Osama bin Laden and the Islamists understand how important Iraq is. They are opposing us there with all they have. It is complicated, but I could refer you to several books on the matter if you are interested. For example, the founder of Stratfor, the private organization that provides Intelligence info to companies and other interested in international affairs, George Friedman in America's Secret War, Inside the Hidden Worldwide Struggle between America and its Enemies, describes how the removal of Saddam's regime was important in the war against the Islamists. See also, Kennet Pollack's The Treatening Storm, the Case for Invading Iraq., The Reckoning, Iraq and the Legacy of Saddam Hussein by Sandra Mackey, and The Pentagon's New Map, War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century by Thomas Barnett. Lawrence _____ From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 6:29 PM To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Text of bin Laden Tape I completely fail to understand how opposing the Islamists has anything to do with attacking Iraq or ousting Sadaam. He was a secularist, and what we have done is open the country to waves of Islamists who have footholds and bases for their agendas. If you support the war on Iraq for other reasons, fine. But I don't think you can make the case that attacking Iraq was an opposition to the Islamists. Julie Krueger ========Original Message======== Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: Text of bin Laden Tape Date: 1/20/06 8:04:47 PM Central Standard Time From: lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent on: We have an enemy: the Islamists. The Islamists want to conquer us. We need to oppose them. If you disagree you should logically argue that we don't need to oppose them or that they don't want to conquer us. If we aren't opposing them as well as we ought, that doesn't detract from the argument that we ought to oppose them. Although I did mention it as an aside, the people are being provided with faulty information by the media. I blame the media and the people for that. The media for being perverse and the people for being gullible, but I am not surprised by any it. We will (as a people) eventually learn that the enemy is to be taken seriously - that he does want to conquer us. It took a lot of blood to get us into both World Wars. We probably need to bleed a bit more before we develop enthusiasm for this one, but notice that Osama does intend to make us bleed. Lawrence _____ From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Andy Amago Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 5:44 PM To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Text of bin Laden Tape Okay, let's cut the leadership some slack. It's all the people's fault that we lost this war. Let's blame them instead. It wasn't Napoleon's fault that he lost (or won). It was the French people, right? So let me get this straight. This is a necessary war, but not an important one. Is that right? And kindly point out the bothersome non sequiturs. ----- Original Message ----- From: Lawrence <mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Helm To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: 1/20/2006 8:38:47 PM Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Text of bin Laden Tape You are giving me a headache with your non sequiturs. I didnt discuss the importance, but I do believe it is a necessary war. It can become more important if we dilly dally and let them win more than we ought to let them win. You have introduced several tangents which dont seem important. We have an implacable enemy. We may or may not be fighting him as enthusiastically as we ought. From the fact that so many people want us to withdraw prematurely from Iraq (to the delight of Osama) it is clear that millions dont understand the importance of fighting this enemy. So perhaps the people you refer to as not doing something right ought to be given some slack for not fighting them as well as they might. Lawrence _____ From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Andy Amago Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 5:25 PM To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Text of bin Laden Tape Well, if it was such an important war, why wasn't it fought more seriously? Why did the Army have to laugh at their proposal and insist on a larger army than what Rove & Co. wanted, and still be nowhere close to what was needed? Why was there no plan for after Baghdad fell? Why did we go to war with the army we had instead of the army we needed (a paraphrase)? Why cut taxes when the money is needed for military spending to fund the army to fight this war that we need so desperately? Yadda yadda. In short, why was it not waged as if it was an important war? If you say it was the Democrats' fault, then you're passing the buck. The Republicans run the show and he had everybody's approval in any case.