And puts our fighting men at higher risk.

discuss.

you've got a point, to a point...

We are just now at the same point where the irrational left made us lose Nam. Just as we were on the verge of beating the Viet Cong, who admitted many times since we left that they couldn't have taken much more, many of the different insurgent groups have been found to be saying similar things to each other. They are on the verge of being beaten.

But, they feel if they just hold on a little longer the cut-and-run, anti-safety, self-hating left will allow them to win by beating the west right at home.

The world is a close place. Even an Al Quaida leutinent sitting in cave can get news of fractures in war support in just a few days. Next comes the Al Jazeera tape that gets them all in a jihad frenzy. Next thing ya know ole yusef has extra incentive to come out the house and fight the next day. Times that by a few 1000 yusef's= 3 or 4 dead marines. A butterfly effect if you will.

We are just now at the same point where the irrational left made us lose Nam. Just as we were on the verge of beating the Viet Cong, who admitted many times since we left that they couldn't have taken much more, many of the different insurgent groups have been found to be saying similar things to each other. They are on the verge of being beaten.

But, they feel if they just hold on a little longer the cut-and-run, anti-safety, self-hating left will allow them to win by beating the west right at home.

I tend to agree.

Please do not use the phrase "emboldens our enemies." It's about as stupid and mindless as "support the troops" or "you'e either with us, or you're with the terrorists."

So the people and their elected officials should sit by quietly while the Bush administration do as they please regardless of the consequences?
I think it is our obligation as citizens and their obligation as elected officials to question when, where, why, and for how long.This is war and these are our troops.Not Mr.Bushes personal toy soldiers.And just because something is supported in the beginning doesn't mean it is going to continue to be supported especially when there is such great loss of life,our own soldiers and reporters along with innocent Iraqi civilians.
Plans don't always work out.When they do not it is time to rethink our position and do whats best for America and her troops.
I don't think this "emboldens" the terrorists in anyway.And I don't see how the carrying out of democracy hinders our troops in anyway.This democracy is after all what they defend and it carrying on with business as usual should make them feel "emboldened" in their fight.

Please do not use the phrase "emboldens our enemies." It's about as stupid and mindless as "support the troops" or "you'e either with us, or you're with the terrorists."

Well I can't very well change it now, can I? "Gives the enemy more confidence", how about that?

Please do not use the phrase "emboldens our enemies." It's about as stupid and mindless as "support the troops" or "you'e either with us, or you're with the terrorists."

What phrase would you prefer to use? Does the obvious lack of will on the part of the democrats embolden the enemy? Yes, it does. I think the phrase is accurate. Flammable, yes, but accurate.

I don't think this "emboldens" the terrorists in anyway.And I don't see how the carrying out of democracy hinders our troops in anyway.This democracy is after all what they defend and it carrying on with business as usual should make them feel "emboldened" in their fight.

Division is an indicator of weakness, and a clever enemy will take advantage of that weakness.

We are just now at the same point where the irrational left made us lose Nam. Just as we were on the verge of beating the Viet Cong, who admitted many times since we left that they couldn't have taken much more, many of the different insurgent groups have been found to be saying similar things to each other. They are on the verge of being beaten.
But, they feel if they just hold on a little longer the cut-and-run, anti-safety, self-hating left will allow them to win by beating the west right at home.

Yeah, like these guys are sitting in their bomb shelters watching Al Jazheers - "By Allah, the infidel Clinton has said the Americans should withdraw, get those IED's ready
Yussuf, I feel an intifada coming on..."
Please, they KNOW the US and it's (dwindling) allies cannot remain for the "long haul", Western politics prevent it. They know that either within the next 2 years or shortly thereafter (irrespective of any "victories" announced by the White House) the Western troops WILL be gone, so they just choose their targets, kill a few each week and wear us down.
They have all the time in the world and we have created a perfect battlefield for them to show that "Islam is the Greatest" because it is THEIR turf and they know how to best defend it.

well your prolly right.

Well, I agree !

[QUOTE=Mobile Vulgus]We are just now at the same point where the irrational left made us lose Nam. [QUOTE]

No, but we are very, very, close.

Get the **** out of Iraq. It is not our country. Let them ****ing figure things out for themselves... If you really believe in the ideals of freedom and democracy, you should be for cutting the strings.

Oh, and 86--Which enemies?

You see, that's the old GOP trick, drag the country into an untenable position and then when finally the country wakes up and says "ENOUGH" they blame the naysayers for the whole mess.

Nam was going nowhere, the South leadership was corrupt and had no intention of "fostering democracy" - that was a delusion that has persisted in the Oval Office up until today. Isn't the fact that immediately on US withdrawal the North folded like a virgin in a Frat house, it was ONLY the US presence that had propped the South up, Likewise in Iraq we have a puppet government that will melt quicker than a snowball in a barbeque whenever we leave, be it now or in 4 years time.
Why sacrifice any more fine young Americans for this spectre of "Democracy and Freedom" that only exists in the Neocon think tanks on the Beltway?

Support freedom and democracy.

A couple of points;

-Nam was lost as a result of
a- poorly stated goals and mission with no congressional approval
b- Political interference in the conduct of the war
c- A rotation policy that created a lousy mindset amoungst the troops
d- An incredibly corrupt ally in S. Vietnam

It wasnt lost because of lefty protests rather those protests were primarily a result of visible incompetence in the conduct of the war and its aims. It was lost politically and as a result militarily. BTW I was with the International Control Commission, arriving shortly after Tet, and the VC and NVA were not at the end of their rope at all. The problem primarily was the US failed to interdict the North's supply system at its source. Tet was a US victory but of course they won the battle but lost the PR war badly.

I agree that the US simply cannot pull up stakes and leave. Made the mess and now have to find a way out. However, debate within US society is a good thing and in all honesty had the debate happened in the spring of 2003 instead of now many of the mistakes would never had happened. Unfortunately the "support our troops", "America love it or leave it" etc crap stifled debate and will go down as one of the saddest periods of the American democracy.

Are enemies of the US government "our" enemies? It doesn't seem that the US government does much to represent its citizens interests anymore.
Until Bush's daughters and the Senate's children start fighting and dying in Iraq, I don't feel obligated to support shit they do.

What phrase would you prefer to use? Does the obvious lack of will on the part of the democrats embolden the enemy? Yes, it does. I think the phrase is accurate. Flammable, yes, but accurate.

I don't prefer any other useless "phrases" or emotional "slogans" to guide the sheeple. I'm sick of them. They don't help, they only misguide and further divide the country, they're worthless except for the braindead and the criminal parties who spew them out.

Get the **** out of Iraq. It is not our country. Let them ****ing figure things out for themselves... If you really believe in the ideals of freedom and democracy, you should be for cutting the strings.

Way, way too logical, SS. You can't expect them to be logical here. Come on.

I can see it didn't take you morons too long to derail the thread.

I'm sorry, was there an actual point to your ridiculous thread title?

What phrase would you prefer to use? Does the obvious lack of will on the part of the democrats embolden the enemy? Yes, it does. I think the phrase is accurate. Flammable, yes, but accurate.


Bingo. We have a winner. Leftists should show some intellectual honesty and admit that what they are doing not only emboldens the enemy but undermines those serving and their mission and ultimately puts the US in a weaker position to fight terrorism. But, none of this should come as a surprise since that poll came out a week or 2 ago showing the Democrats not wanting the US to succeed.




Get the **** out of Iraq. It is not our country. Let them ****ing figure things out for themselves...

Then will you and the rest of the left accept the moral culpability if there is a blood bath, a-la Cambodia, if we were to pull out immediately?

If you really believe in the ideals of freedom and democracy, you should be for cutting the strings.


Nonsense. We need to let the Iraqi's get in a position to deal with the terrorists and dead-enders. Anything else is irresponsible.

I'm sorry, was there an actual point to your ridiculous thread title?

You know exactly what the point is. I don't understand why your whining about the verbage.

Get the **** out of Iraq. It is not our country. Let them ****ing figure things out for themselves... If you really believe in the ideals of freedom and democracy, you should be for cutting the strings.

Oh, and 86--Which enemies?

I don't believe in democracy but I do believe in freedom, and theyll have no chance at either if the U.S. runs.

Way, way too logical, SS. You can't expect them to be logical here. Come on.

Perhaps you could expound on why his pathetically predictable political statement is soooo logical. Nevertheless, we've screwed the place up and we should do everything in our power to set it straight but none of that has anything to with the context of my thread does it? I've fell for the trap again.

Perhaps you could expound on why his pathetically predictable political statement is soooo logical. Nevertheless, we've screwed the place up and we should do everything in our power to set it straight but none of that has anything to with the context of my thread does it? I've fell for the trap again.

What is freedom, what is democracy? Can it really be forced onto people? Isn't the very act of forcing democracy the opposite of everything it stands for? Is there really any people left who honestly, truly believe that we could ever deliver democracy to a country by military force? Are there really people who actually believe that there wasn't going to be any resistance? The very act of forcing it upon them is going to invite resistance.

Let's turn the tables, and imagine that a country invaded us and militarily forced a dictatorship onto us. Would we not fight back? Of course we would. Even if hypothetically half of the population had somehow come to the conclusion that a dictatorship was the "right" way, there still would be the remaining die hards who would fight to the death against it. It's the same situation over there.

You have to want freedom. You have to want democracy. You have to fight for it. We've removed Sadam from power, they've put his ass to death. Fine. How much more are we supposed to do? If they want democracy, let them fight for it among themselves to achieve it. It will have more value to them anyway, since they earned it. Nobody values things that they don't have to work for. It will last longer too.

How many more soldiers are we going to have to sacrifice for people who don't really want democracy all that much? How much more billions of dollars are we going to have to waste? And how about the terrorists in our own country called gang bangers? Shouldn't our country be a priority? Why do we care so goddamn much about Iraq anyway?

Let them fight for it. We've paved the path for it. Democracy is available for them if they truly want it.

And this is where you see the problem clearly. We never really wanted to give them "democracy." That was all a bunch of bullshit. We're only there because it benifits us to have military control of the country. Any other "feel good giving them democracy" crap is all a distraction. They know it will never happen. Just like they'll never end terrorism. It's absurd.

Then will you and the rest of the left accept the moral culpability if there is a blood bath, a-la Cambodia, if we were to pull out immediately?

Does this mean the right is willing to accept the moral culpability for the blood bath that is going on right now?

the blood bath hasn't even started yet.

the blood bath hasn't even started yet.

Yes, it has. But you're right in that the rails have been greased and lead to greater and greater amounts of bloodshed.

The question stands: Does the right accept the moral culpability for the state of affairs now?

Are enemies of the US government "our" enemies? It doesn't seem that the US government does much to represent its citizens interests anymore.
Until Bush's daughters and the Senate's children start fighting and dying in Iraq, I don't feel obligated to support shit they do.

Well said.

M.

Well said.

M.

...except for the little matter of America putting Shrub back in office in 2004. They had their chance to heave the lying sack of shit from office and instead rewarded his bull-in-a-china shop 1st term with another four years. :nonono:

...except for the little matter of America putting Shrub back in office in 2004. They had their chance to heave the lying sack of shit from office and instead rewarded his bull-in-a-china shop 1st term with another four years. :nonono:

I know.
That's the very point at which I pretty much lost hope for America.

M.

Does this mean the right is willing to accept the moral culpability for the blood bath that is going on right now?


Here's a good idea. Why don't you answer my question, THEN I'll answer yours?
Sound good?

Does this mean the right is willing to accept the moral culpability for the blood bath that is going on right now?

Of COURSE the right does and has. It is sad, but it's always darkest before the dawn.

Of course, encased ion your empty headed notion that the right is to blame is the fact that you are, then, simply ACCEPTING Saddam's torture chambers as the only alternative to action.

You are a terror supporter and a lover of tyrants.

Congratulations.

That's the very point at which I pretty much lost hope for America.

The fact that a fetid European thinks the US is on the wrong road makes me ever more sure we are right. When the immoral European left rises in anger, we can be sure we are in the moral rights.

The fact that a fetid European thinks the US is on the wrong road makes me ever more sure we are right. When the immoral European left rises in anger, we can be sure we are in the moral rights.


Indeed. :nice:

The fact that a fetid European thinks the US is on the wrong road makes me ever more sure we are right.

Its not possible for you to be even more sure that you are right. Your certainty of being right is absolute already. It has been for as long as you have posted on this board.

Don't let this nth example of how you are wrong get in your way though: I'm an American citizen. Don't worry, you can just shift to calling me a dirtie commie, or some other insult that suits your fancy... you never tire of the insults. I wonder why I never report you... I'm kinder to you than your behavior warrants, that's for sure.

M.

Warning issued : namecalling

... dirtie[sic]commie.

... dirtie[sic]commie.

Ladies and gentleman, I present the debating prowess of Mobile Vulgus.

Ladies and gentleman, I present the debating prowess of Mobile Vulgus.


As opposed to your debating prowess and baiting people into "being a man", right?

Incidentally, whose post are you reporting right now Optimus?

Ladies and gentleman, I present the debating prowess of Mobile Vulgus.

You really DO have a reading comprehension problem since you don't understand the context of my post you quoted.

I apologize for ever think ill of you. One should not make fun of the mentally challenged. Obviously you are just retarded.

Of COURSE the right does and has. It is sad, but it's always darkest before the dawn.

Of course, encased ion your empty headed notion that the right is to blame is the fact that you are, then, simply ACCEPTING Saddam's torture chambers as the only alternative to action.

You are a terror supporter and a lover of tyrants.

Congratulations.



The fact that a fetid European thinks the US is on the wrong road makes me ever more sure we are right. When the immoral European left rises in anger, we can be sure we are in the moral rights.


Who is "we"? There is nothing "moral" about your bloodthirsty rants, neither is there any "morality" in our foreign policy which is about power and money, instead of doing good for the sake of it...

I don't prefer any other useless "phrases" or emotional "slogans" to guide the sheeple. I'm sick of them. They don't help, they only misguide and further divide the country, they're worthless except for the braindead and the criminal parties who spew them out.

Let's not be afraid to call things what they really are. In this case, the phrase is accurate.

I give up. You people are incapable of having a rational conversation about Iraq much less the original subject of the thread.

We are just now at the same point [b]where the irrational left made us lose Nam[b/].

Ah ha! It's the ole' "but the dog ate my bazooka!" chestnut!

Then will you and the rest of the left accept the moral culpability if there is a blood bath, a-la Cambodia, if we were to pull out immediately?

Sure. Will the right take responsibility for the 2,700 dead marines then?



Nonsense. We need to let the Iraqi's get in a position to deal with the terrorists and dead-enders. Anything else is irresponsible.

The paranoia and fear you people generate will be the end of our nation. Forward basing is bullshit, empirical,

No one is going to cut the funding. They don't have the balls.

It's just posturing in an attempt to fool the voters who want the war over.

I don't believe in democracy but I do believe in freedom, and theyll have no chance at either if the U.S. runs.

Absolute stinking bullshit. Weve been ****ing with Iraq since Eisenhower was in office, never giving these people a chance to just work out a system for themselves.

If you'll look at 'freedom' and 'democracy', you'll see a track record that looks a lot, lot, lot better when its the people of the nation that incite the change. Generally, when you get occupied 4-20 by another nations army, its not being 'freed'. We got Saddam out of power. Now let them make the right choices, or **** it up. Either way, give the Iraqi's the right to freedom and democracy.

20 years old but still the mentality of a teenager I see.

You really DO have a reading comprehension problem since you don't understand the context of my post you quoted.

I understood the context just fine. Your post was also warned.

I apologize for ever think ill of you. One should not make fun of the mentally challenged. Obviously you are just retarded.

You apologize for "ever think ill of me?" One should not make fun of the "mentally challenged?" Obviously I am "just retarded?"

Put together a coherent thought, just once in your hate filled ranting life. Your drooling, vapid posts are boring me to tears.

Let's not be afraid to call things what they really are. In this case, the phrase is accurate.

I'm not afraid to call things what they really are, I wrote about what's actually happening in my earlier post. That's the harsh reality of this whole thing.

And democrats are not "emboldening" the enemy by cutting war funding. That's petty, small time thinking that you guys are so good at. Put the blame on democrats. Blame everyone except the buffoons who got us into this mess. You guys seriously just do not get it, and likely never will.

Stop thinking in terms of feel good patriotic soundbites. They only cloud your thinking. Start looking at the situation at the "meta" level, so to speak, and see the big picture. Step outside your little bubble.

My take? Sure, it helps insurgeant morale to see the signs of our imminent retreat.

Do I care? No.
If I let this petty argument be a deciding factor, then we would continue pouring hundreds of billions of tax dollars into this illegal occupation indefinitely.

I'm sorry, but the morons who thought it would be a good idea to do this in first place can't always come up with excuses to continue down their foolish path at our expense.

The insurgeants deserve morale boosts. US soldiers have no business in Iraq. We should implement a gradual but efficient exit strategy NOW.

M.

My take? Sure, it helps insurgeant morale to see the signs of our imminent retreat.

Do I care? No.
If I let this petty argument be a deciding factor, then we would continue pouring hundreds of billions of tax dollars into this illegal occupation indefinitely.

I'm sorry, but the morons who thought it would be a good idea to do this in first place can't always come up with excuses to continue down their foolish path at our expense.

The insurgeants deserve morale boosts. US soldiers have no business in Iraq. We should implement a gradual but efficient exit strategy NOW.

M.

Kudos for being on topic eventhough you're wrong. :)

My take? Sure, it helps insurgeant [sic] morale to see the signs of our imminent retreat.

Do I care? No.

Of COURSE you don't care! Jeeze, we ALL could have made THAT guess. If it emboldens the enemy, it is of no mind to you. I'd bet you are even happy about their morale improving.

After all, if it helps them kill Americans, you are most likely all for it.

I don't believe in democracy but I do believe in freedom, and theyll have no chance at either if the U.S. runs.

Yes, because its so nice and free to live while being occupied and completly controled by another country's millitary. Im sure we'd love it if someone came to our country and installed a dictatorship and continued to occupy us for years, roaming our streets, telling us what to do and how to live.

There are some good discussions and ideas being put forth here, but a lot of your posts on this thread are just moans about people derailing and being morons. What, were you hoping this would be a circle jerk for supporting the troops?

After all, if it helps them kill Americans, you are most likely all for it.

Why do you feel the need to distort my position, MV?
I'm really curious.

M.

Kudos for being on topic eventhough you're wrong. :)

:nice:

M.

20 years old but still the mentality of a teenager I see.

Nah... A teenagers mentality would indeed be to just keep throwing troops into the blender. Its got to jam eventually.

Why do you feel the need to distort my position, MV?

There was no "distortion" involved.

The insurgeants [sic] deserve morale boosts

emboldens our enemies

Is there a way not to do this?

Is there a way not to do this?

Yes, stifle Democrats who should more correctly be called defeatocrats.

As in Nam, the enemy knows that they just have to hold out long enough for the Democrats to come to their aid.

Yes, stifle Democrats who should more correctly be called defeatocrats.

... You honestly think the insurgents give a shit what the democrats say? All they hear are 'more troops' or 'less troops', if anything. But you know, maybe Im wrong. They were probably incited with rage when hillary made that bad joke, and probably applauded kerry when he made that bad joke calling bush stupid.

As in Nam,

At least we can now admit the similarities in the situations.

the enemy knows that they just have to hold out long enough for the Democrats to come to their aid.

The enemy, the enemy, the enemy. Who the hell is the enemy?

You honestly think the insurgents give a shit what the democrats say?

Yes and they have said so many times. They have been heard to use Democrat talking points and count heavily on the Democrats support for their success.

At least we can now admit the similarities in the situations.

Nice try, but the similarity starts and ENDS with the Democrats siding with those who want us destroyed.

Yes and they have said so many times. They have been heard to use Democrat talking points and count heavily on the Democrats support for their success.

I would LOVE to see some sources, or even hear where you heard this.

the enemy knows that they just have to hold out long enough for the Democrats to come to their aid.

The enemy, the enemy, the enemy. Who the hell is the enemy?

The enemy, the enemy, the enemy. Who the hell is the enemy?

Why, anyone not on MY side, naturally!!!
;)

Yes, stifle Democrats who should more correctly be called defeatocrats.

As in Nam, the enemy knows that they just have to hold out long enough for the Democrats to come to their aid.
Right. You totally neglect the fact that even the US military has admitted that Viet Nam was a war for independence into which the US injected itself, which is why traditional victory wasn't achieved. And you also fail to mention that after Nam the Powell Doctrine was formulated, by Colin Powell of course, and that this doctrine was totally ignored when going into Iraq.
The real tragedy is that complete idiots can lead us into war without knowing what the hell they are doing.
If you want victory, quit supporting stupidity.

...war for independence...

After saying such a thing, you are impossible to discuss it with because you are free of any knowledge of the war.

The enemy, the enemy, the enemy. Who the hell is the enemy?

Why do you constantly ask this question? Instead of telling you who the enemy is perhaps it would be better to describe him.

Why do you constantly ask this question? Instead of telling you who the enemy is perhaps it would be better to describe him.

Because it's an important question. A few members here are absolutely clueless in who they percieve the "enemy" to be. Certain members, see all muslims as the "enemy." Certain members see any "arab" as the enemy.

There's a lot of confusion over this war.

After saying such a thing, you are impossible to discuss it with because you are free of any knowledge of the war.
:not:

After saying such a thing, you are impossible to discuss it with because you are free of any knowledge of the war.
Nice way to dodge the issue entirely. You addressed nothing I said but simply implied I have no knowledge because I disagreed with you.
Quite obviously it is impossible to have a discussion with you, as discussion would imply the ability to examine viewpoints that differ from your own.

Why do you constantly ask this question?

Because, it has become one of the biggest problems of our society... There is this mythical enemy, someone who hates and wants to destroy us, but so few understand why or how they operate, or who 'the enemy' encompasses as a people. Few things are more important in a 'war' then knowing your enemy.

Instead of telling you who the enemy is perhaps it would be better to describe him.

Instead of telling me? You mean, because you cant.

There was no "distortion" involved.

Then how did you arrive at the conclusion that things that kill American soldiers are good in my book?

A) I want our soldiers out of Iraq
B) I want our soldiers out of Iraq
C) I want our soldiers out of Iraq

What part of that do you not understand?
What part of that allows you to say I want to see them get killed?

I eagerly await your next circus act.

M.

Because, it has become one of the biggest problems of our society... There is this mythical enemy, someone who hates and wants to destroy us, but so few understand why or how they operate, or who 'the enemy' encompasses as a people. Few things are more important in a 'war' then knowing your enemy.



Instead of telling me? You mean, because you cant.

If you really don't know who the enemy is (I know you do), they are an extremist sect of Islam that seeks to place the world under Muslim domination, and to specifically destroy the US and Israel. To that end, they hide among civilians and kill as many innocent people as possible. They are determined, and view the US as a paper tiger. They believe that if they keep us under attack long enough, they will achieve their goals. Their immediate goal is to control Iraq and its oil. We cannot allow that to happen. They rightly view the democrats' eagerness to cut and run from Iraq as weakness, so when they hear our elected leaders demanding that we leave immediately, they know that if they hold out a little longer, they'll get what they want. That is why we say that talk about cutting off war funding emboldens them. No one has yet made a credible effort to contradict the statement.

Hadit, what if the goal of the terrorists is to bankrupt our economy? After all, their 9/11 attack was on one of our financial centers.
If that was their goal, then funding wars and running huge deficits would represent our ability to do exactly what they want.
That's why I think cutting off funding is a valid option that should be discussed. Throwing more money at the problem may not be the solution.

If you really don't know who the enemy is (I know you do), they are an extremist sect of Islam that seeks to place the world under Muslim domination, and to specifically destroy the US and Israel.


They have made one overtly successful attack on us, but for all the lives lost it really didnt do much to cripple us. The worst part was the death. The next worst thing was the uncertinity that america being attacked brought.

Now, these are the people your horribly afraid of, the 'enemy' of the us. Now, you do understand that a vast majority of those fighting in the Iraqi streets are not apt to target the US? Perhaps mingled in are terrorist operatives fanning the flames, but the situation is exactly what you would expect disregarding them anyway, due to the religious structure and history of Iraq.

They rightly view the democrats' eagerness to cut and run from Iraq as weakness, so when they hear our elected leaders demanding that we leave immediately, they know that if they hold out a little longer, they'll get what they want.

What will they get? You forget--We have helped establish the Iraqi government (to say the least of things), and train their police and millitary. If Iraqi's decide to let themselves be controled and used by these 'enemies' of the US, that will be their choice, and then we can and most likely will truly deal with Iraq and all Iraqi's.

BTW, I love the buzzword rhetoric that you use. Its kind of like listening to Tony Snow sometimes. 'cut and run', 'eagerness', 'weakness', 'get what they want'. All vague, hyperbolic words.

That is why we say that talk about cutting off war funding emboldens them. No one has yet made a credible effort to contradict the statement.

If we cut off troops, we emboldens the enemy to finish the job. If we send troops, it emboldens them to fight harder. If we keep the numbers the same, things will stay the same.

Let Iraq ****ing lay... You can not build a democracy in a foreign country at gunpoint. If the people of Iraq want it, they'll take it. We can help equip them, and protect them from future enemies if they want. But we cant save them from themselves while trying to force a government on them.

Nice way to dodge the issue entirely

Not really. If you think that Nam was a "freedom movement" then you are so free of any facts, that a discussion would be to no avail.

... You honestly think the insurgents give a shit what the democrats say? All they hear are 'more troops' or 'less troops', if anything. But you know, maybe Im wrong. They were probably incited with rage when hillary made that bad joke, and probably applauded kerry when he made that bad joke calling bush stupid.



At least we can now admit the similarities in the situations.



The enemy, the enemy, the enemy. Who the hell is the enemy?



Very good question ! Finally someone who thinks for themself !

Saudis are the ones financing the terror cells inside America and UK , paying for the radical schools . Saudis , iran and China looks very suspicious too , they sure are hugging up to Russia and iran . Not to speak of their influance on this new aliegnment of Mexico,Canada and America .