Posted on 06/22/2004 9:47:27 AM PDT by Maigrey
What a wonderful post your #856 was to read first thing after I got into FR this morning. I'm always aware of the fact that many more pairs of eyes read threads than actively respond on them. When someone as articulate and well-reasoned as you decides to join the debate, it means a great deal.
Prayers for Pfc. Keith "Matthew" Maupin.
He didn't think that was what circumstances required.
But circumstances changed on 9-11.
Thannk you. I always find your posts well reasoned.
Re your post #825, thank you so much. Winning this war is going to take the kind of patience and quiet backbone that, judging by some of the comments on this thread, many of us Americans sorely lack. The good news, however, is that many of us do. I just hope those folks are the majority who go to the polls come November 2.
Let's stop with that silly, tired old crap. The upper ranks of the U.S. Department of Defense under the Bush administration -- long before 9/11 -- were filled with people who had been publicly advocating a U.S. military campaign in Iraq for years. They were not terrorism experts, they were not specialists in Cold War diplomacy, or relations between India and Pakistan, or in the dynamics of Latin America or sub-Saharan Africa. They were policy wonks who specialized in Middle Eastern affairs specifically with regard to U.S. military intervention for the purpose of "nation-building." That's exactly why they were there.
September 11th simply provided the Bush administration with the political support it needed to do something it had every intention of doing anyway.
Things in Iraq are heading in the right direction. All the hand wringing from leftists only feeds their constituency. Real patriots and men with backbone realize that this is not going to be won overnight. War is brutal, ugly and takes time. Patience and cool heads are what is required.
Cowards is how I would describe someone so afraid of being recognized that they hide their faces with table linens.
Scared is how I would describe someone needing three heavily armed men to guard a bound and blindfolded civilian.
Sick is how I describe the dismemberment of a defensless victim.
Knucklehead. I guess this goes along with the "panty wastes" that worried about hijacked jetliners being used as flying bombs before 9/11 -- oh, woops, that might have ENCOURAGED them to actually to do it -- WAIT -- they actually DID IT ANYWAY...
Ignoramus.
So what ?
The advocacy for "regime change" started with Clinton. The Pentagon is a bureaucracy filled with various points of view.
Those holding this view [regime change] got a hearing after 9-11, and this policy was implemented.
Are you a moderate?
So how's Michael Moore?
Yeah, we should simply put a bullet in the head of the enemy. Much more humane IMO.
No. I'm a conservative.
Huh?
What flavor?
Oh, nothing. I thought you said something that I heard someone say the other day in defense of their anti-war stance.
What "flavor?" Hell, I don't know. It's probably not Cranberry-Grape, though.
"There are none! They are polar opposites. Try studying it for yourself to see."
Sorry hon but I already have 30 years into it. Perhaps you should practice what you preach. Oh that's right Christians typically don't do that do they?
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.