There isn't. But for you to say that the Iraqi government we are protecting right now will never be even remotely democratic only shows you too are ignorant of the situation. We are staying until the new government can police itself effectively and defend itself in the event that such an uprising does happen.[/quote]As evidenced by what happened in London yesterday and 9-11, not to mention previously in other places, it's pretty obvious that these terrorists are crazy enough and have enough backing to try and overthrow the new government. What I'm wondering is...can they be stopped by trained Iraqis? Can they protect themselves without our constant supervision? I'm not so sure they can.

Oh boy.

Listen, I never stated I hate the military, on the contrary, you deserve the praise for being there and fighting for us. BUT...

You have to admit that idiots like England and Graner have tarnished the military's reputation. If I was inclined to label the entire military as ruthless killers, I would've done so. But I didn't, because I don't believe it to be true. I didn't single you out, or any other decent soldier. I was merely picking out the bad apples. You're free to take that as being directed at you, but you would be wrong. I'm not gonna question what you do personally, but I will question the actions and motives of the bad apples and the Bush adminstration in this whole mess. I believe that's what cpausti is doing as well.

---
Think classy, you'll be classy.

I'll quote myself.
[quote]While I do generally consider myself someone who "supports the troops", I've always been a bit reluctant to buy into the line of thinking that we must blindly support our military simply because its our military. I support the individuals who signed up because they wanted a way to lift themselves into a better position in life.

...

I really hope that these acts are only representative of a very small fraction of our military. Well-rounded soldiers like HCRoyall do not deserve to be surrounded by these things.[/quote]
I'm pretty sure this post made it clear that I don't hate the military, just, as niteowl said, the bad apples.

That was me saying "yes, I know you have no choice in the matter." I even called you well-rounded, placing you high above the bad soldiers. When I say I don't support the military, I'm not saying I don't support the (as stated above)individuals who wanted a way to lift themselves up to a better position in life, such as yourself:

but that I do indeed oppose the powers which control you.

You said at least Spankling has intelligent points to make. He/she said the abriged version of what I believe.

You called niteowl ignorant for believing that the powers who destroyed the WTC will be able to overthrow the, as YOU called them, practically untrainable.

I have said that we need an exit strategy, however I never, ever said we should clean up and bail. Our current strategy is to train them, and then just leave? Niteowl is perfectly correct in his/her belief that we will not be able to do that. My stating that we need an exit strategy was out of quick response, and I apologize. We have dug ourselves into a hole too deep to climb out of. We're training a country for combat that is in the heart of an area that hates us.

You want facts?
Here.
More.
"But, just this spring, Alberto Gonzales, our own Attorney General, opened the door to torture when he stated, 'The Geneva Conventions are quaint: They are obsolete.'"

Looking forward to it.

---
all the wrong things for all the right reasons

A useful distinction in discussions of war:

1. A person serving in the military.

2. The decision to deploy that person for combat.

With this distinction, it is easy to "support our troops" while opposing the war.

I'm sure the point's been made, but it's not exactly in sharp focus now.

---
What others say about boorite!

I support Greg Proops.

March 20, 2003 - June 16, 2005.

---
"Jelly-belly gigglin, dancin and a-wigglin, honey that's the way I am!" Janice the Muppet

Powerful stuff.

Then again, I'm sure the conservatives would be glad to develop a map of innocent Iraqis slaughtered by Saddam. Or else, that's what I think they might do if they had an ounce of creativity.

---
"And Wirthling isn't worth the paper he isn't printed on."

Powerful stuff.

Then again, I'm sure the conservatives would be glad to develop a map of innocent Iraqis slaughtered by Saddam. Or else, that's what I think they might do if they had an ounce of creativity.[/quote]

To which it would be easy to respond that Washington is behaving like Saddam.

---
What others say about boorite!

Last I checked, Washington didn't kill 400,000 civilians! Er, not in Iraq, anyway.

The we DO have a goal. Good to know.

---
"Jelly-belly gigglin, dancin and a-wigglin, honey that's the way I am!" Janice the Muppet

How many civilians do you have to kill before you're behaving like Saddam?

---
What others say about boorite!

400,000.

So a scale model of a plane doesn't look "like" a plane?

---
What others say about boorite!

About damn time!
...
...
...
Oops, I meant this one

---
Please replace the handset, and try again.

Hooray to the first link. I don't understand the second one, who's Ira?

---
Dad was flammable

He did the music for the Naked Gun films.

---
Please replace the handset, and try again.

Hey, its all for freedom, so shut up!

---
"Jelly-belly gigglin, dancin and a-wigglin, honey that's the way I am!" Janice the Muppet

[Click to view comic: 'Who's Daffy?']

---
ken.kaufman@gmail.com

True, the 260,000 redcoats and 40,000 hessians were not civilians. The 100,ooo indians were, not sure about the french, but then there's the cherry tree.

---
woof

[Click to view comic: 'I'm Not Really Political']

---
Mediocrity at its most average.

Hey Nathan, what am I, politically? I've been saying Libertarian, but I don't think that's quite right.
---
Here's a quick quiz to see where you are politically.
(i realize the comic might have been just to set up the punchline)
http://www.lp.org/quiz
Myself, i'm dogmaticly (woof) Libertarian, former chair of the missouri libertarian party.

---
woof

Actually, that comic was an actual conversation that went like this:

(Some kind of boring discussion about George Bush)

Gia: I'm not even really sure where I stand, politically. I told (name witheld) yesterday that I was Libritarian, but I don't think that's really what I am.

Nathan: Well, you're an independent. You vote for who you think is right for the job, and just ignore those little letters next to their name, right? That makes you an independent.

Gia: Yeah, I guess. What was Howard Dean?

Nathan: Democrat.

Gia: That's right. I like Howard Dean, he's really excitable.

Nathan: You know that Howard Dean is the chairperson for the democratic committee, right?

Gia: He is? (Throws arms in the air, waving them back and forth) Whoo-hoo! Go Democrats!

Nathan: Shouldn't that be YEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAUUUGGGHHHHHH! Go Democrats?

(My brother emerges from his cave in the basement)

My brother: What's going on?

Gia: I'm a democrat now.

My brother: That's nice. Do you have any ice cream up here?

---
Mediocrity at its most average.

My thread lives.

...and George W. Bush is a poopyhead.

---
This signature has performed an illegal operation and has been shut down.

Hail DexX!

Chicka's bro has the right attitude towards politics and politicians.

Uh, that's all, I had a link but I left the back door open and...

---
Please replace the handset, and try again.

And yet the titular question still hasn't really been answered.*

*I just wanted an excuse to say "titular".

Indeed. (See sig.)

---
I was gonna send a robot back in time, but I got high.

[quote]My thread lives.

...and George W. Bush is a poopyhead.[/quote]

YOU live, my friend!

---
"Jelly-belly gigglin, dancin and a-wigglin, honey that's the way I am!" Janice the Muppet