Quote:
Originally posted by Whit
Would you suggest Viet Nam style protests and calling our soldiers names and spitting on them when they return? Screw that, they are doing their jobs. Doing them well from what I can tell. They are the one's I support, not Bush.
[...] people don't have to like or believe in the war to believe in the men fighting it.
|
I find this argument quite bizarre. Protesting against the war means wanting for the soldiers to stop fighting, go home and not get killed. It's not quite against them.
Quote:
|
As far as taking over instead of destroying goes, you don't think we can destroy everything but the oil wells, and refineries? Or perhaps you think Americans are clamoring for a vacation in one of the palaces? Sorry, that was cheap. Point stands though, the only real value for the US offered in Iraq is the oil. Can we agree on that?
|
No, the US doesn't want only the oil. It wants control over the whole region. Israel didn't quite work out for that matter, and the US has historically craved for the middle east. Iraq is going to be it's major incision.
And about Bush, yes it's improbable there's a way to impeach him unless a really big scandal happens. But I wouldn't know.
But I certainly think that taking a passive action against him is not the right choice. That seat he's taking is too damn important. If you can't get to him directly, get to the congress.
Quote:
|
As for public opinion on a leash goes, you just doubled the standard. You say we went to war against public opinion and protests, but now it controls public opinion. In fact you did it in the space of two sentences back to back. That's a bit askew.
|
The number of protests is unprecedented but it hardly amounts to the majority of the population. The so called "silent majority" (oddly enough) is the one that is currently representing the public opinion.