Tom,
I cannot believe you refer to the 58,000 plus American Lives as "cut losses!" You have truely relagated our Vietnam dead to a value of zero. At the same time you show our Iraq dead as having the same value.

You peace loving crazies have no idea how to fight a war so you just want to take your ball and go back home. I hope to hell you dont live near me where I will need to depend on you to cover my back against the terrorist in our neighborhoods.

Our problem is our Armies are being led by the population instead of the military. Public opinion, public fear and public cowardice stand tall instead of courage and commitment.

We have been told of the plans of the terrorist. We know what they intend to do to us and we know of how they want to see our blood spilled on our roads and in our public places. This will be our families and our children that will do the bleeding.

Yep, lets bring our troops back home so we can all sit on the front porch and smile nicely at the traffic and hold hands in the grocery store. The terrorist are already here! They are happy with the progress they have made working with the minds of those incapable of real thought or those who are so ignorant they actually believe we will be better off as isolationist.

Wake Up!

I agree Tom. Let's "cut our losses" and run.

Let's show them that Sean Penn and Rosie are calling the shots here for the terrorists and all they have to do is wait for their spineless politicians of choice to take the reins and ...wall-aah...GAME OVER!

.. uh guys .. while peace loving crazies like Rosie and Sean don't know how to run a war, the chicken hawks did a pretty awful job too.

The problem - WAS NOT - American population running the war, problem - WAS - a political party and cronies running the way.

I concede - a - current problem is the American population being allowed to influence the war, but it's pretty obvious neither Rosie nor the Lame Stream Media nor the bulk of the American population got us into the current pickle jar.

btw, NC - if you have copies or a credible link to the "plans of the terrorist[s]", how about sharing them - 'cause I think your full of crap with that statement

P.S. - I'm sure Gates'd be interested them too

Uh, Tom. Make that Sean Penn, Rosie, and cRock-o-...feller...

JDR, the same old rhetoric...shoot down the strawman argument then watch the personal attacks begin!

I do not believe the LTTE intended to infer that the dead US military personnel who served in Viet Nam or the Bush Middle East Boondoggle count for nothing. Rather I read this LTTE as saying that their lives were so important that no more should be lost in a futile non-winable military conflict.

I too would like to see a copy of the "plans of the terrorist[s]!" And to state, "....against the terrorist in our neighborhoods." sounds to me like Homeland Security and all of the illegal surveillance against American citizens did nothing to curtail/stop entry for questionable persons. Hmm, does this mean that the Bush Administration has wasted money, YET AGAIN?!!

Ponder those thoughts!

Shalom

"The terrorist are already here!"

Funny, I thought we were fighting them THERE so we wouldn't have to fight them HERE. Is this another Bush administration failure?

A simplified history of Vietnam.
Rules of engagement prevented the military from doing what it does best. The NVA repeatedly told us after the conflict was cut short that they were terrified of the sounds of approaching B52s. If the prosecution of the war were handled by in-country generals, Hanoi would have fallen.
We knew that the peace accord would lead to the fall of Saigon, but those afraid of an American victory chose the least honorable way out. Despite the wet dreams of liberal cowards, we did not "lose" the conflict- we lost our ability to trust our troops. Every man and woman who gives their life for America deserves all respect- not to be fictionalized as wasted assets.
Astroboy, if you don't think there are "sleepers" walking among us, you are dreaming.

W J, who set those rules of engagement? I ask that seriously. What I remember is that the politicians tied the hands of the military. Is that how?

On the other hand, I thought rules of engagement were set by the military, be they the Joint Chiefs or field commanders.

"I cannot believe you refer to the 58,000 plus American Lives as "cut losses!" You have truely relagated our Vietnam dead to a value of zero. At the same time you show our Iraq dead as having the same value."

NC, are you saying that the 58,000 dead are not losses. What is your point? Are you saying that their lives were meaningless?

I do believe you are saying that the "peace loving crazies" have much in common with the administration. That is a slap at "peace loving crazies" everywhere.

"The problem - WAS NOT - American population running the war,"

Come on, JDR, you know that this admin rules purely by attention to public opinion surveys!

I just love how the revisionist righties act today like Vietnam was EVER a winnable war. If it makes them feel better, then more power to W.J. Ellis, etc.

How come you never hear the "Gung Ho" war crowd criticizing the "Chicken Hawks" who took us to war?

WHY?

Five Deferment Cheney gets a free pass.

AWOL from the Alabama Guard gets a pass.

Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith get a pass.

What is with these fruitcakes who love being led into a needless war by people who did EVERYTHING to avoid serving in the military?

Next time you hear our "village idiot" (neocon) blame the media, liberals, etc for anything, be sure to remind her who's actually running this ridiculous shenanigan!

I wonder if Cheney ever sewed a Canadian flag to his backpack? hmmm...

I'm sure too, Ellis .. but it is certain the recruitment and therefore count of "sleepers" would be a tiny fraction of the current number had we stayed the hell out of Iraq, and focused on Afganistan and maybe Somolia and been productive in Lebanon - the silence over Israel's last day cluster bombing of Lebanon will be heard for decades.

WJ,
Do you REALLY believe Vietnam was a "worthy cause"? North and South Vietnam were political boundaries, but of the same people. We propped up a government much like the one we're propping up in Iraq...with the very same goal of "Democracy"! Do you not study history or have you just had so much administration Kool Ade that you can't see the truth? Don't worry, you've got "The Village Idiot" supporting you. In fact, he parrots every word you say.

I wonder too if Wolfowitz and Feith ever sewed a Canadian flag to their and their families' luggage to cower behind when traveling abroad?...Hmmm

Neocon, do you always respond to TLC with that retort, or just when you want to steer the subject away from the Bush administration's disasters?

If you go to church this week or next, you'll be reminded of a disciple who denied association with Jesus Christ due to concern for his safety. He went on to found the Christian church and was later sainted.

I'm not nominating TLC for sainthood, but I think we can give him a pass for worrying about his safety on an overseas trip.

Tell me Kornbluth, what does this have to do with the subject matter:

"Five Deferment Cheney gets a free pass.

AWOL from the Alabama Guard gets a pass.

Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith get a pass.

What is with these fruitcakes who love being led into a needless war by people who did EVERYTHING to avoid serving in the military?

Next time you hear our "village idiot" (neocon) blame the media, liberals, etc for anything, be sure to remind her who's actually running this ridiculous shenanigan!"

The world traveler says that Cheney ,Wolfowitz, etc. are draft dodging cowards, yet he inadvertently disclosed the fact that he cowered behind the flag of another country when abroad. I have never heard of any of them hiding behind the Canadian flag before, have you? To me this is a shameless display of cowardice.

I don't go to church. I find it highly hypocritical for some who post here to go to church on Sunday morning and listen to the preachers' sermons about loving thy fellow man, then jump on this blog Sunday afternoon and call people "idiots", "mentally retarded", etc. or tell them ..."f**k you, I've been wanting to tell you that for a while now". Then on the next post, they will relate the discussion they had with their preacher, pertaining to a certain point about the Almighty they believe in apparently only when it is convenient for them to believe. I find such two-faced people deploring and sickening, don't you?

As for me giving the world traveler a pass, I will give you more credibility and your remarks some consideration when I see you chastise him for some of his mentally impaired remarks.

"I'm not nominating TLC for sainthood, but I think we can give him a pass for worrying about his safety on an overseas trip."

I'm going to China in September. Where can I buy some Canadian flags to sew onto my luggage? Damn I don't know how to sew. Perhaps Demon Deacon can show me how to do it.

In Vietnam, the US had substantially more firepower than the enemy. We killed many more of them than they killed of us. Whenever our soldiers went into a village, all the people smiled at them & told them how grateful they were for what they were doing. Some of those smiling people were, in fact, among the Viet Cong insurgency & proceeded to find ways to kill our troops. None of the smiling villagers were grateful enough to the US soldiers to report the insurgents among them, or even to warn the US soldiers of ambushes, etc.

Neocon, you asked about the relevance of TLC's comments about most Bush administration officials' dodging of the Vietnam war. You should probably ask him, but I suspect he is saying that if they had served in Vietnam, they might have understood that the Iraqi people would not be "shocked and awed" into submission any more than the Vietnamese were.

I know what the world traveler was saying. He was saying Cheney, Woflowitz, etc. were cowards.

But the accusations of being a coward from one who cringed in fear behind the flag of a foreign country while traveling abroad, and thus taught his children to also use such tactics, ring rather hollow, no? This is my point.

As for your synopsis of Vietnam, you're right. So was Lt. Calley.

Siiiiiiiiggggggggghhhhhhhhhh.........

Yes, Astroboy, the rules of engagement were set by civilians who didn't have a clue how to win a battle. In-country generals are beholden to the civil government.
Remember WWII? We bombed Germany and Japan without concern for the effect on the civilian population. I'm sure that the holier-than-thou crowd thinks that was an abomination, but it ended the war.
Mr. Liberal Conservatve...... where did I say anything about the Vietnam conflict as being a ""worthy cause""? I reread my post several times, and all I can glean is an historical perspective of the stupidity of civil leaders entering into a war and not allowing the military to prosecute it in a manner that would ensure victory. After all, the original letter refers back to Vietnam.
Geez, use a little logic.

"... an historical perspective of the stupidity of civil leaders entering into a war and not allowing the military to prosecute it in a manner that would ensure victory."

That's the point, Bill O'Rights .. we have exactly repeated that error.