where would we be then?

We'd be right where we are now with Iran. They're doing the EXACT same thing that Hussein did - gambling that the U.S. and partners don't have the balls for a fight. Because of all the liberal calls to bring our troops home, the Iranians think the time is now perfect to continue their plan to develope their nuclear weapons.

If your next door neighbor has told you for years how he hates you and your family, then you see him stockpiling weapons in his house, what would you do?

Just what do the liberals think we should do if we just let Iran continue on their path unabated? Allow nuclear exchanges in the desert, because it's not here at home? Is that acceptable?

John D. you wrote something that really hit home here:

"Much of the actions taking place in Iraq are those by terrorists, the same terrorists you lefties say don't exist. I know you folks have a hard time with reality, but they are the same terrorists who fly planes into buildings, try to bomb 10 airplanes, try to bomb Sears Tower, bomb London's subway twice, Madrid's commuter rail, Bali nightclubs, the USS COle, etc."

This thinking is a huge part of the problem. These are not all the SAME terrorists. If you were to put all of teh groups that were responsible for those horrific actions in the same room they would never agree. So why do we say we have a war on terrorism when there is no front to fight on? In the end this is an intellectual battle that must be won, not a military solution. Not that military strikes won't be part of it, just that conventional techniques won't work. This isn't a war in teh traditional sense and cannot be treated like one. The fact is if we weren't in Iraq and Saddam was still there, terrorists wouldn't be. not an endorsment of a brutal dictator, just a fact.

You also make mention many times of people not beleiving that terrorists exist. I frankly haven't seen that, and if I missed it forgive me, but only an idiot would deny that terrorism exists. How the threat of terrorism has been used to curtail our freedoms is the real issue, and it has been used to do that.

This is the new spin from dj rove. We now call it islamic fascists..not terrorists anymore. Now anyone who doesn't support them are just like the sympathizer of the fascists in Germany. See..your no longer called unpatriotic! Much better huh?

JohnD???? What country did those terrorists who flew those planes come from????

Hey John D. We can argue day and night about who has called whom more names, or who is a dove and who is a hawk, none of that really moves the debate.

I'll admit, I'm against Bush, Cheney, et al., but I'm willing to listen to a reasoned explanation for their policies. But we never get explanations. We get general statements about how we need to trust them. Statements about how the liberal press only paints an anti-U.S. picture of the struggle. OK. For the sake of argument, I'll listen to a factual message from the administration that highlights all of the postive achievements (or even postive progress towards achievements) of the war. Again, this never seems to get out. My guess is that we don't hear the postives because they don't exist.

Respectfully submitted.

Jihadists are a small, tiny fraction of those responsible for killing in Iraq. Most of the killing is at the hands of Shiite death squads. Iraqi's are killing Iraqi's and we are in the crossfire. As soon as you realize that John D. You will realize how absurd this war is. Nobody from Iraq was involved w/ those plots you brought up.

To Jim Fuchs. I would be willing to support your position if there was any other nation in the world that supported this position. If fighting Iran is on the "right" side of the moral divide, why aren't their any other nations willing to fight with us. Right or Wrong, I fear that fighting Iran will end up being as successful and expensive as it has been for the U.S. fighting the Iraqi insurgents, or the Israeli's fighting Hezbollah.

I point to the discovery of the plot in London a few weeks back as evidence that good old fashioned police work and intelligence work are the best methods for fighting terrorism. Fighting Islamic nations only costs us lives, money, and world-wide reputaion...in that order.

Respectfully submitted.

Two hundred and thirty years ago American Colonial Insurgents rose up against their imperialist British oppressors and drove them out of the country, mainly by using terrorist tactics. Donald Rumsfeld is correct when he says some people don't take a lesson from history. Problem is, the leaders of the Government of the USA have been among that group for a long time and even today won't acknowledge their culpability in the rise of global terrorism.
The exploitation of Third World economies by American Corporations, in many cases with Government assistance, is in my opinion, a root cause of the proliferation of extremism and unrest in the Middle East.
Rumsfeld and the boys need to take another look at their history books.

Before I read your return post to Jethro and myself...you will say..Islamic radicals, al-Qeada, or terrorist it doesn't matter what you call them...they all live in Iraq.

The right wing is also famous for making up arguments that it claims liberals make. How many times have we heard "you lefties say terrorists don't exist". Really? I'm a leftie, proud of it, and I know terrorists exist. People like Osami bin Laden (gee, remember him?), who's still the world's number one terrorist five years after this administration promised it would capture him and put his terrorism to a stop. This administration has fought a breathtakingly ineffective war against terrorism because it's just incompetent. It's focused on the wrong people, the wrong places, the wrong methods and, worse yet, it brings an insufferable arrogance to the process.

Did anyone ever notice that the majority of the "insurgent" terrorist attacks in Iraq target and hit Iraqi civilians? For anyone who sees these thugs as "freedom fighters", please explain what kind of freedom they are fighting for? The freedom to kill as many of their own countrymen as possible?

If horse flies that can inflict nasty bites are buzzing around the room, swat them one by one until they are all dead. Seems clear.
You cant kill them all in one broad stroke, because they are all over the room.
The neocons would argue that taking up a stationary position on the couch would be an effective strategy to be done with the pests, because the flies will go to the couch, and will be easily killed.
Sure.

The Christio-fascists against the Islamo-fascists. It's fasc-tastic!

O.K. Let's invade Iran pre-emptively - that will go a long way to protecting us against terrorists. I will support it as long as John D. and Jim Fuchs take the point.

It's easy to talk tough when your weapon of choice is a PC keyboard.

Hitting Iran is just plain talk.We have 10 of our 12 divisions in Iraq. We have no Combat ready divisions at home. So what military units will attack. Again this is a tactic to scare America.John D your family is not in Combat do you want to join up. I did my thing once all ready in Nam. Talk my friend is all that is going on right now.As to the talking points we have to fight them there so we do not have to fight them here.Is being said by people who never served or read the 9/11 Commission's report. Here at home the do nothing Congress has done nothing to protect us here. So keep talking or punching your keypads or join up and see how your treated like dirt when your done just like our heroes now are

George Bush and his merry band of flaming idiots still see everything in black and white and haven't the foggiest notion that they've radicalized much of the Muslim world and have made things infinitely more dangerous for all of us.

George Bush is Osama's best friend since he's the poster child of the extremists. All those people have to do is hold up a big picture of our beloved president and kids coming streaming out of the wood work to volunteer as terrorists. What could be more perfect?

My own theory is that Osama would really like it if George Bush could serve another term. It would make recruiting much easier.

Now, where is Jimma Carter when ya really need him! He could write the terrorists love letters, like he did Khomeni and stop all of this!
Paulo

Pater, I've not seen anyone refer to the "insurgents" as "freedom fighters", and I don't think it's implied. There are certainly many attacks on coalition forces and coalition-backed Iraqi forces that can be considered an insurgency. Not a fight for freedom, but rather a fight for power and control -- by the Sunnis who've lost their position of dominance, and Islamists who see an opportunity for a theocracy. Either way, the goal is to defeat the coalition and the coalition-backed government, so clearly it's an insurgency. Or a civil war. Take your pick.

But you're right, much of the violence is against Iraqi civilians. Some of this is intended to serve the insurgency by creating instability that will weaken the Iraqi government. A lot of it is just good old-fashioned ethnic hatred, in this case Sunnis vs. Shiites. Clearly the tactics are terrorist in nature, but it's no more relevent to our security than the ethnic terrorism that previously took place in Northern Ireland. These aren't the terrorists who are attacking us. Iraq is a mess, but it still isn't the source of the terrorist threat against the US.

Of course Al Qaeda is fanning the flames, using it for propaganda and motivation. But they're not the impetus, they're opportunists, and the opportunity was provided by George W. Bush. Not that I think this mess can be fixed by just pulling out of Iraq. But I've no hope it can be fixed with Bush at the helm. His clumsy, immoral policy continually makes things worse.

The 2 main groups of insurgents fighting for conrol of Iraq are the remnants of the Baathist Sunni regime and the majority Shites.

It is in fact a civil war but it doesnt look like one so far as neither side has the heavy artillery that they can bombard each others turf with.
So for the mean time they are limited to bombings and kidnappings.

These 2 groups are not in the same vein as Al Qaeda or Jemaah Islamiya which do wish to attack US and its allies on their own territory.

For Mad George to claim that the Sunnis and the Shites will follow the US back home if they withdraw the troops is another of George's crazy theories like WMD and "Saddam Hussein tried to kill my daddy" LOL

Whether the US leaves Iraq next week or next decade,Baghdad government will fall as quickly and surely as Siagon did in 75.
Any groups like "Al Qaeda in Iraq" wont hang around long as whoever gains control of Iraq will not tolerate foreign insurgents on their newly won turf

And so whats happened to the hunt for Osama bin Laden,the man who really did give the US a blood nose ?
Have they quietly let him off?

Posters: I would suggest not responding to every inane comment John D. makes. He baits you constantly, and probably craves the attention you provide him. He drags down the level of civility and intelligence on this blogsite -- frankly probably drives a lot of readers away. Perhaps gently ignoring him might help.

This is not to say that John D. does not have a right to free speech. He certainly does, and I think all of us would defend him there. But I think your constantly rising to his bait gives him a forum he does not deserve.

Enjoyed catching up on your comments tonight. Especially glad to see folks saw through Secretary Rumsfeld's speech. Best wishes.

Saying that war in Iraq ligitimizes the UN is completely insane.

If your neighbor says he hates you and your family and stockpiles weapons and you break into his house and stop him from committing a crime before he commits it, you'd go to jail. Good analogy.

Hey Lefties,

Just the other day, a Muslim takes his car and deliberately hits 15 people in San Francisco, killing one. A few weeks ago, a Muslim drives from central Washington to Seattle to shoot and kill Jews at a Jewish center. Earlier this year, a Muslim rents a car, drives to a North Carolina campus and randomly hits a bunch of college students. Even the two Beltway Snipers from a couple of years ago said they did it in the name of Islam. In each of these instances, the Muslims doing these crimes said they did them because they hate Jews, they hate the West and it's in the name of Islam and Allah.

The Middle East being a powederkeg has nothing to do with Western or U.S. imperialism. Do we companies in the Middle East? Sure, we do. Are there Japanese companies in the U.S.? Yes. German companies in the U.S.? Yes. Norwegian companies in the U.S.? Yes. Mexican companies in the U.S.? Yes. Many Arab countries are awash in oil money. Very little filters to the people. Some Arabs become employed in oil. But at the same time, many of those Arab countries would be much worse off if it wasn't for oil -- in many cases their only source of revenue.

After 9/11, the Bush administration decided that terrorism would be ac military problem, not a police issue (police part of the equation, but more military and less law enforcement). The Bush administration believes that much Islamic terrorism, facism, what have you, is because freedom, democracy largely has not existed in that part of the world. In many respects, some of the most heinois regimes have existed and continue to exist in that part of the world. Many of these governments support terrorists and aid terrorists. Iraq and Hussein was one of them.

The administration believes that if democracy can take root in that part of the world, and beginning with Afghanistan and Iraq, it could spread elsewhere. While Iran has an awful government, many of that country's people are pro-West and anti-mullahs. What if in time Iran could become democratic and more pro-West? That is the theory and the hope and the goal.

While there are daily bombings in Iraq, much that is good has been taking place too. Infrastructure, which Hussein never rebuilt after first Gulf War nor even desire to improve and upgrade, is being improved and upgraded. Schools and hospitals are being rebuilt and improved.

No doubt there is a long way to go in Iraq. No one EVER said it would be easy. Mission Accomplished referred to defeating the Iraqi Army and Hussein. Even during that speech, Bush said much had to be done and that it would not be easy.

The Bush plan, or neo-con as some of you folks like to call us, is to foster freedom and democracy in the Middle East. All approaches to the Middle East in the past 50-plus years have gotten us nowhere. Maybe the Bush plan will not work either. But since all other plans ended up not working, why not try something different? And since Iraq, Iran and others have aided, assisted, housed terrorist groups, why not target them? Do you lefties want Iran to have the bomb? Do you want Iran to continue to foster turmoil in the region? Do you believe that fighting Islamic facism or terrorism is a war, police action, diplomatic mission? How would you handle Islamic terrorists? Do you believe that people who chop off the heads of those they don't like can be reasoned with? Those who blow themselves up, can they be reasoned with?

JohnD..I just made a promise to myself not to read any posts that start with "Hey lefties"

Well, Bill R., that is your right, but I think it has more to do with you not wanting to know anything else than what you want to know and accept than whether I began with "hey lefties."

By the way to "in praise of civility," I would like to know how these are civil discourses:

"For Mad George to claim that the Sunnis and the Shites will follow the US back home if they withdraw the troops is another of George's crazy theories like WMD and "Saddam Hussein tried to kill my daddy" LOL"?

Or, "George Bush and his merry band of flaming idiots"?

Or, "The Christio-fascists against the Islamo-fascists. It's fasc-tastic!"?

Or, the usual nonsense from one Raving Loon: "Little Johnny D,quit sniveling about the censors and have a debate about the war you love.

Un-like you, Juanito's a big boy,he can take care of himself.

If this blog's getting to tuff for you,there's one on the Disney web site you might try.

PS,you're really stating to ramble,you worry me,you're not the "Hammond Sniper" are you?"???

These sound like civil and intelligents, huh??

JohnD I have no doubt that is what you think!

John D, Jim Fuchs, and a few others out there, ARE the problem that needs to be addressed to end the ideological mindset this administration is attempting to instill on the population, in order to maintain their control over government.

I think all of you are missing the point. Its not left versus right (remember Kerry laying down in the 2004 election for his Skull and Bones buddy Bush?). For the most part both parties are controlled by corporate and higher interests. I'm sorry you all can't see that. The two parties argue over meaningless issues that will never be resolved, minimum wage (poor will always be poor), abortion (will we ever figure this one out?), etc.

I'm sorry to say our media has been hijacked. Our politicians have been hijacked.

When John D. talks about terrorists in Iraq he fails to realize we are occupying their country. No country has ever peacefully been occupied. No country likes to be ruled by outsiders (American revolution anyone?).

It is the belief of many people in and outside the U.S. that the good ole' USA is the real terror organization. It pains me greatly to say that, having been brought up to believe we are the greatest country in the world founded on republican (not the party) principles.

I urge you to read through the now declassified CIA documents detailing our operations in Cuba, Africa, Vietnam, Afghanistan, the list goes on. Our country's version of nation building can better be termed "assassination and subversion". This is not speculation, these are facts you can check for yourself if you just do the basic research and reading in the national archives.

Stop focussing on what people say, focus on what people do. These are politicians! Why would anyone want to spend millions upon millions to get elected to public offices that pay much much less than their private sector jobs? The answer is easy: These positions do pay well IF you play ball.

Do the reading... Investigate your leaders... All of them... Don't listen to rhetoric from either side. Read the legislation they are passing throughout our country - I doubt as a citizen you would agree with even 80% of it.

Paulo,
Should we send terrorists guns and ammo like your hero?

John D.,
We invaded Iraq because of WMD. Democratization was the 3rd...no wait...was it the 4th excuse for invading after no WMDs could be found?

John D.,
So much of your argument (and the Administration's argument)are based on the belief that western culture and democratic freedoms can spread through the middle east. This is, to me, a viewpoint that makes absolutely no sense. What leads people to beleive something like that? Has history taught nothing? Western culture and Islamic faith have been at odds for centuries and there is no answer to the conflict. It exists, it will always exist, and the only thing we can do to make it better is to leave it alone. How can democracy exist in a culture who's religion deems the separation of church and state to be an evil? We need to reduce our need for oil from the region and try to stay out of the region's affairs. Of course this won't always be possible but should be the goal. Religion is, without question, the enemy of peace despite the benevolent teachings that most faiths espouse.

What I have never understood is why we want the rest of the world to be like us in the first place? Our nation is far from perfect and, from a historical perspective, actually in deep decline. We should be looking for ways to fix ourselves, not trying to fix others. Instead we allow our rights to be eroded day after day. One of the great ironies is that the Muslims who have accepted our society and choose to live in it, are the ones who are persecuted the most. If we continue down this path these people will become our enemies once more (and yes some are already there) and the cycle continues. How sad.