Is there something you don't understand what the job of the military is? 99% of the military will disagree with you, they know what their job is, and you obviously don't.

Or...

On one hand, they're fighting an enemy THERE

Or

On the other hand, they're making it so that we're not fighting an enemy HERE.

You socialists just want your cake, and to eat it too. You have this false sense of security, that the enemy will just wave, and say "bye" when we leave, and never come attack us on our homeland. What suckers you are.

Nah, that's just more fear-mongering from the right.

There is no evidence whatsoever regarding a causal linkage between the war in Iraq, and "lack of attack on our homeland".

Just because you keep saying that, does not make iti true.

Try again. Maybe, use some better "logic" this time....

...because it's murky. Read the link below, and if you have a better plan, we all would love to hear it.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/securi...31-jenkins.htm

While our attention understandably is focused on the war in Iraq, the worldwide war against al Qaeda and affiliated terrorist enterprises continues. Unlike the fighting in Iraq, the campaign against the terrorists does not provide the continuing flow of televised images or battlefield displays. It is a war fought largely in the shadows. We measure its progress in the periodic arrests of terrorist leaders and the passage of time without a major terrorist attack.

__________________
Cheney is the second executive officer to shoot someone in the face and chest. Clinton was the first.

Global Security? Apologists for the Neo-Cons? Nice try.....

Nah, look, you guys keep saying that - it's like, you keep pointing to this "murky metric" that no one can really measure - "periodic arrest of terrorist leaders and the passage of time without a major terrorist attack" -

But here's the truth: you guys have failed. You have failed, thoroughly and unquestionably.

Show me Osama's head on a platter. Where is it? Where?

Do you even know where Osama is? How close can you narrow it down? A thousand miles? 500 maybe?

Every time you guys get lucky and catch someone, you point to it as "success", but it's not, it's usually dumb luck. For every one of those clowns you catch, there are hundreds more you don't. So, don't sit there and tell me your metric is "meaningful", until you show me results - bring me Osama's head on a platter - show me something - anything -

'Cause all you've shown me so far, is a god-awful mess. The freakin' terrorists are still blowing up our boys over in Iraq, three years and a trillion dollars later. And there's only ten thousand of those clowns. Tops. So, why can't you guys round 'em up? Huh?

I'll tell you why - it's 'cause your freakin' incompetent, that's why. Your Commander-In-Chief is a god(*)(*)(*)(*) moron, and he couldn't implement his way out of a paper bag.

Show me results. Goddamit. Or else, stop spending my money.

The guy was appointed by Clinton

__________________
Cheney is the second executive officer to shoot someone in the face and chest. Clinton was the first.

With Iraq getting better, the Dems will now show
their true face and show the American people just
how they really are, wanting to lose the war at any cost.

Re-elect a war losing party, is their new slogan.

__________________
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
Thomas Jefferson

Yeah, him... well, I was thinking of the "rest" of those clowns, mostly....

But yeah, I hear you.

Nah, I was just ... ah.... what is it the black folks say.... "representing", that's it.

You know, I mean, you hear me too, right?

It's like, you know, freakin' Bozo over there, our C-n-C, could have done a lot more with a trillion bucks, that's for sure.

I mean, kinda where I stand on this thing, is that I support the "goal" (such as it's been explained to me, although I'm still not entirely clear on why it keeps shifting all over the map) - but I just think Bushie is going about this in entirely the wrong way.

You know, like I posted on the other thread, I mean, we got real threats, right?

And these terrorist clowns.... they're kinda, I dunno, how would you put it, "stupid enough to be dangerous", that kinda thing? You know, tryin' to light their shoes on fire, 'n all....

And you know, truth is, any Columbine kid could go buy some fertilizer or something, and.... well.....

I just don't think Iraq is all that important, that's all. Not like, a trillion bucks' worth. Not that important. A little important maybe. But I'd "for sure" rather be puttin' all that money somewhere else. Like, real homeland security, might be a good place to start. You know, borders, protecting the infrastructure, that kinda thing.... But I mean... Iraq???? Nah, we're just pissing away our money there. There ain't nothin' good gonna come out of that, "even if we win". So.....

You know - yeah - there's definitely threats, right? "A" threat - the terrorists represent "a" threat.

Out of all the gazillions we're faced with, they're "a" threat. And I mean, our entire strategy, this "pre-emption" bit, is based on something that hasn't even happened yet. The terrorists do not have nuclear weapons, right? Or any other kind of WMD, right? So, like, we're basing our entire foreign policy, and a big chunk of our domestic policy, on something that hasn't even happened. It's like, we're protecting ourselves from a pipe dream, a fantasy, a pie-in-the-sky "might happen someday" scenario.

I mean, all that's happened so far, is "one" thing, and that's only 'cause Bushie screwed up on the intelligence yet again, so.....

Yeah, I just question the sanity of Bushie and his clown parade.

I mean, like, these guys are tossing all their eggs (and that means, by extension, "our" eggs) into one single basket, and meanwhile there's like thousands of other important things that are falling by the wayside.

Not the least of which is the Constitution.

It must be election time.