After you, Senator McCain.

Please! Someone give this guy some toys to play with so he doesn't bother the grownups!

McPain still doesn't know he lost his bit to be the President. He's just a political hack. I don't pay any attention to anything that he says.

Is McCaine trying to position himself as more of a hawk than Bush!?

It pisses me off when people like McCaine, who know more than they should, spout off opinions just to get themselves on TV, and risk 'telegraphing' the strategies of the president and DoD.

McCaine is in the Legislative branch of the federal government, and has no business interfering with the day to day duties of the Executive branch of the federal government.

McCaine needs to [be?] shut up before he kills American troops by yapping his motor mouth!

I didn't vote for McCain, but I think he's on the money now. Andrew Card sounded like a total weenie on this morning's talk shows. When asked why anyone would trust us over there after we failed to protect Haq, Card says something like "well, we think they'll want to be on the side that's right." Give me a ******* break!

I have been a huge Bush supporter, but I think he and his advisors are squandering the unprecidented support they've been given by the American people. I'm really beginning to believe they are afraid to do what is necessary to win this war.

Please enlighten me with your military expertise...

1. What defeated the Soviets was American aid to the Afghans along with their desire to occupy the country.

2. "Starve 'em out"? I don't think we have the will or the guts to do this.

I'm sorry, but as long as we keep apologizing for every d*mn civilian death, we don't have what it takes to win.

People don't need military expertise to sense when things are going badly. You can scoff if you like, but if our leaders don't pick up the pace quickly, Americans are going to beginning wondering what the h*** is going on. When that happens, watch for Bush's numbers to sink.

He will disagree with whatever Bush does. Sore Loserman is a class act compared to McLoserman.

Please go away, we've sufferred enough!

A couple of things:

1) Our armed forces are not made up of unhappy, unprofessional, conscripts as the Soviet Army was.

2) Our armed forces will not be invading for offensive purposes but for defense of their homeland and should have morale appropriate to the cause.

3) The place will not be a space on the chessboard of a fight between superpowers.

4) Our armed forces will not be using the equipment the Soviets were using. They will be using equipment that defeated the world's 4th largest army in a few hours that was equipped with that Soviet equipment.

Sure it will be hard, the Afghans are tough, its a hell of a place. But I'm sick of this "we are the Soviets" attitude. We aren't. We beat the freaking Soviets AND we beat the freaking Iraqis. You can't determine our outcome by the lousy war the Soviets fought. If we are to lose in Afghanistan it will be for reasons of our own making and not the reasons the Soviets got beat.

You must be joking. I'll stick around as long as I please. My point of view is shared by more conservatives than you realize. I mean, why is there even a question as to fighting during Ramadan? During the winter? Whether to bomb the various Taliban fronts? Much of the way we've conducted this campaign so far can only be interpreted by our enemies as "weakness."

Nuke them for all I care , just don't waste my son and his generation fighting an endless war against an infinite army. We have nukes , use them on the Philipines , the Saudi and any other Muslim nation that interferes with us. The less semites in the world the better for us. World war 3 now , get it over with .

I agree 100%. And I didn't mean to imply you were apolgizing for civilian deaths. My point is that right now we don't seem to have the will to win this war, let alone do the things you recommend above.

But if we did, and if we established a ground presence over there, and if we worried less about residual damage, I think we could reach our objectives in fast order.

I agree with your assessment. It sounds to me like many are not in it for the long haul. I, too, wish it were over but know it hasn't really begun yet; the bombings are only a preliminary to what is to be. There is so much more we do not know than what we are being told. I assume these guys are hidden in caves naked to the eye and have enough bio-chemical weapons on hand to wreak a little havoc. Our guys are brave and gung-ho to fight them on the ground but they are also smart. It might appear to be another pc war in the media but you can bet your buns those guys over there could care less what Rather, Jennings, and all the other arm chair quarterbacks think.

"dealing with a two-pronged public relations setback," so says the article. I, too, am amazed at all the grumbling about civilian casualties. 13 civilian casualties in a time of war is a public relations setback??? Gimme a break. I can't stand to watch the news, even FOX, because all they talk about are the stupid civilian casualties. I sense a shift of momentum for Bush here, at least among the talking heads - including the conservatives. Everyone is armchair quarterbacking and most are unsupportive of the military campaign, not to mention the Anthrax mess.