Replies

Now now, Mr. Mulliner, though I have just called into work sick I am not going back to sleep. As I've said before, you don't have 4 sons (3 in Scouts, a good indicator for future military service) whose brains may get blown away in any military action. I want the current sacrifice of sons and daughters to be based on facts that the threat is imminent.

Of course you could say I have a wife and daughter who are at risk from S's WMD now, so take him out. Fair enough, my Dad killed Japanese so I'm not speaking Japanese now. We nuked their cities (another crime we are blind too: could have nuked their navy to show them to awesome weapon and futility of resistance: but that is another issue)

Let's not forget that Iraq has one of the largest populations of Christians in the Middle East. They and their families will die with bombs our taxes paid for. Yeah, yeah, war does equal death, no big news flash their...which is why war must be seen as a last option. "liberating" any foreign country is NOT our job, unless they pose a distinct, imminent threat to our nation. Israel has nukes, let Saddam tangle with that....

So, as to my challenge, why doen'st the lack of evidence concern you? I won't presume to call you a warmonger, but I think if you read the speech there are good linguistic examples of doublespeak.

My dear, We are not going to be flying over folks houses saying 'think I will kill this family' or that one. Saydamn kills more just on weekends than the entire war will kill and besides, I just don't like the idea of this certified nut giving bombs to the AQ and they setting one off on 5th
Ave. Rather it is better for our bombs to go off on SayDamn Drive.

Since you are slow to respond, Mr. Mullinger, I have taken the liberty to respond for you with a quote from the Prez's speech lasrt night:

Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option.

Assuming sometimes puts egg on your face, I thought you were one of those female type minority women, sorry bout that.

I take it your not in favor of the "liberation" of those many Christians in Iraq? I know, I know, Iraq is basically a secular state and less repressive towards Christians than most other middle east countries. But why not do something that is really going to shake up the pot in the middle east so that their kind of tyranny becomes a relic of history?

As I've said before, you don't have 4 sons (3 in Scouts, a good indicator for future military service) whose brains may get blown away in any military action.

I've wanted to respond to this fact you've brought up a few times. It sounds to me like you are either apologizing for basing your arguments on your emotions because you have more to fear with four sons. Either that or you are saying that I don't have enough emotion involved because I have no sons.

I think a good decision about whether or not to go to war should have NOTHING to do with how many children one has and what gender they are. If there are good arguments for going to war, then that's the right decision even if one has 10 sons, all in military service. If there is not a good reason to go to war, then having no possibility of the loss of loved ones is no virtue in arguing for war.

Strikes me that the evidence you're looking for is a large hole in the ground and 3,000 coffins gift-wrapped and labeled, "Kisses, Saddam." Well, we got that hole in the ground, and we got those 3,000 coffins, only most of those coffins hold but a slice of DNA, or an arm, at best.

I'm amazed by the intellectual short-circuit in those who approve of our action in Afghanistan and oppose the coming war with Iraq. The street walking morons who protested the war two weeks ago here in DC aren't even consistent on this. They opposed the war in Afghanistan, and attributed it to imperialism and oil. They oppose the war in Iraq and attribute it to imperialism and oil. Here's the disconnect: they have been proven wrong about Afghanistan. Now, what evidence did we have that Afghanistan was responsible for Sept. 11? Perhaps you don't recall. There was no smoking gun. Bin Laden himself denied it.

Here's what it comes down to: if Sept. 11 had not happened, we would not be going to war today with Iraq.

It's all about that big hole in the ground in NYC, and the children, the mothers, the fathers, the husbands and the wives of those 3,000.

I see that elsewhere you've brought up the relativist argument of "why just Iraq?" Why not..." Drop it. It's false logic, and has no place in the real world. If we used this kind of thinking during the Cold War there'd be no world left to fret about.

Greetings LibertyBelt, ATWIOTB FReepers, et al:

Lurked this thread since I first discovered FR; but never felt compelled to respond in this thread before. This is more of a rant. Fortunately, most of you are gone by the time of this post.

I expect a telephone call soon. Again taking me from the arms of my loving wife and three sons. With honor and moral courage, my US armed forces reserve commitment continues. Could have retired nearly five years ago, but this Gulf War Veteran understands the value of experience. The same expertise and devotion to duty passed onto me by like minded Viet Nam era veterans.

On 9/11, 09:30, my office phone rang. Exiting my desk through a teary eyed, but now cheering office staff; to wear a uniform again, daily. By noon, with the help of fine respectable young men and ladies; we did our duty, protect our country. Four days later, the local mass media went ga-gah. The media finally connected the dots, they discovered a horrific homeland security hole. And a enemy fifth column also carefully selected their targets. But we had our corner of America covered.

Some day, when the threat condition drops, we would love to tell America, and the world: what events happened in the USA the year after 9/11. Warfare entered a new paradigm. Let me assure you, no news is very good news. And it is time to bring the fight to the enemies of freedom, concurrently liberating a captive Iraqi people.

Our enemy reads our newspapers, uses Internet, exploits the very freedoms we enjoy, to expedite acts of evil against us. We know who directs the fifth column here. Questions? A.N.S.W.E.R.

With two sons in college, I pray those fine young men, both Eagle Scouts, will complete their education; before they feel compelled to do what they can for good of their county.

What's great about the USA, everyone is entitled to their opinion; even the opinion is steeped in sheer partisan ignorance. Let there be no mistake. We are not talking about a sleazy, self-serving, draft-dodging, dog-patch lawyer here. My Commander in Chief believes: In God we trust. /rant

With Honor, Respect, and Devotion to Duty,
OneLoyalAmerican

I do believe Colin Powell is speaking to the UN next week and will give the evidence. And then President Bush will speak in the days after that to reinforce that evidence. The statistic that got me last night was that the inspectors have found 16 of the 30,000 missiles that can deliver biological agents. At the rate they are going, it will take them 300 years to discover the other 29,984 missiles. Those agents may not have the capability of a nuclear bomb, but the biological agents could kill millions of people. Are they not a weapon of mass destruction???