The Speech President Bush Should Give

The scarey part is that most Americans think that as soon as we kill Bin Laden the war is over, everyone comes home,WRONG! this war or fight is going to last at least a generation. Get use to it.

Mustang, if that's the case (as I've pointed out before... maybe to you or someone else), then we will lose.

History shows that America lacks the stomach for a long-term fight. Hell, even our involvement in WW2 didn't last five years.

Our want-it-now, microwavable, fast-food society cannot win a struggle of ideas against a culture that views a decade as if it were a minute.

That's why I fervently believe that, ultimately, the Chinese will rule the world. Maybe not in our lifetimes, but it will. It's simply a matter of time perception and birthrate. China's history is so vast and long, they can wait another hundred years to achieve the inevitable. Maybe China won't be communist then. Maybe it will. Point is that China will dominate the world and America will likely occupy the position that Britain now holds.

You cannot look at this war in a lethal fashion. Kill all the Arabs you want. They're like Doritos... they'll make more.

you are probably right, I dont think the majority of Americans have the stomach for a long slog. As long as the mall and starbucks dont get hit, well who cares.
We are a TV society,Every thing last 30 minuets and ends happily ever after.

Remember that we live in a society in which every citizen, regardless of his contributions to the body politic, are considered equal. It is a misinterpretation of the phrase, "all men are created equal." They are. However, their contributions to society are not. Therefore, the benefits they reap and the responsibilities accorded to them should not be either.

I don't know if I've ranted about universal suffrage on this board or not, but I think it is the single-most worst thing that has ever happened to the American political system. The right to vote was originally given to the landed elite, the class who had the most invested in the country's future. As the vote expanded, it became less of what was good for the country and more of "what's in it for me."

Citizenship is universal and without effort. This is a travesty. Citizenship needs to be conditional. If everyone has it for doing nothing, then it means nothing.

Correct me if I'm wrong, LTC P, but if I could walk around in a set of Dress Blues and say I'm a Marine and everyone had to take me at face value, would you not be offended? And would the worthiness of the title "Marine" not be degraded and cheapened by that action? Not to say I wouldn't make a good Marine (I like to think that, had life been a little different for me, I'd have made a damn good one... maybe next go around). However, the mere fact that you can claim a title without having to earn it makes it morally bankrupt and hollow. And that's what citizenship in America has become.

Americans give nothing and contribute nothing in order to have a "right" to everything. The great burden of protecting their security and liberty fall on the shoulders of a precious few... a VERY precious few. The percentage of Americans taking an active part in supporting this current war hovers around one percent... ONE PERCENT! Never in American history during its great trials by fire was such a monumental task given to such a pitifully low fraction of society.

I do not believe in the draft, but I do think the time is coming where American citizenship is going to have to be examined, debated, and refined. What is it to be an American? What is it to be able to vote? Why do you vote and what motivates you in voting as you do? What gives you the right to even have a say in the future of the country? What makes you worthy enough to claim your right as a "stakeholder" in society?

I believe one of the best things that could happen would be to strip the vote away from the average American. I don't believe in stripping away their constitutional protections or their civil liberties. However, the vote is simply to precious, valuable, and FRAGILE to simply toss around at anyone who is merely come of age.

The vote needs to have a requirement. I say it is a term of honorable military service. Those in uniform have invested much more than the average American in the future of this country. A stockholder who ponies up capital to purchase 100 shares of a company does not have the same voice as one who purchases 5 shares. And that's just in the corporate world.

We're talking about the future of our COUNTRY and our SOCIETY. As it stands now, people vote with their pocketbook. It's all about them and getting theirs.

We stay on this current course and we will vote ourselves into socialism and the living dead state that Britain and the western European nations find themselves in.

Remember, the "great experiment" in democracy isn't a success yet, it's a work in progress... in fact, it may turn out to be a colossal failure in a couple of more decades. I believe the Founding Fathers would shudder at what we've become now... a vast, global empire. We're the Victorian England of the 21st century. We're the Roman Empire of the new millenium... having accomplished bringing civilization to the far corners of the globe, we now find ourselves having to defend our realm from the barbarians.

The sun never sets on the American empire.

I'll step off my soapbox for now.

I agree and disagree also. Such as a prerequiset for military service to vote. What about those who are unable because of physical abilitys? I would rather see it where if you dont pay any income tax, you can't vote.
During WW2 some of the best contributers to the war effort were the engineers and defence plant workers!
As far as an empire, well I think the Greeks, Romans and the old British empire rulers are having a good laugh at our ineptness and timedness at running an "empire"!lol
We should use the old General Curtis LeMay philosophy: "When you have them by their balls, their hearts and minds will follow"!!!

I believe another right for Americans should be the opportunity to serve. I have no problem with enlisting a paraplegic. Yes, he can't tote a rifle (maybe not even deploy). But, he can type, file, collate... basically release an able body to serve in the line. I think it is an excellent idea and would also further empower handicapped Americans.

The Romans might laugh at us. Their world was vastly different than ours, with little news from the outer edges of the realm and units that would practically spend lifetimes deployed... taking families and all along with them.

The English would be a little more sympathetic. The decline of their empire, I think, was a product of their own leadership and population becoming less brutal in their methods. WW2 finished the Empire off, but it would have happened anyway, as Britain began seeing their empire and the way they managed it as immoral.

GEN LeMay was a man for his time, not ours. He would be out of place and innefective in our current fight. Look at the amount of firepower we threw at Vietnam. It made no difference. You can carpet-bomb mountains, but it will not root out Bin Laden and the Taliban.

In war, the moral is to the physical as two (or was it three?) is to one. That's what Sun Tzu said and he's right. If you have a population who is fervent in their belief and fanatical to their cause, they are a very difficult enemy to defeat.

You are right, you dont carpet bomb jungles you carpet bomb cities and ports ie. Hiaphong, Hanoi. The rules of war is you destroy your enemies will to fight.
Our enemies know that we will go out of our way to avoid inflicting casualties both on the enemy and accepting casualties on our side. And they use our timidness to their advantage.
If you are recieving fire from a building in a war zone you level it. You do not ingress it like your doing a drug raid in Kansas City!