Who thinks that war is the same as having a tea party?
915613
Most people are weak and do not have the stomach for a real fight.  If they had lived in the 40's we would all be speaking either Japanese or German right now.  I'll tell ya one thing.  If I ever hear of some liberal puke spitting at service people at airports like when I came home from Nam, I will go there and introduce them to my baseball bat.
641339
Totally agree...I've lived in both places!\n\nAnd my Brit friends here, working on contract for our military fixing and upgrading the M1A1 tanks and Humvees used in Iraq and Afghanistan (at Ft. Stewart, Georgia) will tell you...\n\n"it's because you are our children...after all, we let you win the Revolutionary War because we loved you!" \n\nGotta laugh at that, stiff upper lip to the end! :)
1115240
Absolutely not.  Going to war should be a last resort, not an offensive attack on a country who may possibly attack us someday.  In my opinion, all the spin about Iraq having WMDs was a smoke screen and an excuse to invade them to retaliate for the bad blood between Sadam and Bush Sr.  And if I read or hear one more person stating that we're at war over September 11, I'm going to vomit.  Why is it so hard to comprehend that Bin Laden, the Taliban and al Quaida were responsible for the 9/11 attacks - not Sadam or the Iraqis?  They are not one in the same.  They are not even from the same countries.  They have a religion in common.  But many ignorant people who lump them together do so because they eat up what they are told by the government and the media.  God bless the day people will make an effort to inform themselves and form their own thoughts...
118607
No.  There is no party that is truly conservative anymore.  We can't even protect our borders. We can't even win in Iraq.  Why?  Politics.  I am from the political standpoint of Winston Churchill.  He crushed his enemies with brute force.  He was considered on the fringe of the right in his time but if he was Prime Minister from the start rather than Neville Chamberlain, Hitler would have been stopped rather than appeased.  I urge anyone who considers themselves to be a republican to read Churchill's biography.  Find out how a true conservative thought.  He did nothing short of save this world.
792298
An interesting range of responses to your loaded and what appears to be a somewhat biased question. I find the conservatives talk about winning, defending the concept of freedom, respecting the honour and sacrifices of troops both American and allies, addressing both the lies and propaganda of both the terrorists and main stream media… the lines of which seem blended, blurred, and sharing a common goal.\n From the less than loyal opposition I see the usual demeaning rhetoric, insinuation, and strained logic and comparisons…the weak straw dog of one that is afraid to explaining their own goals, at least up front and honest. They all champion their mantras that conservatives are parrots repeating…why do the all say that? (Right Elway?) \n And as to comparisons, talk about scare tactics eh michaelsan! I notice you don’t compare the appeasers of WW11 to the Pelosi/Murtha/Kerry philosophy, but contort like a circus freak to work in the leftist’s party line comparing the present administration to the Nazi machine. How about Hillary health care to Leninists socialism…A comparison I can relate to actually.\n Americas left seem to be saying that not defending our republic, appeasing, leaving our troops out to dry like they did in Viet-Nam is their course to regaining power in America…This time the stakes are much higher…The left doesn’t care as long as they can garner power…Even at the cost of America’s Republic!
338649
Amen.\nIf you are a republican and don't want this war, then you're probably not a conservative republican.
635172
Well, I guess in a way if youre fighting war than that means youre starting a war against war, which means you are already contradicting yourself. The point im trying to make is it doesnt really matter what context it is in, it takes a war to start yet another.\n\nI applaud you for asking this question, but I am a lil confused as to why you did it since your ideology seems so thrown together and a little clumsy.\n\nI dont believe evil has a face. Its only a word we've constructed to seperate each other. But even if it did, are you saying that war exists because of "evil"? If thats true, than why do you feel that saying "war is wrong" is any different than saying that it is necessary?\n\nO i get it, we call that atitude nihilism - a belief that there is no point in caring because to care would mean that you think it is possible to change. But dont you think that in already saying it is impossible to change than you have already disqualified yourself from ever changing anything in the first place? \nDoesnt that whole idea go back to the "takes a war to start one" thing?
400712
I've never actually heard, or read about, any Americans claiming they've never lost a war. However, if 'Vietnam, Korea, etc. were "police actions"' as someone here claims, what the heck DO they call a 'war'?? At least they can't pretend Iraq wasn't a 'war' - it was called one repeatedly, although I'm still not prepared to accept that "America" (or her allies) won, it looked to me more like a successful invasion which has caused civil unrest!! Not quite the same thing as a 'war'!\n\nAnd why does America (or her government) think it's acceptable to compensate all those 'nice' soldiers for the damage caused to them by Agent Orange - but that it's okay NOT to compensate the Vietnamese, who are still suffering to this day, and who were mass-murdered by a bunch of Americans?!???? America DELIBERATELY poisoned Vietnam! Those were civilians!! Even if America DID have the right to poison the land (which it DIDN'T!!!) they should STILL give HUGE amounts of compensation to the Vietnamese who are SUFFERING!!
512038
I think it is high time for modern day Boston Tea Party.  The problem is that they don't even teach History very well anymore, so most kids today would think that the Boston Tea Party is a party at someones house serving a variation of a Long Island Ice Tea.
357357
The Republicans are full of Chicken Hawks...War-mongers who never actually bothered to serve their country when they had a chance. And when Democratic war-vets run, like Kerry and Cleland run, the GOP is only too happy to diminish and/or mock their service. Yep, the Republicans are one class act.
584114
At it again are you? I'm not saying that the reasons we are there are right or wrong or any war for that matter but I do realize that someone, somewhere, must try to stop dictators and third rate nations that try to become first rate to fast. When talking fails and turning the other cheek doesn't work... all that is left is war, no matter what scale. So... it takes a lot of dedicated young people to try and straighten things out with weapons and I know of nothing more dangerous in the military's arsenal than a pissed off nineteen(+) year old with a weapon. The sad thing is... someone has to lose. Be it us or them is yet to be determined. One of life's facts is that everybody has to pay. To what cost? I don't know but I've seen enough to know that this is sometimes the only way to deal with zealots and fanatics. Oh, I have my own thoughts(and ways) of dealing with terroists but then the American people would be really taken aback! I'm amazed that most people can't comprehend war or what happens in war. I guess that's why our military does its utmost best to keep it away from our shores. By the way, I've eaten crow(Roasted) Once I got past the worms and maggots and almost cooked it black it's not to bad. I won't recommend it though. Only if you're extremely hungry.I've also talked crow (called them in). That's how I got to eat one. Having a weapon would have made it a lot easier.
764283
You forgot the war on the middle class and the poor.  They do like their war but only if it keeps them in power or they can make money on it.
669741
they are not related. what the person says above is true. its just a hot botton issue. the republicans are trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator so you'll forget about the war, the corruption and the ineptitude. \n\ndon't be fooled.
1109986
Lazy, uncritical thinkers make this comparison, but history will show otherwise. Many democracies have shaky starts, it just takes awhile for things to settle out. Germany was in a state of chaos for awhile after WW II - similar to what we are seeing in Iraq... Not all the Nazi sympathizers wanted to go quietly...\n\nFrom reading history, all the whining and bellyaching by liberals are just like all the anti-war, pro-slavery Democrats during the Civil War, who hated Lincoln and considered him the worst president this country ever had. They said that the war was not winnable, that we should look to make peace with the Confederacy and just leave them alone... Democrats and liberals think that being anti-war is some kind of great virtue. They would rather slink away with their tails betwixt their legs than stand up for what is right. Iraq will get it right, and will be a beacon of hope for the rest of the Middle East. \n\n2,500 soldiers killed is a steep price, and I salute their sacrifice and mourn their loss. They have not died in vain, and their sacrifices will help to build a more stable Iraq, which will lend itself to stabilizing the entire Middle East. The media and liberals (sorry, that was redundant) only want to focus on the negatives, so a lot of what has already been accomplished is being overlooked or ignored.\n\nHistory will record that George W. Bush made the right choice to invade Iraq, and the naysayers will continue to hate him regardless of the outcome.
643074
The war is wrong no matter who supported it. Besides, you can get yourself into a half-baked idea and later realize it was foolish. That's the real problem with what's going on; we refuse to pull out and spare American lives and resources.
579842
There was a great essay I saw on this the other day, here:\n\nhttp://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/5/26/155350/677\n\nThanks to the original writer, I couldn't have said it better myself.  You can't wage a war against an emotion.  It's like the "war on love" or the "war on sadness", the "war on regret".  You just can't "win" or "lose", there is no goal.  I'm still trying to figure out how people got Iraq mixed up with "terrorism", despotic and tyrannical dictator and murderer, sure, but not a terrorist.
834987
Maybe...I heard W on the radio this morning saying that the choice between republicans and democrats was the choice between fighting terrorists or giving up (letting them win)! Does anyone (even hard-core republicans) really believe that any American would just give up the fight against terrorists?\n\nIs anyone STUPID enough to fall for this nonsense? I understand the whole lowering taxes, anti-abortion, anti-gay message (although I don't agree with it), but come on. \n\nIf this war in Iraq was diminishing world terrorism, even slightly, maybe Americans would be behind it. Recent reports show that the Iraq war is actually encouraging more terrorism!\n\nW said that democrats view the war in Iraq as a distraction but the republicans know that the war is the front against terrorists. So since the democrats want to leave Iraq, they're against fighting terrorists! What flawed logic. I miss having an intelligent, articulate president who didn't embarrass me. I'd MUCH rather have John McCain (whose views I don't share) than W who I don't agree with but also makes Americans look like idiots to the rest of the world.