[beanball]

is it unamerican to be antiwar.?

[Ben Mugged]

No, but it is unamerican to attack a sitting president prosecuting a war that was authorized by congress by fabricating rationale for articles of impeachment and distracting Americans from the task at hand. The task at hand? Defeating radical islamist terrorism.

[rdb3]

Two posts in just over two years. That's interesting.

[KStorm]

It isn't wrong to be anti-war, but our enemies aren't anti-war. The anti-war position in this case implies that Americans are, by and large, expendable.

[vharlow]

It's unamerican to claim to have been mislead when what has actually been said, the exact words, have been repeated over and over and over and no lie was involved. If you claim to have been mislead, I suggest bettering your education, because you fail to understand our own language. It is also an admission of stupidity to claim to have been misled under the circumstances. Why not just say, "I've been told over and over I've been misled, so I believe it! Even though the actual words expressed demonstrate clearly that I could only be misled if I don't understand clear english."

I suppose I'm being harsh, but if you accept that you've been misled by the government, you are accepting what you have been told by the democrats that are pushing this line --- that you are too ignorant to understand what's going on, so just think what we want you to think! That's their rationale, isn't it?

Being antiwar because war is terrible is one thing, being antiBush, or anti-war-on-terrorism because those on the left think you are stupid and keep telling you so is another. War is a terrible thing. There's not a single person denying that. There are no war lovers here. We are, in fact, all antiwar. But we didn't start it, and if we don't fight there, we will be fighting HERE. I guess that's not clear to the leftists.

[L98Fiero]

"is it unamerican to be antiwar.?"

I would not say it was un-American. However, the "Anti-war" crowd sees "peace" as the end-all be-all of human existence. They think a lack of warfare and "peace" are synomynous. I happen to believe that freedom and liberty are far more noble goals than simply "peace". Freedom and liberty are claimed through force of arms. "Peace" has never freed a people from tyranny, abolished slavery, or removed violent despots. To be blanketly "anti-war" is to appose freedom and liberty for those who don't have it.

[curtisgardner]

That has nothing to do with what i wrote. Why dont you read what i wrote before you respond or just dont do it at all.