Anti-war liberals are a danger to society

Enter Stage Right ^ | August 21, 2006 | Charles Bloomer

[Gunner9mm]

The election of Ned Lamont in the Connecticut US Senate primary and the increased visibility of anti-war Liberals such as Jack Murtha are disturbing trends in the direction of American politics. At a time when we are in a war of survival against an enemy whose ultimate goal is our complete destruction, the ascendency of the cut-and-run crowd is dangerous.

While no one thinks the war in Iraq has gone perfectly, reasonable people know that wars never turn out like the paper plans -- no matter how carefully the plans were made. Wars are always ugly, deadly, and destructive. War plans are worthless after the first shot. Being able to adapt and change on the fly is imperative, and the mark of a great military. Have we killed or captured all the enemy? Of course not, any more than we can say that the police have caught all the criminals.

What we see on television and read in the dinosaur press about the situation in Iraq is focused on the negative, and very seldom covers the successes we have accomplished -- the numbers of schools and hospitals opened, the clean water, the electricity. Nor does the media report on the successes of the Iraqi people themselves -- the functioning stock market, the new businesses, the rebuilding and improving of their own infrastructure. The Liberal agenda of the mainstream press feeds directly into the anti-war agenda of Liberal Democrats to be used as propaganda.

But just because war is ugly, difficult, and deadly, is that reason to abandon a major front in the War on Terror? No. In fact, to do so is to bury our heads in sand of wishful thinking.

[kawaii]

Frankly ALL liberals are a danger to society.

[radar101]

Yes, just ask:
Hungarians,class of 68, Vietnam, Class of 73, Cambodia, Class of 74.

[Boundless]

Cutthroat Cultist: You let us jihad. We kill you last.
Liberal: You've got a deal.

Cultist: Oh by the way, we lie.
Liberal: I'll pretend I didn't hear that.

[white trash redneck]

The liberals would rather see the US take a hit in the WOT so that they could pin it on Bush, than see US forces under Bush win a resounding victory.

While they may not be strictly anti-American (they may not see America's defeat as a good in and of itself, but rather as a club to pummel Bush with), they are clearly not pro-American, and there is really very little difference.

[sgtbono2002]

We are in Iraq fighting a war. What the liberals dont realise is that this mess has spread. It is beyond Iraq now.

If the war were only in Iraq it would be over.

But the enemy--Islam--has declared war on the world.

Iraq is at war--Islamics are fighting each other there. It isnt really a Civil war it is a war of Sunni against Shiite against Kurds. It has spread far beyond the boundaries of Iraq, Into Iram, Syria, lebanon, turkey, Palestine--if you want to call it that. The islamics are fighting their own war against each other and against the rest of the world.

Wake up Its an islamic religious war they the rest of the world is tied into. Anywhere there is an Islamic there is potential for becoming part of the senseless religious war.

Add to that the two mental midget wannabee dictators Kim Jung Il and Chavez and this is a stinking mess.

[TheSpaceCoyote]

The Liberal agenda of the mainstream press feeds directly into the anti-war agenda of Liberal Democrats to be used as propaganda.

Fight propaganda with propaganda, I say ....

[redstates4ever]

[W04Man]

Bump! This article was also published in our local newspaper, The Potomac News, much to my surprise, the rag is so liberal. I couldn't believe it would print such a fine document. The writer is a resident of our area here in Prince William County, VA.

HELP US DUMP MURTHA

Bump and Elect Diana Irey --- Donate Today!