To: Dominic Harr
How is it suddenly 2,500 dead over years is a 'disaster'?
It's a disaster when there's no need for the 2500+ to be dead. I'm sorry, but your condescending remark is no different than Kerry's in my opinion. Rumfeld's policies and actions towards the military are more reflective of Kerry elitism than support for the troops.
posted on 11/02/2006 8:46:09 AM PST
(From where the sun now sits, I will fight on -FOREVER!!!)
It's a disaster when there's no need for the 2500+ to be dead.
It's a bridgehead against the terrorists. A 'target of opportunity'.
We picked the time and place for the battle, chose ground we want to fight on.
We took the battle *to* the enemy, and have now not been attacked on our soil in years.
The Iraq war is a cause celeb for the terrorists. They all want to go fight there. This is a *brilliant* and successful strategy.
posted on 11/02/2006 8:50:45 AM PST
by Dominic Harr
(Conservative: The "ant", to a liberal's "grasshopper".)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson