Quote:
Originally posted by Mike AI@Apr 16 2004, 04:24 PM
PD - Gulf War I was a resounding success, we did not go farther because Bush Sr. did what liberals like you wanted and only went as far as the UN resolution would allow. To expel Iraq out of Kuwait. I am sure if Bush would have went al lthe way to Baghdad that YOU and the rest of the libs would have been flipping out...
You want to have it every way PD....
Democrats do not win wars.... they are incapable of it. Liberals would rather demonize their own country and coddle our enemies!
Democrats are continuing their hypocritical ways.... with Al Quada they want to know why Bush did not act sooner, and do something preventative. Then in Iraq they are bawking about acting too soon.
Democrats will say and do anything to get elected.
It is funny watching Kerry try to define himself as a moderate. A man who is more liberal the Kennedy, at least his voting record.
Demorats and liberals know that if they admit they are liberal and run on being a liberal they would NEVER win Nationa office!
|
Mikey ... FYI, this liberal was pissed when we stopped. I never bought into the "liberate Kuwait" stuff much - a feudal monarchy wasn't, IMHO, worth a fucking drop of American blood. I did, however, recognize that it was our dog (Saddam) that was out of his pen and into the chicken coop, so it was our job to put him down. If a dog is going to be killin' chickens, backin him into a corner is not the answer.
George the First (not the liberals, not the media, not even liberalactivistjudges) built a faulty coalition that did not allow him to do the job properly. For twelve years after the war he assured us was NOT like Vietnam, the son-of-a-bitch who started it was shooting missles at American aircraft, and was killing a bunch of folks we'd encouraged to revolt (a fact that I'm sure has nothing to do with Iraq suspicion of U.S. intent today, of course).
George the Second, in command of a military substantially smaller than that possessed by his father, dispensed with the coalition effort entirely. Nobody feared the Iraqi military; only a fucking fool believed the parade bullshit.
Now, you keep saying that liberals don't win wars. When I presented an alternative opinioin, you responded by repeating that liberals don't win wars along with a few other generalized attacks on the left that have no basis in fact other than the fact that enough bobble-heads like yourself keep repeating them. (You forgot Chappiquidik, btw). I also noticed that you skipped Vietnam and Korea entirely, and went straight to Gulf War I, the end of which was, of course, the liberals fault, not the asshole that built the coalition.
On the outside chance that you are capable of thinking beyond the catch-phrases contained in the catechism, answer my next question.
You advocate an outright imperialistic approach to Iraq. You want us in there to ensure the supply of oil and provide a base of operations (for military troops to be obtained later [and paid for by our Great Great Grandchildren], I suppose) for future operations.
Can you provide me any example of a victory in a war comprable to Iraq by ANY power?
Your answer is limited only by the cavet that the telephone should have been invented before the commencement of that war.
World War II was NOT remotely like this war, so don't try pulling out the post-war occupation on me.