Edwards called the war on terror a "bumper sticker" slogan

He really should stick to chasing ambulances, He's clearly not fit to lead.


NEW YORK - Democrat John Edwards Wednesday repudiated the notion that there is a "global war on terror," calling it an ideological doctrine advanced by the Bush administration that has strained American military resources and emboldened terrorists.

In a defense policy speech to the Council on Foreign Relations, Edwards called the war on terror a "bumper sticker" slogan Bush had used to justify everything from abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison to the invasion of Iraq.

"We need a post-Bush, post-9/11, post-Iraq military that is mission focused on protecting Americans from 21st century threats, not misused for discredited ideological purposes," Edwards said. "By framing this as a war, we have walked right into the trap the terrorists have set — that we are engaged in some kind of clash of civilizations and a war on Islam."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070524...08_military;_ylt=AmNbF6cGMD2ftpYWe3MxJaLMWM0F

 

IT IS an ideological doctrine
there is NO WAY to defeat an ideology what the hell are they teaching the ritalin generation? it is a total ideological notion

"war against terrorism"

please i have asked repeatedly for you ferverent right wing folks to explain to the rest of the world HOW you WIN a war against an Ideology?

It lives in the minds of men and women...has no country, no culture, no religion, no uniforms, no shape, no defenition it is as fleeting as the wind


I dont even like Edwards but I DO LIKE his anaology of this being a
Bumper Sticker slogan

it fits very very well

just to show you all how they have you looking the wrong way who was Edwards addressing? The C.F.R.

the NWO it is democratic and Republican at the same time!!!!

 

Edwards is exactly right. Terrorism is not one person, an army or even a country. Terrorism is a tactic used to try to advance an agenda. You can no more defeat terrorism as you can defeat an idealogical belief. We can do our best to stop people from using terror but it will never be eliminated. This concept that we're at "war with terror" shows just how little our leaders understand what is going on.

 

Hey Folks

Yeah, and he has sex with men.

 

You're absolutely right with the content of this post... and Edwards is a good man and a good candidate.

What's being referred to is right after 911 Edwards was speaking on the need to go after terrorists and saying how he thought everyone would stick together even in regard to the war in Iraq. The Right is spinning this against what he's saying now trying to discredit him.

The fact is immediately after 911 everyone was on a heightened state of alert. And the Bush/Cheney administration did everything they could to embellish the truth (or it's been reported lie) and make Iraq seem like a logical target.

But the thing is everyone has learned a lot since then. We now know about the false intelligence (even the fact Bush was told some of it was false and he kept on giving speeches including it) and the 911 Commission went even further to inform us of the Civil War aspect & the lack of an exit strategy. Even the Pentagon is now saying Iraq is in a religious Civil War.

So what to do? The Bush administration says mission accomplished or stay the course, or surge, or surge again. But what it all really boils down to is Nation Building at the expense of thousands of lives of American service men and as of today over $500,000,000,000 (five hundred billion) hard earned American taxpayer dollars. One might make the case it's "stuck on stupid".

Edwards is just willing to learn from mistakes and call things as they are now with all the information that has been gathered. Seems intelligent & progressive to me. We need some kind of a problem solver... the "shoot 'em up" cowboy strategy just isn't working.

 

Yes terrorism is a tactic. One may as well declare war on ambush or stealth. The term is puposely non specific so that once given the power it can be applied widely and at will.

 

uhuh

Possibly but it's also because he doesn't want to admit to our muslim community that it's really a war against muslim supremacy. I don't hear any reports of us going after communists and anarchists, do you? Nope, this is definitely a war against muslims yet I think it's more about our country's self interest than anything else including the welfare of Iraq's citizens. I personally don't think the white house and pentagon really give a flying frig about those dirty stinking muslims over there. I think the neocon agenda is based more on greed and hope for national security than Global Humanitarian principles. This in turn means, it's an agenda for a New World Order. The Problems with the agenda to topple every non-democratic nation is a long list indeed. First of all, Democracy is relatively young and hasn't really stood the test of time, second of all, representative government is still one of the least used forms of government in the world. Third of all, it's a hypocritical platform because the majority of American citizens don't want to physically force the global expansion of Democracy which in turn means they certainly will discontinue support for Neocon candidates who wish to do such. Americans on the whole are not willing, nor should they be, to risk their lives to fight the people of the entire world in trying to push the American 'State of the Art' government on them. Fourthly, and this is a big hypothetical here, even if we actually went through with such a monumental task not considering by force or by desire and did it successfully, there is no reversing it then and nobody can predict if such a thing would be beneficial to America, even the world. It most certainly wouldn't end war and it would probably lead to creating even more American enemies simply from a country's freedom to pursue self interests. Fifthly, and this is another big hypothetical here, if we did begin to strongly undertake such a campaign, it would curse us to be the international keeper of Democracy if Democracies should fail which they would and have. We would have to grow into a huge military state to monitor the whole world and make sure they stayed democratic. So such a campaign is a waste of time and tyrannical. I will never back such a thing and neither should you. My thoughts on the idiotic Neocon agenda.

 

Unless something has changed this morning we're still in a cold war with North Korea and Cuba (communist nations).

 

Are you saying that they are "dirty stinking muslims" or are you saying that other people believe that?

 

Yep

I'm saying that's how I think the Government really looks at these people and don't really care about them at all. They really are dirty stinking muslims but I'm beginning to believe we are there only for Business interest which is what the Neocon Agenda in theory is all about.

 

"Dirty stinking muslims". Man, that is something.

Let me ask you something, and pleas answer me honestly. I will not react to it. Do you think that all people of non european descent should be taken out of world society?

 

This is not a war . It is not about terrorism or terror
This is a imperialistic occupation for the profit of international oil companies.
To argue for or against a war on terror is a mis guided waste of time.
An accurate metaphor is: You are fighting the smoke and not the fire.

 

Same way you win against Fascism, Communism, Imperialism etc. They still exist. The ideology will never surrender or sign a treaty. Best we can hope for is for it to whither and fade.
I would rather wage war against it, as opposed to accepting it, allowing it to achieve its goals and encouraging its use. Even if it can never be eliminated.
MARK

 

If we called it a war on Islamic Fundamentalism we would upset to many Muslims, so we call it the war on terrorism. We name it for the smoke but we are still fighting the fire. MARK

 

Hmm

Not at all. Just out of my/our society. And the people of the Middle east are our oldest enemies.