The Rooster Strikes Again!

Actually that sounds more like the current conservative war on terrorism/Iraq.

“they have no real solution” –The republican plan more or less consisted of; the war would be a piece of cake, US troops would be welcomed as liberators, and democracy would emerge in Iraq. We can all still remember Bush landing on the aircraft carrier announcing, “mission accomplished.”

“they are willing to waste time” – 4 years and counting

“and resources to half-baked responses” – True, we don’t need to send in enough troops to do the job, they don’t need body armor or armor for their vehicles.. pfff no way. After all, we’ll be liberators.

“they get their butts handed to them and are being eaten alive because they don't realize when it's actually time to fight and stick it out until victory is achieved.” – yep, 3195 US soldiers dead. 23,417 wounded. I’d have a hard time sticking it out if I were dead or missing a limb as well. But then again, I am a liberal.

LOL here we go again!

- No one ever said the war would be a piece of cake, US troops WERE welcomed as liberators by those we were fighting FOR, and as long as we don't back out, democracy will emerge. One point for you, Bush is an idiot and called out "mission accomplished" when it wasn't. I would much rather have McCain be running this war.

- 4 years and counting of liberals fighting without a solution, trying to break apart the Republican's solution, which is the only one that will make us victorious, not just militarily, but democratically as well.

- 3195 soldiers dead. 23,417 wounded. Yes, this is sad and I pray for them and their families, but fighting this war was their choice. These are people that took an oath to defend their country and lay their lives down for democracy, on or off our soil, no matter what. Those who aren't willing to do this are are still civilians or are named Watada.

Liberals are supposed to fight for reform right? Supposed to fight for human rights where they aren't given? Human rights was a major reason for going to war with Iraq. Connections to terrorism was just the straw that broke the camel's back (forgive the regional metaphor LOL).

Left-wingers are only seeing that our soldiers are getting hurt and killed out there. That's fine and I would support that if the situation was different. What isn't ok is that they continually fail to recognize that we are fighting the people that support terrorism and will bring the war back to U.S. soil at first opportunity and/or the people that violently support the oppression of those that believe differently then them.

Now my last point - I swear I was talking about ants in Malaysia!

“Connections to terrorism was just the straw that broke the camel's back” Actually there were no connections between Saddam and al-Qaeda. The war on terrorism, which I actually support, started against a guy named Osama bin Laden. Al-Qaeda was the group that attacked the U.S. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. But instead of increasing troops Afghanistan to find and kill/capture bin Laden, we invaded Iraq. Once again, a country that did NOT actually support al-Qaeda in no way at all. Until now that is, because thanks to the U.S. liberators, and the republican solution of “staying the course” we’ve more or less opened the country up to any terrorist group who’d like to enter.

One thing that conservatives have never understood, and I can’t figure out why conservatives don’t get, is you can’t force your beliefs on others. In this case, you can’t force a democratic government on a country that’s not ready for it.

Oh, the ants – Yeah, just step on the little fuckers.

"Actually there were no connections between Saddam and al-Qaeda". Yes, actually, there was, but this is something the liberal media likes to either ignore or cover up. There were confirmed communications between the former top-level Iraqi regime and al-Qaeda. There were WMD's being at least stored, possibly developed in Iraq as well. Satellite photos confirmed a massive envoy shipping out of Iraq to Syria during the 3 day period between the warning of a U.S.-led invasion on Iraq and the beginning of Shock and Awe.

Granted, there is the argument that no one knows for sure exactly what was being shipped in this envoy, but it is known that it was not a standard export due to the method of shipment.

This would be similar to catching someone stealing stuff at a store, the camera not actually seeing what has been stuffed in the shoplifters clothes, but knowing that the shoplifter is attempting to get out of the store with the goods.

The only difference, besides the scale of the operation, is that in a store, security doesn't warn the shoplifter, they just bust them. The U.S., however, gave a 72 hour heads up that we "were going to get them". This gave them time to perform a massive emergency export that was planned well in advance.

So, saying that Iraq had no connection to terrorism is like warning a shoplifter the exact time security was going to bust them. The shoplifter runs out with the goods before the appointed "busting time" and gets away clean. Security can't follow the shoplifter beyond store property, so all they can do is call the police to follow up.

Now the next point, beliefs and political configurations are two totally different things. Conservatives are not trying to convert Muslims to Christianity. That is not the issue. The issue, the straw that broke the camel's back, is that the old regime Iraq had was corrupt and violently disregarded any human rights. It's not that they weren't ready for a democracy, it's that it was the only way to A) overcome the groups that completely disregard all human rights to those that slightly disagree and B) put into power the people that want a stable, respectable, human-rights supportive government.

You need to keep in mind that when democracy was installed in Iraq, the people chose to vote for democratic leadership. This is just like Lebanon, with different results. Iraq chose a democratic government while Lebanon chose Hezbollah.

Back to the ants issue - I don't stepping on them would be a good idea. Ants know when other ants are in trouble. They will attack when there is danger. I suggest an exterminator.

Based on that reasoning, we should currently be at war with North Korea, Iran, and various African and South American countries due to “corrupt and violently disregarded any human rights”. Why don’t we just get to the truth of the matter, it’s a war for oil, plain and simple. And the connection – just because two groups meet, does not equal mutual support and an alliance. How many organizations does the U.S. government meet with that we do not support.

How about we play that song, “the ants go marching one by one” over loud speakers, then lead them conga line style out of the temples.

North Korea, Iran, and various African and South American countries have agreed to talk things out with us. If diplomatic efforts aren't successful with them, we'll stand up to them too when the time comes. Iraq was just the first violate all U.N. sanctions. Sure, this could end up in another world war, but hey, if we're going that route, I'd rather be on this side because we are fighting for the overall good.

War for oil? Nice. This is a left-wingers last-ditch argument with no grounds. If this was a war for oil, we would just take over the oil fields and not be in the major cities fighting for justice of the Iraqi people who's end goal is a sound, safe government.

The loud speaker method of getting rid of the ants is a pretty funny visual. Sounds about effective as the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq though. Sounds great, but it won't fix the issue.