With our tails between our legs......

There are those out there, primarily the hippie peace lovers and supporters of Ms. Sheehan, that are taking dangerous advantage of the war in Iraq to have a "Kumbyah" moment with the world, and apparently the terrorists. Is this what we really want to do to fight terrorism? Is this the way that will defeat terrorists? What about this plan will defeat terrorists? Are we, as peace lovers, hippies and anti-war crowds thinking that the terrorists will suddenly have a huge change of heart and see "aw geez, look at 'em. They really don't mean any harm. C'mon Osama, let's call it a draw." No, I kind of doubt it. Remember terrorists offered peace to any country that withdrew from Iraq. Right away Spain stood up first. Within a week, they found a bomb on their train system's tracks. Holy crap! Terrorists lie! No way!

How can we honestly appear as a strong nation if we give in to the terrorist's demands? How can we look like anything other than weaklings if we pull out of Iraq. No one likes war, no one is pro-war. Just as Abortion Rights Activists hate being called "pro-abortion", Americans are not "pro-war". But if we didn't help Iraq, who would have? All those hippies, all those war protesters, answer me! Who would have helped Iraq? We went in there looking for WMD, we didn't find them. But to say that they were never there is ridiculous! It was not the position of the United States to find the weapons. It was Iraq's responsibility to prove the weapons were not there. Did they do that? No. Even by the U.N. Weapon's Inspectors own accounts, there was much weapons material that was NOT accounted for. Iraq didn't have an explanation, the U.N., appearing as nothing but an appeaser, continuously gave false threats to Iraq in the form of "you'd better do this or we're gonna....gonna....well, when we do something, it'll be bad you bet'cha!" The United States is the only country in the U.N. that stood up and said NO! You've had your time, you've stalled, you've mis-directed, enough! Either comply, or we will come in. Iraq chose by their own free will not to comply. So, the U.S. did the job of the U.N. for the U.N. Let's look at not finding the weapons. For approximately one month, the U.N. continuously warned Saddam action would be taken. Gradually, the U.S. was getting irritated. Saddam knew it was a matter of time before the U.S. would have enough and come in. Regardless of what brave face he put on it, he was deeply afraid of the U.S. We out numbered him, we out-armed him, we had better weapons. Saddam had plenty of time to get rid of the weapons he had to other locations. Where? How about Syria? They hate the U.S. and would gladly hide stuff for Saddam. If you were to go to a drug dealer's house and tell him, "we know you have drugs here, if you don't get honest about it and get rid of them on your own, we're coming in, in a month!" We see he's not complying. We go back in a month. Do we honestly expect the drugs to be there? Now come on! The drug dealer isn't going to keep them there if he knows he'll be raided, why would Saddam keep what he had when he knew the U.S. was coming after him in a month?!

You know, I hate to say it, but, war is war. If it were nice, it would be called something else. Terrorists don't negotiate. They don't, period. You can't negotiate with them. They've said repeatedly that they want to kill Americans, period. Tell me peace lovers, hippies, anti-war protesters and Ms. Sheehan, how do you negotiate with that? I'm deeply interested in knowing, please tell me. Feel free to leave your comments here and tell me how you would effectively negotiate with a terrorist whose attitude is "kill as many Americans as possible." I look forward to your comments.

If we were to pull out now, is there any doubt that the terrorist insurgents would flood the country and take over? Iraq does not yet have a Constitution, how can they protect their country from insurgent terrorists? How? Running now would effectively make the U.S. appear as though we are weak and we won't own up to our commitments. We made a commitment to be there for the Iraqi people, we need to keep that. The word of the U.S. should still mean something. Liberals like to say we should get out of Iraq, that we shouldn't stay there for any length of time. Well, we're still in South Korea, and all over Europe. Yet, when President Bush wanted to pull out of Europe, the Liberals were in an uproar! Why so upset? There's terrorist activity in Europe today same as Iraq and you want us out there too. Britain for example. Maybe we should just pull out of all the world, bring all troops back home and tell the rest of the world to "screw off" and just take care of our own. But, we don't because we believe in freedom. That's a good reason to be in Iraq. Freedom isn't free. Those hippies, peace lovers and Ms. Sheehan protesters, you have the right, no-the freedom, to protest because of the U.S. Military. Don't the Iraqis at least have that right? Shouldn't they have the right to protest if they wish? Or, do you want to shut them up? Because, without a Constitution, they won't have that right. By vacating Iraq now, that will leave the country open to evil and repression. That's not something we should do. Those that die in Iraq, whether U.S. Military or Iraqi, are dying for freedom, and henceforth, with honor. They are dying for something that is honorable, to bring freedom to those who have it not, and who thirst for it. Why would Liberals and hippies wish to deny Iraqis that gift of freedom?

We play too nice with the terrorists in Iraq. We need to get tougher. I am not necessarily advocating using nuclear weapons against terrorists, because that is a line I do not think we should cross carelessly. However, we should have a "zero tolerance" policy against terrorists. We need to send a clear message to the terrorists, "we will deal with you harshly." And, I am not referring to the purported "harmful" treatment that are given to those terrorists at Gitmo Bay, or, Club Gitmo as Rush Limbaugh puts it. Those terrorists are treated quite well. They are allowed to pray, they are given excellent health care, they are fed and housed. Do terrorists treat people this way? Nope, they blow them up with a goal of "kill as many as you can". That's their message. They receive, I'd argue, better care, housing and food than most people in a homeless shelter here in America. Yet, they're terrorists. Perhaps we should send them back to their country of origin where they'd be fed less, housed in less desirable locations, not well cared for, probably not allowed to pray and probably tortured and executed.

My point here is that, by leaving, we will be handing the terrorists a victory. They will have driven us out and will "make an example of us". Terrorists around the world might just unite because they will see that America bows down to terrorism. Is that a message you Liberals want to send?

If Liberals think that terrorists are treated so bad by the U.S., why not start an "adopt a terrorist" program, and these Liberals can give the terrorists the kind of care they feel they truly deserve, at their expense. Further, let's make it tax deductible for them so they won't complain about "why should I flip the bill?" Let them negotiate with the terrorists and reason with their "kill all Americans" attitude. Let's see how far they get.

Running from terrorism will not leave us free to fight another day. It will send us running forever. We must draw a line in the sand and say "no further". We must now fight the terrorists without white gloves on so as not to get our hands dirty. They fight us with everything they have. We must do the same. We must not bow down to terrorism. We must stand up to them. When will we realize that fighting fair against terrorists does not work? They don't fight fair because it's a war. They are focused on killing us, Americans. We are focused on "political correctness" in war. It is time to say "enough. We will not surrender, we will fight on." President Bush had it right when he said "Bring it on".