Shots Across The Bow

some of the more stable and intelligent ones, like our own SKB. As I read through their blogs, I was struck be the relentless negativity.

Rich, all I said was "Saddam captured alive." and linked to some news stories and showed his disheveled picture.

Exactly how is that "relentless negativity"? I realize that you are probably referring to some of the comments, but that is not how the above sentence sounds. You don't say commenters. You say "their blogs", i.e. SKB. I have not blogged anything negative about the capture of Saddam. In fact, I am very happy he is in custody.

Your ingrained, relentless hatred of Democrats and people with different viewpoints once again prevents you from being fair and causes you to assume the worse and make up facts.

Whatever.

"the worst".

sorry that you read it that way bubba. I'll make the change to make it more explicit. I'd thought that the initial description would be enough to signal that I didn't consider you as one of the irrational ones.

My bad.

Capturing Saddam brings the war on terror "a giant step forward?" What? We're not even sure that his capture will appreciably reduce the Iraqi resistance, much less have any effect on the REAL war on terror, which he had nothing to do with.

Maybe finding him will, in fact, reduce the resistance that is killing our soldiers daily. Hope to God that it does. But, of course, worrying about him has only deflected our attention and resources from the instigators of the REAL war on terror in which we're involved -- in Afghanistan. In THAT war on terror, it's been pretty much nothing but big steps back, Rich. And that's the one that counts.

But who wants to worry about that when we can beat our chest about overrunning a third-world country? Without supreme skill and perseverance on our part -- neither of which the Bush Administration has indicated it has -- deposing Saddam in no way guarantees that we'll be safer in the long run, and possibly less. Ayatollahs are just waiting to come out of the woodwork, and religious zealots fighting for their god will be even more dangerous to us than a simple evil thug fighting for himself.

This is just my second visit to your site, by the way, and here's a response to your post of a few days back on your daughter's "political indoctrination" at school and your setting her straight with the "facts" to dispense with the teacher's "propaganda." (Sorry if you already saw this on that thread, but posts on threads several day's old often get missed.)

Just curious: when you were giving her "all the information," did you tell her that there is NO reputable evidence from ANY intelligence agency linking Saddam to 9/11?

Did you explain to her how overthrowing Saddam has been a goal of Wolfowitz & Co. going back more than a decade, well predating 9/11, and that the administration immediately sent out talking points to its minions to link the two without evidence?

Did you explain to her how the decision to take over Iraq diverted resources from Afghanistan, where Taliban warlords -- the folks that directly supported al Queda, the folks that attacked us on 9/11 -- are making such a comeback that last week the U.N. told us that if security didn't improve they were going to have to evacuate the country?

Did you explain to her how much money we're spending in Iraq, and how Mr. Bush has decided that he'd rather have her pay for it -- and his tax cuts -- decades from now instead of spending the political capital to actually pay for it now?

Did you then explain to her how little we've spent on Homeland Security, and how we still have college students carrying weapons on planes to show the FBI how lax things still are?

Did you tell her how many soldiers have so far died in the deposition of this tyrant that had nothing to do with 9/11 and who, we know now, seems to have had no weapons with which to threaten us?

Did you tell her how many soldiers have been wounded?

You told her how to look up articles on "conditions in Iraq." Fine. Did you tell her how to look up articles on conditions in Africa? North Korea? China? Or in Saudi Arabia, for girls like her?

Then did you explain to her why, if "conditions" in Iraq are a valid reason for taking action, we aren't pursuing similar policies elsewhere in the world?

I didn't think so. After all, that would be so... complicated.

Balisardo, just about everyone concedes that the capture of Saddam deals a tremendous psychological blow to the Iraqi terrorists and holdouts. Additionally, the ignominious manner in which he behaved during his capture insures that he will never again be a rallying point for the insurgents. Not to mention the reams of documents captured along with him.

As a practical matter, the capture of Hussein cripples the resistance in two key areas. First, they've just lost their hold on the populace. No resistance can hope to function without the support, whether given freely or coerced by fear of retribution, of the general public. Until Saturday evening, the populace kept silent by fear that Saddam could return.

That's over now. We can expect to break cells with increased intel from those same Iraqis we watched dancing in the streets on Sunday. Already, this prediction is coming true as we have reports that major insurgent figures have been apprehended

Second, any resistance needs money to function effectively. Terrorists may be idealists, but arms dealers are capitalists, guns cost money. The loss of Saddam means the loss of a major source of money. This presents a double loss as not only the money must be restored, but also a centralized administration to collect and disburse that money. Like any criminal enterprise that is suddenly decapitated, we can expect war between the various factions as they each vie to become the new leader of the insurgents.

Attempting to claim that the capture of Saddam is meaningless is simply a sad attempt to prevent giving the President the credit he deserves.

As for Afghanistan, the Taliban is still operating from caves in the borderlands between Afghanistan and Pakistan instead of from Kabul. They're fighting each other and tribal warlords and have no energy or money to spare to support al Qaida.

What you fail to realize is that no single country is our primary target. Our principle target in the war on terrorism is the terrorists themselves. This is a new type of war, unlike the European style wars of the last century. We target the countries the terrorists opeate from not issome desire for conquest, but to deny the terrorists aid and sanctuary. It is not a war of territory, but a war of attrition. As such, it will be fought differently, with different goals, strategy and tactics.

We will maintain a force in Afghanistan, and we will prevent it from falling back into the hands of the Taliban, or any other regime which will condone and support terrorists. What we will not do is turn them into a client state. That means the afghans themselves will bear the lion's share of the burden of building a new society. And they are doing just that. Despite the gloomy picture you paint, the Afghan's are ratifying a new constitution in the next few days.

There is progress.

As for my daughter, I gave her enough information to correct the idiocies planted by her teacher.

Taking your points one at a time:

I've never suggested to her that Hussein had anything to do with 9/11. What I did tell her is that after 9/11, we could no longer afford to wait for the terrorists to come to us. That is the connection between 9/11 and Hussein; not that he caused the former, but that he was capable and willing to do something worse.

Provide links to proof of those talking points. Others in the liberal world have said that Bush and his administration linked the two, yet extensive searches have come up empty. I'll be interested to see if you can do better.

The UN evacuated Iraq when a building a couple of blocks away was bombed. Their threat to pull out of Afghanistan fails to impress. Aditionally, considering their profound lack of success in Africa and the Balkans, I'm not sure that them pulling out wouldn't actually help the situation in Afghanistan.

The deficit is an issue that needs to be addressed.

Homeland Security will always be inadequate. As I posted earlier, there is simply no way to anticipate and counter every possible threat without shutting down the country. Homeland Security is nothing but a placebo; it accomplishes nothing, but it makes people feel better. The true defense against terrorism is precisely what we're doing; taking the fight to them.

Every death is tragic to the family of the men and women who don't come home, but at no time in history has so much been accomplished with such minimal loss of life on both sides.

And for your last point, one step at a time. One of the anticipated benefits of a successful conclusion in Iraq is a general moderation of conditions in all of the Middle East. It may not be quick, and it might not happen, but the possible gains make the attempt worthwhile. By the way, the argument you make is flawed. To suggest that we shouldn't have acted in Iraq because we haven't acted elsewhere first is a circular statement that would prohibit all action.

So no, I didn't tell her all these things, not because they are complicated, but because they were wrong.

I also note that you have no criticism for the teacher, who initially presented an unbalnced and factually wrong account not just of the Iraq War, but also the Phillipine American War, yet you decide to blast me for balancing her demgoguery with a few facts.

I think everyone will agree that Saddam was a tyrant. He tortured and killed his own people and other people from othe countries. He did alot of horrible things. To downplay his capture to avoid political ruin is down right tacky. A tyrant has been captured and now will face punishment for his crimes. If you are happy about that, you should go seek medical help. If you are happy about that and still talk bad about it, grow up! (kind of ironic comming from someone that would be considered today's youth)Accept that his capture may not play into you political hand, keep your mouth shut, and move on for christ's sake...