How about those of us who were on board with the decision to go in, on board for the removal of Saddam, on board for the killing of his sons -- but wonder why, now, we are (apparently) just sending Marines and soldiers out on patrols, waiting to be blown apart by those who aren't being turned in by other Iraqis. Bush and the people around him have, to my eye, decided to minimize violence against the "innocent" and find many more of them to protect than seems legit. We need vicious, continual, utter destruction -- and then, when enough of them are dead, we come home. Bush could start with retracting the silly idea that Islam is just another God-worshipping religion. Just who, exactly, is being weak-kneed?
The first sane post in this thread. Thanks.
Swift, vicious, and utter destruction would have ended this experiment in 'democratization' long ago. But, we're not interested in a 'quick' solution. Lots mo dollars git spent if'n you carries it out a while.
Look, we went there to bust *ss for the twin-towers, pentagon, and flight 93. Now, we're concerned about purple thumbs, elections--what's next, handicap parking spots for camels sporting a wheelchair sticker? You can lead an arab to democracy, but you can't make him vote.
We could use fuel air bombs over their heads!
War is hell.....look how we bombed Germany in WWII.
Bomb them into submission. Let em know whos boss.
thank you