[Nix 2]

You are nuts, man. Clinton changed the Mission in Somalia. What happened in Mogadishu can be lain directly at his feet. Don't try to teach a history you don't know anything about. So far, you have defended a traitor, (Kerry) defended another traitor, (Clinton,) and frankly, I am beginning to wonder about YOU! Zero is a very good number if you are counting nothing.

[NeonKnight]

I know Clinton changed the mission in Somalia, but what was the original mission? The whole thing was a mistake.

[Zeroisanumber]

You are nuts, man. Clinton changed the Mission in Somalia. What happened in Mogadishu can be lain directly at his feet. Don't try to teach a history you don't know anything about. So far, you have defended a traitor, (Kerry) defended another traitor, (Clinton,) and frankly, I am beginning to wonder about YOU!

I'm not going to debate the rightness or wrongness of the Bush41/Clinton produced idiocy that lead up to the debacle in Somalia. We shouldn't have been there (Bush41), and we shouldn't have stayed (Clinton). The point of my post had absolutely nothing to do with who did what, but rather when it was done.

Much like Somalia, the Vietnam war was a monumental waste of good men, money, time, and effort. It was a stupid attempt to fight a stupid war for the stupid French under suicidal restrictions. In my humble and rational opinion we should take those responsible for starting, promoting, and refusing to end the goddamn debacle, flambe them and dump their bodies into a sewage canal (this goes for both Vietnam AND Somalia).

Guys like Kerry and Kovic are on the other side of the aisle from me, we disagree about things like guns, economics, and the need to sometimes drop bombs and shoot people; but in the case for Vietnam, they were spot on. They wern't traitors, I'm certainly not a traitor, and I'm pretty sick of being called one by armchair jurists with a Tom Clancy novel understanding of politics, and history.