It is not only possible but often a patriotic duty to oppose one's country's leader and his policies. It was so for Iraqis that opposed Saddam and it is so for Americans that have opposed Bush and his incredible failure of a war. Bush does not equal America. Trying to prevent an unnecessary, ill-conceived war is patriotic. Having failed to prevent it and having seen it fail spectacularly, it is likewise patriotic to try to end it with as little damage as possible. It was so in Vietnam and it is so in Iraq. We are the patriots. You are the partisan.
What a load of bullschit. You might have some cred if your anti-war faction of the Democratic party didn't oppose ANY AND EVERY military engagement. So just because public opinion moves in your favor you start acting like you carefully deliberated whether to support or not support the effort... and then prematurely and falsely declare that you made the right call. Well, nice try General Patton, but you simply have zero cred.
tj continues to meltdown as the harsh reality of the Republican's electoral drubbing and the rolling fiasco that is the Bush Administration's Iraq policy batter his, surprisingly stout, but beginning to crumble, walls of denial.
You're awesome, Jorge. Just make it up as you go along. Of course you're wrong again. (Are you ever right? Serious question.) I supported war in Afghanistan. In fact, I would support any military action against the people that actually attacked us. I just thought it was stupid to divert all of our attention to a country that didn't and that posed no serious threat to us whatsoever. And my opposition to this war was not based in opposition to any war -- it was specific and multi-faceted and, as you very well know, on each and every reason that I opposed the war, I and my side were right and you and your side were wrong. I truly wish it had been the other way around. I'd much rather have been wrong. It would mean that a lot of people that are now dead or maimed would be alive and well. Unfortunately for them and us I was right though. The vast majority of Americans see that now and that's why they would like Bush to stop the bleeding. Unfortunately for everyone involved he refuses to admit that he was and is wrong, as you do, and that will mean many, many more unnecessary deaths. It is the saddest, most ****ed up thing I have seen in my lifetime. Even worse than 9/11, which I do not really believe could have been prevented by our government, because this was entirely avoidable.
basso, you've reached a new low. I wasn't sure that was possible, honestly, but you surprised me. Thanking Trader_J for his incoherent babblings, when he's never responded to a request for a link to back up his constant stream of BS, to my knowledge, much less being ahead of you, as hard as that is, in slandering other posters here with assaults on their patriotism, and you've proceeded to join him at the hip. Clap. Clap. Clap. Bravo. You've reached a new low, basso. D&D. Bravo.
According to Newsweek... "Iraq's economy is booming" And the average Iraqi salary is up 100% since the topple of Saddam. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16241340/site/newsweek/
We aren't losing? Please tell me by what criteria you judge this. Have we taken more territory from insurgence? Can we even stabilize the capital? Is the insurgency dying down? Are the Iraqi troops being trained doing a satisfactory job? Are they restoring order on their own? Have we found the stockpiles of WMD? What exactly is going on in Iraq that gives you the idea that we aren't losing? We are losing ground as far as territory held. Attacks by insurgents are up, The Iraqi forces are corrupt, undertrained, under equiped, and violence in the nation has gone up, and the people of Iraq are less safe now than before. Please explain how you think we are winning.
Uh didn't Democrats start several military engagements? Didn't a Republican oppossing the Kosovo intervention rail about "Democrat wars"? Haven't you yourself on this thread mentioned how many Democrats voted for the Iraq resolution?
Interesting article and I would agree that there are some good things that came out of the invasion. The World is rarely black or white but always shades of grey. That said that article doesn't paint a totally rosy picture and states that the economy in Iraq is really only doing well in places with relative security and that the lack of major investement or developing an internal capital market is the lack of security.
That statistic is great news. It, in no way, means we are winning the war, but it is good news for those people. basso, once again you are asked to explain your reasoning which doesn't seem sound by any criteria that I can think of, and you pretend like the question which you can't answer never even existed. That is what is so strange about you. You seem as if you would be a person who can rely on logic and reason and recognize them. Yet when information unfavorable to your position is presented you don't respond, and seem to pretend like it never existed. To this day you haven't said anything about the fact that Al Qaeda hopes the U.S. STAYS in Iraq. Nor have you answered the question in this thread about what makes you believe we are winning in Iraq.
He also said that we are not losing. Obviously, there is a tremendous difference between that statement and the liberals' mantra of "we have lost". Anyone incapable of seeing this difference needs to recuse themselves from this forum and restrict themselves to the mindless pop culture banter in the Hangout.
the very same man whom GWB's brain had branded as unpatriotic using the slogan "just because you're a POW doesn't mean you're a patriot"
