<p>I blame America becuase our fearless (but chicken hawk leaders who avoided war at all costs for THEMSELVES) said it would be easy, we would be welcome and that gosh combat was OVER and had no clue as to who was in the country, basically did not guard the borders, so people could come in, did things so badly that many Iraqs did not trust us, grabbed people, and kept them for months and months even though they were innocent, raided homes, destroyed houses, not to mention all the other messes we made and have not fixed</p>
<p>We are the occupiers and its getting worse not better on our watch</p>
<p>Citygirlsmom posted: “Tell, me, zoosermom, you must have kids, if they are enlisted, I pray they are safe, but if not, would you encourage them to go”</p>
<p>My children aren’t old enough yet, but my middle daughter has already made contact with West Point. As a member of a multi-generational military family, I would support her completely in whatever choice she makes.</p>
<p>“What is my bias, please,”</p>
<p>I think you share the same bias as so many other liberals. That their self worth depends heavily on being other than, better than, more enlightened than the great, unwashed American masses. Which group is personified by GWB. For the record, I disagree with Bush loudly and profoundly on more issues that I agree.</p>
<p>We are arrogant as a nation…sure we are, to deny that well, that is naive</p>
<p>we posture, we flex our muscles, we refuse to talk to other leaders, and Bush won’t even go to the NAACP convention…that is arrogant, no matter what he says is the reason</p>
<p>If we had to go after Saddam Hussein because we THOUGHT he had WMD, why do we not have to go after Kim Jong Il–who we KNOW has WMD? And, in fact, now that it looks like we might need to go (back) into North Korea… we can’t because the military is overextended as it is.</p>
<p>And for the person who said we only need another 50K troops to calm Iraq—please read a history of the Vietnam war.</p>
<p>Citygirlsmom posts: "We are arrogant as a nation…sure we are, to deny that well, that is naive</p>
<p>we posture, we flex our muscles, we refuse to talk to other leaders, and Bush won’t even go to the NAACP convention…that is arrogant, no matter what he says is the reason"</p>
<p>It is remarkable that you would presume to speak for the citizens of a nation of 200 million people. Newsflash: Not every one shares your view and it is not the only valid point of view. Arrogant, indeed.</p>
<p>Personified by GWB. let us see…hummm…Bush was raised in a very wealthy family, daddy was President, he got into a great school with mediocre grades, he was given businesses that failed, he got out of the service by connections, wonder how he would have done without his connections</p>
<p>yeah, he is one of the masses, yep indeedy, when someone calls him part of the masses, what can one say to that…the absurdiity is too funny and it shows me alot</p>
<p>That Bush is seen as the common man, when he is not</p>
<p>JFK was not one of the masses either, but at least he understood them</p>
<p>When you have a presdient who think that a woman who has to have three jobs to take care of her family that somehow that is the “Uniquely American” like its swell has to do that, yeah, he is one of the inwashedmasses</p>
<p>DMD posts: “If we had to go after Saddam Hussein because we THOUGHT he had WMD, why do we not have to go after Kim Jong Il–who we KNOW has WMD? And, in fact, now that it looks like we might need to go (back) into North Korea… we can’t because the military is overextended as it is.”</p>
<p>We knew he had WMD at least at one time, and my personal opinion is that five or ten years down the road, the conventional wisdom of no WMD will be proven to be not quite so black and white. North Korea should have been dealt with by Clinton, but of course he kicked that can down the road. I don’t agree that our military is unable to handle multiple fronts. We do have a pretty excellent navy (yes I am biased as a Navy brat, and I admit it!) and Air Force. Frankly, it should be China and Japan to deal with NoKo. We are called arrogant for being involved everywhere, but yet some people (not all) who share that view expect the US to fix everything. I happen to like my lifestyle (relentlessly middle class thought it is) and I am not so hysterical and dramatic and out-of-touch that I will scream about no blood for oil. I’ve actually thought through that possibility and it is grim. Saddam could never have been allowed to control that much of the world’s oil supply.</p>
<p>Zoosermom–an interesting idea, that China and Japan could get together to deal with North Korea. It doesn’t seem likely to me, but now that North Korea has missiles that (when they get them working) will reach the west coast–which Iraq has never had, while North Korea threatens them–it seems more important than it used to, dealing with Kim Jong Il.</p>
<p>As for Hussein, of course we knew he’d had WMD–we’d sold them to him during the 80s. However, at the time we invaded, he had theoretically disarmed, and the UN was doing inspections. We rushed the gate on the invasion. And we know now that Powell was set up to lie to us.</p>
<p>DMD Posted: “Zoosermom–an interesting idea, that China and Japan could get together to deal with North Korea. It doesn’t seem likely to me, but now that North Korea has missiles that (when they get them working) will reach the west coast–which Iraq has never had, while North Korea threatens them–it seems more important than it used to, dealing with Kim Jong Il.”</p>
<p>I agree it is more important, but I’m of the school of thought that multilateral talks are better.</p>
<p>“As for Hussein, of course we knew he’d had WMD–we’d sold them to him during the 80s. However, at the time we invaded, he had theoretically disarmed, and the UN was doing inspections. We rushed the gate on the invasion. And we know now that Powell was set up to lie to us”</p>
<p>I agree that we were dumb as stumps for many years with regard to Saddam, but I don’t agree that we could have known that he disarmed – I’m not convinced that he did. I also don’t think that we rushed anywhere because we spent a long time dealing with the UN and there were multiple resolutions. Ultimately, though, this is one of those areas where people of goodwill (which we both are!) can disagree and still chat politely. Which I am very glad about.</p>
<p>I think GW is praying right now for the rapture to pull him out of this mess. </p>
<p>The problem we have is as clear as the conversations on this post. Instead of questioning a different opinion be it right or left, it is dismissed completely. Alot of you don’t “understand”, when maybe the other side does, but sees things from a different angle.</p>
<br>
Yes, there are a lot of potentially valid opinions on the war and how to fight terrorism. Unfortunately, when the opinion comes from the perspective of: Bush lied, Bush is Hitler reincarnate, Bush did it for Haliburton … to make daddy happy … to outdo daddy … to get re-elected … to make the oil companies happy … etc., I tend to discount the worth of the opinion as one that originates from a mind so blinded by Bush-hatred that it is incapable of clear thinking on the topic.</p>
<p>How about my opinion that Bush screwed up because he only had people around who agreed with him? They had no debate amongst themselves before taking action and now they truly surprized by the outcome? That is not a party issue, it’s a management issue.</p>
<p>I didn’t realize that you were listening in on the debate. Were you actually in the room or did you have it bugged? With firsthand knowledge like that, you certainly are entitled to your opinion.</p>
<p>Opie posted: “How about my opinion that Bush screwed up because he only had people around who agreed with him? They had no debate amongst themselves before taking action and now they truly surprized by the outcome? That is not a party issue, it’s a management issue.”</p>
<p>You know, I may not agree, but when posted like that without hysterics or name-calling, it is clear to be a valid point of view and something worthy of consideration. I’m a conservative, but I don’t think the post-war period has been handled very well, and I know lots of serious, thoughtful conservatives who are as opposed to the war as people on the hard left. Smart people don’t need to resort to ugly tactics.</p>
<p>Pretty simple those who disagreed were “retired” from the administration or militarym, then discredited. How stupid do you expect someone to be when a disagreement with the boss means the loss of your job? Are “yes men” retired and discredited? </p>
<p>This administration fully, truly expected to be welcomed with open arms in the middle east and expected Iraqi resources to be paying us back for our troubles. Why?</p>
<p>If you go with my reasoning, it’s because nobody disagreed in the room. There certainly are enough taped press conferences out there that show this administration’s leaders (Bush, Cheney, Rummy…etc…) speaking with conviction about what’s happening. </p>
<p>OR</p>
<p>You could say they went forward, despite some contrary opinions and did this anyway and the last few years they’ve been blowing smoke up everyone’s skirts. In other words lying through their teeth to the American people.</p>
<p>Personally, I don’t believe GW is a liar, I think he is just not a good manager. But if you want to beleive that he’s gone ahead with full knowledge of the posible outcome, I guess that would be a “slam dunk” wouldn’t it? :)</p>
<p>Nope, I’m just a kid raised by a single parent (“Pa”) in a small town called Mayberry. Life was simple, neighbors were friendly and the town’s (world’s) problems were discussed at Floyd the Barber’s place.</p>
<p>My dad took care of the community with common sense and a wisedom not everybody had. He knew his neighbors and respected their homes. He kept the peace without having to pull out his gun too often and really hated to pull it out at all. </p>
<p>His deputy Barney was always wound up, kinda jumpy and skiterish. My dad and Barney would often disagree on something but my dad was smart enough to listen to Barney and talk it out. Sometimes Barney had a point, sometimes he was just plain crazy.</p>
<p>Gotta go catch some perch at the pond. bye.</p>