Well, my Dad was sick for a long time, but since he's been dead now for 20 years I don't think your sincere concern is necessary. You also might actually read my post again, go back and read yours that I was responding to, and then get a dictionary and look up the word "sarcasm". And you might also find some veterans who were in combat and see how much they like to talk about it. Most of them don't. Not that you would care, but my father enlisted in the Navy and voluteered to be sent to where the fighting was. He didn't think it was right to spend the whole war teaching radar while others were risking their lives. For what it's worth, I'm sorry about your grandfather. War is hell.
This has really gotten ugly....Guys, leave each other's dead relatives out of this...there is nowhere to go once you get into that mode...everyone feels they want to defend their ancestors, and rightfully so...but someone dying for their country/beliefs doesn't make them smarter about the issues than you or I, just probably braver, so they don't really count either way as support for whichever argument you're making....1st hand experience with war as a soldier doesn't afford you the scale to judge a war's validity by and large, as the 1st hand experience of an average soldier would have differed very little were he fighting on the German or Allied side in WWII...I admire/get emotional about the bravery and sacrifice those men made, but I know from having 6 relatives in WWII, including 3 in D-Day, it didn't make them any smarter...just more admirable.
Yes, it has gotten ugly. I was addressing a topic I feel is important and thought I could add to the discussion in the broad sense. Possum choose to go in a different direction entirely, imo. And while I'm normally pretty laid back, I don't care for being attacked in such a fashion by someone who doesn't understand what I'm saying at all, as best I can tell, and obviously doesn't have a clue about how I stand on the subjects being bandied about. I'm what I would describe as a JFK Democrat, for want of a better term. I believe in a strong defense... stronger than anyone else's, but I think our defense dollars should be spent wisely. I don't think Bush is doing a good job at all as President and hope we get someone else in the next election. I think his foreign policy is making a mockery of what I believe this country stands for. I think his domestic agenda is appalling. I'm deeply concerned about where he is taking this country. I've said repeatedly that I think he is getting bad advice. I value our long-time relationships with our allies. I think the UN serves a very useful purpose. I would be delighted with the overthrow of Saddam and think he's a cancer in the Middle East, but I think the run-up to this war has been a textbook example of how not to conduct foreign policy. I think North Korea has the potential to cause us far more harm than Iraq. Uh, I could go on, but I'm sure I've said too much already.
You’re right it has gotten ugly and I’m sorry about your father and his difficult times. Now please tell me how I went in a different direction. Once again I didn’t attack you or your family. I simply said I don’t know you or what kind of a person you are that’s not an insinuation of any kind. I know exactly what this subject is about and so do you.
Let's forget about it and try to have civil discussion, which is what we all strive for. I was disagreeing with sinohero about, I guess, this "imposed Pax Americana" on the world... which is in a different thread now, I think. You sort of jumped in and got me on a bad morning. Usually I wouldn't use so many asterisk's, so, if I offended you, I apologize. I'm afraid you'll have to figure out my posts on your own, assuming they're worth reading. I'm just here to have fun and talk about things some of my dumb*** friends in real life aren't interested in.
If you guys need anything to bond over, you could join the latest trend and spend time taking shots at me for the...er...lack of brevity of many of my posts... No, but seriously I am glad to see that you both have class...This is such a great site in general, and it's nice to know that men can even back down like men in here instead of getting into some sort of ESPNboard ego war...Much appreciated.
I would personally favor Damascus before Iran (they are the first two choices, regardless of which goes first) for two reasons: 1) Much of the Iraqi leadership is fleeing there, the Damascus government has openly supported Saddam in this war, there are reports that Saddam sent much of his WMD there for safe keeping before the war, it has funneled money, guns, bullets, and dumbasses to go fight for Saddam - these reasons alone make it a combatant in *the Iraq war* in my mind, never mind its other crimes (massive support of terrorism, destruction of Lebanon, etc). 2) I would rather see if we can deal with Iran without interfering militarily, ie, give the revolution brewing there a little nudge. Try that before bombs. As for North Korea, I personally think that if Kim really intended to do anything supremely stupid (like roll over the DMZ or start lobbing missiles at his neighbors) then he would have done so while we were preoccupied in Iraq. Therefore, I think the Bush strategy to put NK on the backburner and deal with our Islamic/Arab foes first was a good one, albeit a gamble. It appears as if NK can wait. By taking out the Syrian regime, we will also effectively deal a death blow to Hizbollah - they cannot survive without Syrian financial, military, and training support, as well as Syrian smuggling routes into Lebanon. The Palestinian terrorist groups will also be severely weakened by the loss of both their Iraqi and Syrian backers, which will make it much easier for the Israelis to deal with them. Has anyone been paying attention to what "follow-on" forces we're sending to Iraq? 1 Cav, 1 AD, 4 ID, 2 & 3 ACR... This is not an occupation force. It is a massive invasion force, and I'm sure Assad Jr and Khameini are aware of this. Iran has been trying to act real friendly since we crossed the Iraqi border... I have been saying all along that Baghdad (really Kandahar) was just the first step in a series of wars, or more accurately, a series of large battles in a single huge war. No one ever believes me...
