I think this is a very good post. I think you'll struggle to find a lot of people that are against a war with Afghanistan. The Taliban directly funded Al Qaeda and, because of that, they became accountable for the actions of Al Qaeda. If there was any solid proof that the Ba'ath Arab Socialist Party in Iraq had funded Al Qaeda, I think you'd have widespread support for the War in Iraq.

I think the problem a lot of people have is in the way that they see the war. For example, I believe I see it very differently from you. I think the U.S. has won this war. The goals going in, to my knowledge, were to remove Saddam's regime from power and ensure that any WMD that could potentially harm the United States were removed. Those goals have been accomplished. People insult President Bush for going on the air craft carrier with the Mission Accomplished sign behind him, but, in my opinion, our mission had been accomplished.

At some point, our ends began to extend past our means. We decided that it was more important to make the War about the promotion of democracy and stability, rather than about the safety of the American people. In that regard, we committed ourselves to a goal that is virtually impossible to complete. I can't really see any point where anti-American, anti-Democracy forces in Iraq will put down their arms and admit defeat. However, if we can frame this situation in a way that doesn't create a winner and a loser, we may be able to come to a compromise.

If we remove forces from Iraq, I won't feel any less safe than I do right now. If we completely stabilize Iraq, terrorists will just move elsewhere. I don't foster any illusions of moving an extensive American troop presence to every country in the world because anti-American terrorists are located there.

The biggest problem I find with comparing the War in Iraq to WWII is that the latter had a clearly defined enemy. We knew who we were fighting. In Iraq, are we fighting Al-Qaeda? Are we fighting Iraqi insurgents? Are we fighting radical Islamic fundamentalists? How do you define radical? How do you define a fundamentalist? Furthermore, modern military technology is very different from the way it was in 1944. Because of that, death numbers can't really be compared.

I understand that people don't like the fact that the media touts 4,000 deaths as some kind of milestone. But it is a variable that must be used when measuring the success of a military engagement. If the lack of violence can be used to measure the success of the surge, why can't the abundance of violence be used to measure the mistakes that have been made?

I think a lot of Republicans and Democrats just need to define a common goal and work toward that. This issue has become far too black and white. It's become a you're-either-with-us-or-against-us issue and it doesn't have to be.

__________________
"The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised.”
- George Will

Interesting choice of words.

"govt schools" You mean like those in boot camp?

"Politically" No argument there, this is purely political.

"correct" No argument here either, given that by a long shot, most Americans disagree with the minority support of this war.

"BS" That's your opinion, most of us don't agree with you. Deal with it.

"You would think it would be a good thing for students to get to see history from a real source instead of just a text book."

I'd agree if this was anything other than propoganda disguised as "real history." It's nothing more than a covert attempt to recruit fresh meat for the military grinder.

I'll say it again, if you so support this war, send your family's kids off to fight it, leave ours out.

no one is "sending" anyone anywhere, there is no draft etc. No one forces or forced them to join the armed forces.

__________________
No individual can plan his own existence in their view.

So the state planners must arrogate to themselves the right to manipulate any sector of the economic system if the good of “society” or the “general welfare” is paramount.

Ipso- if the rights of the individual get in the way, the rights of the individual must be sublimated.

The Road to Serfdom
FA Hayek (interpretation)


Mortgage Backed Security survivor

Well, how about this?

Save your propoganda about this glorious, romantic war for YOUR KIDS. Don't feed to to our family's kids.

There Imp, does that make you feel better?

Just for your edification Imperator:

Army expanding 'stop loss' order to keep soldiers from leaving

By Tom Squitieri, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — The Army will announce as early as Tuesday new orders that will forbid thousands of soldiers from leaving the service after they return this year from Iraq, Afghanistan and other fronts in the war against terrorism, defense officials said Monday.

(cont') USATODAY.com - Army expanding 'stop loss' order to keep soldiers from leaving
---------------------------------------
So it seems that perhaps dispite your denial, that soldiers are indeed being sent to this war against their wishes. So much for the myth of an "all volunteer military. A backdoor draft, is still a draft.

Walks like duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck. It's probably a duck.

Thats cool.

and you don't have to contentious johnny, I was just making a statement sans rancor.

can you please reply in kind?

__________________
No individual can plan his own existence in their view.

So the state planners must arrogate to themselves the right to manipulate any sector of the economic system if the good of “society” or the “general welfare” is paramount.

Ipso- if the rights of the individual get in the way, the rights of the individual must be sublimated.

The Road to Serfdom
FA Hayek (interpretation)


Mortgage Backed Security survivor

and again you said “sent”- these folks are in the zone already, its doesn’t say they are taking state side troops cutting their ETS dates and sending them back to a war zone. they are keeping them till their units rotates out.


Yes they are being held over, called being "involuntarily extended" when I was in, I was held over when I was in service back in the day. It is also know that it is written into the regulations/contract under which you sign up.

Officers are under even more strenuous obligations, they serve at the presidents behest and can be called up years later after they are OUT entirely.....

It’s a shitty deal agreed but not unexpected nor new.

__________________
No individual can plan his own existence in their view.

So the state planners must arrogate to themselves the right to manipulate any sector of the economic system if the good of “society” or the “general welfare” is paramount.

Ipso- if the rights of the individual get in the way, the rights of the individual must be sublimated.

The Road to Serfdom
FA Hayek (interpretation)


Mortgage Backed Security survivor

You say tomatoe... I say tomato...

I'd rather not quibble about the landscape, let's call the whole thing off.

That was a tongue in cheek response to "anti American left rears it ugly head".

Like I said later, the principal made a decision based on educational criteria.

The left had nothing to do with this, what happened was "grassroots", parents called the principal to protest this, not Ted Kennedy and Barack Obama.
When the principal felt that the political drama that this event would generate would outweigh the educational benefit he canceled the event.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

Well I see wooyarn cannot back up his claims so I guess I win this round......ya me

What claim would that be? Look at post #57.

Look at post #59 where I ask you to back up your claims with facts.

I just used the link you posted, so I guess if part of the page is wrong then we can assume that all of it is wrong. That would mean that your # 78.5% is also wrong. It really doesn't matter to me how mant christians there is,was or will be in this country, so go ahead and claim victory if it makes you feel better, I left the play grounds a long time ago.

While we're here can you provide some prof that the people that called the prinsiple are Dems and not just concerned parents?

4000 is not a milestone and it has nothing to do with success or failure. It is a death tally nothing more. For Democrats it's an opportunity to complain and for Republicans it's a pain in the ass.

Don't hold your breath waiting for the Democrats to decide it is in their best interests to work with Republicans. As long as people keep letting the MSM trick them into voting for Democrats they have no reason to change. It is up to the voters to force them to change their ways. Republicans have, to our detriment.

__________________


"We can't screw it up any worse than they have." - Barack Obama

Wanna bet?



"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste...." - Rahm Emmanuel

If we're going to use casualties as a variable for measuring levels of violence, I think it's acceptable to discuss death rates. I'm not sure milestone is the best word to describe the media's coverage. After all, as long as death rates are being reported (and I think they have to be), people will find out and want to know.

I don't disagree at all with your second paragraph.

__________________
"The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised.”
- George Will