Did Germany & Italy attack us during WWII?

Dan,

No, Italy and Germany did not attack us before we entered that phase of the war, and there were many in this country that did not believe that we should enter the war. President Roosevelt felt very strongly that we should enter the World War, and when we were attacked by the Japanese, it gave him justification for entering the war on both fronts.

But that war is rememebered as a good war because we prevailed, even though it was a bloody one where many American lives were lost. There are Americans now who say we can't win the Iraq war, so it isn't a good war. But, this is a war we can't afford to lose. If Radical Isalm prevails in the Middle East, you can be sure that Israel will follow, and Europe will be of no help to us. In the end, it will be us standing alone. Will we have the will to defend ourselves when the time comes or say that it is a war we can not win?

One slight problem in your logic, Oak Ridge. Iraq was not a "radical Islamic" state until made so by our invasion. Remember, it was WMD's, not radical Islam that Bush used to invade Iraq. Of course now there are what, 20 some excuses for the invasion. Can't keep up...they change every week. Shall I list them?

Perhaps you are confused...the radical Islamic SAUDIS were responsible for 9/11, not the Iraqis. I know, I know, if you tell people something long enough and loud enough, they'll begin to believe it. That's how propaganda works. Doesn't have to be truthful at all. However, it does have to be consistant..and that's why W's reign is falling apart, the inconsistancy. Looks like the Republican Senators are now on his case.

Dang, must be hard being persecuted by your own party! Perhaps he could go to Asia and get away from all this pressure. Oh wait, he's there already.

"Will we have the will to defend ourselves when the time comes or say it is a war we can not win"? Sadly, it may be the latter. Consider this:

"Experience proves that the man who obstructs a war which his nation is engaged,no matter whether right or wrong,occupies no enviable place in life or history. Better for him, individually, to advocate war,pestilence,and famine,than to act as obstructionist to a war already begun".- U.S. Grant

If not for Henry Fonda and Teresa Heinz's money,Jane and John would already have been assigned to the dustbin of history for their acts during the vietnam war. And this is where Michael Moore, Ms. Sheehan,and co. will end up eventually.

All imo,of course!

NeoCON...Cindy Sheehan lost a son fighting this war. I think she has earned the right to say whatever the heck she wants to say about it.

How bout you...how many of your kids are fighting in Iraq now? I am assuming that you think it is a worthy cause and that you are encouraging all your family and friends to enlist? Right? Right?

PROGRESSIVExian , Where did I say that Ms. Sheehan doesn't have a right to say whatever she wants? In fact the media picks up on every little word she and the rest of her 'troops' speak and trumpets it.

As I have stated in the past, I have one son who is of military age and he is thinking about a stint in the armed forces. I neither encourage nor discourage him. That is a personal decision. Myself, I was drafted and signed up for an extra year on my own. So,I know of what I speak,liberalexian. Also,I have 2 nephews who are in the armed forces and one of them has been to Iraq 2 times. The other has not. Both tell me that the media here does not do justice to the work being done by our military there.

As of today neither of them has hung their medals on the white house fence or burned the falg in protest. Nor have they been used by the likes of Michael Moore to promote his own agenda.

"There you go again" (Reagan), NeoCON, using those loaded words right out of your NeoCON handbook. "Liberal"...lol. When all else fails call someone "liberal". Hey, that's okay, I am in good company these days...even good ole Rick Santorum and Lindsey Graham are saying what I am saying. Hey, and that LIBERAL Howard Coble is saying the same thing as well.

It's good you have family serving in our armed forces, and I really mean that. It helps me understand why you defend the war and Bush as you do.

Please don't misunderstand, I am against this war BECAUSE I support our troops. I don't think it fair to put of young men and women in harms way for an invalid reason. Even if you think THIS war is being fought for valid reasons, you'd most likely agree with me that war is a serious thing and is not to be entered into lightly or with misleading intelligence.

You must realize that there are more and more people, Democrats and Republicans, coming out against the war. How do you feel about that. It certainly isn't just "liberals" that are voicing concern at this poing. Shall I post some quotes from the more conservative voices who are questioning our efforts in Iraq?

Again, I DO support our troops, including your family. And I will keep them in my prayers. No matter what side of this issue we are on, we would all pray is that not another soldier should die.

...and then my spelling and grammer went to hell. Sorry about the mistakes in the last post. I need coffee!

'Liberal' a loaded word? I didn't intend to convey that,but I wonder why it is that you guys call yourselves anything but liberal. Not all,but most liberals call themselves 'moderate'. My opinion is that this is to deflect critizism from both sides. But this is just my opinion.

No need to quote me what those 'moderate' republicans are saying,I already know. McCain and the rest are positioning themselves for a run at the white house in '08 and like the rest of the moderates,they want to sound appealing to as many folks as possible.Even if it means abandoning the people who elected them in their home state.

As for the spelling, you have little to worry about as the grammar police selectively corrects whom they deem as ignorant rednecks and hicks.

I do pray that all of the troops come home safely. Not just the ones I know. Casey Sheehan joined the military of his own free will. To me,this kinda throws a monkey wrench into the liberal anti-war machine who constantly harp about the number of troops killed thus far. But again, that is just my opinion.

Mr Progressive:

I don't think most are "against the war".

I do think most are against having troops in Iraq because that action was and is diluting the real war.

I think some still supporting the occupation of Iraq have taken that position to save face - and everyone is looking for a way to withdraw
gracefully, ideally after they have been securely elected into another round of Officehood..

The worst scenario would be actual settlement of "One Iraq" with no let up in Terrorism and the real war of Islamic vs. Western civilzations, closely followed by the splintering of Iraq with no let up in Terrorism and the real war of Islamic vs. Western civilzations.

neocon wrote: "I do pray all of the troops come home safely"...and on that we can agree!

Good post, James D....well made points. I agree with you completely. The war is against terrorism and I don't think what we are doing in Iraq is helping that effort. In fact, I would maintain that it is hindering the fight against terrorism.

Your words better convey what I was thinking than what I wrote.

I have a question please. Everyday I hear Bush lied Bush misled, yadayada.

Let's say Bush knew for a FACT that there were no WMDs in Iraq prior to the war but launched it anyway based upon the WMD argument.

If he knew prior then he knew that no WMDs would be discovered and would lead to all the criticism today, then why would he have started the war on that argument? Why would he have not used another reason?

Thoughtful responses please, I can't wait to see them.

First, Bush never expected to have the opposition encountered that has been.

I believe (key word I), that it was felt that a military intervention into Iraq could take place; overthrow the existing government, install a well placed puppet government (one under US auspices), and have military conflict over within no more than twelve months.

Instead, the stupidity of ALL the current administrations actions have only heightened the anger towards the US and US ideals. Therefore, the US has put itself into a quicksand/quagmire, that will take countless years and far more uncountable lives lost to ever correct.

The entire operation was based on fallacy, not reality!

Shalom

Dan - I'll give you my opinion:

Georgie honestly THOUGHT there were WMD's - that's because he doesn't read newspapers, or listen to anyone other than Cheney, Rove, Rummy, and maybe a couple others.

Cheney had / has an agenda which has nothing to do with making America great for anyone but Cheney and his buddies (you think he really cares about Abortion or any of your other core buttons? I think not).

Rove had / has only one focus - making Georgie shine in the eyes of all the world, as needed to get him elected. Period. He probably does have real feelings about your core buttons, but only if they do not interfere with his main mission in life. For a fact he has no interest in honor, or country.

DIGRESSION: One of my favorite quotes comes from Robert F. Lee: His priorities - and the order is what I love: Honor - Family - Country. This from the greatest General ever - and his job was his third task - but notice his first one ...

Rummy: I don't know that much about him, but it's very clear this admin' was EXPECTING to slam-dunk their way into a Chalabi Puppet Regime, and control 10% of the worlds oil reserves.

One of his other friends was C. Powell, who was very iffy about the whole thing, but as a good soldier did his part. Watching his presentation to the UN, it was VERY clear that he was not truly sold ... watch it again with an unjaundiced eye and tell me what cha think.

http://www.state.gov/secretary/former/powell/remarks/2003/17300.htm

So all his "friends" TELLS Bush 43 --- WMD's, WMD's -- so of course he BELIEVED it. You like him because he's SIMPLE? You got Mr. "don't confuse me with too much information", Mr "Keep it simple, Stupid".

Mommy taught me to believe in Santa, too.

Now I'm not saying they were never there - and the real fear is who is now sitting on 'em - but Hans was spending a lot of time - admitedly getting the run-around - but also finding nothing and willing to look for years. Turns out he was right.

Now flip that around - what if they WERE found shortly after the invasion - do you think they would all be CROWING?

That's my 2 cents, Dan.

JDR, so if Bush honestly THOUGHT there were WMDs, then why does the left relentlessly call him a liar?

I honestly THOUGHT my first marriage would work out!!!

Darryl, I do agree with you that they thought this operation would be over in a shorter time, it was a miscalculation. The actual invasion went very quickly and sucessfully. They didn't account for the religious tenacity of jihadists.

http://www.thenewstribune.com/opinion/story/5333405p-4830382c.html

... because when you and your first wife split up - you were forced to declare humility and humanity - "we screwed up, and now we need to get on with it".

I learned a new word with this administration: HUBRIS - Overbearing pride or presumption; arrogance.

Another set of opinions:

Cheney knew it was questionable, but this was business, so with Chalabi paving the way over there, and one hell of a justification using 9-11, go get that oil. Karl has convinced George that even discussing missed steps is tantamount to open weakness. Rummy is just loyal. Colin left in disgust.

Hannity and Rush rally the dittoheads. (Editorial: Why do they call themselves that? It clearly means "Yes Sir, what ever you say; Yes Masser" Jeeze!)

Condi did some good stuff this week - of course there is a history of non-success on these type of agreements, but at least she's still trying.

Now - with no plan, they are pretty much quiet about it - isn't that right? I swear the honkies in the Whitehouse are hiding, 'cause they sure ain't doing much about Iraq except lashing out to defend past actions; there is no looking forward.

.. the only thing that is makes me sicker than the Iraq Blunder (a label from NeoCON's link), is the continuing gut of jobs - apparently another few hundred local paychecks went to China this week.

The reality is we'll never compete with them on a price basis (at least not until we become a true third world nation) - so we need to stand up and say ENOUGH.

I'm not sure what standing up and say ENOUGH really looks like - but ain't nobody doing nothing 'bout it.

The real danger is right here and I get called all sorts of things for speaking out about it.

Sorry to hijack the thread.

Side note: on my wedding night with my first wife I got laid, 18 months later in the divorce I got screwed, there is a difference between the two!! Luckily my 2nd wife is a wonderful woman and we are blessed with 2 healthy, beautiful. loving children.

FYI only Rush uses the term dittos. It means for short "Hey I agree with you".

Gotta go get some sleep now, I'm out of town making a living & typing on my new wireless laptop.

Dittos,

Dan

it's only Rush's term, but I reserve the right to stereotype them into the term "Ditto-HeadShot", which lumps GG Liddy in with 'em too.

A minute ago I posted this in the "President is known for his straight talk" thread:

Here it is: Ever listen to Rush or Laura Ingram? They have mad a career from making fun of others, especially Laura. She is the most mean-spirited parrot I've ever heard.