Skip to comments.
AN EMAIL FROM THE FRONT
andrew sullivan ^
| Wednesday, April 14, 2004
| in iraq
Posted on 04/16/2004 5:07:20 AM PDT by dennisw
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 261-273 next last
To: Alberta's Child
"Understood. Did the Bush administration even think in their wildest dreams that 120,000 troops would be there even one year later?"
Do you honestly think that one year is a long time for this kind of operation? How long did Germany or Japan take?
To: RichardW
You really should go back and READ exactly what all members of the Administration said concerning what was expected as far as difficulty (pre, during, and post invasion. WE ARE STILL AT WAR)!
It was media and ex-military "talking heads" making the cake-walk case, not the adults in charge of our government today!
I support our troops in every way that I can. I believe in the MISSION, the MAN, and OUR military. I think that a good number of Americans do not have the stomach to live in the world as it is today. The problem is.....we have no choice! It is either US, or THEM! No excuses...
LLS
122
posted on
04/16/2004 7:44:03 AM PDT
by
LibLieSlayer
(We point out Kerry's record and the facts, and they just THINK it's attack politics.)
Comment #123 Removed by Moderator
To: APFel
"I am having trouble understanding why you are repeating DNC talking points on a conservative website. " It gets attention.
But why people waste their time on someone who shows he has no knowledge of what he speaks and doesn't care to have any is beyond me.
124
posted on
04/16/2004 7:46:04 AM PDT
by
mrsmith
("Oyez, oyez! All rise for the Honorable Chief Justice... Hillary Rodham Clinton ")
To: ExpatInLondon
"Yes, for the US to be in a war it has to be against an enemy of _ours_."
Selective reading?
--->Did you forget our Dept of State people that were killed in the west bank? Do you know who Hamas is?<---
Slick willy should have nuked them---> when Saddam tried to assassinate Bush 41.<---
Comment #126 Removed by Moderator
To: Alberta's Child
"Yes, they did. The timing of this war was originally aimed at getting U.S. troops out of harm's way long before the 2004 election."
That's the first time I have ever heard of such ridicolous rankor! Please provide proof of this claim. As far as everything I have ever read and seen and heard, everyone expects us to have troops there for many generations to come. Think Germany, Japan, etc.
127
posted on
04/16/2004 7:48:54 AM PDT
by
CSM
(Vote Kerry! Boil the Frog! Speed up the 2nd Revolution! (Be like Spain! At least they're honest))
To: ExpatInLondon
I will see your:
Camille Paglia
Fyodor Dostoyevsky
Evelyn Waugh
And raise you:
Jack London
Seutonious
Autobiography of Admiral Halsey
To: Tiger500
The writer of the email is sorry example of a potential leader in our real mans military, he should get out and repay the taxpayers for his free education. We don't need another Wesley Clark.
To: ExpatInLondon
Howver, I used to be very positive about Bush, even if I did vote for Buchanan in the last election. But this war founded on lies has hurt America in many ways and the liars behind it should be remembered on election day. Please, please, please, do not come back to America. Please stay in Europe. We don't need you. We don't want you.
To: ExpatInLondon
pointless war that only wound up entrenching muslim radicals and preparing the ground for a jihad against the few remaining Christians
Man...you are right about that!
Have you read Samuel P. Huntington?
To: Alberta's Child
"It would have had nothing to do with the weather. In fact, March was probably the absolute worst time of the year to start the military action -- due to the onset of the hot summer months in Iraq. If weather were an issue, they would have waited until October."
We were prepared to move much earlier, however the likes of you prevented it and demanded more "international cooperation". Another concession by the administration that is resulting in a "slapping" by those of you on the left!
132
posted on
04/16/2004 7:53:34 AM PDT
by
CSM
(Vote Kerry! Boil the Frog! Speed up the 2nd Revolution! (Be like Spain! At least they're honest))
Comment #133 Removed by Moderator
Comment #134 Removed by Moderator
To: Alberta's Child
"The first day I saw "conservatives" using Bill Clinton, the U.N., Hans Blix, etc. as credible reinforcement of the Bush administration's rationale for the war, I knew the whole thing was a fraud".
The only fraud here is YOU, your politics, and "much" of your country (I know many fine Canadians that love the US, and are truly our friends. You are NOT among them).
You and your mates fiddle with terrorist's, while America is reshaping the world for eventual peace and freedom for all. You and your kind bitch, protest, and support actions and remedies that will lead to massive destruction of life.
LLS
135
posted on
04/16/2004 7:57:55 AM PDT
by
LibLieSlayer
(We point out Kerry's record and the facts, and they just THINK it's attack politics.)
To: Dog Anchor
O.K. I will call your T.S. Elliot.
Here is what I have:
"These newspapers, owned and edited by these men, although free from the repulsive vulgarity of the yellow press, were susceptible to influence by the priviledged interests, and were almost or quite as hostile to manliness as they were to unrefined vice...they favored the removal of tariff on works of art; they favored all the proper (and even more strongly all the improper) movements for international peace and arbitration; in short, they favored all good, and many goody-goody, measures so long as they did not cut deep into social wrong or make demands on National and individual virility. They opposed, or were lukewarm about, efforts to build up the army and the navy, for they were not sensitive concerning National honor; and, above all, they opposed every non-milk-and-water effort, however sane, to change our social and economic system in such a fashion as to substitute the ideal justice towards all for the ideal of kindly charity from the favored few to the possibly grateful many."
- Theodore Roosevelt
To: RichardW
they tolerated Klinton.
137
posted on
04/16/2004 8:01:24 AM PDT
by
q_an_a
To: Rodney King
>>>>>>>>The answer is clearly to split the country up into three new countries. Yugoslavia didn't work without a dictatorship, and neither will Iraq.<<<<<<
If this is the answer, what is the question? Meddling of Gernmany caused split up of Yugoslavia and the result was bloody civil war and bigger trouble than one in the 1990. But Yugoslavia's civil war would look like walk in the park in comparrison with the civil war that would errupt with the break up of Iraq.
In hindsight, decission to support break up Yugoslavia was a mistake. Only Bosnia sucked $100B with no end in sight. Poppy and Baker knew that and tried to avert disaster but Germany pushed Yugoslavia down the cliff (Holbrooke was ambasador to Germany).
If Iraq is split into 3 states, it would be 3 Bosnias.Eeach statelet would have a civil war within and probably statelets would fight each other because Shia, Sunni, Marsh Arabs, Kurds, Christians, Assyrians are more or less intermingled.
138
posted on
04/16/2004 8:02:22 AM PDT
by
DTA
(you ain't seen nothing yet)
To: ExpatInLondon
Ha! Now that is funny!I'm serious. It was very important that the Tories ran away to Canada so we could establish our Republic. We aim to keep it. You stay where you are.
Comment #140 Removed by Moderator
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 261-273 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson