democrats
One of the founding principles of this country was to give the citizens and the media the power to air their grievances with the government, yet this author, dubiously claiming to be a "patriot," is twisting the actions of those exercising this right as "treason." Perhaps Mr. Alexander should look up the definition of "treason" before wrapping himself in the American Flag while spouting fascist rhetoric.
Seriously, do you guys expect anyone to believe this "left wing conspiracy" crap anymore? You wonder why people don't take conservatives seriously? Because you guys all failed debate class. All you ever do is resort to name-calling (anything without a conservative slant is "leftist, socialist, marxist, or progressive").
The government is taking away your rights. They're spying on you without warrant or probable cause. They're suspending habeas corpus. The people who claim to want to "shrink" government are the ones who increase its size the most. They want to turn this republic into a new Roman Empire when we don't have the moral right or even the funds to do so. The founding fathers would be ashamed of this.
What do you do? You roll over on your backs and beg the government for more! "Please government! Take more of our rights away! Take as many as you can! Just don't take away our gas grills and HDTVs and we'll be okay! Anything to keep us safe from the terrorists!" What cowards. What sniveling, whining, fearful cowards. In this nation, we used to roar like lions for liberty, now we bleat like sheep for safety. Unfortunately, those who give up the former for the latter will end up with neither, according to Ben Franklin anyway.
Quit blaming democrats and dissenters for your failures in Iraq. We shouldn't be there in the first place. We've already spent 10 times what we spent in Vietnam, and the cost in lives has been tragic. But I guess you guys can't go a couple decades without slaughtering brown people can you?
The purpose of the Iraq war was to line the pockets of George W Bush's oil buddies, nothing more. There were no weapons of mass destruction. Iraq was no threat. ...
We've already spent 10 times what we spent in Vietnam, and the cost in lives has been tragic.
I guess Ann Coulter is correct: Liberals Lie!
The Dems and Bush reacted to the same Intelligence of the time. Even President Clinton understood that Saddam Hussein was dangerous but did not have the cajones to do what GW did. Clinton's awareness of Iraq and transnational terrorists may never be completely known because the treasonous Dem used his security clearance to destroy classified material related to Clinton.
Whether or not the validity of WMD in Iraq is actual or mystified is irrelevant. The fact remains Hussein has shown in the past no hesitation to attack his neighbors for hegemonic gain and profit (with Iran the US aided him and with Kuwait we were against him). This is not to mention the brutality that Hussein and his psycho-sons inflicted on Iraqi citizens. Even now in 2008 mass graves of slaughtered men, women and children are haphazardly stumbled upon.
The only reason the U.S. does not send a military force to remove the butchering Arab Muslims from Sudan is the Islamic world would wrongly perceive it as an attack on Islam. Western nations even with the potential of their combined power to remove the current Sudanese government fear the Islamic reaction (The West is dominated by Left Wing cowering dhimmis). The genocide against Black Muslims in Darfur and Black Christians in Southern Sudan is enough reason to take out the regime. It is a demonstration of dhimmification of the U.N. and the protection of Communist Chinese that such action is not even close to being a consideration.
As far as oil goes: duh!! Are you an American or a dimwitted American? Islamists (though a growing minority in the Middle East) run the perceptions of America. If Islamists control oil in Iraq as well as oil in Iran and the Saudi Monarchy is a sneeze away from joining the Shah of Iran's fate. How do you think the National Interests of America would be affected if Islamists controlled the life blood of the World's economy? Can you say convert or no oil? That would mess up the Dems utopian delusional vision on how we should respect what happens in another nation's internal affairs.
As for the Iraq and Vietnam comparisons, the only thing valid that you have asserted is the unpopularity (forged into the minds by a Leftist MSM ignoring other facts and the Dems exploiting the non-reported facts) of the Iraq War in America.
So in essence Moralnilhilist, you are full of manure. I leave it to you decide what kind.
You mean the intelligence that was cooked up by the Bush administration in the first place? Those Aspirin factories Colin Powell said were chemical weapon sites and then they turned out to be....aspirin factories? Also, grow the fuck up. I can tell you haven't been to war. You're just one of those armchair warmongers that think this world is your own personal sandbox. It's sad how detached Americans can be about it. Too many of us think war is all cowboys and indians, and manliness and BAWLS TO THE WAWL YEEEEEEEEEEEHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!
Americans are spoiled. Most of us have never lived in a war zone, have never had to defend our turf with our lives. You may think Europeans are wimps for avoiding war, but they know a HELL of a lot more about it than we do. They LIVED it. Many of those alive today remember vividly the Nazi occupations, the fighting in the streets, and the death camps. Meanwhile here in the grand ol' USA safely across the ocean the worst we had to endure were rubber rations and war bonds.
War is fucking serious shit. People fucking die, if they lucky. If they're not lucky they get a leg blown off or an eye gouged out, or worse. That's why, when you send our soldiers into harm's way, it better be for a damned good reason. Iraq does not qualify for a damned good reason.
You blame Clinton for not doing enough, but it's real funny how you forgot how conservatives were condemning him for being too aggressive back in the 90s. If you remember, Bush ran a campaign of humble foreign policy, and no nation-building. Then he turned around and used 9/11 as an excuse to do just that. Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11, nothing to do with terrorists. The only reason Al-Quaida is there now is because we're there now. Our foreign policy is to blame for 9/11. We made Osama Bin Laden (who Bush still hasn't caught) what he is. We even made Saddam Hussein what he is. If we adopted the foreign policy of the founding fathers, 9/11 would never have happened.
You're preaching to the choir about how evil Saddam Hussein was, and if that were a reason given going in, maybe the war would have a bit more support. But I think singling out Saddam was a bit hypocritical. Kim Jong Il has, repeatedly, openly threatened the United States with nuclear weapons. I don't think anybody doubts that he's crazy enough to use them as well. The funny thing is the North Korean dictator was openly threatening us with nuclear war just before the Iraq invasion yet Bush chose "diplomacy." If I were Iran, I'd sure as HELL want nuclear weapons, it's the only way to get the US to leave you alone!
How do you think the National Interests of America would be affected if Islamists controlled the life blood of the World's economy?
Here's a little clue for you: Islamists already control the lifeblood of the world's economy! Here's where the hypocrisy is strongest. Saudi Arabia is one of THE hotbeds of terrorism in the middle east! It is the home of Al-Quaida and Osama Bin Laden. It houses Mecca, the holiest city in the Muslim world. It is one of the most oppressive regeimes in the world as well......and we're in bed with them! We're their biggest customer! If this war really were about terrorism, we would have invaded Saudi Arabia a long time ago.
Free Images on FreeCommentTags.com