Re: Somehow No One Seems To Think

In article <f72fbcb3-1895-4b26-bfdd-ab9674c0f8b8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Bill C <tritonrider@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Howard we agree that the handful of folks on the anti-war side had it
right in the beginning. The vast majority, including lots of folks on
the left bought the cooked intel, and the UN's miserable failure to
get transparent cooperation. As TK has pointed out a lot of Clinton
officials were making a lot of the same arguments before Bush came in.

Yes, and lots of people have pointed out again and again, that, in spite of the
comments by Clinton and Clinton associates, they didn't believe it rose to the level
of invading Iraq. Looks like they were right.

The fact that Hussein tried to keep everyone guessing what he had did
him in. Maybe it was foresight, maybe it was just prejudice and dumb
luck that the anti-war folks were right this time when lots of
knowledgeable, experienced people that totally disagree with Bush were
fooled too.

Ah, I see, the lefties just happened by dumb luck to predict that there was going
to be enormous amounts of sectarian violence and strife or that it would turn the
entire Middle East upside down or that it would have enormous negative influence on
the US' standings in the world.

You and I obviously take note of, and see things in a different light
on those blogs you are talking about. I admit I'm reading them, and
inclined to a critical point of view. You will never admit to the rose
colored glasses.

Oh, horse***. What you call "rose colored glasses" is actually that I don't look
for the secret "Hate the babykillers, Destroy the US, Blame America First" agenda
that you do. I read the words and interpret what's actually there. OF course, I have
to be honest, I seriously doubt you spend much time reading leftie blogs unless
you're searching for another Ward Connerly.

As for the withdrawal disaster. You might find it offensive, you also
have denied that the withdrawal from Vietnam was a disaster for a ton
of people.

Really? I have? Huh, I wonder where those statements are, Bill. Maybe they're the
same place as my statements about Israel being war criminals. Try being less of a
strawman builder. As for what was offensive, here's your statement:
_____________
"We support you is a slogan, that's got to be combined with something other than
what you are doing is useless, worthless, and we're going to totally destroy any good
you've done by re-enacting Vietnam.
"It happened once, and Obama in particular, along with the anti-war
movement wants a replay."
_____________

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/msg/40e72e8c12095f55

What you're saying is that an entire segment of the population (at last count,
over 65% oppose the war) are traitors and want the US to be seen as a failurre in the
eyes of the world. Sorry, but that is pure bull***. You completely mischaracterise

Obama and the anti-war folks are insisting on pulling the troops out
ASAP with little to no regard to the situation on the ground. The
Iraqis, and a ton of others have repeatedly voiced the same concerns
and accusations I am.

By "the Iraqis" you mean people like Chalabi and company. In interviews with
regular Iraqis, the concensus is that they want us gone. Examples here:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/03/26/iraq_debate/

We shouldn't be there. Bush stuck us there. We can't just pull out,
leave a power vacuum, and then ignore the results, again.

It already *is* a power vacuum. As I've said (and these are words that can be
found), yes we broke it, we bought it could apply. But there is a point where doing
the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is a good definition of
"stupid." And staying there while the same thing keeps happening will gain nothing.


If you find it offensive, I find what was done to our troops, our
allies there, and the people still living in Vietnam really offensive.

And it's all the fault of those elitist liberals...

What you're doing with all this is a textbook case of dolchstosslegende - the
"stabbed in the back" myth that was first popularized after WWI by the Germans. The
war had been lost because the soldiers had been undermined by the civilians behind
the lines, according to people like von Hindenburg and von Ludendorff. Yeah, we
woulda won in 'Nam if we hadn't been stabbed in the back by the traitorous hippies.
We woulda won in Iraq if we hadn't been stabbed in the back by those same dirty
traitorous hippies who are now in Congress and their dirty fucking hippie kids.
Whatever...

--
tanx,
Howard

Whatever happened to
Leon Trotsky?
He got an icepick
That made his ears burn.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
.

Loading