Funny how....

As a Viet Nam (Era) vet, I was politically against that conflict, just as politically I am against this one.

You may want to start your own thread, but I think that I shall decline your offer to start one as I have discussed this subject on other threads and I know from experience that things can get pretty nasty. I don't think anyone needs the kind of excitement here.

 

From what I know of war with Canada, it started in what is now the San Juan Islands in Puget Sound, WA over a pig. Nobody died, but the pig.

Silly Billymac...that wasnt a challenge. You brought it up. I deal with reality not politics. Suit yourself.

Blackbird...you crack me up.

 

I beg your pardon! I most certainly did write my post from scratch in response to Texas Sky's post!

So, please show me the proper respect and offer an apology for making this accusation! How dare you? Yes, I'm in a huff now!

I do not plagarize, Sir!

 

' The most sensible argument for the invasion was not that Hussein was about to strike the United States or anyone else with a nuclear bomb. It was that containment could not be preserved indefinitely, that Hussein was repeatedly defying the international community and that his defiance appeared to both the Clinton and Bush administrations to be gradually succeeding. He was driving a wedge between the United States and Britain, on one side, which wanted to maintain sanctions and containment, and France, Russia, and China, on the other, which wanted to drop sanctions and normalize relations with him. The main concern of senior officials in both administrations was that, in the words of then-national security adviser Samuel "Sandy" Berger, containment was not "sustainable over the long run." The pattern of the 1990s, "Iraqi defiance, followed by force mobilization on our part, followed by Iraqi capitulation," had left "the international community vulnerable to manipulation by Saddam." The longer the standoff continued, Berger warned in 1998, "the harder it will be to maintain" international support for containing Hussein. Nor did Clinton officials doubt what Hussein would do if and when containment collapsed. As Berger put it, "Saddam's history of aggression, and his recent record of deception and defiance, leave no doubt that he would resume his drive for regional domination if he had the chance." '

- www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/17/AR2005061701217_pf.html

 

I beg your pardon! I most certainly did write my post from scratch in response to Texas Sky's post!

So, please show me the proper respect and offer an apology for making this accusation! How dare you? Yes, I'm in a huff now!

I do not plagarize, Sir! </font>[/QUOTE]And, if you don't believe me, try googling any part of my post and see if a match comes up! Yep, I'm on a soapbox now, for sure.

 

And furthermore, I'll take it as a compliment that my posts are so profound and significant, well-written, organized, and well thought out, that surely I couldn't have possibly written them - surely they must be written by some world famous author from whom I must steal! Humpfh!

It's downright character assassination, I tell ya.

 

Houston, the LadyEagle has landed(on top of BillyMac's head).

 

Won't he be surprised when he logs back on!

 

LadyEagle----I just can't buy into three facts

#1---that we actually LOST a war to a nation whos nation is colder in the wintertime than we are

#2---that we left without telling them "Bye"---no soverneirs, cigarette lighers or a single girlfriend to account for the loss!!!!

#3---the war lost wasn't over crude oil or who makes the biggest "shyster"---a bad Communist or a good Democrat!!!

 

The War of 1812 is one of the forgotten wars of the United States. The war lasted for over two years, and while it ended much like it started; in stalemate; it was in fact a war that once and for all confirmed American Independence. The offensive actions of the United States failed in every attempt to capture Canada. On the other hand, the British army was successfully stopped when it attempted to capture Baltimore and New Orleans. There were a number of American naval victories in which American vessels proved themselves superior to similarly sized British vessels. These victories coming after victories in the Quasi War (an even more forgotten war) launched American naval traditions.

- www.multied.com/1812/Index.html

 

Blackbird, I'm into quagmires, now. An ex-Navy Seal explained the "quagmire" this morning. It's a great war strategy and it is working. I salute our brave young men and women who are drawing the fire for us from all the jihadist wannabees in the Middle East. The more they can take out over there, the better.

Regretfully, I should have figured this out long ago, but never having seen battle except on the chess board and in movies, I hadn't figured it out. Now I understand. It takes me awhile sometimes. Just watched the movie "Behind Enemy Lines" this afternoon, based on the true story of Capt. Scott O'Grady. When it first came out, I didn't know as much about world events as I do now. Having watched it this second time, I understand things better. But seeing these things, mass graves, etc., make me feel shaky inside the older I get. And as my son says so lovingly, "Mom, can we agree you are getting old?"

 

Canada is too cold, anyway.

 

[EDITED]Oops! Posted in wrong forum.

 

Reality???

Okay....... You're on.

*The reality is that Bush invaded a soveriegn country where there were no wmds after he said there were.
*The reality is that Saddam was not a threat to the US, but lying Bush said he was.
*The reality is that our troops are dying left and right and are sitting ducks for insurgents to kill and sacrifice.
*The reality is that if Bush doesn't pull our troops out post haste more and more innocents will die needlessly.
*The reality is that I am opposed to this war and have been from the very beginning.
*The reality is that the deficit is mounting ever higher in a war that is costing us more and more and more.
*The reality is that our economy isn't getting that much better because of Bush's war.

Deal with those realities.

You don't think politics are reality???

Shows what you think.

 

The Democrats who made regime change in Iraq the policy of the United States in the late 1990s would disagree with you, BillyMac, besides the Republicans.

I think your policy idea would have put us at great risk a few years down the road and could have cost us dearly with maybe hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions of deaths, on our shores.

Fortunately, the Democrats and Republicans agreed on regime change in Iraq and regime change took place.

 

Well, I was just going to add, that if you were in combat in Vietnam, perhaps youve forgotten how politics flies right past you just seconds ahead of the first bullet. That my friend is my reality.

How nice it is that we can sit here, for now, and talk about it. Shows you take your luxury of free thought and let the media handle it for you.

Forgot a few...Remember these?
WTC 93, Borjinka project 95, Khobar Towers 96, US Embassy bombings in Africa 98, Yemen 99, US/BC border control/LAX bombing attempt Y2K.

After Texas sorted it out, there isnt much to say after that.

 

And just how was Saddam involved in any of that??? Reality says: not at all.

I think you need a reality check.