Seen this? It was just as egregious and slimy as our worst fears? And think of all the things that came afterward. Shame on that cabal. War crimes tribunal is too good for them.

This is worth every minute it takes to watch it:

Watched that last week on RM... made my blood boil.

They should indite Bush/Cheney/Rice/Rummy any way... this is TREASON and a human rights violation. We (USA) will have NO right to criticize other nations as long as we have this blood on our hands. >100,000 Iraqis died due to their lies ! 4000 more Americans died and 10s of 1000s suffered life changing injuries, and cost us Trillions ! it's called TREASON !!

Regardless the WAR on terror - is warranted and should continue towards that all terrorist are eliminated.

However;
Like I said before the WAR on Iraq was totally uncalled for.

Nope.

"Terrorism" and "Terrorist" are so ill-defined and subjective that a "war" against either is in effect a license to exercise extraordinary powers in perpetuity: You're never going to eliminate "terrorism" itself, nor are you ever going to eliminate every last "terrorist" -- and so, the conditions that will end the "war" will never exist.

War powers granted to the executive are intended to be a temporary necessity in response to an existential threat to the country. The "War on Terror" removes the "temporary" part, in effect creating a permanent military democracy in which the "democracy" part is slowly subsumed by the constant materiel and security demands of an ever-increasing military (and those who profit from it) ...

You seem to answer your own debate - or are saying that , to let terrorist kill and murder when ever they want ? ?

Point being is that since terrorist are international , so therefor it is a global WAR.

Agreed. You will never eliminate all of the "terrorists".

How so?


Your question presupposes the only alternative to our current strategy is to do nothing. I reject that supposition and suggest there are alternatives available that don't involve the endless extension of conventional military power abroad or the commensurate erosion of liberties at home ...


And my point is that a WAR against "terrorism" is by definition (or rather, by the lack thereof) without end and poisonous to a democracy, and is therefore an unwarranted (not to mention self-defeating) response to the challenges posed by today's radical fringes.

Well put.

#6 for #1 in 2016.

You missed wide, carp. What six is saying is that a "war" of any kind against something that is so nebulous — so hard to define, almost mercury-like — is neither possible nor practical. The concept of victory is just that: a concept — an idea that has yet to be executed. Cockroaches have evolved and survived for millions of years. Even the most advanced technology has been unable to eradicate the species. Sure, that's a predictable and easy analogy for how we might view terrorists in general. But more so in terms of how to deal with them. Maybe a simpler metaphor is Whack-A-Mole.

I understand what Big Six is saying - however you must do something

As nebulous as it is , you can measure success by the declining number of terror attacks. I am talking about the big organized attacks and not those from single wackos with a silly cause.