...and a GREAT POST Jveritas BTTT !!
Posted on 01/18/2007 7:50:55 AM PST by jveritas
Thank God for your firm grasp on the obvious; sort of makes up for your evident dismal record at the School of QW&R.
Exactly and it is really sad to see some of them right here on FR.
...and a GREAT POST Jveritas BTTT !!
"Roosevelt in the Kansas City Star", 149
May 7, 1918
Even the President acted on the belief that we need to change some things in Iraq. Relaxing the rules of engagement among them. Making clear to Maliki that we need to engage ALL trouble makers, not just the Sunni troublemakers. Is Bush a traitor?
Only the fool hardy will redouble their efforts and expect a different result.
" We can make up a list of the defeatists and the mods can give us their internet information so we can track them down and do what is necessary in this struggle of life and death."
For minute, I thought you were serious...hahahaha, thanks for the laugh...!
You are welcome, and I am just your humble freeper :)
Many Americans seem unaware that nearly every war that we've won has had major blunders, debacles, setbacks, unforeseen difficulties, and disasters.
We don't have to ignore policies we don't think are working or support them just because Bush is a Republican, but we needn't sound disappearing over every problem.
Soldiers and Marines, who are doing the bulk of the fighting in Iraq, are enlisting in record numbers. But to hear many people talk you'd think Iraq was an unrelenting meat grinder, like the Russian front became for the Germans in WWII. Why is it that those who are most in harm's way are optimistic and convinced that with time they can win this war and those whose connection to the war is at best far away observers are in so much despair? Could it be the steady drumbeat of bad news and hyper-criticism? Nothing is ever perfect, and when it is nearly perfect we work to make it better. The lack of perfection is not a reason to quit.
Victory may be hard to define in Iraq, but the president has stated it would be an Iraq able to defend itself, stable at home, and safe from foreign attack or influence. Defeat would surely be the opposite. Defeat would be an Iraq that's a safe haven for terrorists. It's certainly not a safe place for them now. Our defeat, as jveritas says, will inspire our enemies, and you cannot wish that away. They will intensify their efforts to destroy our way of live. Many who support a "redeployment" that is really a retreat, behave as if there were more options than victory or defeat, some third course. There are not more than two outcomes now anymore than there were in Vietnam.
Many of those who've called for more troops and more troops also supported the "peace dividend," less defense spending, and gutting our intelligence agencies. Fortunately, most of them are not here at Freerepublic to take that hypocritical position. But some here do act as if we had a much bigger army and marine corp than we have. We have as much as we have. If we need more, we need to build a bigger force. But we cannot conjure forces up that do not exist.
Dissent and freedom are important principles. The defeatist talk is like talking about your last bowel movement. You're free to do it, but no one wants to hear about it. And in the case of the defeatist talk, we all notice that talk rarely offers a realistic alternative or a better policy.
The Iraqis do need to know our support is not open-ended and that they must assume more responsibility for their own freedom. Many of them are dying as they do that. We should not betray those who are trying to win.
That is the greatest fear.
I would just like you to address the points and questions I asked without the rote 'you may be a defeatist if..' statement. We'll leave the past 400-500 years of history in the region and more recent attempts at representative government in the region for another time, eh?
I disagree.
I would argue that the President needs to pursue the war more aggressively on all fronts, not just Iraq. I am talking of:
limiting immigration from designated countries.
Deporting anyone who has violated their visa's starting with those from countries who have actively supported terrorism.
Seal the borders.
Restructure the CIA to greatly increase our feet on the street (probably already being done).
Form designated Special units to take out known terrorists and terrorist training facilities in clandestine fashion (also already being done to some extent).
More aggressively promote the successes we have had in Iraq
Fight the war on words on the home front to counter the BS coming from the left.
Demand prosecution of those who benefited from the 'Food for Oil Scam'.
These are all t hings that the President is not doing to the degree that they should be, or at least to the degree that we know of.
Does this mean I do not support him, no. It means I disagree with him on the prosecution of the war, but not on the goals.
The Dems disagree on the goals.
There is no comparison!
You seem to forget who defeated the Soviets in Afghanistan; "our" proxies did. Without the stingers, the cash and intelligence from the CIA I don't think the Soviets would have been kicked out.
Many lost perspective. This war has by far the lowest numbers of US casualties compared to any other war with the same duration. People who are angry because this war lasted more than WW II forget always to mention that in WW II we lost over 410,000 soldiers compared to 3,000 in Iraq.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.........since you put it that way!
Yes it is very sad that some conservatives and despite all the proof in the captured Iraqi documents still believe that Saddam had nothing to do with terrorism and he did not have any secret WMD programs and thereofre we should not have gone into Iraq. I expect this from liberals and their media but when I see conservatives saying it, I really get depressed.
LOL... excellent cartoon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.