« KS lawmakers vote to abolish franchise tax |
| FDA lab update »
02:44 PM in Open threads | Permalink
February 13, 2007 at 09:48 AM
BPA - Are you purposely ignoring history and the very confirmations of the present administration? You stated:
"In your analogy, you failed to mention that the guy that killed your family is in the same 'gang' as the guy that you have disliked for so long."
What you are ignoring is that the present administration has admitted that Irag and Sadam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11.
You also claim to lump Sadam and Al Qaida in the same "gang" simply because they are Sunni. Not only is your logic a rash generalization, but it is way off the mark. Sadam, although a Sunni, was opposed to theocreatic rule. That's like saying I'm in the same "gang" as Jerry Falwell just because I'm a Christian.
Afghanistan was coming under control and the U.S. had a real opportunity to maintain a presence, track down a mass murderer and assist the Afghanis in creating a stable government. Instead, we diverted our mission and chose to invade a country controlled by a dictator rendered powerless by more than a decade of suffocating sanctions. By the way, Irag was offering very little, if any support or participation in Afghanistan, while our "ally" Pakistan was offering the Taliban and Al Qaida support and protection through its military and police.
February 13, 2007 at 10:52 AM
It is important to realize that apologists for the war in Iraq, like our good friend BeProudAmerica, cannot be bothered by the facts.
Like Colbert, he feels the truth in his gut. For such people, truthiness is all that is need, and our good friend "knows" what is truthful.
Notice the complete absence of any "facts" on the connection between Iraq and Al Quaeda.
Old Drum |
February 13, 2007 at 11:10 AM
Well said Old Drum and Mike!
There were actually more connections between our government and Iraq than between Iraq and Al Qeuada. I stand by my analogy as it was made BEFORE the invasion started and much of what I predicted came true.
Saddam was indeed a ruthless leader and the world is a better place without him. My question is, was it worth over a trillion dollars of our childrens' money, more American lives than were lost on 9/11, hundreds of thousands of destroyed Iraqi lives, lost world respect/admiration and a commitment of troops that will likely exceed five years all at the expense of being able to use our military to protect our interests overseas and our National Guard to be there for us at times of national emergencies/disasters? I say no.
February 13, 2007 at 02:43 PM
John Fairfield for Mayor!
February 13, 2007 at 09:41 PM
I'm new here, just wanted to say hello and introduce myself.
August 16, 2008 at 11:02 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.