Oh, speaking out against police actions is now considered traitorous. Let's look at the definition of treason again
1. Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
Have I violated my allegiance toward my country? By dissenting against a political action? Good grief. Have I waged war against it or purposely acted to aid its enemies? Well beside the fact that our 'enemies' can apparently change with the changing of administrations, I have neither aided nor acted to aid the enemies of this nation of states. Disagreeing with an action made by the administration against another nation is in contrast with nationalism, not patriotism.
But carry on subject, rah-rah and all that jazz. I still support the troops but not the action with which they are involved. And it's for one simple reason. No matter what George Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Fox News, or any other talking head 'conservative' will tell you to make you sleep all comfy and cozy at night with the flag wrapped around you, this whole thing is futile. Twenty years from now, thirty years from now, sometime in the future, some future President will be sending troops back there (that is if they ever leave) to continue the WOT. You can't fight against a people's that don't want us there and if we were to follow conservative values, we would understand that and leave them alone. Defend our borders, attack if attacked, but quit this 100 year campaign to 'spread democracy'
Do your arms ever get tired holding up that 5th Column?
Do you ever get tired of continually defending the ever changing definition of conservatism?
"I still support the troops but not the action with which they are involved."
Again as I said before...that's like saying you like football players and HATE the game of football. You can NOT support one without supporting the other.
"Twenty years from now, thirty years from now, sometime in the future, some future President will be sending troops back there (that is if they ever leave) to continue the WOT. You can't fight against a people's that don't want us there and if we were to follow"
And I'll be going back if I'm ordered to. Just like I went last year when I was ordered. The IRaqi people aren't the ones resisting us. It's all the foreign thugs coming in from and on the payroll of Iraq and Syria.
The Iraqi people WANT us there. They are thankful EVERYDAY that we rid them of Saddam. I guess you'd have known that had you BEEN THERE!
"And it's for one simple reason. No matter what George Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Fox News, or any other talking head 'conservative' will tell you to make you sleep all comfy and cozy at night with the flag wrapped around you, this whole thing is futile."
I sleep well wrapped in the flag every night cause I'm out there pretecting that flag. It amazes me how you arm chair generals can make such insepid and obtuse comments about something you know nothing about and don't have the time nor the inclination to actually LEARN about.
You trying to tell me about what is REALLY going on in Iraq is like me trying to tell MacArthur what he did wrong with the Inchon Landings.
Nope if we are evicted or withdraw in failure, we will never go back there. We will pretty much be finished as a world power if we lose in Iraq.
Also Iraq is really three nations, Kurds, Shiite's and Sunnis. Things are going well with the Kurds, and the Shiite's aren't making to much trouble. Our problems is with the Sunnis and foreign fighters. I fully expect us to succeed in Iraq now that Fallugah has been taken.
This is a mind boggling mission, imagine what history will think of our soldiers, sailors and Marines then 2000 years from now they learn now the USA civilized the middle east just like the Romans civilized Europe 2000 years ago. History, real history is in the making here, Rumsfield and Bush might make the short list of names to remember.