This totally subjective screed is just red meat for the type of Con who has to express his moral superiority in terms of liberal ostracism. Like, there are plenty of good old fashioned reasons NOT to go to war with Iraq, like they were never a threat and we didn’t have to, or maybe we should have Congress, god forbid, declare war like it said on some piece of paper somewhere. Maligning your anti-war opponent as an elitists who thinks the troops are saps while you regard them as heroes is simplistic nonsense, sort of populist feel-good therapy. The cream of the Nazi and Imperial Japanese forces were heroic and capable too, which of course doesn’t reflect a whit on their ignoble cause and war. It seems you are just as anti-intellectual and kneejerk as your tormentors.

I moved down the road to Barstow here in the High Desert and you can deffinetly feel a cooling toward being a Conservative, but at least you’re not cast out because of it. (Since we’re all stuck here in the desert anyway I guess they figure that’s bad enough. :p ) So everything is fine right? Wrong.

See, I work for NASA, or more specifically JPL. They’re down in the heart of Liberal Land. Dealing with them can be bad enough because we don’t live down there (where the civilized folks live), but it turns into a frozen wonderland when they discover you’re a conservative. When there’s 8 hours of nothing to do but watch numbers scroll by on a screen you can end up with some pretty varied conversation topics. I’ve always managed to fight them tooth and nail on every topic that’s come up.

So much so, many of them won’t even show up to the site if they know they’ll be forced to work with me. Or request a different operator. I love it! >:)

But the interesting thing was my nephew who went to a magnet type public school (they lived in Studio City). He was a part of a class wide audio visual project about the life of a female mexican artist (who had an accident on a streetcar and was impaled but lived) and her communist husband. That they were good. This is what kids learned in High School.

There was enough evidence that Saddam was involved that a US court convicted him of liability in the attacks, and in collaboration with Al Qaeda. See http://www.husseinandterror.com.

Sincerely,
Wake Up Brad

“Well, Iraq, for one thing. I believe we were right to invade, to topple Saddam Hussein, and to stick around and make certain the bad guys don’t win. I’m sure even you wouldn’t want to see Al Qaeda using Iraqi oil revenue to fund worldwide terrorism.”

The above quote is staggering in it misrepresentation. Saddam Hussein was a tyrant, but a secular tyrant. Fundamentalist groups like Al Qaeda were a threat to his authority and were brutally repressed. This is inherent in the Bath political ideology. Even the Bush administration was eventually forced to admit this. Did you mean to imply that Al Qaeda would replace Saddam Hussein? First, this would only be possible because of the invasion. Second, it implies that Al Qaeda would be able to co-opt the entire Bath political and security structure. This is again a glaring contradiction since it implies wholesale conversion of the Sunni from a secular to a fundamentalist ideology. Thirdly, what about the Shia majority and their allies in Iran? Do you honestly believe they would acquiesce to an Al Qaeda take-over in Iraq?

The invasion of Iraq has rescued Al Qaeda from oblivion and given them credibility they could never have achieved on their own. I am astonish that you could defend such a devastating error.