[Utah Girl]

I hate moral equivalence. War is an awful thing, but living under a Hitler or a Stalin or a Pol Pot or a Hussein is infinitely worse. When does one draw the line and say "No, I won't let you do this anymore" and stand up for our rights? NEVER, according to the Left.

[kcvl]

That's because they are sitting in their IVORY TOWERS complaining about anything and everything that anyone does to defend the United States of America (unless it's the draft-dodging, women hating, military-despising Bill Clinton).

[MEG33]

Ellen's sly sanctimony is a hit piece on Bush..and has nothing to do with honoring our WW2 heroes...

She is a disgusting partisan lefty....and I resent her even mentioning our brave armed forces..she managed to slam them, too...

[Rastus]

Wow, say the byline and stopped there. I can't believe this hack is still around.

[Psycho_Bunny]

It never ceases to amaze me how skilled lefties are at skirting the one conclusion which would render all the arguments they just made moot.

It's like a painter who purports to follow the school of "realism" putting his most recent work on the wall and telling you it's a forest pastoral only, when you look at it, you can't help but notice he's managed to use ever color but green.

[Coeur de Lion]

It's sickening how the dems have turned this into a partisan affair, when they know fullwell that Clinton would've probably pursued a similar approach if the same thing had happened on his watch. It would've been done with less vigor and perhaps not planned as well stategically, but it still would've been done. It's just further evidence that they have no principles!

The pundits and those on the left got and continue to get this war wrong. We didn't invade Iraq in order to get the oil for Haliburton or complete the job that should've been done in Persian Gulf War I. We invaded and easily conquered Iraq for reasons which these folks "seemingly miss", which I don't believe is because they're obtuse! There were three potential countries in the Middle East which we could use to provide forward basing for the continued war on terror: Iran, Iraq, and Syria. Syria probably would've been easier than Iraq and while Iran probably would've been tougher--it is/was unlike Iraq, probably more amenable to "nation-building." But in neither country did we have causus belli. That made Iraq unique. One would have to be a poor student of geography to not notice Iraq's location with regards to those other two countries. We know that our invasion has had an effect on Syria, plus a few others countries e.g. Libya and maybe if we're lucky it might forment a popular uprising in Iran and result in the overthrow of the mullahs. Not too bad for killing not two birds, but a few birds with one stone

[dts32041]

Dwight David Eisenhower exhorting the D-Day troops off on "the Great Crusade."

DDE and OB got more troops killed than was necessary, cause they didn't know how to fight.

The were politicians and logician, not combat warriors.

If they fought like they had a couple between them and stopped trying to keep Unc Bernie and chuckie happy, the war good have been over in august, but no, they had to go head to head and kill good people cause they didn't have a vision.

[Choose Ye This Day]

But there is no such thing, then or now, as a good war.

No, Ellen, but often there are GREAT things accomplished or achieved through war.