As the Iraq war grinds deeper into its fourth year with sectarian strife increasing, not abating, and with more and more U.S. servicemen and women dying in -- not departing from -- that nation, I find myself conjuring up hopeful thoughts from disparate places.
I listen as our leaders bitterly debate how and why we got to this pass, and I wonder at the mind-set of Republicans and Democrats alike who continue to substitute politics and name-calling for what is truly needed -- realistic, bipartisan policies. But despite my befuddlement, my inherent hopefulness in humanity's ability to overcome its all-too-frequent bouts with irrationality brings to mind a concept called the seventh-generation rule. Have you heard of it?
The basic idea is that, in making major decisions, a nation must consider how its actions will affect the next seven generations. The rule was part of the Great Law of the Haudenosaunee Confederation, also known as the League of the Iroquois. Made up of five northeastern tribes, these leaders figured out more than 400 years ago how to maintain a harmonious existence without losing their individual characteristics.
Although many people lump Native Americans into one big group, the fact is that the various tribes were as different from one another as the Sunnis are from the Shiites and as both are from the Kurds. They spoke different languages and dialects, followed different spiritual practices and traditions, and organized themselves in different social groups. The common thread was their respect for the environment and for future generations.
Those Iraqis who now appear to be dead set on nothing other than annihilating their fellow Iraqis would do well to consider the Haudenosaunee's seventh-generation philosophy themselves. After all, once the five tribes banded together in a league of peace, they became one of the strongest forces in North America. It was only after the European settlers arrived to colonize the continent and force the natives to assimilate that their preeminence was destroyed. Nevertheless, the traditions persist and still inform the lifestyles of many Native Americans.
But the most important students of the seventh-generation philosophy would surely be our political leaders. The Haudenosaunee tradition has it that the Great Peacemaker spread a message of peace, unity, and the power of a good mind among the various tribes in the confederation. I respectfully suggest that President Bush consider his own legacy seven generations hence, and strive to find the Great Peacemaker of the Middle East. I nominate former U.S. Senator George Mitchell, who won respect from both sides of the political divide chairing the Northern Ireland peace talks that resulted in the Belfast Peace Agreement, signed on Good Friday of 1998.
Who would you nominate?
Donna Carpenter, an award-winning journalist, is founder, chairman, and chief executive officer of Wordworks, Inc.
To join the discussion on leadership, click the button below! 
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 65
I find it interesting that you mention how the Iroquois Nation held together until the Northern Europeans caused it to break apart. Our presence has heightened the divisions among the people of Iraq as well: it's an interesting parallel.
I especially love that you put forth a suggestion for peacemaking and resolution. This was a very welcome message.
I wish everyone, not only our political leaders, would think out seven generations.
However, no one does that anymore. I'm hardly telling you something you don't already know. But then, we, as the American people think on such a short time frame that no political leader has time for his policies to take effect.
I am wondering why no one has proposed building a huge, long-term partnership with the Iraqis that will span seven generations. Like maybe building 10 army bases, or a Subic Bay-style Naval base...........maybe a permanent air force base in Kurdistan.
Now THAT would shake things up in our favor in Iraq!
Dannielle, I believe the factional divisions in the Middle East have existed for thousands of years, long before we became involved.
As far as who could assume the role as the "Great Peacemaker", I don't believe that individual has shown himself yet. Bush 1, Baker, Carter, Clinton, etc. do not possess the Statesmanship that would be required to attain this lofty goal.
This was a wonderful, educational piece. Thank you. I always enjoy reading about great peoples and traditions in this tremendous land I now call home, and it inspires me to continue with a memoir I'm writing about my American experiences.
I'm chewing the food for thought, Donna.
I think half of America (the lower half) did not agree. Sound familiar? We all know how that turned out. I think that the author was on track, except for one thing. I think America's leaders do need to think 7 generations ahead, BUT, we ALL need to come together to help the Iraqis and defeat the terrorists there versus here!
oh yeah, you forgot to mention how the "Indians" don't mind crappy land deals or living on reservations because they knew they'd recoup their losses with the help of tom delay and jack abramhoff. (unless your casino's from a rival tribe of course)
and last thing my dear ryan. as someone who believes in the teachings of Christ, I find nothing Christian about children dying from war, famine, or preventable diseases. We can't bomb, incarcerated, or ignore our way to respectability. Only through truth, love, compassion, and forgiveness can we even begin to find our way home.
And before you try to paint me in some liberal corner, I am a fourth generation vet, who only wants war to end with me. enough children have died all around. we must find a better way.
I believe President Bush does have his legacy very much in mind, and has throughout his administrations. The lies that so many people prefer to believe are just that -- lies conjured and promoted by his political foes.
As the mother and grandmother of young men now serving in this nation's military I am fearful for them -- but I am not fearful for the future of this nation as long as it can stay the course to bring defeat to the terrorists and liberty to the Middle East.
Donna wrote:
"my inherent hopefulness in humanity's ability to overcome its all-too-infrequent bouts with irrationality..."
I think you meant to say all to FREquent bouts instead.
Anyway, we are doing what needs to be done...almost. When your hometown gets terrorized and you still do not think we are doing the right thing even then just start packing and leave please.
I believe most of the al queida captured or killed have been in Iraq. I thought they weren't there? Hmm!
The language of the article is good but I would need to investigate iroqois history to confirm the data. It sounds good though but wars between Indian nations I know were common.
As for our plan and a peacekeeper: Keeping peace the past 50 years has given time for the doers (radical islam) to organize and plan terrorist acts. We can not remain appeasers or we will not be around much longer. War was declared on the West by radicals prepared to die for having the pleasure of killing you and me. To not fight back with a force to erradicate the enemy is a prolonged and painful suicide. The cheek can only be turned so much before the pain just before your neck snaps makes you fight back and kill if necessary.
MY NECK IS KILLING ME! HOW IS YOUR NECK?
Thank you so much to the all volunteer military of the USA. Please finish your mission and come home safely when the job is done. I hope that your hands will not be tied any longer and you can do what you need to for victory.
, Ryan Rogers would give us an irrelevant lesson on Native American history. Ryan Rogers, your issues regarding the native americans are either a diversion or you just dont know how to debate. Probably the latter. We arent going to start living in wigwams and hunting buffalo, my friend. Try using your brain a little bit more in the future. It could have been martians, robots, japanese or apes from the planet of the apes. The point is we better start thinking a bout what kind of world we are leaving for mankind after we are dead and buried. This transcends the issue of the war in Iraq as well.
And that, my friends, is reality.
p.s. Richard C and Brutus B, you substitute your names for Ryan's when you read this.
[
He is behind the proposal to establish a Department of Peace. Why have a Department of War and not have one FOR Peace? He speaks for the good of future generations.
This is from his webpage:
Department of Peace
The United States was founded on hope, optimism, and a commitment to freedom. We can once again become a beacon of hope for the world. To do that, we must reject the current administration's policies of fear, suspicion, and preemptive war. It is time to jettison our illusions and fears and to transform age-old challenges with new thinking. This is the idea behind my proposal to establish a Department of Peace. This is the idea to make nonviolence an organizing principle at home and abroad and dedicate ourselves to peaceful coexistence, consensus building, disarmament, and respect for international treaties. Violence and war are not inevitable. Nonviolence and peace are inevitable.
We can conceive of peace as not simply the absence of violence but the presence of the capacity for a higher evolution of human awareness, of respect, trust, and integrity. We can conceive of peace as a tool to tap the infinite capabilities of humanity to transform consciousness and conditions that impel or compel violence at a personal, group, or national level toward creating understanding, compassion, and love. We can bring forth new understandings where peace, not war, becomes inevitable. We can move from wars to end all wars to peace to end all wars.
Citizens across the United States are now uniting in a great cause to establish a Department of Peace, seeking nothing less than the transformation of our society, to make nonviolence an organizing principle, to make war archaic through creating a paradigm shift in our culture for human development for economic and political justice and for violence control. Its work in violence control will be to support disarmament, treaties, peaceful coexistence and peaceful consensus building. Its focus on economic and political justice will examine and enhance resource distribution, human and economic rights and strengthen democratic values.
We must change the metaphor of our society from one of war to one of peace. The Department of Defense now requires in excess of $400 billion for its activities. A Department of Peace can be an effective counterbalance, redirecting our national energies towards nonviolent intervention, mediation, and conflict resolution on all matters of human security.
A Department of Peace can look at the domestic issues that our society faces and often ignores as we focus on matters internationally. We have a problem with violence in our own society, and we need to look at it and address it in a structured way. Domestically, the Department of Peace would address violence in the home, spousal abuse, child abuse, gangs, and police-community relations conflicts, and would work with individuals and groups to achieve changes in attitudes that examine the mythologies of cherished world views, such as "violence is inevitable" or "war is inevitable." Thus, it will help with the discovery of new selves and new paths toward peaceful consensus.
The Department of Peace will also address human development and the unique concerns of women and children. It will envision and seek to implement plans for peace education, not simply as a course of study, but as a template for all pursuits of knowledge within formal educational settings.
Americans have proven over and over again we're a nation that can rise to the challenges of our times, because our people have that capacity. And so, the concept of a Department of Peace is the vehicle by which we express our belief that we have the capacity to evolve as a people, that someday we could look back at this moment and understand that we took the steps along the way to make war archaic.
Violence is not inevitable. War is not inevitable. Nonviolence and peace are inevitable. We can make of this world a gift of peace which will confirm the presence of universal spirit in our lives. We can send into the future the gift which will protect our children from fear, from harm, from destruction.
there was no viable al Qaeda presence in iraq until we got there. saddam was a bad player, he needed to go. it shouldn't have been what it's turned out to be, a shameful embarrassment. if we had the right policy going in, if we had simply told the truth and not b.s. about wmds, if we had only listen to the generals going in and not the policy wonks who have never worn the uniform...
and ryan, only a fool would believe not innocent children have died from our campaign. we can do better.
and for brutus, please don't equate iraq with nazi germany or with japan in wwII. that's silly.
i think we all can admit we got it wrong, or we misled the american people. i want to believe we just got it wrong...anything else would be too disheartening.
america can do better.
More and more
get less and less
the best sacrificed
to great God Success
Anger
building
brick by bloody brick
Is it a surprise
("Look! Into my eyes!")
when the peasants cackle
resurrecting the guillotine
Raw power
hot metal shooting
making unmistakable mark
burning ragged skin and guts
and glory
Tell me a story, daddy
about before the war
when water flowed
in abundant freedom
when the air was pure
of the stench
of progress
when everybody had
a sacred right
to feel
and believe
and dance in the moonlight
when we could afford to be
young, untried, open
to possibilities not cut off
by a sacrificial knife
repeatedly deeply severing
vital organs
without regard to the waste
with no respect for place
or the people for whom that space
holds stories
Weapons forged in anger
built up shattered layers of
desperate pride, disrespect, grief
create festering wounds
poisoning the populace
unto the Seventh Generation
caught up in some grotesque
morality play
(c) April 27, 2006 Laurie Corzett
But I need my V-8 engine because I can't pull out fast enough in a 4 cylinder. I could go on all night ... The bottom line is our leaders think at best the next quarter or the next election because that is what we demand from them.
Also, look up European Union Document page 666. Interesting stuff. This Javier Solana signed this document to put into effect. This created the new Office of High Representative of Common Foreign and Security Policy for the European Union.
In November 1999, Javier Solana, the former head of NATO, became the first person to hold this powerful new position. He was also made Secretary General of the Council of Europe. This is the main decision making body of the EU. The following month, Solana also became the Secretary General of the 10-nation WEU alliance. These three positions made Solana a very powerful new player on the world scene.
Also while you're at it look up ENPI (European Neighborhood Instrument) and its' 7 year deal which takes place on Jan. 1st, 2007.
Very interesting stuff if you do your investigation into it. We live in a world of infinite information just on the web alone.
I suspect that this Javier Solana will broker your peace in the middle-east that you are looking for. And if it isn't him, then it will be the one whom procedes after him.
As a great man once said, "Ours is a world governed by the aggressive use of force".
Like it or not, the radical Islamists want the western world dead.
How do you negotiate with that? Where do you start?
Peace follows victory. Period.
Iraq is considered a mess by many. I say it is because of people who hate this President so much they undermine everything he does. Most of the world said Iraq had WMDs and WMD programs in place. Over 700 chemical weapons shells found to date. We all know Iran and Syria had/has no motive for helping Saddam hide the evidence.
I'm just glad we have a President whom isn't waiting for the talkers to talk us right into our own demise.
And by the way, if the Haudenosaunee Confederation had built a better defense system and had been concerned about National Defense, well maybe they would still be around to day to help come up with an answer to the "Iraq Problem".
Yes, even back then, the world was governed by the aggressive use of force!
And thanks to Richard for correcting my mistake.
If you have the biggest, nastiest, most effective military around and you make it clear to that you will use its full capability against anyone who is even thinking about doing harm to you, you know what you get? Its called peace. If you run around hugging and kissing your enemies they cut your throat for you.
As for thinking 7 generations ahead, I support that. How would we like the history books to read? Saddam Hussein was butchering minorities in his own country by the hundreds of thousands, conquered neighbouring countries in order to enslave their populations and take their resources in order to conquer still more countries and the rest of the world did nothing. OR, Saddam Hussein wanted to do all of the above, but was stopped by an American lead coalition?
Yes Iraq is a mess, and that's due to poor planning and implementation for which the Americans should be roundly criticized. There were a slate of reasons a mile long for taking out Saddam, the mistake the Bush administration made was on focusing on WMD to the exclusion of the many other (and far more relevant) reasons.
1. fossil fuels use was viewed as primative.
2. leaders that mislead are not.
3. america by her virtues, vision, and veracity, is still that shining beacon on the hill.
4. hunger and poverty are eradicated.
5. everyone has health coverage
6. corporate leaders are guided by social responsibility, and realize we live in a world of abundance where there's enough for all to enjoy a less stressful life.
7. eating animals is viewed as primative.
8. the lakers are world champs for the 8th year in a row
9. we learned to stop killing people to show that killing people is wrong.
10. spirituality is the practice of God (Love) and that religion is the politics of God (Love).
11. ( generations is about 150-200 years from now, yes? no?) anyway and perhaps most important that the beings from the next galaxy over how made contact with us decided to leave us alone because humans have demonstrated they can work out their issues.
12. the Giants finally win the pennant.
As I veteran i trust those who have been on the ground, who've worn the uniform, who've felt the sting of battle. And most of us stand with their families in support, praying for their safety, for them to accomplish the mission to the best of their ability.
When we ask our men and women to lay down their life to defend our freedoms, our values, all they ask of us is for the cause to be just, for it to be true, not for it to be a political excercise or some domestic power grab.
We have real enemies, foreign and domestic. Let's not take our eye off the ball. (again: Clinton in 98 and Bush with the Tora Bora campaign)
For those that may quarrel with my appellations, keep in mind that Islam was born in violence. How else to explain its explosive growth in its first 100 years to many times the size of the Roman Empire? It wasn't be sweet reason. The most reasonable explaination for its recent violent explosions (word play), is funding from oil revenues, not Bush's foreign policy. Their goal is a world wide Caliphate. Islam has historically offered infidels three choices: convert, submit, or death. When the opportunties permit, the offers still hold. If in doubt, ask any Sudanese Christian.
Asides:
1. The Amerinds (this Scotch-Irish, English, Frenchman considerers himself a "Native American") participated in three major wars in America, and chose the wrong side each time. The last time was responsible for the Indian Territory becoming Oklahoma. They are a source inspired elightenment?
2. Osaze, #13 on your future list should be that we now all live in the United Democratic Socialist Republic of the World, with the same world wide average income (currently that of a Mexican peasant).
Pace.
Richard your UDSRW position is silly. I'm a life long fiscal conservative, social moderate, Republican from a line of life long free market Republicans. I simply believe that time has come for us to eliminate corporate welfare, live within our means, stop passing the debt off to our children, tell voters the truth, (they are not the children most politicians like to treat them as), and most important, respect our men and women in uniform and their families, take care of our veterans, foster the middle class and not neglect the poor.
Is it too much to ask for my country to do better? If you, really believe Richard America is operating at full intellectual and moral capacity, then i fear for this nation's young.
Bottom line:If the choice is war, then get it right. think it through, beginning to end. Don't play politics with american lives.
My appologies. I reread your list and all I saw was a polly anna wish list that might not need a new world order to come to fruition, although items #4-6 may be tough to achieve without forced redistribution of wealth. Item #9 won't happen as long as Karl Marx and Islam have militant adherents.
Corporate welfare is a leftist chimera. Big business engenders wealth, government and government regulations do not. While the Exxon logo may be construed as the sign of the double cross, their size and capital enabled them to discover an immense oil field 9 miles below the surface.
As for keeping the public informed, we are in agreement. Here is my list of egregous government lies, what about yours?
1. The real reason that we were involved in WWI was to preserve the British Empire, the most evil entity in the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th.
2. The Federal Reserve is under less control by the US government than is Federal Express.
3. The real reason we were involved in WWII was to save Stalin's ass. If you think that the invasion of Poland was the reason, remember that Stalin took the eastern half and never gave it back.
4. JFK was assinated by Lee Harvey Oswald? It was done by the Mossad and the CIA and at the insistance of the Federal Reserve (remember JFK's US Bank notes that took the Fed out of the business of printing money?).
5. UFOs are real.
6. The bombing of the Murrah building in Oklahoma City was done by two ex jar-heads all by themselves? Check out jaynadavis.com.
7. TWA flt 800 did not come down because of a fuel tank explosion.
8. For 9-11, see scholarsfor911truth.org and ny911truth.org.
9. GW Bush is concerned about border security. Google "North American Union".
As far as the problem with Islam, perhaps nuking Tehran would save a lot of American lives and give militant Islam a wake-up call.
Pace.
Ok, maybe not "Most" but many!
For a second time though I state: "Like it or not, the radical Islamists want the western world dead".
And for the second time I ask: "How do you negotiate with that? Where do you start"?
The brilliant minds of the left will not face that fact and have no answer for it.
Just more talking while the radicals make their plans for our death and destruction.
i think you start with having a respectful and spiritual dialogue with the three major religions about God. Radical Islam doesn't represent the majority of Islam. No more than the Christian Right represents most of us.
Most of us believe in God. That's a starting point. We belive in something greater than ourselves. So I guess my next question with those at the table would be, what would the common God we believe in, what would that God want for us?
If the common God wants us to live in peace, to recognize his calling, his will for us...if the common God wants us to coexist, to figure out a way to steward this planet, take care of God's creation...then i think we have a starting point.
I doubt the common God wants us to destroy ourselves. We have to have a thorough, a deepening of our understanding of God. I for one believe there are texts, teaching of God not yet discovered. My understanding of God is so minute. Perhaps if we became Masters of God and all his attributes, Masters of Love, Masters of Forgiveness. The universe of Love is so vast. Why wouldn't we want to know more?
The radicals are our children too.
just a humble opinion from the middle of somewhere.
respectfully,
one
Thank you for the thoughtful post. I am not opposed to a "respectful and spiritual dialogue", but I take issue with some of your points.
1. I am not willing to stand by and let them attack us while our response is delayed by dialogue.
2. We put our "Christian Right" who kill innocents in jail and some even to death. (Timothy McVeigh) In my opinion, there is no moral equivalency here.
3. Radical Islam may not represent "the majority of Islam" but their majority are not doing very much about their radicals. In fact they seem to be more scared of them than anyone else.
4. Until they stop sending their children to kill innocents, I don't think they really will be interested in "respectful and spiritual dialogue".
Possibly you missed my earlier post where I stated my agreement with;
"" As a great man once said, "Ours is a world governed by the aggressive use of force"."
Like it or not, the radical Islamists want the western world dead.
How do you negotiate with that? Where do you start?
Peace follows victory. Period.
Start the dialogue, if you think it will be fruitful, but I think victory of one side or the other is required first.
Of course if it is their victory, life will be very miserable for many and none existent for many many more!
I do not know what you mean by; "The radicals are our children too."
And one more thing; in an earlier post you stated:
"Bottom line:If the choice is war, then get it right. think it through, beginning to end. Don't play politics with american lives. "
Are you able to note for me a war that was thought through from beginning to end and gotten right from the onset? It is not possible.
Our enemy is smart. They change their tactics to try to win, just as we do.
The people who give comfort to our enemy by undermining our President should be held to account.
IMHO.
You write "Peace follows victory. Period." Allow me to quote the Great Communicator who said "Peace through Strength." During the cold war, our enemies didn't attack us because we were strong and respected.
That global respect has been squandered by the Clinton (Rwanda and Somalia) and Bush II (Iraq) administrations.
We play politics with our brave servicemembers and their families when we make statements like "we can win (politically) with this (war in Iraq) because the American people trust us (Republicans ) more with national security." -Karl Rove, Jan 2002, long before a supposed decision was officially made to go in. War should be a last resort, not a political power grab.
Is the world better off with Saddam gone? yes, but with a very small "y." Was he the biggest threat out there, warranting our greatest resource? Oh course not.
Mark, tell me with $300 billion spent, with nearly 3000 American soldiers dead, countless more maimed for life, with no WMDs, and a more frayed American fabric, loss of international credibility, was Iraq (not an iminent threat) worth it or could we have done better?
People who've never worn the uniform are the last ones to be leading us into battle.
Peace doesn't always follows Victory, but it will always follow respect.
And what i mean by "The radicals are our children too," is they are God's children. Thus they belong to us. Each citizen, each precious life is our responsibility.
Mark I ask you, how do you think God sees the "Radicals?" Someone to be crushed, or someone who has loss their sight of the possibility, the peace, and the power of God's Love?
No more politics, left or right, with American Lives. No more falsehoods about our enemies. There's enough evidential truth warranting our attention and vigilance.
God's speed.
Excellent points. osaze may have forgtten that the Roman and Brittish Empires engendered little love, but did bring Pax Rommano and Pax Brittania. Pax UN is a leftist chimera.
You replied: (You write "Peace follows victory. Period." Allow me to quote the Great Communicator who said "Peace through Strength." During the cold war, our enemies didn't attack us because we were strong and respected.)
First, "The Great Communicator" is in my top 5 personal heroes.
I think your statement is less than accurate to the facts.
1. There were physical battles during the Cold War. Mostly they were fought with surrogates. Remember a little struggle in Afghanistan? More than just a little American aid went to that endeavor; we did have troops (advisers) on the ground there. Stopping the expansion around the globe of communism was a very big, complex and important battle.
2. In that case it was a battle amongst "Nation States" and peace did follow victory. Surrogate battles and military technology battles were won.
3. Thank God we didn't have to attack "The Evil Empire", but then again, they weren't flying jetliners into our buildings and marching suicide bombers into school buildings.
4. We are still respected around the world. But the longer the media and the left and the McCain's undermine this Administration the more emboldened our enemy become. That results in less respect from the Radical Arabs and causes for more resistance which ends up as less respect around the world. It is a vicious cycle.
You replied; (That global respect has been squandered by the Clinton (Rwanda and Somalia) and Bush II (Iraq) administrations.)
OBL or UBL as some call him has stated that the former is where he learned that America wouldn't take causalities.
1. OBL knows our media and our left. (Not to exclude McCain and his ilk)
2. The one issue that comes to mind where I differed with "The Great Communicator" was when we didn't crush those that conducted, planned and financed the bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon.
3. I don't think Bush II has "squandered" our respect; on the contrary, I think it has been the opposition that has squandered it! Could you imagine the message it would have sent around the world if we truly had been able to go after Global Terrorists and ALL of the States that sponsor them. If only the Left and the Media (to include McCain) had not started undermining this President from the very outset. It is they who have "squandered our global respect".
You replied: (We play politics with our brave service members and their families when we make statements like "we can win (politically) with this (war in Iraq) because the American people trust us (Republicans ) more with national security." -Karl Rove, Jan 2002, long before a supposed decision was officially made to go in. War should be a last resort, not a political power grab.)
1. Please source this quote of Rove so I can read in context what was said.
2. Not knowing in context what Rove said, I do not concede the point that it was decided to go to war so we could win politically.
3. It is a fact though, to date, that the American people have trusted the Republicans more with national security.
4. And when in a global battle against these fascists, we had better make sure the American people know what they will be losing and what they will be getting should the left take control of the Legislative or the Executive branch of our government.
You replied: (Is the world better off with Saddam gone? yes, but with a very small "y." Was he the biggest threat out there, warranting our greatest resource? Oh course not.)
1. GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM.
2. Did he not fund terrorism? Blood payments to the families of teenage suicide bombers.
3. The real Inconvenient Truth is; way back before 9/11, many around the globe, even the useless UN stated his WMD program was a danger.
4. Just as I stated and has went unanswered; …….. Iraq had WMDs and WMD programs in place. Over 700 chemical weapons shells found to date. We all know Iran and Syria had/has no motive for helping Saddam hide the evidence.
5. OBL himself has said Iraq is the battle front of this clash of Islam and the "Infidels"
6. No Sadam wasn't the "biggest threat out there", that's probably why we went to Afghanistan first.
7. I believe we should have gone to Iran second.
You replied: (Mark, tell me with $300 billion spent, with nearly 3000 American soldiers dead, countless more maimed for life, with no WMDs, and a more frayed American fabric, loss of international credibility, was Iraq (not an iminent threat) worth it or could we have done better?)
1. Refer back to my first post: …….. Iraq had WMDs and WMD programs in place. Over 700 chemical weapons shells found to date. We all know Iran and Syria had/has no motive for helping Saddam hide the evidence.
2. Again; The real Inconvenient Truth is; way back before 9/11, many around the globe, even the useless UN stated Sadam's WMD program was a danger.
3. Had we not went in and a WMD was used by a terrorist group and even the slightest link back to Saddam was made, would we ever hear the end of "What did he know and when did he know it"?
4. I've addressed the credibility issue above.
5. What we could have done better and still can do better is unite behind the effort and make it clear to Radical Islam and the Middle East; America, there is no better friend and there is no worse enemy! If you want to commit terrorist acts around the globe and terrorize the globe, we will wipe you from the face of this earth.
You replied; (People who've never worn the uniform are the last ones to be leading us into battle.)
1. You are not talking about the President.
2. You are not talking about me.
3. I don't remember reading in the Constitution where it states any words to the effect that only Presidents with military service are also the Commander in Chief. Who are you referring to in this passage and what are you aiming to convey?
You replied: (Peace doesn't always follows Victory, but it will always follow respect.)
1. The latter would be because the respect is usually borne from victory in these matters. Yes there are those around the globe who respect us because we protect them and those because we feed them and other issues, but the Radical Islamists and some others, to include the dictators in the part of the world we are debating here, it is victory.
2. And I don't know if I agree that peace follows respect in that part of the world unless it is respect earned from victory.
You replied; (And what i mean by "The radicals are our children too," is they are God's children. Thus they belong to us. Each citizen, each precious life is our responsibility.)
1. Yes, we are all God's children.
2. Obviously, we all don't believe in the same God as I do.
3. No, I think the life of my children is more of my responsibility then any others. And when they are eager to teach theirs to commit suicide in an attempt to reach their political and/or religious goals, it is my first and foremost responsibility to protect mine.
You replied; (Mark I ask you, how do you think God sees the "Radicals?" Someone to be crushed, or someone who has loss their sight of the possibility, the peace, and the power of God's Love?)
1. I am not sure how God "sees the Radicals".
2. I know the Bible is replete with God's grace and mercy, but I also know it has examples of His wrath and His direction to go to war to defeat certain groups of people from time to time.
3. I don't think God requires me to negotiate with people whose starting point is my death.
You replied: (No more politics, left or right, with American Lives. No more falsehoods about our enemies. There's enough evidential truth warranting our attention and vigilance.)
1. Again, I don't cede the point that we have gone to war for politics.
2. I don't know what falsehoods about our enemies you are referring to.
I also don't know as to what you are referring to when you say "There's enough evidential truth warranting our attention and vigilance.
So I will try one more time, could someone tell me; how do you negotiate with the Radical Islamists when their STARTING point is our death?
So I will try one more time, could someone tell me; how do you negotiate with the Radical Islamists when their STARTING point is our death?
Are you willing to be the first to give your life in an attempt to get the talking started?
I'm not. But I support the hundreds of thousands of our military who have volunteered (after 9/11) to go fight them over there before they get here in amass!