Dreadsox said:
Back to the topic at hand....
I can remember when people in this forum would hold the war dead saying he was not facing the families....
This article pretty much shows that is false.
sorry, but one sentimental article (in a magazine that the WH had the gall to blame for dead post-riot Afghanis in that whole Koran-toilet debacle) does not a compassionate man make. it really doesn't matter what the right wing media shock troops, or you, think of Cindy Sheehan. a greiving mother is way more compelling than a vacationing president who clears brush for fun (lost on him is the fact that, in the real world, people have to clear brush for paychecks).
why no post-war plan? what was victory supposed to look like anyway? why roadside bombs and not the roses to greet our troops like Cheney promised?
i cannot, for the life of me, understand people (not you, Dread) who might have had coherent reasons for supporting the invasion who are not bashing this adminsitration, and particularly Rumsfeld, for making essentially wrong decisions at each and every critical moment. it's a mess, the war is essentially over, new euphamisms ("global struggle against violent extremism") are being tossed out like Coca-Cola Classic after the 1985 New Coke bomb, expectations have been lowered, and recruiting goals are coming up so short that (gasp!) they're now ignoring the whole "don't ask/don't tell" clause.
it's over. i'm sorry it's over, i'm sorry we screwed it up, i'm sorry Iraq is now a haven for terrorists and increasingly religious, i'm sorry our leaders invaded for poorly supported reasons and then didn't have anything resembling a post-war plan.
seems as if everyone gets this but Mr. Bush and Mr. "last throes" Cheney.
sorry, a bit off topic, but needed to vent for a moment.