Replies

I'm not embarrassed by America. I love this country and, most especially, what it stands for more than you will ever know. I'll take your insinuations and the scum you want to associate me with in stride.

I have no problems with what we did in WWII. I also support North Korea and Vietnam and the efforts to stem the spread of communism. I also thought the Gulf War was crucial. The big difference is all of those conflicts were started by other countries and we used our might to stop those who would conquer by force.

This case is a little different and it appears to be the beginning of us using our might to conquer. What if we don't like the next person to come to power in Iraq? I guess we bomb them too or we make sure the right kind of ruler gets in, either way we are the ones initiating force.

I support using our resources to dig out and remove every last vestige of Al Qaeda. Do I think bombing Afghanistan did that? No, but it helped since the Taliban was such a staunch supporter. Do I think bombing Iraq or any of the other 60 countries who have supported some terrorist group in some way will do it? Doubtful. Do I think obliterating any group that has inflicted harm on America is appropriate? You can bet your last dollar. Do I think oblitering any group who may have thought about it or who we think looks like a group who has thought about it is appropriate? You can tell the answer to that one from this thread.

I have no problem with differences of opinion but I do have a right to explain my side and discuss this subject in a rational manner.

Thank you for a thoughtful response, albeit we are in disagreement on the issue of our respective perceptions of whether future flexing of US military muscle is in the name of "conquest", OR a matter of pre-emptive self-preservation. You moreless see it as the former; I the latter...

We can no longer stand idly by while evil leaders conspire, support, or hatch the planned destruction of America. It is indeed unfortunate that some rogue States or certain people cannot be, nor will not ever be depended on to yield to a "common sense" to a "common good" in the name of peace. History has proven negotiations with genetically predispostioned warriors have proven futile in the past as well as the present, as well as in the future, and as such must be dealt with in the only manner and language they seem to understand -- an overwhelming armed tour de force and the mettle to use it if necessary.

If that, my friend appears to be our only option, and thus a sad commentary on human nature, that is because, IT IS.

Have we not yet learned from the Neville Chamberlains of the world?