[Michael.SF.]

or unfortunately coming from some conservatives

The disgruntlement coming from this Conservative does not come from any thing approaching 'defeatism' it comes from the lack of courage of convictions or over concern with PC crap that is preventing us from going after the terrorists in a complete and more total method.

No most conservatives displeased with the WOT are more concerned with doing more, not seeing us defeated.

[TommyDale]

"No most conservatives displeased with the WOT are more concerned with doing more, not seeing us defeated."

You are correct here. Yesterday, I read where our troops had captured and detained 28 insurgents. My question is "Why did we detain them, why didn't we kill them?"

I don't think anyone here is giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Without specific examples, it is nothing but hot air and smoke.

[OldFriend]

The so called conservatives I hear, and who call themselves Reagan conservatives, want only to say I told you so, Bush is not Reagan.

Well, I'll not go into Reagan's record here but suffice it to say, I think.....thank G-D Bush is no Reagan.

[karnage]

What is "disgruntlement"?

[pollyannaish]

You are correct philosophically...but wrong functionally. If the President is not supported in this...any lack of support for him is automatically perceived as support for the Democrat plan.

The press is not capable of grasping the nuance, and if we do not at LEAST support what the President is proposing, the funding will be cut and we will lose something we MUST win.

It may not be what we want, but it is what it is and to fail to understand that is to undermine the war effort. You've got only two choices...support the President, or support the Dems. There are NO other options at this point. How you respond to that, is the difference between winning and losing.