Why do so many idiots buy the "Fight 'em there instead of here" line?!?

[Sparkly]

I'm listening to the replay of today's Washington Journal, and I'm amazed at how many people call in and say, "Better to fight them over there (Iraq) than fight them here."

Have any of you ever spoken to someone who spouts that line? If so, could you please explain what the HELL are they thinking?!? :crazy:

[Chicago Democrat]

1. Its a simplistic lie...

For simplistic minds...

[Road Scholar]

2. The only requirement to watch Fox News. NT

[Burma Jones]

3. Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the

American Public...

and, of course

There's a sucker born every minute.


I think the first quote is Mencken and the second is Barnum.

[Sparkly]

4. It'd only take an ounce of intelligence and two seconds of thought

to realize what a totally stupid statement it is. Do they really believe it? Or do they just think other people do? It's mind-boggling to me. :crazy:

[Burma Jones]

9. C'mon, you've seen reality TV, right?????

Seriously, many folks think terrorism, Al Quada, Islam and the Iraqi resistance are all the same thing. They are probably using their last ounce of intelligence to figure out how to make a living and pay for health care, and their two seconds of thought is probably spent thinking about fear, money, sex or religion ....

[XemaSab]

34. not to mention

All Arabs and Saddam's republican guard.

[shadowknows69]

5. I wonder what their excuse will be for Bush

when we do get attacked again. We will. Probably soon if the rest of the world is any indication. Probably be Clinton's fault.

[Sparkly]

7. One caller said "He's doing the best he can."

Unfortunately, thay's a big part of the problem!!

[tandem5]

6. I think you've answered your own question...

they're idiots.

[zoeb]

8. My brother believes that crap...he's a repuke too.

But this past week a caller said that Saddam had WMDs...So it just goes to show you, there are much bigger idiots running loose and sadly, dumbing down the gene pool.:puke:

[Sparkly]

11. What does he say when it's pointed out that "fighting them there"

does nothing to stop an attack here? Or that it didn't stop attacks in London or Madrid? Or that it's sucking money away from security here?

[zoeb]

21. He says we haven't been attacked since 911

so we must be doing something right. I tell him that's just a matter of time.

[Fleshdancer]

22. Doesn't he realize it took 8 yrs between the two WTC attacks?

This is the point I always make when people say this stuff. The first WTC attack was in 1993. 9/11 occurred 8 years later so why should be expect an immediate attack now? To think they would be able to create another huge attack in the US so soon is giving them way more credit than they deserve.

Fortunately for the US, we're sandwiched between big oceans that serve as a monstrous logistical problem for foreign terrorists.

[Poiuyt]

36. We HAVE been attacked since 9/11.

Remember the antrax attacks? Remember the shoe-bomber (he was caught before he did damage).

I fail to understand how our being in Iraq is preventing terrorists from Saudi or Pakistan from buying a plane ticket to the US.

[ikri]

45. Since 9/11

There was the Anthrax mailings. These were probably down to a few high ranking people in the intelligence community who were trying to show how weak the infrastructure was to this sort of attack.

There was the shoe bomber. Though he was on a plane thus technically not in the US and he was luckily a bit of a crap bomber.

Then there was the very strange explosion a few weeks ago outside the British consulate. A grenade went off (in New York) causing minimal damage. Made international news at the time, but was quickly forgotten and as far as I've heard no one has ever been arrested for detonating a grenade in the middle of New York.

Why does no one (especially Democratic politicians) ever pull the republicans up on this line? Next time someone spouts the line "we've not been attacked since 9/11" point out the 3 most obvious attacks, only one of which has ever resulted in a conviction.

[jenmito]

39. After the London attacks...

He said, "We, like London, will not be intimidated by thugs and assassins. That's why we must stay on the offense and fight them THERE so we don't have to fight them here." (Applause). Don't they realize this makes NO sense, and that "they" DID "fight" us "here" (London is "here" according to the way Bush takes "credit" for being attacked in London). Sorry for all the quotation marks. :)

[HysteryDiagnosis]

10. Ask them how many they have killed by supporting this thing in

the wh that NEVER NEVER EVER would have lifted a frigging finger towards any one of us... EVER.

This is the simple hard truth. We have MURDERED thousands of Iraqis and have ripped their economy and country apart. If they don't have a problem with that then so be it, otherwise, this point should give them pause.

[indepat]

12. Because religious zealots and other ideologues will blindly follow

their leaders through the gates of hell, obediently and unquestioningly: they are both brainwashed and brain-dead IMHO, not caring a hoot about the legality, constitutionality, justness, or humanity of their leader's actions.

[Historic NY]

13. They must think that "they" can't get here......

what if they decide to open another "front" other their war with the evil satan. Come to think of it London probably was an opening salvo. We won't let Cat Stevens in but, how many new recruits have come ashore and are just waiting.

[Sparkly]

14. Do they think there are 6 of "them?"

And they don't recruit?

[Historic NY]

16. Exactly..........another related thread on the subject

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1648894

[brentspeak]

15. Agreed. One would certainly have to be an idiot to believe that line

Especially because Backup Reason #2 (or is it #3?) for us to invade was to "make a better life for the Iraqi people".

And yet, it's difficult to improve the lives of the Iraqi people when their country has been turned into a battleground.

Has any reporter asked Bush if he thinks the Iraqi people want their country to be a battleground in the U.S.' war on terror?

[joanski0]

17. I heard bush* update that line. The other

day I actually heard bush* say "The terrorists chose to make Iraq the center of the global war on terror, so we're fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here". So it's the terrorists' fault!!!!

[MiniMe]

46. The terrorists weren't using Iraq as the center of the global war.....

The terrorists weren't using Iraq as the center of the global war until BushCo decided to attack them. Once the US attacked, radical Muslims from the entire mideast started using Iraq as a training ground.

Having said that, fighting them "there" does nothing to prevent them from attacking us here.

[Stil]

18. Ask them

How many americans would have died if we did not go to Iraq. When they say "I don't know?" Tell them how many have died since we did go.

[Vinca]

19. I wonder how Londoners feel about that line, considering,

from our standpoint, they're "over there." The fact is, the terrorists weren't "over there" (Iraq) until after we arrived, then they decided to come.

[Vickers]

20. Most of them have never fought a goddam thing ANYWHERE

This is the kind of simplistic bullshit that chickenhawks squawk.

[liberaliraqvet26]

23. just repukes who don't have kids "over there"

[Panda1]

24. I heard that woman

She appeared to be spouting from the mighty Wurlitzer.
She recited talking points.
Pounding the lies and hoping they stick.

Have you noticed that more and more callers to WJ are speaking sincerly with disgust and anger? It's interspersed with the wingers and TP calls but I sense a change.


As for why so many idiots buy this tripe...
"See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda." —George W. Bush, Greece, N.Y., May 24, 2005

[Pushed To The Left]

25. It's just another catchy right-wing line

They say it to make themselves believe that what's going on in Iraq is somehow making us safer here, when the exact opposite is true. The 9/11 attackers were living here, not in the Middle East! In my opinion, homeland security is the most important part of preventing terrorism. If the Bush Administration really wanted to go after Al Quaeda in the Middle East, why haven't they gone after Saudi Arabia?

[ladjf]

26. Out of sight, out of mind. The same as with sewage.

It may sound like a workable plan. But, it's turning out to be just the opposite. Ask the British and the Egyptians.

[Incitatus]

27. Why do so many idiots buy the "Fight 'em there instead of here" line?!?

Why do so many idiots buy the "Fight 'em there instead of here" line?!?

[Sparkly]

35. That's still the question.

Seems to me even an idiot should be able to spend three seconds figuring out what a dumb line it is. :shrug:

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

38. The fear factor?

Which has been so exploited by this administration.

The fighting over there idea soothes that fear.

Let them fight anywhere but here, never mind who suffers.

It is a very sad commentary on how the supposedly pro life culture values life, ie American life as well.

:wtf:

[Vinnie From Indy]

28. I explain it like this...

I tell the woefully misguided that the situation in Iraq is much more like our economy today. We invent stuff here and then we send it "over there" somewhere to be manufactured and then it comes back to us through Wal-Mart. The war is the same way. BushCo. invented Osama and then they went to Iraq to build an Osama factory and it is just a matter of time before container ships filled with shiny new Osamas comes back to us through Wal-Mart.

[0007]

29. "Fight 'em there instead of here"

Is proof that some people let FAUX News, CNN & MSNBC do their thinking for them. These are mindless ignorant folks that haven't woke up to the organized crime family that is leading this nation.

[sakabatou]

30. Because if you play it backwards, there's a hidden message

It says: Destroy all liberals!

[El Fuego]

31. But we're really bringing Americans TO THEM

So that they can kill them over there.

They don't have to attack us on U.S. soil. American soldiers are fish in barrel in Iraq for terrorist attacks.

[Imagevision]

32. Seems like a lot of Dems have to get up to speed - as Cheney

and Rice say beware of that mushroom cloud? -- this could only happen with the likes of a Bush character calling the shots!

[WhiteTara]

33. they are cowardly NIMBYs?

[Erika]

37. I agree 100%

They are comfy cowards who think everyone but themselves should sacrifice in this unjust "war".

[howmad1]

42. Hold on for a sec.....

......I really don't think we'll see another attack here because there is no earthly reason for another attack on the US? Consider; OBL spent a measly half million bucks on Sept. 11 and our bozo government is spending $1 billion a day fighting terra. Our economy is in the tank, and shortly, we'll be a bankrupt nation because of this war on terra. Since 9/11 we've lost most of our personal freedoms and it will get worse thanks to Patriot Acts I and II. We're far less safe now than we've ever been. Our military is in the worst shape it's ever been in and I can go on and on about the worsening situation in this country because of that $500,000 investment. So again, why bother with another attack? OBL sits patiently watching the demise of the worlds once greatest democracy. My answer to those assholes who think we are safe because we've not been attacked is simple; "Why bother with another attack? The "terrorists" have already gotten everything they could ever hope for."

On the other hand, pres. Putz is planning a vacation during the month of August. Maybe we should stay out of tall buildings next month.

[knight_of_the_star]

40. They don't want to think about that

They just want to go on with their lives and not actually stop and think, "Hey, that's bull!" It wouldn't mesh with their little bubbles.

[KBlagburn]

41. This question will stop them in their tracks!!!!!!!!

What difference does it make whether they kill americans over "there" or over "here"? Americans are dieing irregardless.

[Leafy Geneva]

43. It's because they are cowards.

They want their "war on terror" but they want other people to bear the burden of the carnage that war entails.

[nookiemonster]

44. Limbaugh, Hannity, and the usual ilk.

As much as I hate these bastards, they try to come across as good ole boys and the cretins eat it up.

Such simple minds. Damn.

[mwb970]

47. It makes no sense.

It's like saying "I'm going to go lock myself inside my summer cottage so nobody can invade my main house." Huh?

[Swamp Rat]

48. Because THEY want others to fight for them and not have to pay any of the

consequences of war.

Because 'THEY' are chickenshit bastards.

[DemGa]

49. They're selfish and afraid

I think they feel if you kill enough people, you'll eventually get the right ones. "Sure, it's unfortunate that all these innocent people die, but I'm trying to manage a family, career, etc."

[Toots]

50. 55% of Iraqis killed were women and children under twelve (civilians)

Sure glad they didn't launch an invasion into the USA and kill us all.