[ex-snook]

We need overwhelming force. Next month is the anniversary of the D-Day offensive and less than one year later, the war against Germany was over. For over a year now, we have used the finest troops and strongest equipment the world has ever known. Yet we have been fighting two wars without victory in either. AQ and Iraq opposition are stronger. The terror alert flag is unchanged, even elevated at times. Bad intelligence, perhaps even dirty-tricks, permeate our decisions.

If Bush still believes that Islam and the axis of evil are WW III threats like WW II, he needs to propose more than his present methods. After Iraq, he still has Iran, Syria and North Korea to defeat. He has to mobilize the nation for a multi-front effort, recruit millions of military, send Rosie the Riveter back to war production with in-sourced factories, ration oil and start War Bond drives. If Bush wants to win the war completely with least casualties in the shortest time, he has to commit the nation like Roosevelt did. That's how you win wars. Anything less is just slouching toward defeat.

[CWOJackson]

Thanks for proving my point...I said earlier that the press and our own anti-war loonies wouldn't wait for his speech before spouting their pathetic talking points.