Comments like these amaze me. You're the first to criticize the administration on the poor job, but yet you can't even begin to offer a solution. The problem is that you're afraid to lose a few good men. Whine and cry about losing 600 men in one year. We lost that in a week in other wars. Quit crying and accept the loses. Its war, not patroling in a cruiser down main street chasing drug pushers. Pussyification in America at its best.
Look, one thing that GWB says a lot that is true is that 9/11 changed everything. Everyone now sees the importance of fighting the war on terror, including Kerry along with all Democrats. Again, I have issues with the way many Dems have dealt with foreign policy, but Kerry is now an anti-war pansy. He fought for this country and by all accounts did so with valor. With that context, I believe what he says about the war on terror and fully believe that he would fight it on ALL levels, not JUST LE, but EVERYTHING. As far as the waffling issue, you just brought out a statement from Kerry from 1970 and another from the Reagan years. Of course if you look at statements made over the course of 20 years there will be changes in policy and stance. 10 years ago, I thought that I would NEVER consider voting for another Democrat, but here we are. You are allowing your prejudices and bias get in the way of what is truly important. Everyone, Dems included, sees that the WOT needs to be and stay on the front burner. If you cannot see that then you have willfully chosen to wear your blinders no matter what. Unfortunately, there is no cure for that. You will just have to open your eyes yourself. I don't like Bush because of the policies that he has enacted and the moves that he has made. I was uneasy when he was elected because of the way he (and karl Rove) treated John McCain in South Carolina. I was dam* proud of the way he handled 9/11 and the aftermath, and was impressed that he went in to kick the Taliban a$$es all over Afghanistan. Up until that point, I was on board and relatively happy with where the country was. The Iraq action and the fiscal irresponsibility have turned me, though. I have not been a "Bush hater" since the beginning, but it appears that no amount of logic or reason can overcome your prejudices. Pity that, you seem to be really intelligent in many other ways. Again, how much damage do you really think Kerry can do with a GOP controlled House? Not much. Fortunately, he WILL rein in the deficit so that my son will not have to carry a second GWB term's worth of debt. Getting GWB out will send a message to the GOP that conservatives need to have some fiscal responsibility or they will be booted. I SOOOOO wish that McCain had won the nomination (in 2k). There is a Republican I could vote for.
He did offer a solution. Identify and implement a strong strategy rather than the aimless bumblings we have witnessed so far. Nobody is going to "whine and cry" about losing the men as long as they are not dying in vain. Nobody is talking about packing up and leaving, we are just talking about exploring all of our options to try to find a strategy that reduces violence in order to facilitate the creation of a strong democracy in Iraq. Going after and killing their holy men (even the nuts) will do nothing to stabilize the country, nothing to legitimize our presence there, and nothing to build good feelings towards the US.
Comments like yours amaze me. The issue is not how many, but why. In my view, this is an ill-concieved, ill-advised, politically driven crapshoot that is quickly reaching FUBAR status. It does nothing to advance the national interest and will most likely end up being a detriment to the nation. And there is no good solution. When we made the mistake of going in, we sealed our fate... we're stuck with choices between bad and worse... but if I'm wrong and there really is a solution, the first step has to be that we quit living in fantasy land and face up to the realities of the situation, one being that knocking off individuals will not make one whit of difference unless the underlying causes are addressed. So far, we're stuck on the tactics of identifying and eliminating leaders instead of pursuing a strategy that deals with the conditions that create those leaders.
Looks like despite the tough talk both Sadr and the US occupying authority are looking to avoid a showdown. ******** Wednesday, April 14, 2004 Muqtada Will Negotiate without Preconditions: Iran Involved Reuters is reporting that radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr has ceased demanding a US pullback from Najaf as a precondition for negotiating. He gave in under enormous pressure from the senior Shiite establishment in Najaf, which wants to avert a US invasion of the city a la Fallujah. Despite his bluster, Muqtada has in the past often backed down and even said obsequious things about the US under pressure. ' Sadr's spokesman, Qays al-Khazali, said the cleric, bowing to pressure from senior Shi'ite religious authorities, was now ready to negotiate without insisting that U.S.-led forces first leave residential areas of Najaf and free detainees. Sadr himself told the German news agency DPA: "We want to free holy Najaf from the claws of the occupiers." He said he was willing to die in the struggle, but left the door open to "well-meaning" negotiators who wanted to help end the violence. Iran said Washington wanted its help. "Naturally, there are demands by Americans...that we help to resolve the crisis in Iraq. And we are acting," Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi said. ' The Iranians also seem pleased to be drawn into a role in resolving the issue. I am frankly amazed that the US is willing to countenance this, and it seems a sign of real desperation on the part of the Bush administration to turn to the Axis of Evil for help. I am also amazed that Khamenei agreed to it on the Iranian side, and can only imagine that he thinks that it is a good thing to have the Americans owe him one so that he can continue to crush the reformists and reconsolidate conservative control of Iran. But once Iran is drawn into a formal role in Iraqi Shiite politics, the Bush administration should be aware that it will not be easy to push them back out. There is a story about the desert camel that is cold and its master lets it put its nose under the tent. But then it slides in its head, slowly slowy. Then its hump. And finally there is only a camel in the tent and the hapless owner has been pushed out into the cold night. We may be witnessing the insertion of the camel's nose link
Maybe next time, the Army should just shut and do its job without giving someone a warning through the media. By not following through on the threat, we look like a bunch of losers.
