No one on the American right enjoys sending 'the kids' (by the way, they're Men and Women; at least afford them that respect) off to get shot at. The majority of us on the American Right are heterosexual and inculcate our children with Patriotic Ideals. You should realize that these, by and large, are *our* children that you're talking about.
And you love them so much that you're out protesting in the streets that we're sending them into harm's way for reasons that are dubious at best. Oh wait. You're not. If you're not demanding, immediately, that the "men and women" (I don't know the demographics off hand, but lots and lots of the US infantry are in their teens and early 20s [those are kids, considering that many of them can't even buy alcohol]...just look at the casualty reports) be brought home and out of harm's way, then you must therefore want them to get shot at.
So then, if you think that they're worth losing in this battle, then you must therefore think that Iraqi lives/freedoms are worth more than American lives (since, of course, you don't think it's sufficient to let the Iraqis work out their own problems)? I'm with you! American lives must be lost for Iraqi freedom! We must sacrifice our sons and daughters so the Iraqis can be free! And if they rise up against us, we'll sacrifice MORE sons and daughters so they can be free!
Maybe you're out protesting in the streets that we're becoming the world's policemen? Nope? We should sacrifice MORE of our sons and daughters, of our husbands and wives, all around the world, to ensure that they are free!
From time to time it is necessary to unleash the nation's warriors on the nation's enemies so that they can cut the enemy to pieces.
It is necessary because some people like to see our sons and daughters get shot at. No? Then it's necessary because those in power lack the imagination to come up with solutions that don't put our sons and daughters in danger. Or perhaps because they secretly like to watch them get shot at. Or killed.
Happily, we're no longer waiting around for the enemy to get strong enough to hit us; we're going out and stabbing the f**ker in the heart before he has the chance to do it to us. In short, we're not sending our brave men and women off to get shot at; we're sending them off to do the shooting.
You'r'e kidding, right? You're suggesting that our brave men and women aren't getting shot at? That that's not part of the bargain? Of COURSE they're getting shot at. And we choose to put them in harm's way. And because we've chosen it, it is either a) because we like to see it or b) because we lack the imagination to come up with a way to avoid it.
And anyone who's not out there demanding that the soldiers come home is de facto
supporting them getting shot at and possibly killed.
I'm not even going to TOUCH the "no longer" bit. Like we've always waited around.
But at least you seem to agree with the idea that that link describing life in Iraq closely matches The Left's Ideal; The Leftist's 'The Way Things Ought To Be'. Wasn't that a peachy picture?
I have no idea what you're talking about. You're the one supporting an administration that demands that all kinds of documents be kept secret, and that locks up American citizens without charging them or providing them access to a lawyer. You're the one supporting an administration that wants to tap your phones and read your email. You're the one who's supporting an invasion of another country. You're the one who wants us to be the world's policeman. You're the one who wants us to send the kids in to get shot at.
That hardly seems patriotic or American.
I'll bet Hillary Clinton would love to have all of us under that kind of power.
I have no idea why you brought this up. Shoudl I start bringing up the Klan and suggesting that they're representative of your political beliefs?
PS As I write this, American forces on the ground report seeing the skyline of Baghdad. Press on! And don't forget the ChemBio Equipment! [/B]
You're urging on an urban war with the possible use of chemical weapons?