Replies

I gave you my argument and you are unable to refute it. that comes out a clear win for me.

Oh, puh-leeze. I prefer to argue in a civil fashion, which you seem incapable of, but no matter... Your argument:

Those who wish for more effective defense of Iraq and a prolonged war are Anti-American.

That's how you feel... that's not what you first said, but no matter. Kamiya is quite clear - he once "secretly wished for things to go wrong." ONE PERSON... SECRETLY... WISHED. That's one person - not all of Salon, not every liberal (as the Washington Times editorial claims). And that's "secretly wished" - not publicly advocated. He's not Nicholas DeGenova. Kamiya also doesn't say he agrees with DeGenova - but Newsmax is happy to assume he does in their article.

What both articles, and O'Reilly, completely ignore is this - Kamiya was confessing that he was wrong. The title of the article: "Liberation Day: Even Those Opposed to the War Should Celebrate a Shining Moment in the History of Freedom -- the Fall of Saddam Hussein." Leave those details out, and you distort what Kamiya was trying to say. Does your "reality" rely on ignoring the details and taking quotes of context? Try to reply with a rebuttal, not an insult, if you can.

I agree.

From the moment I read the article, I interpreted it as Kamiya siding with "us"(whoever that is.) I did not interpret him as still rooting for a disastrous American venture in Iraq.

Frankly, I thought O'Reilly would have focused more on the OTHER people who Kamiya refers to, and as such Kamiya WAS doing a service by exposing them.

I will try to be civil in my reply .......although it is especially difficult in light of the fact that I am sure that even if I use a "civil argument" the chance that it will be recieved with any modicum of reality is slim to none.

I take from your last remarks that a mere thought is pardonable, even though it may be a thought that a certain thing will happen and the thinker of that thought wishes for that thing to take place. After that thought which is some way not acted upon the one who thinks that way is pardonable because it was only a passing thought and therefore can be excused. He did after all say he thinks Saddam is bad (which all of the anti-war....anti-Americans say) but he wishes the American troops could have a harder time winning the war.

The most glarinfg difference in what you think and what I think is that I hold that person responsible for the blatant anti-American feelings he had just for the purpose to make G.W. Bush look bad.