I keep hearing that 60 whatever percent of Americans are “against” the war in Iraq. The Democratic Party has taken this as a mandate to immediately begin withdrawing troops from Iraq.
They need George W. Bush to fail. They need him to fail so that they can regain power in Washington D.C.
This is so wrong.
Some of these same Democrats (and a few Republicans) voted to authorize the use of force against Iraq. Now they want to force the Commander in Chief to pull out prematurely.
This is insane.
It makes me wonder if anyone reads. Have you ever heard of a war that was easy? Have you ever heard of a war without tragedy? History shows that war requires perseverance.
War is completely undesirable and it always will be. But we have to finish what we started in Iraq.
My fellow Americans, the 60 whatever percent, ARE YOU CRAZY? Are you living in complete unreality? Do you not see our enemies? Strength will always be necessary to have peace. That’s right, the ability and willingness to reluctantly make war will always be necessary to have peace! It is not the only thing needed, but it is needed.
Howard Dean, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and others have been trying to capitalize on the unpopularity of this war. (Hillary and John Kerry are worse because they were more for it in the beginning!) I am disgusted with what appears to be a willingness to cause a loss in Iraq in order to gain politically.
Progress is being made in Iraq! Is anybody paying attention? Or have Americans become infused with a deadly poison of negativity coming from the false leaders in our nation who will do anything to advance their agenda?
I am sure there are a few who have always had principled opposition to the war (Ron Paul for example). But so many who had access to the same intelligence and logic as the Bush Team are turning to gain power. God help us.
What message are we sending to our enemies? “The Americans are not so bright, they’ll defeat themselves in time, don’t worry. Their civilization is inferior. They will crumble.”
We have won in Iraq, we are winning in Iraq, and we will complete the win if we persevere. Perseverance is a basic fact of life. Surrender is not an option. Losing the victory we have gained is not an option!
Wake up America, before we make a gargantuan historical mistake. Wring out the poison in your souls. Get cleaned up from the negativity and pessimism being puked on you for the purpose of people’s agendas. Clear your heads, shake out your minds and WAKE UP!
It is not too late. We can stick with this thing. We can win. In fact, we have already won if we could only just see it!
————————————————————
Read this article on CNN about the House trying to make politics out of this war and change your mind! We need 80% of Americans and more saying “Let’s finish this thing with a clear and decisive victory in Iraq!”
http://us.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/14/iraq.war.funding/index.html
For some time now, the 75% of us who think George Bush should be a night watchman at a tank farm somewhere have been looking at you guys asking “Are you crazy?” It’s high time you got around to returning the favor.
I’ll answer your question. Yes Jon, we are all crazy. The will of the people is only valid when it supports your point of view. You alone can see the truth. Congratulations.
We will clearly need to expand the prisons to hold the 180,000,000 americans now guity of treason.
Since you are such a great american and rabid supporter of the War on Terror (TM), I look forward to news of your enlistment in the US Army. I did 4 years in boots, and I’m a treasonous Liberal – surely you’ll be made a Ranger and a Staff Sergeant right out of boot camp.
That’ll help.
Dear Casper,
I don’t think you are treasonous. You were probably against the war from the start. That makes more sense to me if you always opposed it. I was a questioner from the start, and I still am. It is finishing well that I am a supporter of and I do see some valid reasons for the war, with questions as well.
My problem is with those who have switched their position for political gain, and for those Americans who have switched their position because it is “hard” in Iraq or because they have been poisoned by Negativity.
I wish you could be persuaded that, regardless of your dislike for George W. and his policies, we need to finish strong in Iraq. We do need to get out, but not because a bunch of Democrats want to regain power in Washington and not before the right time, which is not immediately.
ThirstyJon
You don’t think I’m “Treasonous”? My DD-214 says “Honorable Discharge” and “Highly recommended for retention in the United States Service”, but the endorsement of a radical rightist non-veteran is just the icing that cake needed. Thank you.
I was against it from the start, and here’s why. I was in Lebanon back in the 80’s. Unlike anyone in the Bush administration, I’ve had a peek at what they sent these young people into, though my experience pales in comparison to what’s going on now. I know that you don’t send people to that if it’s not necessary. I never believed it was necessary or justified, but knowing what I’m talking about made my threshold higher than your average Chickenhawk’s.
You’re disappointed in the Democrats – well I am too. 4 years ago, when the public had bought the Bushite lies hook line and sinker and the Bush’s approval was 90% it would have been political suicide to not support the war. Many Democrats and more than a few Republicans had doubts, but they went along, they said what the mislead public wanted to hear, and I was heartbroken. I was disappointed then.
In ’06 enough of the public had caught on to the truth of Bush’s failures and lies to elect Democrats to a majority, and we did it for a reason. We want Bush’s policies undone, we really want the war undone, but since time travel doesn’t work we’ll settle for the war ended NOW. Stop the damage, stop the bleeding, let the Iraqi’s sort it out for themselves. That’s what’s going to happen when it’s all said and done, and another year and another 1000 KIA and 5000 WIA aren’t going to change it very much.
You may have heard that congress’ approval ratings are even lower than Bushes, and that’s true. You know why? It’s simple really. Republicans are fiercely partisan and will disapprove of any congress not run by Republicans, so there goes 35%. Democrats elected Democrats to go in there and stop the war and nail Bush and Cheney to a cross on the White House lawn, and they’re not doing it, so there goes another 40%. That leaves the 25% or so that are “Independent”, which mostly means they’re not paying much attention. About half of them approve, so there’s your 12% approval.
I completely disagree with you on what the Dems are doing now. You think they’ve changed their minds for political advantage. I think that they’re now being true to their consciences, and to their constituents, and they were being disengenuous before. If they succeed in cutting off funding and forcing as end to this trainwreck I may gain some respect for them.
So then, You want to “Finish well”, that’s a fine idea. I’ll help you. Your local Army Recruiter is at:
932 N Green Bay Rd
Waukegan, IL
Wait, actually a great American â„¢ like you will want to join the Marines, go to:
1028 Mount Prospect Plz
Mount Prospect, IL
It’s a little more of a drive, but I’m sure it’s worth it to a great patriot like yourself.
You want to “finish well”, sign up and do it. Ok – do your part. Or are you like your other hero – Dick “5 deferments” Cheney. That chickenhawk thinks wars are great, never saw a war he didn’t like, but he sure wasn’t going to risk his precious backside in one. It’s easy to sit here in the USA, or New Zealand or the east Coast of Australia or where ever you are and talk about “finishing well” and “staying the course”, but what have you done?
We’ve lost 3,800 people. We’ve got 25,000 wounded. Your president recently visited a few of them – did you see? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/11/09/in-pictures-president-bu_n_71991.html
There will be more, and for what? Tell me, for what?
“I am sick and tired of war. Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, for vengeance, for desolation. War is hell.”
William Tecumseh Sherman
In peace,
C
Army desertion rate up 80 pct. since ’03
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071117/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/military_deserters
There are limits,,,
Casper,
I take no delight in war and I am not deluded into thinking I know what is like. I have never been in a war. I have literally fallen asleep grieving for the lost lives in Iraq. I would not be happy if it was my loved one, and I am not happy that someone else’s loved one suffers.
I admire those who are “ready to go” mentally and physically if the defense of our nation calls. I wish that I had been trained when younger how to use a weapon and how to be ready to fight if necessary.
I even struggled with the strong language of my own post. Especially the use of the word “crazy.” I was not being “creative” or trying to be divisive. “Crazy” is how it appears to me. I am not insinuating that anyone is literally clinically insane.
When I was back in the U.S.A. watching the news and reading articles on Broadband Internet I spent a lot of time observing. This is what I see. President Bush is consistent in what he says. I am not convinced that he was in any way “deceiving” or “lying” about WMDs. Either the intelligence was wrong (this seems to be the generally accepted answer) or we gave enough time to Saddam to move/hide things.
I have not heard an adequate answer from either “side” on that issue. I have read bits of David Kay’s report. My understanding is that the report shows that they did not find WMDs, but they also cannot prove that they were not moved or hidden just before the war. David Kay says that we were “probably” wrong about the WMDs being there at the time of the invasion and the season before. You can read some of his thoughts at http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/01/28/kay.transcript/.
In that article, David Kay points out that intelligence agencies around the world believed Saddam had WMDs. He also points out that Iraq was in violation of UN Security Resolutions regardless and was actively trying to disrupt the WMD trail. (If they had none, why were they trying to disrupt the trail? Even via looting after the invasion?)
Short answer: I do not believe Bush lied. I don’t believe it. He has been too consistent.
And regardless of whether or not there was a specific strong tie between Al Qaeda and Saddam, there was a strategic tie. Two clear enemies of the United States appeared to have the means and the motive to cause the proliferation of WMDs ultimately into the hands of terrorists. Iraq definitely had the potential to destabilize the entire region in a big way, as clearly shown by their invasion of Iran and Kuwait.
Iraq formerly had WMDs and used them, they refused to prove that they currently did not (and they were obligated to), they had the means and the motive to connect that resource with our other enemies, and intelligence agencies around the world believed they currently had those Weapons.
Sounds like a very dangerous situation to me. I understand why Bush ordered the invasion, why the Democrats and Republicans initially supported Bush with authorization to use force, and why the whole thing happened.
Then it got hard, as wars do, and cynicism increased, and popularity went down. How can I not think that Hillary Clinton and others are not changing position because it is convenient? I heard her talking about how we needed to deal with Iraq. I remember the “news” speculating that she was acting like a “hawk” because of a future presidential run.
I am grieved by the Iraq war. I am favorable to keeping our nose only in our own business, but given the information that I have and watching the different factions present their case the only reasonable conclusion that I have been able to come to is that Bush is and was right.
And even if he wasn’t, we are obligated to finish what we started now. I work with people a lot, and I can only see great grief and loss of credibility around the world if we don’t lick this thing. One key principle is to do what is right even when unpopular and in the end you are usually vindicated. (Although sometimes you get crucified.)
I still have to stand with George W. on this one. He has way more credibility with me than Harry Reid or Hillary Clinton.
ThirstyJon
You called all members of the majority party in the United States Senate and the United States House or Representatives “Crazy”, but you’re not trying to be divisive. So tell me, just what would you say if you were trying to be divisive?
Crazy is how it appears to you, Ok. Well the points of view espoused by your side of this look “Stupid”, “Bloodthirsty”, “Delusional” and “Criminal” to me, but I’ve been too polite to say so until now (and you started it).
I will agree with you about Bush being consistent. He is consistently wrong, he consistently lies, he consistently misuses his power,,,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Speaking of lies:
George W. has “way more credibility”,,, you’ll like this then (fresh off the presses this morning).
“”The most powerful leader in the world had called upon me to speak on his behalf and help restore credibility he lost amid the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. So I stood at the White house briefing room podium in front of the glare of the klieg lights for the better part of two weeks and publicly exonerated two of the senior-most aides in the White House: Karl Rove and Scooter Libby.
There was one problem. It was not true.
I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice President, the President’s chief of staff, and the president himself.”” ——- Former White House spokesman Scott McClellan.
GWB has more credibility that Harry Reid. Ok. There’s that delusional thing again.
Hello Casper!
You can choose to believe what I say about my motives or not. I am still happy. 🙂
Don’t forget these quotes from the publisher of Scott McClellan’s upcoming book:
The source of both quotes is CNN.com.
It sounds to me like the publisher is trying to prevent people from being disappointed with what the book does not say about President Bush, because everyone is latching on to potential “evidence” against Bush that either isn’t there, or is not of the level they were thinking it would be.