The email for Letters to the Editor is editor@tribmail.com (250 word limit).
No projectile vomit alert?
Well, he is correct in his assessment of the Clintons but woefully, foolishly and embarrassingly naive about Obama.
Yep! A man of peace, like all good Muslims are.
I take it that Mr Shipp is referring to McCains "bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran" quip.
Here is a clue Shippweed... Iran started a war with us in 1979 and they are still at it now.
Obama is our only hope for peace in Middle East (Obama man of peace, like Lincoln, says reader)
a man of peace....a man from the religion of peace.....which is the truth????
Obama wants to expand troop presence in Afghanistan. Am I reading the article correctly that the author doesn’t understand these are two separate fronts?
I have to find the link that states unequivocally that Obama will go into Pakistan - a nuclear country - with or without their permission should they not cooperate on Bin Laden.
There was no war in Lincoln's time!
He was a man of peace, especially after he was assassinated.
Independent-minded conservatives know these things.
And my patriotic duty is to support America and all she stands for - including Michelle Obama’s many blessings - which would mean not supporting her husband.
A true man of peace would have to be the strongest, toughest man in the region. A bowling score of 37 doesn’t contribute to a perception of the candidate as one of those.
really?
Obama’s Campain Coordinator on Iraq, Colin Kahl,“Stay on Success: A Policy of Conditional Engagement,”.“the U.S. should aim to transition to a sustainable over-watch posture (of perhaps 60,000–80,000 forces) by the end of 2010 (although the specific timelines should be the byproduct of negotiations and conditions on the ground).”
Obama may have claimed he was against the war from the start but was he always against leaving troops?
Answer: NO!!!
Obama July ‘04 to the CSM,
“the United States has an “absolute obligation” to remain in Iraq long enough to make it a success.”
“The failure of the Iraqi state would be a disaster,”.”It would dishonor the 900-plus men and women who have already died. . . . It would be a betrayal of the promise that we made to the Iraqi people, and it would be hugely destabilizing from a national security perspective.”
A degenerate.
But then again R2D2's speakers kind of suck. No mid-range.
That minor scuffle during Lincoln’s peaceful time in office only resulted in almost 600,000 military deaths. I don’t think we need another one of those — although Barak’s election might lead to one.
He shall cause the lion to lay down with the lamb.
Obama ME peace = forsake Israel and let the Pali’s run wild...
Bringing the troops home before the mission is done will cause mayhem beyond our imaginations.
Does that idiot (and the minions who follow his garbage) think that bringing the troops home now will just automatically achieve peace? ow, I wonder? Is it OK if Iran and its findamental, militant Islamic rule just spreads that into Iraq? Will it be an accomplishment to let al Qaeda rebuild and run rampant?
Some people watch too much cable TV.