[HairOfTheDog]

Why is this point so vital to you? Do you not have an image in mind of the protester we are talking about? I think it is a given that most people in this country are not out shouting in the streets on either side. It is obvious, is it not, that there are many who may not have opted for war if given the choice but are not out shouting in the streets about the fact that they didn't personally bless it. We are talking about the fringes here. a thousand people protesting in a city of 4 million. We don't need to define the 3,998,000 that were not there in order to define the hypocrisy of those who were.

And we are sidetracked from the point. The point is that these folks may have a long and intertwined rationale they can explain to the troops if the troops had the time to sit and listen. But they don't have that kind of time. The point is, to the soldier hiding behind a sand dune in a hot zone, the distinction between your choice 2 and 3 is meaningless. To foriegn people who want to see our weakenesses and do not understand our language, the distinction is meaningless.

How it looks hurts, and that how it looks is the only message that really gets out.

[jammer]

It's not vital. I was reading about 15 posts about an article with a false choice. Every one of the posts gave the same false choice, along with statements that can only come from IEB (that's internet enhanced balls). I mildly pointed out that that wasn't necessarily all the choices, you grabbed it like a bull dog, and won't let go. No, to put it plainly, the goddamned article is wrong about many people. Plain enough? No more responses from me.