God Bless you and your missions.
Wanted you to know that there are many of us behind BOTH.
Now to dean.
Had to do it, didn't you?
Well, I can't let our fighting brethren think that some of us cannot connect the dots.
"Apologies buff if some of us above took your question rather flippantly. It's just that we have discussed the topic on this forum many times. If you scroll through the past threads in the Politics forum you will be able to read screeds on our views."
"And gocav, while I respect the work you are doing and that you are putting your life on the line, to say that no one is entitled to an opinion unless they are actually in the thick of it like you are, is bull."
However, YOU are in a much better position to accurately judge the situation. We suffer through the filter of the media. Many of us practically BEG returning soldiers to give us the real story. That is why I sincerely hope you guys drop in from time to time and educate us.
"We all read, and listen, and draw our own conclusions. And that goes both ways. Those against, and those for, because the men who decided you would go there, did not make that decision along side you in Iraq. They made that decision in a comfortable Washington office."
Dumb statement. The days of Henry V are over. The last major official that I can think of that pushed a war, resigned his elected position and went off to War was Teddy Roosevelt in 1898. I didn't see FDR at Iwo. Missed billyboy when the bombs fell on the Aspirin factory. Where was Lyndon during the Tet Offensive.
"Dastang, good work you are doing. This is one part of the site where virtually everyone, I would say, does know where Kosovo is."
"Now as to Iraq. My personal view is that I am opposed men like yourselves risking your lives for a war I do not think was entirely justified."
I am very proud of you men fighting a war that was not only justified but inevitable. I was either going to be Germany in 1932 or in 1941.
"Comparisons with Hitler are incorrect."
They are right on. Every brutual, expansionist characteristic was present and active.
"Saddam had no more plans for territorial expansion."
Wrong. Read Duefler. On his way to reconstituting his weapons of mass destruction program. What for? Ask his captured regime members. They have said he was on his way to further conquests. Besides, who in the hell would think that after invading Iran, Kuwait, and firing missles on Israel, that this guy was going to stop?
"His armed forces had never recovered from the first Gulf War."
"He had no WMDs."
Yes he did. Apparently, no obvious stockpiles. He had a nascent weapons program that was being increasingly funded every year.
"Iraq does not further the war on Terror either."
Front line of the war on terror.
Not to mention the concept of deterrance.
Anyone else glad to have a burgeoning ally NEXT DOOR to Iran right about now?
See hostage taker as President.
"It may make our terror problem worse in the future."
Actually, it has already helped. See Pakistan offensives. See Libya voluntarily relinquishing WMD. They understand deterrance.
"Now as to the point made that a vicious dictator has been removed from power, there are tons of vicious dictators and evil regimes in the world. Do we go after them all?"
Do we have to go after them all?
See Libya and the concept of deterrance.
This is on of the most ignorant dem positions taken. It's like saying, "I'm a patient with Lupus, Brain Cancer, Diabetes, and a ruptured gall bladder. No Doctor, you cannot fix my gall bladder unless you fix all the others RIGHT NOW."
"Or just the ones with oil?"
HALLIBURTON RULES THE WORLD!!!
"Or the ones we have a ten year old score to settle with? Or do we just do it to be a 'War President'. Or to outdo daddy?"
Jesus, that is so irresponsible as to make comment difficult.
"And is it right to fabricate intelligence to begin this war?"
"And is it right to go on about 'liberating the people of Iraq' when this was not our initial intention?"
It certainly was one of the major aims. See the 2002 speech of W. that I posted for you. I would appreciate the courtesy of reading material that I lay out.
"It is great that the people of Iraq have been freed from Saddam, but this was not promoted as a reason to begin the war."
That is absolutely false. See speech.
"And is it right to create an illusion in Americans minds that Al Qaeda and Iraq were somehow the same thing, when before the US invaded this was patently not true?"
You are dead wrong. zarqawi was harbored and protected by saddam. You knew (from not reading my material) that the King of Jordan asked saddam to extradite zarqawi BEFORE THE WAR and saddam refused. AKA harboring. Or do you maintain that zarqawi isn't al qaeda?
"And why are we diverting resources away from looking for Osama Bin Laden, the real perpetrator of 9/11?"
Everyone raise their hands if you think that more troops are the answer?
Ask Porter Goss about it. He'll tell you it isn't troop numbers, it's getting Pakistan to allow troops in to get bin laden. How would more troops have helped that?
"When you weigh everything up, the only good to come out of the Iraq war is that Iraq's people are free now. But the damage caused to the US's position in the world, the creation of future terrorists, the death and destruction, have been too much of a cost."
Wrong. Identified our REAL allies. Disrupted, killed, captured, removed, deterred terrorists and terrorist supporting regimes all over the planet.
Inspired trust in our ability to stay the course. Lived up to our ideals of promoting Democracy. Undid a wrong (arming saddam).
Again, I want you guys to know that what you see on the media is as misrepresentative of Americans as it is of the War in Iraq. Don't forget that most of the media don't bother to feign objectivity.
We are behind you and your mission.