You regard the American 3000 as chump change compared to what Iraqis have suffered and then add that at least 90,000 dead in Iraq since we invaded, you make the predictable omission of the multiple times 90,000 tortured and killed under Saddam during a similar period of time. Of course this isn’t your concern and focus, Bush the enemy is. Where does your concern take you, content with what was happening to the Iraqis before, or just blaming the US? Is this humanitarian? Maybe you can point more and more useless fingers at the US but when someone like President Bush at least has the guts to do something and despite mistakes, on average or “technically” as you might say, no worse than any other War, he has made things measurably better for the Iraqis then pre-Saddam. You argue as if the people would be better off with Saddam, yes that is what you are arguing because that is the way it would be.
These people of Iraq have been saved and are clearly better off now than before. How better off where the Vietnamese, Cambodians and Laotians when we prematurely washed our hands of Vietnam? One can argue whether we should have gone in to begin with but that point is mute, trying to reverse history always leads to worse failures, we were in Vietnam, we are in Iraq, and we have responsibilities. What would it have been like if one of the people most politically responsible for this bailing of responsibilities had become President (KERRY)? Like I said this is a test for the left, not for the right and I don’t care how much you focus on what you think are indisputable failures, the left is failing the test even worse. We are in Iraq and the left offers to compound the failures, what are the solutions from here out? This is why the public, stupid or not, in the end don’t trust the left on such matters. By the lefts standards every War where we didn’t cut and run would be was a colossal failure riddled with unforgivable errors by the Commander and Chief… well clearly war is a failure of mankind but as long as there are humans we will have them. Liberals act as if War is an option we can always negotiate away and while you navel gaze the world moves on and shit happens, like Georgia.
Concerning Russia’s invasion of Georgia I hear Barak say “both sides better be careful” he then sticks his finger in the wind and revises his statement. Does he have a core belief or are his true beliefs masked because they are unacceptable, especially on Security matters, or does his flip flopping on such issues indicate he is less prepared to lead? This guy didn’t even have the judgment to get the hell away from Jeremiah Wright and a host of other nutcases, was his association with them due to cynical needs for street cred among blacks, money, or does he actually believe these things? All point to deep flaws. I voted for Hillary and would of supported her in the general election but in no way would vote for Barak.
You can lay 9/11 at Bush’s feat all you want but shit happens and we all argued about what to do after 9/11. The whole Congress, Democrat and Republican decided what to do and the Democrats did everything they could at first to give tepid support, then two faced support (I voted against it before I voted for it) to downright undermining the process they collectively voted to support. They can’t even admit the level of success the surge has attained because they are so politically committed to its failure. Again this is a test for the left not the right. Once the debate has ended and we have made our choice, we went into Iraq with overwhelming Congressional support. The left talks about concern for human rights yet turn a blind eye to the facts when politically expedient. You did it in ascribing Iraqis plight to Bush without acknowledging their Saddam days of a terror as being much worse, it was also done when the left callously ignored the consequences and followed Kerry’s dimwitted pronouncement that there would be no genocide when we cut support to Vietnam, tell this to the Cambodians, Laotian and Vietnamese.
The left loves to criticize action, yes War is hell but you have only bickering to offer. Barak’s “we’ll sit down and talk to the tyrants” is a joke and people know it. Barack’s “both sides should be careful” is also joke and people know it. He should win in a landslide but if he doesn’t don’t fall into your people are stupid routine as such arrogance is ugly, your arguments are one sided but then again you know this. You are indeed everything you project upon those you demean. Like the rest of the left, you need to learn to accept disagreement as something less then sinister, and also with more grace.
