It is the same thing. To think not isnt to not think the trail is logical, but to think that yours is the only way.
We killed thousands of Iraquis in retribution for Afghanistans Al Queda which is led by a Saudi. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and if you will actually hear what the Bush administration has said since, you would know that as fact. Also they admitted that Iraq had no WMDs. So in fact, the killing of their people for something done by others is the same as killing people in your neighborhood for something done by another.
>>No the rules of war are quite different from a countries law so not there is no comparison. Police would be held accountable to the laws of the state in which the illegal act occured. The only repercussion for an act of war against a country is a declaration of war against them whether it be held on their soil or ours. Which is the reason I don't agree with your logic trail and not because I think that my way is the only way. If I did I certainly wouldn't be bothering to reply to you. I have no intention of attempting to win you over to my side and it's your choice to hate the administration or even your country if it suits you. Face it, we will never have a perfect little country you've always imagined, there will always be something to not agree with no matter the administration. I guess you could try Canada, it's supposed to be heaven on earth and our Jenn speaks very highly of it. :bgrin
Only difference is since your neighborhood would be on American soil, there are laws against that.
>>Yes, as I said above. So not quite the same thing after all? Please make up your mind I'm getting dizzy.
Since it was done on Iraq soil, then our Imperialist administration deems it ok. Thats sick. Its wrong and God willing these men ( and I use that term lightly) will be held accountable.
>>Doubtful, no administration has ever been held accountable for a declaration of war against any faction of another country that has initiated an act of war upon us.
You are putting words in my mouth to suit your needs. I never said anything, not one word about not going after Al Queda.
>>I put no words in your mouth and never even mentioned Al Queda. I said you made it sound that way not that you said it. My bad, I interpreted your words incorrectly.
We should and in that vein if we had the troops in Afghanistan doing that, instead of Iraq, we would have gotten them by now instead of Saddam. Read what I write, not what you want to read into what I write.
>>I did read what you wrote and, again, that was my interpretation of what you said. And we will never know if you are correct or not. Anyone can be an armchair quarterback, doesn't mean that's the only way it would have turned out--it's your perception of what could have occured.
Isnt that what got Bush into Iraq as it was? Telling the intelligence people what to find instead of reading that they found? That is not saying the troops are at fault. They arent, they are doing there job.
>>I don't know for sure and neither do you. All we know is the propaganda the media wants to portray. Often we never know what really happened only the spin that's put on it depending on your political persuasion. I get a lot of information from those that have been there, several have done two tours and are willing to return again if need be. I'd much rather get the truth from the horse's mouth, our soldiers, rather than the other end of the horse--the media. By the way, some don't have a high opinion of the Dixie Chicks opinions either. You know I had to ask them.
: They make my boss twitch, he's a Colonel in the AF and my son, an AF lifer, and his friends said some things that shouldn't be said in public. See I did manage to at least stay on topic.
:
It is their Commander in Chiefs fault and I would bet you that if his name was Clinton, Gore or Kerry, you would be flipping out about it all.
>>Actually no, I voted for Clinton, not once but twice, and supported him whole heartedly regardless of his indiscretions and even when I didn't agree with some of his policy. Gore might have even been a good president but Kerry, well you've got me there I think he was, and still is, a fool.
Patriotism isnt loving your government, they are just men and men are prone to being wrong. Patriotism is loving your country. Patriotism doesnt mean that to love the troops you have to love the reason's' behind what they are doing. Patriotism isnt the RIGHT of the President, he cannot hijak that word to make his cause just. His cause has to be just on its own. THANK GOD people finally realized that and did something about it.
>>Patriotism means supporting your government even when you disagree with the mission, many of the troops have to do it daily. Anybody with a mouth can whine about it, doesn't mean it's all about patriotism. I do love my country because in few others can you speak your opinion without being silenced or worse. Patriotism means supporting the troops even though you disagree with the mission knowing they are duty bound to carry it out. The president has just as right to his own patriotism as you or I and if people finally realized what you say then why did he win a second term? That's exactly what they did about it, they voted him back in.