that's fine, but you fail to hold this administration to the same standard. bush is not above you or i, don't you get it? the consequences of what bush & co. have said and done will be felt for generations. they have sold us up the river for the benefit of the few.
Very clearly you are not aware of the political map of Africa during WWII. Ask yourself why there were British, French, German, & Italian troops in Africa in the first place and you might understand why your comment doesn't make any sense.
No analogy is perfect, but I've read here that we should have invaded Saudi Arabia because most of the 19 terrorist hijackers were Saudi. It's not tit-for-tat. There were reasons for staging in Iraq. The resistance was underestimated and I'm not real clear on why the Admin has such a hard time realizing that but the cheap shots at their intelligence and allegiance are not worth my time or energy. I hope I'm not trusting people who are not trustworthy, but anything difficult is going to have differing opinions on how it should be or have been done.
Boy if you think Iraqi resistance is bad, I can't even imagine what Saudi resistance would be like. You'd have the whole Arab world uniformly spewing rhetoric and funding resistance. At least with Iraq you had a country that wasn't exactly friends with all of its neighbors, but Saudi Arabia is the functional leader of the Arab world and would demand the largest possible resistance. That would probably be the greatest military disaster in American history.
Just to be clear: that is not or was not my idea. Some here had suggested it-- perhaps tongue in cheek. I don't remember the posters or the context. I think you've hit on a couple of more valid reasons why Iraq was used for staging. They were not beloved. They were not theocratic. There had been a clear but weak world (UN) posture against them.
Yes, we did invade Africa. It was called Operation Torch and we invaded because that is where the Germans were weakest. What we didn't do was invade Germany and then pull a bunch of troops and most of our German-speaking specialists and send them to invade Peru. And that last sentence very much reminds me of the complaints of British officers, dressed in resplendent red, during the Revolutionary War. I'm hard-pressed to decide which George is worse.
the guy lost his brother, who, no matter the circumstances of his death, served his country well and honorably. kevin is entitled to all the rightous anger he can generate. i may not agree with his take on bush or the war, but the man is certainly entitled to his opinion. rock on, kevin.
cute how you ignore the foreign policy that put us in this situation to begin with... and i'm not saying just bush's foreign policy, but a lot of the practices and policies used over the past several decades which has helped antagonize middle eastern resentment towards us.... stop me if this is making too much sense. but it's real neat how you think the terrorists "hate us for our freedom."
When you get off your high horse, don't step in the horsesh!t or fall on your head. Where did I say the terrorists hate us for our freedom? I agree with you and probably did when you were still in junior high that they resent our presence in their world. I'm inclined to be an isolationist, so don't go lecturing me about what I think. They resent our presence in their world, yet they (Muslims) are welcome and embraced in ours-- provided they are loyal Americans. They despise our culture. Here in the US, we encourage theirs so long as they are loyal Americans. Their radical element covets our world-- for destruction-- more than we do theirs. Look at what's happening in Spain.
When most people complain about our being in Iraq, they follow that quickly with an acceptance of the need to go to Afghanistan to topple the Taliban and to hunt bin Laden. Tilman was killed in pursuit of those goals in Afghanistan. As even basso suggested, Kevin is given wide birth to speak his mind freely due to his personal loss of his brother. Kevin's wide-ranging criticism heavily targets Iraq mostly but his brother was killed in the Afghan war.
They both served in both theatres, giddy. There are 7 times as many troops in Iraq. Seven times as many as there are in Afghanistan, as what we accomplished in Afghanistan unravels. Yet those responsible for 9/11, those at the very top, remain free to plot their madness. Meanwhile, Iraq is a factory, churning out terrorists by the hundreds, and those who hate our country by the thousands. Why? Kevin Tillman responds to that question and to those issues. Keep D&D Civil.
Not quite. There's a country you are missing in my analogy... Afghanistan... you know the one that protected OBL and was run by the Taliban... It seems there was something important about those two, but I can't remember what it was... Oh yes... They were responsible for 9-11. So, my analogy would be Germany is Afghanistan and Peru is Iraq. FDR didn't go into Germany to invade Peru but Bush went into Afghanistan to invade Iraq. Clear? Yes, I know it's a ridiculous analogy, but this is the most absurd argument not to mention the actual war, so it kind of fits.
Why should this be embarrassing? Because I chose to look into it? Next time, quit being a parrot and look into it yourself, before you attach yourself to others. Obviously, you have no opinions of your own. Quite frankly, I am embarrassed for you...
No, because of the blatant partisanship of your post. Could you perhaps direct us to some of your posts in which you questioned the veracity of a number of the fake chain-letter e-mails posted by your fellow war supporters? Or do you choose only to denigrate the opinions of the fine men and women who defend you and this country who also disagree with your beloved leaders failed policies? I didn't look into this myself? News to me. Let's pretend that you have a clue as to what you're talking about. Inform us all as to what my initial reaction was upon reading Kevin Tillman's inciteful, patriotic and dead on summary of this administration's failed policies. I thought my opinion of your post was clear. Obviously, your reading comprehension skills are lacking. I'll type it slower for you this time. In...the...future,...you'll...want...to...stick...to...something...you...know...like...fast...food.
I have NO idea what "Woe are we when" means. Of course, ANYbody can comment. And, from your post it sounds as if you HAVE trod the battlefield. If so, you have a unique opportunity. What can you tell me from your experiences in Afghanistan or Iraq that would change my opinion that pulling troops out of Afghanistan to invade Iraq was the greatest American military blunder ever? Of course, I never said that only those who have trod the battlefield can comment. I said that YOU are not standing up to those who wish to kill us. Actually, all you've done in this post is tell someone who DID stand up to those who wish that they might want to keep quiet. I guess the only people who can comment are those who share your opinion. 2. Don't confuse an opinion with the truth. You do know there are others -- maybe even others with longer or more hazardous military careers who will disagree with Tillman, don't you? So, is Kevin a liar? I'm sure you'll have no trouble providing us all with your point-by-point refutation of Kevin's insightful, patriotic and dead-on summary of this adminstration's failed policies. And, while I'm sure there are others with longer or more hazardous military careers, YOU do know that they didn't have a brother abandon an NFL career to enlist who was then used by this adminstration as a poster boy for their war and was then killed in a friendly fire incident which this adminstration covered (and is still covering) up...don't you? 3. I do more fighting the adolescent, knee-jerk reactions in here than applauding anyone's policies You DON'T applaud the invasion of Iraq or the Military Commissions Act of 2006? That's quite a revelation. Nice to see you're wising up.
