"...we could endlessly discuss the storm and how terrible it is, but ultimately it doesn't change the fact that storms will come and you don't run from storms."

YES. Excellently said.

Damn! Well said! Very well said.

Friedman has been absolutely schizophrenic on Iraq. Now it's "double the boots on the ground or we will fail"? "Training is overrated"?

Sorry, I think he's dead wrong (today, tomorrow, who knows?). Iraqis have to take up the fight, with our help, to win. And that's exactly what we're doing right now.

Of course, some people just like to think their nation should win the wars they fight.

Silly, neolithic thinking, I know.

Sorry to all liberals for starting the war. Sorry you didn't buy our multiple rationales, preferring to focus merely on the rationales you could argue with. Sorry you never shave your pits, legs, or sideburns.

I'm sorry you smell like cabbage. You know, like circus folk.

Really, I am just plain sorry. But don't you know? There's a war on.

And at the end of the day, I don't care who started it, or why, if I'm going to call America my home and suckle from her breast, I'm going to cheer her on.

It's like the disgruntled sports fan who thinks their team plays awful, and is always throwing away the games, and making trades they don't understand. Then, when that team makes the playoffs, instead of cheering on their team-- the team they loved so much in the first place-- they'd rather see their team "get what they deserve" in order to learn some sort of "lesson."

Meanwhile, the team, and the millions of fans who stayed loyal, get to suffer the heckling from people who think they are fans, but are in reality, not helping in the least.

Only with nations, you know, people die, and cities go up in smoke.

Cheers,
Dave at Garfield Ridge

Staying on the sports theme, someone wrote a nice column a while back using the basketball analogy in which the US Team was up by 75 points at halftime and the fans were booing and complaining about the play calling by the coach and how he was going to lose the game. Perfect description of these America haters.

Unless, of course, one needn't have been in the path of the storm in the first place.

As for the rest:

Yes - it is true that curbing the US' projection of power sounds appealing, at least to this liberal.

This, perhaps, is the fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives today.

Conservatives think that because we have the power we must project it (or else why invade Iraq, a dusty backwater in "the global war on terror") while liberals know that if we didn't screw the rest of the economy by funding the military to the extent that we do, sending the military in on a hopeless misadventure wouldn't have been an option on the table.

Yeah! Keep America weak 'cause America sucks! I HATE AMERICA!

And don't question my patriotism you fascist!

sigh.

I joined a discussion board a few months back and came across that mentality of liberals seeming to want the war to go badly for the U.S. Someone posted an article about how Cheney said that things in Iraq would settle down by 2008. "We'll hold you to this Dick," the poster said. Having seen other posts by this guy I asked him if he did at least hope Cheney was right.

I was blasted for daring to question anyones patriotism and suggesting that these people wanted innocents to die. What I actually suggested was that some people wanted the war to go badly to justify their own political desires. The fact that I was able to pull up a quote from the poster back in 2003 about how if the Iraq war was short it would be a "disaster" because that would benefit Bush was deemed unfair.

All Hell broke loose with them after that. I stayed calm even while noting that they all seemed to jump into hyper-emotional mode as soon as someone pointed out things contradictory to their beliefs. It ended up that I was banned (in mid post) and they cut out my posts from the topic. I took a little comfort in knowing I had been the victim of Stalin-esque historical revisionism.

For any of you that care this was a Star Wars discussion board (stardestroyer.net)

I've had the same type of experiences as Allen described. Any type of hole I punched in their arguments or anything that I called them on that stated what they really felt, namely that they wished things would go badly for the US, was met with the "don't question my patriotism" line.

Even things that had nothing to do with it got that response from a few of the lefties. Now whenever anyone disagress with me on anything, I'm tempted to use it.

"Did you see that new Batman movie? I thought it was pretty slow and boring."

"I disagree. I thought it did a great job of mixing character develpment and action"

"Are you questioning my patriotism?"

"...."

Game over

The actual difference is that liberals are America-hating pussies who want us to live on our knees and conservatives aren't.

"...(or else why invade Iraq, a dusty backwater in 'the global war on terror')"

Nice scare quotes, Avenger. On your site you also refer to it as our "hysterical little war on terror." Actually, I wish more Liberals were as honest as you and stopped pretending to be interested in fighting terrorists.

Liberal Avenger

while liberals know that if we didn't screw the rest of the economy by funding the military to the extent that we do, sending the military in on a hopeless misadventure wouldn't have been an option on the table.

Exactly who should take our place as the most powerful nation on earth? The Russians or the Chinese Communists? And exactly what would we do when they began asserting themselves into the power vacuum left by us? The Cold War was not caused by us, it was caused by Stalin and later the Soviet Union and Mao and later the Chinese Communists and almost led to nuclear war. It was only our vast strength that saved us from having to participate in Armegeddon or backing down to Commnis, which if Liberals had had their way, we would have done and would be surrounded by Communist nations right now. Your notion that all we have to do to improve the world is to withdraw from it has been repeatedly been proven wrong, and at terrible cost to us and the whole world in blood and treasure.

I am just plain sorry.

Wanna join my team at the World Bank, Dave?

We could use a man like you who knows how to throw the "s" bomb around with aplomb.

By the way, I'm also sorry for that poor schlep who the runaway bride stood up. The international community could have done something about it--not sure just what--but we could have. And we didn't. And I'm sorry.

One more thing before I finish: I'm sorry that we never stopped George Lucas after the first three Star Wars. Perhaps the first two. Yes, I apologize for not stopping George Lucas after The Empire Strikes Back.

I don't know about you but I feel better having said that.

Lynching, Rwanda, the Runaway Bride, Star Wars. That covers it, I think.

Now who's game for some makeup sex?

I will not stand here while you bad mouth the United States of America - Eric Stratton, Animal House

The Libreral Assholer is a troll. DO NOT FEED

The liberal avenger's post just is another confirmation that my actions of voting Right (which means....sigh...republican) in the national elections.

I hope to return to the Left someday since I disagree with the Right on so many social issues (from stem cells to abortion to public displays of religion) it is not even funny and my peer group is mildly displeased (or think I'm mad) with me since they all votes left (or abstain as some can not bring themselves to vote for a Rep but are to disgusted with the current Left to vote for them).

But I actually do love America and it's ideals of Freedom enough to stand with it in this sad time.

I just have to be very quiet about it or else I am called a Nazi.

The Terrorists are the evil ones, those that kill and oppress, it is not the American Military, not Bush, not even Delay.

X-lefty

To resurrect Ace's meteorological metaphor, you don't run from the storm, and you make sure your roof is up to code. This country spent eight years ignoring those little problems with the roof and it got us 9/11.

As for Liberal Avenger, what are you avenging? Clinton? Move on, indeed, troll.

Thank you, Ace, for a well-written and fair acknowledgement that liberals have more than one opinion regarding the war. Far too many conservative web sites fall back on childish insults like "Dave at Garfield Ridge" above that willfully misrepresent the issue.

I like to think I fall into the pro-America anti-war category, and I'd like to explain why. It's not that I don't think American power should be projected internationally - obviously, it has been with positive results, WWII being the most obvious example, the first Gulf War being another. But, as Spider-Man said, with great power comes great responsibility. We have used our power irresponsibly in the past - we helped install the Baathists in Iraq as a counterweight to Iran. And the Ayatollahs are running Iran because we tried to replace a Democratic government with the Shah. And, of course, there's Osama bin Laden, who we trained to fight the Soviets, and then just let loose afterwards.

Liberals who acknowledge mistakes we've made in foreign policy don't point this stuff out because we hate America. We love America, and we don't want to see it keep making the same mistakes. If the Iraq war had been well-planned and well-executed, and we had gone in with a clear idea of how to build a stable, democratic society, I might have been for it. But we just rushed to Baghdad, and decided to figure everything else later. I worry that the result will be similar to what happened in Iran in the 70s. Our attempts to set up a friendly government will be seen as too heavy-handed, and the populace will put an anti-American gov't in place a few years down the line. I'm not rooting for that to happen by any means, but I fear it will, and I know that if we had gone about things more intelligently, the odds of it happening would be a lot lower.

Now, that's the reason I disagree with the Iraq war. Here's the reason I fucking hate the Iraq War: I'm a New Yorker. I live close enough to Ground Zero that I could smell the smoke on that awful morning. 3,000 of my neighbors were murdered that day. We knew who was behind the attacks. It wasn't Iraq. It wasn't Saddam. It was Al Qaeda. Based in and funded by Saudi Arabia, more than any other country. So, do we go after Al Qaeda? Bush made a token effort, and then six months after the attacks, declared bin Laden "not a priority", and trained all guns on Saddam, who never attacked us, and wasn't a threat to us. Was he a bad guy? Sure. Is Iraq better off without him? Undoubtedly. But was that our first priority? Hell no.

I studiously avoided visiting Ground Zero after the attacks. It seemed morbid and insensitive for people to drop by and take photos like it was the ice rink at Rockafeller Center. 3000 people died there. And in the early months, while rescue workers were still searching for bodies, it was a mass grave. It disgusted me when Bush stopped the rescue work to do a photo op - stood, for all we knew on the bodies of our firefighters, and broke the reverent silence with cowboy slogans shouted into a bullhorn.

But one slogan stuck with me: we're gonna get this guy, dead or alive. Why is he still alive? And don't tell me we're looking for him. We have 100,000 soldiers in Iraq not looking for him. Not going after his henchmen. Not disrupting Al Qaeda's funding. Not busting up their camps. Not threatening countries like Saudi Arabia who support AQ. Every soldier sent to overthrow Saddam was a soldier not attacking the terrorists. And every million dollars spent on Iraq, or "lost" by Halliburton is a million dollars not spent on investingating and shutting down Al Qaeda.

I avoided going to Ground Zero for as long as I could, but more than three years after the attacks, I found myself in the neighborhood. Even with so much time passed, seeing that empty space brought me to tears. Not just because so many people died. Not just because Bush ignored so many warnings, and sat idly by while the attacks took place, and our Air Force sat on the runaways, waiting for orders from our Commander-in-Cheif, but because we had the enemy in our sights, we vowed to do the right thing, and then we forgot all about it and moved on to something else.

Will we ever shut down Al Qaeda? Maybe next time they kill a few thousand Americans, we'll have a President who's up to the task.

I'm glad theres a war going on right now... all the right people are dying. All of us who don't feel the need to go out and "project our power" will sit home and wait for the rest of you till kill yourselves and try not to get in your way too much. Good luck with all that. Oh and we don't need to wait for ANYTHING else to happen... we already have rights to a 100% valid told ya so.

Hey Schoreder? You want a childish insult?

You're a filthy pigfucker.

There, THAT'S a childish insult.

You sound like you're an intelligent person. Prove it, by recognizing that I employ these things called "jokes" in combination with "sarcasm" in order to illuminate differences between political viewpoints.

I apologize for including "all" liberals in my ad hominem attack. It's useful shorthand, even if it's inaccurate. Just as I routinely suffer getting lumped in with "all" racist, women-hating knuckle-dragging biblethumping conservatives, when I'm not any of those.

Well, okay, fine-- I really don't like Pacific Islanders. If that makes me a racist, call me Robert C. Byrd.

Cheers,
Dave at Garfield Ridge

P.S. You're wrong about Iraq. But you already know what I would say, so we can skip the discussion, and have a beer or two and laugh about the sports page.

Schroeder should stick to playing his f'n piano with Lucy grabbing his tool. What a bunch of crap.

We installed the Baathists? WTF? Ever read a history book, dude. The Baathists installed themselves. As for the Iran situation. We put the Shah in because of the f'n Soviets. Remember them? Ultimately it went wrong, but it was a call that was made in the heat of a very warm Cold War.

I love how you lefties just conveniently remove facts from context. Now move onto the race to Bagdad. It was a brilliant military move, the Saddamite defenses crumbled. We won a war against a country of 23 million people with less than 2,000 deaths to date. Please show me one example from history of such fine execution. Hell, we lost 700 in a friggin' training accident for D-Day you douche.

As for your look at me, I'm a New Yorker so I have more credibility about Al-Qaeda, blow it out your ass. We destroyed the bases in Afghanistan within three months, that quick enough for you? We have been rolling up their network ever since. Yeah, we haven't gotten Osama, yet. Newsflash: the world is a big place and getting to him in some parts of it is not worth the cost. But he is no longer effective.

Iraq was a state sponsor of terrorism and a menace to the region. Saudi is now making progress against the Wahabbis and we are killing a lot of those Saudis in Iraq.

When you pull out of your ass the Bush sat idly by when he could have stopped the attacks card and mention Halliburton, you reveal that you are in the hate America crowd, or at least the I-put-the-political-fortunes-of-the-democrat-party-ahead-of-my-country-crow. All of which makes you a feminine hygiene product.

These moonbats are immune to logic. The evilness of America is an article of faith for them. Contradict one point of their's with the facts and they'll just move on to the next alleged manifestation of evil.
Contradict Gitmo, they go to Abu-Ghraib. Refute that and they'll say Bush Lied! Point to the hole in lower Manhattan, and they blame the JOOOS!.
For if America is ever presented in a good light, their whole rationale for their existance comes undone and they are but camels without a jockey. Wandering around lost, stinking up the place.

Schroeder, you don't give two shits about UBL on the loose and we all know it. You believe the President is vulnerable there so you pretend to, but to you it's the same as screaming, "Halliburton!" You know fuck-all about it, except what you read at Bartcop or wherever, but it sounds Bad For Bush so it's good for you.

You know nothing about Iran or Iraq, you pretend you believe Saudi Arabia was a better target than Iraq, which is just foolhardy. Nothing you're saying is any different than the average Commondreams moonbat ravings yet you expect your opinions to carry some weight because you live in New York.

Really, take that shit elsewhere, somewhere it hasn't already been said a thousand times much better than this. When you're ready to discuss it honestly, to either admit you're thrilled when things go Bad For Bush or else educate yourself to some realities, then try again. That effort was piss-poor and worse, not funny.

Those closest most of these lefties have ever come to wearing a uniform is a Starbucks apron, yet they feel they are qualified to second-guess the US military in how it fights this "hysterical little war on terror" . Nice. And that includes Tom Friedman, who knows a lot about the Middle East but jack-shit about Army doctrine or tactics. As for the non-argument that soldiers in Iraq should be searching for bin Laden? Hey great idea, we'll just send Divisions of combat infantrymen into Pakistan and we'll find him in a lunch hour. Christ, the US Marshals hunt fugitives full time, and sometimes they can't find guys in a mid-size American city. So I'm sure the Army might hit a snag or two searching for one man in an endless network of caves and safehouses, right in the heart of Indian country.

If we had invaded Saudi Arabia we would hear from Schroeder asking why aren't we attacking Iraq. Schroeder is an undeclared pacifist - undeclared because the position can not be defended.

shcroeder

Things have gone worse than anyone could have imagined in Iraq, especially the terrorists. Everyone thought the Iraqis would hand over the Baathists, hang the troublemakers, welcome us and be cooperative. First there was jubilation, then stunned silence and now a childish, petulant impatience over how slow the stabalization is going. We counted on the Iraqi people to show more guts in the face of terror than they did for a long time and are just beginning to.

And yes mistakes have been made, I don't believe there were no WMDs (or at least something in the design stage) but it's true we haven't found any. But we know that Saddam was trying desperately to acquire nuclear weapons and his program was getting further along all the time; something we could not allow under any circumstances. (Too bad it all derailed us from grabbing Iran's too, but he seemed further along than they were at the time.) But let us remember that the Isrealis considered his program such a threat that they bombed his nuclear facilities in 1984. And he had proved himself to be a Madman capable of anything. We simply couldn't have him with nuclear weapons in the midst of 2/3 of all the world's oil.

We've also had some very bad luck in terms of weather caused shortages in oil, coupled with terrorist attacks on facilities in the Gulf, lack of cooperation from the Saudis, and rising demand by China and others.

But this constant carping critiscm by Liberals really is hurting our war effort when we squabble amongst ourselves, having to fend off their ridiculous charges of all kinds. And our image among the terrorists (all over the world) and the Iraqis people (whom we desperatly need the good will of) is hurt terribly by the insane, shrieking hatred of our own Liberals, thereby making the job much harder, much more bloody, much more expensive, and much longer than it had to be.

And Liberals have got to know that, which is why conservatives hate them so much.

schroeder - You seem thoughtful, and I shall pray for you.

If you're healthy and between the ages of 18 and 35 and you support the war but haven't volunteered for military service, I'll give you one guess who the real pussy is.

If you wish for the US to fail and celebrate victories for the enemy in order to further your own narrow-minded partisan political views, we already know who the real pussy is. It's you.

We need a better crop of trolls with some original flamebait.

LOL Phaedrus!

So when Bill was sending troops to Kosovo, I'm sure a lot of lefties signed up for duty!

No offense, but you are a fucking moron.

This has got to be one of Friedman's dumbest articles ever. Liberals love to talk about Iraq. We won't shut up about it. It is a splinter in the mind. It is an open wound.

Anyone thinks we want people to die and for our money and international respect to go down the toilet just to prove Bush wrong is a fucking idiot.

America can be a force for good and justice in the world. It is Bush and his merry band of pirates who are dragging us down to hell.

Actually, I wish more Liberals were as honest as you and stopped pretending to be interested in fighting terrorists.

I'm certainly not interested in fighting the Iraqis.

Hey - where're bin Laden and Mullah Omar?

...if Liberals had had their way, we would have done and would be surrounded by Communist nations right now. Your notion that all we have to do to improve the world is to withdraw from it has been repeatedly been proven wrong, and at terrible cost to us and the whole world in blood and treasure.

Trying to imagine what "woulda happened" if "liberals had their way" is pointless.

If our leaders can't keep us out of unnecessary/wrong wars of choice then we need to hobble the military so that invading non-threatening countries ceases to be an option for them.

The war is a sham, and has been from the start. Would you mind losing the war if it meant your son or daughter would stay alive? Losing doesn't take anything away from the US. Iraq is a hotbed for "terrorists" in media nomenclature only. The middle east's troubles are not here yet, and by continuing this sham war, we ask for them ever more loudly. I hope those troubles never arrive here, but the fact the war is a sham - not was, is, and continues to be - should be glaring by now. And so, now, we must quit this nonsense before more bodies pile up. If you don't care enough about that, you should talk to the parents of those kids. Freedom is not being won over there, just lines in the sand, which blow away daily.

Phaedrus,

Didn't I see you riding the short bus with Rosie. Want to explain how supporting the war means I need to be in the military? Unfortunately for your little test, I am exempt, but I just want you to explain that logic.

This libs are fun to read. What a bunch of stupid twats. They do not give two shits about American soldiers.

The troubles in the Middle East reached here pretty clearly on 9/11.

Liberal Avenger is a pussy with no imagination. We would be cowering in hybrid cars if Algore were President and we would be surrendering in French if John Kerry were.

Instead we are beating the shit out of terrorists in Iraq.

you don't run from a storm ... especially if you took part in the big rain dance that brought it.

Even though 2 of my brothers died serving in Iraq, I will be proud to give my life for the precious oil there. We need it to survive. We must defeat the evil terrorists or they will invade us.

Conservative Chris - It was a brilliant military move, the Saddamite defenses crumbled. We won a war against a country of 23 million people with less than 2,000 deaths to date. Please show me one example from history of such fine execution.

Leave the WMD error behind - that was excusable since all the national intelligence services believed it. What ISN'T excusable is the lack of any plan for postwar Iraq, and Rumsfelds and Bush's insistence that war can be fought on the cheap with less troops than we need. And that any senior officer that says otherwise has lost his career. And that this "critical war" can be conducted by only asking 1% of the American population to sacrifice while the other 99% are told to enjoy their tax cuts and shop for all the Chinese stuff they can cram into their houses as their expected sacrifice to the war effort. Oh, and wave your made-in-China US Flags and cheer "the troops"!

This war just passed Korea and in real 2000 adjusted dollars is now the 4th most expensive war we have fought and is now on schedule to pass Vietnam in a year to be only behind WWII and the Civil War. And in another year and a half, it will be our 3nd-longest war next to Vietnam and the Revolution.

I supported this war and I still do, but I am highly disappointed in Bush and Rumsfeld's teams for their poor planning, ridiculous pollyannish statements over the last 2 years, and poor leadership in making their case to the American public about "staying the course" in Iraq amidst the wider war, which is actually against radical Islam, not "a few evildoers who hijacked the Religion of Peace". And Bush and Rumsfeld are showing a spectacular lack of concern of rising China. Bush has less aircraft carriers, ships, submarines, tanks,and fighter planes than Clinton gave him 1 trillion in Fed Gov't debt or so ago.

Reagan borrowed too, and rebuilt America's military and caused the Soviet Union to collapse because they couldn't match our build-up. If military resources are diminishing under Bush, where is all that borrowed money going? You know...just look at the new mansions and toys in wealthy neighborhoods..

China is projected to have 3 X the subs the US has if they keep going on their naval capital construction. Bush and Rumsfeld are transferring military resources and active duty troops largely out of "Blue States" in the Northeast and Midwest, and closing down Reserve Centers up there. With recruitment in trouble - their response has been to demilitarize the states with 40% of America's population, plus California, which alone has fully 13% of America's potential military recruits.

Dumb. Dumb. Dumb!

Nor do I believe so much in the "noble Iraqi people" hungering for democracy a la Right-Wing Zionist Natan Sharansky's theory. I see a nation of lackadaisical fence-sitters watching in partial amusement as Americans fight their fight for them and get maimed or die because Iraqis didn't pick up a gun and fight for their own freedom right away after Baghdad fell.

Bush can still pull it out, but he better stop talking so much about Social Security and making his tax cuts for the wealthy permanent - and more about Iraq strategy, the conflict with radical Islam, energy independence, trade, China, our failing health care system. and how he will keep the middle class and the volunteer military strong in the future.

"June" 3:14, 6:29, 7:28; 7:42 PM -

I don't blame you for not using a "tag". If I was an anti-American traitor like you I'd be afraid or ashamed to sign with a "tag" as well.

when a football team has a lousy record, the coach doesn't hide behind the players and shout "Hey you should support the team" No The owner fires a shitty coach.......The truth is the several Generals warned Rumsfeld & Wolfowitz that their plan sucked. Rumsfeld ruined his career. Now 2 years later we find out the General was right. Well maybe that's why he was a General. Rumsfeld is incompetent. He fucked the US Armed Forces. We need a fresh group of 140,000 troops. Enlistment is down. Why don't you fuckwads ENLIST and actually start supporting the troops. Fuck you.

"I'm certainly not interested in fighting the Iraqis."

Nor any other terrorists. On January 8th, 2005, you said to me:

"Yes, our hysterical little 'war on terror.'

You don't actually believe all those ghost stories George Bush and Tom Ridge tell you about scary muslims coming to get you, do you?"

I too witnessed 9/11 with my own eyes. I resent our catastrophe being exploited to justify a war which was in the works since Bush took office, if not earlier.

Also, whether liberals 'want' to curb US power
and cons want to extend it is a non issue. Due to economic and demographic factors the US is a declining world power. And we've
blown our wad in Iraq in a big way. Now we can't do anything militarily, except drop bombs or lob missiles.. There are no more troops, and a draft is out of the question.

A decining world power? You are an idiot.

Many nations are hand to mouth. Some are luckily only at double-digit unemployment, like Germany. Some have citizens who do much better than us. But none has so many doing so well, as the USA.

The US hasn't even scratched the surface of the treasure it has available to fight wars with, if it so chose.
Have you had to save scrap metal for this war?
Have you contributed your own needed possessions in a materials drive, like hosiery, fabric, things made of rubber?

HAVE YOU HAD TO GIVE UP A SINGLE FUCKING LUXURY WHILE WE HAVE BEEN AT WAR?

We have been fighting a global war, and we still have:

-Fresh fruit--out of season-- in our ginormous supermarkets.
-Cheap and abundant clothing.
-Clean water from the tap.
-Nutritious whole foods, also cheap. If you think food ain't cheap, you ain't eating rice and beans, so shut your hole.
-Money for luxury items
-Millions of young men still at home

We have more durable goods floating around in junkyards than many nations have ever had. Ever.
Never mind what we actually own, in good working order.

We are like Ferdinand the Bull. We don't rile easily, but you are fucking FUCKED once you wake us up.

And we have a capacity for making war that is still virtually untapped.
You don't think we have enough men enlisted?
Wait until the next attack, asshole.
We're Americans, not Spaniards.

"If our leaders can't keep us out of unnecessary/wrong wars of choice then we need to hobble the military so that invading non-threatening countries ceases to be an option for them."

There. Someone finally said it. Hobble the military so that we can't fight. That is the liberals' goal. Finally put in words.

Yeah, tweak them enough and they'll show their true colors.

And Lauraw, your comment is a keeper.

I was against this war, but from the beginning wanted it over and done with. But, I keep waiting for this administration to make the right moves. Folks, things are not getting better. History tells us that you can't beat a determined insurgency (Vietnam?). As for yourself, would you be willing to sacrifice you child for this cause? Not just send a child there, but have that child killed. If that happened, would you think it was worth it?

I am a vet and served my country proudly under Ronald Reagan. But I would not be willing to put my children in harms way for this war. It isn't worth it.

Actually determined insurgencies can be defeated, in Vietnam, the Viet Cong were done after 1968 and it was the NVA that had to do the fighting.
The British stopped the communist insurgents in Malasia, and the Greeks stopped the Commies after WW2. To say nothing of the half-assed revolutions that periodically pop-up in Banana Republics and the like. It just requires political will.

No, adam, you are a moonbat pretending to be a vet. Flap away now.

You may wish that to be true, but it isn't. I am a vet and am offended at your garbage. You probably wouldn't ever even think of serving your own country. As for 'moonbat', I voted for Reagan, Bush, Bush, Dole, and Dubya. In 2004, I sadly left my party and voted Kerry. You can call names to try to minimize what I am saying, but I am against this war and feel strongly about it deep in my heart. Even if you disagree with me, I certainly don't deserve your taunting because of my beliefs. I am not playing games. I asked a serious question. Answer it or STFU.

I don't have to wish anything to be true, moonbat. And yes, you deserve taunting. Don't give me this shit you asked a serious question with your would you send your child to die crap. They're not children and it's a volunteer army. Now, flap your two left wings and fly away.

They are someone’s children. And, just because they volunteer doesn't mean they shouldn't count on not getting put in harms way unless absolutely necessary.
As for your childish attempts to paint me as a radical because you lack the ability to debate, grow up.

Its because of the moonbat turds you dropped in your original post, Adam.

History tells us that you can't beat a determined insurgency (Vietnam?).

There's one!
And

would you be willing to sacrifice you child for this cause?

There's two!

We've been around a while, Adam. Moonbat turds might as well glow in the dark, we're so good at identifying them.
Your sweet, sorry, hurt tone of voice doesn't quite cover your phony creds. Shoo.

Adam, you are absolutely right.

and lauraw, nice to brag about how fucking wasteful our country is. and people wonder why other countries want to bring us down?
Of course we could nuke anyone, but what would that prove. We don't have the ability to wage conventional war on any more countries, no matter how decrepit. Especially if the Chinese pull the plug on our spending spree.

"young men at home" yeah if everybody supports this war, why aren't they rushing off to fight the eye-rackees? BECAUSE MOST YOUNG PEOPLE ARE UNINFORMED, DON'T GIVE A SHIT OR ARE OPPOSED TO THE WAR.

oh and lauraw, we're not sacrificing anything but someone somewhere down the line will pay for our profligacy.

I could by a Ferrari on my credit cards, doesn't mean I can afford it. Ditto the War.

Of course we could nuke anyone, but what would that prove.

That we could nuke anyone.
There's three!

signed, the "real" June 17

back to the original thread, whether liberals
want Bush & co. to succeed in Iraq is besides the point, because they can't succeed -
they're incompetent, they are in over their heads...and did I mention incompetent?
(see above posts)
good luck cleaning up your mess georgie.

There's four!

LOL LOL LOL

Where's the scooper?

"Yes, we could endlessly discuss the storm and how terrible it is, but ultimately it doesn't change the fact that storms will come and you don't run from storms."



Interesting rhetorical device--the war in Iraq just "came." So it wasn't the result of a deliberate decision on the part of the Bush administration, one for which they should held accountable? "The lamp just fell, Ma." "The Devil made me do it." It's all part and parcel of the "good vs. evil" worldview, which steadfastly refuses to even try to account for the motives of terrorists, and consequently disastrously misplays every stage of the struggle against them.

try to account for the motives of terrorists

Five.

"Its because of the moonbat turds you dropped in your original post, Adam."

So, anyone who believes differently than you is not allowed to talk (no matter if they are a vet or if they vote republican)? Is your position that weak? Do you want to live in a world where everyone agrees with you? Last polls I saw showed most Americans now think the reasons for going to war were wrong. Are they 'moonbats' dropping 'turds'?

This libs are fun to read. What a bunch of stupid twats. They do not give two shits about American soldiers.

Exactly right. Not like the current admin which sent our troops to fight an unnecessary war without the proper armor.
Not like the current admin which tried to lower combat pay.
Not like the current admin who tried to cut veteran benefits.

Don't these lefties know it's difficult fighting a war. Especially when there might not be enough money for everything.

Wait a minute, not enough money?
OK, let's make that tax break for the richest 1% of our people permanent!

Support the troops indeed.

72 VIRGINS,

Are you saying we should blindly support our leaders?

Even if they ARE wrongheaded?

If so, let's jump on the jerk earlier in the thread that talks about Clinton's 8 years.
He was our leader, you know.

So, anyone who believes differently than you is not allowed to talk

Six.
("censorship!")

You said
"I think that's right, and I've got a lot of quotes from liberals to prove it." So - where are your quotes? Or are you just making shit up (i.e lying) like Rush?

Liberals do NOT want our mission in Iraq to fail, even though we think Bush's war is a tragic mistake. When you are a parent, you do not enjoy pointing out your child's mistakes, even though it is your duty to do so. That certainly doesn't mean you WANT them to fail or that you hate them! You want them to learn to do better.

There's a huge difference between - "We TOLD you this was going to be a miserable failure" (true) and "We WANT this to be a miserable failure" (false). Right wingers just can't seem to grasp such fine distinctions. They just yell "Treason!" That way they don't have to deal with unfortunate facts.

I am a proud Liberal and I love my country. I love my country enough to say that I want us to be BETTER than Abu Gharib, BETTER than Gitmo, BETTER than lying to the world to start a war on false pretenses.

I am also proud of our fine men and women in uniform and feel the best way to support them is to stop getting them killed for a pack of lies.

So - until you can provide actual quotes from influential Liberals (not your crazy uncle Joe), stop telling me what Liberals think, because you don't know.

>

Funny. That's just what the Germans said.

End of the day, if you're willing to cheer for the military conquest of other countries, absolutely regardless of the reasons for the conflict, then you really have no place in a democracy. There are plenty of military dictatorships in the world where you would feel more comfortable. Leave us here in peace and freedom (two things Bush's supporters revile).

The above post missed this original quote:

>And at the end of the day, I don't care who started it, or why, if I'm going to call America my home and suckle from her breast, I'm going to cheer her on.

Percy's PoP, you hit the nail on the head.