[dilligras]

Quote by: Sonart Sure, with one correction: we did not capture Iraq's leaders. They fled, and by the time of their capture months later, the insurgency they had started was well under way, and they had become irrelevent when a more competent resistance took over.

Oh.

Saddam ran away before we captured him........well, then that just changes everything doesn't it? He must still be putting women in rape rooms and chopping off hands and gassing Kurds and filling mass graves and tying people up before throwing them off 5 story buildings and feeding them alive into chippers and vats of acid and commanding his army and everything, eh?

And my best example? Hitler conquering Poland, France, etc. and Operation Barbarosa.[

Sorry, no pass. If you want to compare apples to apples, you would have to view Hitler's war on Poland as over when he conquered their army, murdered its officers and occupied the country......a matter of weeks. Same with France........when they surrendered, their war was over and their country became nothing more than a battleground for the other warring armies.

Sure, there are many battlefields in France and, in fact, I played in some of the foxholes and trenches there as a child.........but France and Poland did not field any of the armies that eventually drove the Germans out.

Like Hitler taking Europe, we had taken most of Iraq. But the fighting continued until, like the U.S. and our allies in WWII, the Iraqi insurgents and al-Qaeda took over, made the war theirs, and, if not winning, are currently keeping us from winning,....

What a total crock of crap!

First of all, we "took" all of Iraq, not most of it.......Saddam was no longer in power there after the first 2 weeks.

Second, the Ba'aath Party Iraqis and the Jihadi fuckwads of Al-Quaeda haven't "taken over" a damn thing from Saddam's army, except the desire to have the Iraqi population's neck under their boot.

If it weren't for the daily misrepresentation of the insurgent mosquito bites as a "war", along with carefully crafted video to paint the conditions there in the worst possible light, perhaps our people might see past the lefty agenda driven "journalists" predilection for hand-wringing defeatism.

which, after all, is the goal of any insurgency... to tie up the occupiers in a war of attrition until their public support on the other side of the world grows weary of the sacrifice.

You mean until the commie pinkos in the so-called "peace movement" and the MS media sway public opinion with lies of omission and distortions of fact and reality, just as they did during 'Nam.

Sedition. my great aunt Matilda's hairy tits!

You want to write your congressman or President and share your "anti-war" bullshit, great!!! Have at it! They can do something about it. But when a person tries to practice their freedom of speech at the obvious expense of those in harm's way, and in direct opposition to our country's interests, then I'll be damned if I will have any title for them but TRAITOR.

After eight solid years of non-stop scandal-mongering in your vile campaign to oust Bill Clinton, don't you DARE utter the words "Bush Hater".

Huh?

Did I miss something here? MY vile campaign?

I was not aware that I waged any campaign during the Clinton admin......maybe it was my evil twin, my doppleganger, 'cause I was nothing politically before 9/11, and in fact voted against Nixon, Reagan, and George the first. I am happy to report now, however, that I never voted for that lefty crook Clinton, and I certainly will not vote for his "wife" in '98.

So perhaps I am better qualified to recognize the ideologue who will sell their soul for any chance bring down the accursed object of their hatred..........those who will spew their bile in any public forum whatsoever, IRREGARDLESS of the safety of the soldier who may next face the bombs and bullets of the chickenshit thugs who take heart and gain resolve from such words.

"Loose lips sink ships" was a caution to the casual conversationalist who might inadvertently give the enemy something to use against our soldiers and sailors during WWII..........I think we need a few more slogans like that and a few less like, "Bush Lied, Men Died" if we are to persevere against the head-chopping doucebags of Islam.

I never accused Bush of being 'stupid' during the election... no one who gains his party's nomination for President can be considered stupid. Nor did I ever fault Bush - or Al Gore - for fighting with every weapon at their disposal over the Florida vote count. In fact I'd have expected nothing less from someone running for President of the United States. I was comforted by Bush's seeming leadership after 9/11 and supported his invasion of Afghanistan, if with some concerns... after all, neither Britain nor the Soviet Empire had succeeded where we were seeking to venture.

You and me both.......but where we diverged, I suspect, was in the trusting the Pres. when he stated that we were not there to make an empire, but rather to accomplish a very distinct goal, and then leave.

He did NOT say that it would be short and easy.......unlike Clinton who, when going into Bosnia, claimed that we would be there for a year or less and "be out by Christmas".......or are you afflicted with the same selective memory as the BUSH HATERS?

But from the moment it was first whispered that Bush intended to invade Iraq, I knew in my bones that it was a really bad idea, and I mean bad militarily.

And from whence comes this ominous foreboding?

Have you the same background in modern military operations as those in the MSM who swore that the Taliban or the mujahadeen of OBL would kick our asses in short order?

And the left wonders why reasonable men take their wailing with a HUGEMUNGOUS grain of sodium chloride?

And since then his policies have proven to be one massive screwup after another.....

Well, at least we agree on this part.....but I'm afraid our lists are quite different in several important respects.

from the failure to find the very things he had justified the entire war on, to the never ending policy miscalulations, misjudgnements and screwups in conducting the war

"the war"?

See.......there you go again.

I assume you speak of WMD's, when you mention "failure to find" things...........are you able to find everything YOU ever looked for? When you didn't find something for awhile (the car keys for example) that you knew once existed, did you finally throw your hands up in despair, and suddenly decide that you must have been lied to about that thing's very existence?

Of course not.......that would be patently stupid.

Absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence........we may yet discover what happened to them, because Saddam refused to account for them.

As for the "phony intel" claim.......more crap. More than a few of the duplicitous Democrats on the Senate Intel Committee saw the same intel and all stated that Saddam had the WMD's and posed a serious threat, due to his support of terrorists.

In fact, I was rather shocked by Clinton's admission on Larry King's birthday show for Sen. Dole. I happened to be watching when Larry took Clinton's phone call to congratulate Dole, and he stated clearly that there was no doubt that Saddam had the WMD's and was a threat.

Given all the other Dem's disengenuous claims to the contrary just before we invaded, (this was '03) I nearly fell out of the 'ol Lazy Boy.

As to the "never ending policy miscalulations, misjudgnements and screwups in conducting the war...", I'm not sure what you're talking about........could you give a bit more detail?

Unlike Johnson and Nixon, Pres. Bush does not appear to me to be micro-managing things and seems wise to let the generals and Rummy run things, despite all the efforts of the lefty media to castigate him at every turn.

If you read the Nasty York Times, I can understand why you might consider Bush a total failure........those traitors sure do.

... on into Katrina, his abandoning of the American scientific community to pander to his religious and oil industry bases, his supervision of a Republican Congress that has spent more money than Johnson, to....... to everything the man's touched.

Now you're talkin'....at least on the spending part. The "pandering" part is normal politics.....they all do it and you damn well know it, if you've lived in this country more than 2 days.

As for the "scientific community", they were fucked long before Bush was Gov. of Texas

'Irregardless' is not a word. You've already annoyed my enough with your accusations, don't compound it with atrocious grammar.

It is a common usage word. Besides, I'm not writing in my "academic" mode. Whaddayalookinfor.....ajobasaproofreaderorwhat?