<p>Sorry Ann, my mistake...I think I am blurry eyed from reading all these posts.
However, I do believe that rationale & objective (at least as objective as one can be, being a parent of future military person) rebuttals were made to the article. Certainly more thoughtful at least.</p>
<p>And a most heartfelt congratulations to your son on his appointment to WP...
now lets all go and have some chocolate or better yet a glass of wine and make Jamzmom happy..</p>
<p>sorry have been unable to read every post but the initial post was interesting. Actually, we all support the troops whether we like it or not. Our tax money in various forms pays for the war. Just like us, our soldiers don't have a choice. And they, like the tens of thousands of Iraqis who have been killed, injured or lost their homes, are victims. I suspect this war will produce very few winners, and many, many losers. We have been tied to the people of Iraq, who we know very little about. We are all in this together.</p>
<p><em>Sigh</em> I'd rather rub more wasabi cashew residue in my eyes than go here. LOL
Our soldiers don't have a choice? Whatcha mean speedo? Just double checking to be safe....</p>
<p>uclari,
share some Japanese opinions about the war in Iraq and the Bush administration with us.</p>
<p>Wait, UCLA! Can't we talk about something else? How's the food in Japan? Tried any Kobe beef?</p>
<p>the Japanese recently put an embargo on American beef, so Kobe beef is all they're gonna' get, if they can afford that. More importantly, I want to know if they're paying him in dollars or yen, and if the US dollar has any worth these days in Japan because the last time I was in London, a Starbucks venti latte cost around $7.00.</p>
<p>UCLA probably won't post if I'm here... I made him really mad. :(
So if you'll come back UCLA, I SWEAR I won't post in this thread. I'll be quiet as a mouse. I promise. I'll just read, cause it really truly would be interesting to know what the answers are to some of the questions the other Mom's just posted. I would hate to see you come back in attack mode though. But I promise, I'll not say a peep.</p>
<p>I wasn't going to post, but . . . </p>
<p>You all are so bored with each other that you are practically begging the guy to come back? Anything to pass the time until the next crop of "How can I make up my mind" or "Am I qualified" questions come in?</p>
<p>Amazing! [And here I am in the middle of it too. Double Amazing. I am sooo ashamed of myself; I don't even let my wife or son know that I still visit this site.]
CC anonymous here I come.</p>
<p>hey bill,
which showing of the movie "Annapolis" will you be attending this weekend?</p>
<p>Don't be ashamed, this is innocent, low cal fun!</p>
<p>Oh Bill thats a bunch of poo. No boring days when you post. Besides where else can you find this sort of entertainment? Yea, I'd like to see him come back. Outsiders are fun. </p>
<p>We'll keep your dirty little secret for you. Hey, speaking of cheap entertainment, are you going to see Annapolis (the movie) this week-end? I just gotta do it if just for that 3000 calorie double butter popcorn & those king kong size reeses cups.</p>
<p>Edit: LOL! There goes that great minds think alike thing again!</p>
<p>Bill0510- welcome to the flock returning to capistrano! ;) (gee- wonder who posted that one?? :rolleyes:
Definately one of my favorites- a CC Classic!!)</p>
<p>Anyway, if you don't hang around "till at least tomorrow, you'll miss all the buzz about Annapolis!!! Now go and get your tickets so you can play with us tomorrow- just to make sure we are all playing fair!! I'm sure the law won't miss you for 180 minutes!!!</p>
<p>JM- LOL - we have to stop meeting like this!!! this is too funny!!! I definately think it's time for some blackstone and crabs and that frog stew you make and a good movie- I know just the one too!!! ;)</p>
<p>HaHa 09mom - "Low cal fun"! That's a good thing! (And the price is right too!).</p>
<p>Wait a minute - this is RESEARCH, isn't it?? I thought it was.</p>
<p>GO NAVY!!</p>
<p>Bill, it must be time to talk about underwear and boots and what to bring to I/R day! Ooh, tighty-whiteys long or short?</p>
<p>People sign up for the armed services for various reasons, patriotism, career advancement, economic reasons etc. Once youre in they don't ask you which war you would like to fight in. Youve made a committment and you follow orders. The problem with this particular war isn't the troops or whether we support them or not - it's with the fundamental rationale and uncertainty about what exactly the mission is. As it stands now, the mission is to create "democracy" in Iraq and somehow see it spread to other countries in the Middle East. Despite the efforts of our troops and considerable support, we have had only limited success. (Yesterday's election of Hamas, is not encouraging) One wonders whether we are not doing an adequate job or more ominously, if the mission as detailed by our politicians is not really what they have in mind. There's a big difference in not supporting the troops and not supporting the mission. I wonder if you can really give someone else their "freedom". The French didn't free us from the British, we didn't free Poland from Communism, the Iraqis have to step up and do it themselves, and it would have been a lot better had they shown signs of that before we went in. As it is now, it looks a lot like N. Ireland, were both sides ended up resenting the Brits. I think the original article would have been better stated if it was entitled, "I don't support the mission".</p>
<p>Speedo: It's Friday afternoon, about 4:30 and I am having a drink. You missed the serious part of this thread. Now its just blabbering, bored, parents that otherwise have no life.</p>
<p>I will probably go see the movie tomorrow afternoon. The Grandparents [son's grandparents, not mine] and my other children want to see it. [Okay, I want to see it too but I can blame it on them.]
Local paper gave it only one star. And it is not shot in Annapolis. And it is not accurate. But, what the heck . . .
If we go, I will report back.</p>
<p>SPEEDO: You start your comments right-on. It did get a little fuzzy when you mention, "limited success". I feel the capture of Sadaam, the deaths of his sons and many, many other subordinates of the Bath party, is beyond limited. Freeing Iraq is a large effort. Establishing an atmosphere without fear was/is the biggest problem our troops /leaders are dealing with. The Iraqis have established a system of ELECTED officials and are now supporting the troops by pointing out some of the strong holds. Their police and modest Army are also protecting their sovereignty. When you get an atmosphere of protection with a bit of freedom without reprisals, then dramatically your society starts to grow and prosper. Allied forces spent 10 years in Germany post WWII. Iraqis are grabbing their freedom one man-women-child at a time. It takes time, and our presence will decrease gradually as their strength increases. Mr. Joel Stein doesnt need support, he titled his article I dont support the TROOPS and had ample opportunity to change the wording. He meant what he said, and Ill hold him to it. I support the troops; I got no support when I was in the Navy in 1972. Opposition to this war is strengthened by one of our political parties. Joel is correct you cant have it both ways. This is the era of decreasing terrorism throughout the world- a very large task; a long struggle- and not comfortable with our fast-food society. Ill stand tall supporting all the troops including the Commander in Chief.</p>
<p>Rockymnt ...good answer, your post rocks :)
..and thanks for serving</p>
<p>Rockymnt,
I agree with some of your post. I think that where the American public is showing some doubts is with the "mission" as it was and now is explained to them. The rationale as explained by the Bush administration at the outset as explained to the American people, the UN, and the world was that Iraq was an imminent threat to the US by way of weapons of mass destrution. Most Americans, both Republican and Democrat agreed that the mission as stated was a legitimate reason to invade Iraq. The stated goal was to disarm Iraq by force to protect ourselves. (Certainly one outcome to achieving the stated goal would be to kill or capture the Iraqi leadership during the course of the war). The problem is, of course, that the rationale as stated was not to "liberate Iraq" to depose a murderous dictator or to spread "peace and freedom" throughout the Middle East. That particular rationale emerged when it became fairly obvious to even the staunchest supporters of the original Iraq policy that the first rationale was off the mark. At the onset of the invasion many Americans were even of the opinion that Al-Queda was being harbored in Iraq by Saddam government, and that Iraq may have even had a hand in 9/11, a belief that our government did nothing to officially dissuage despite the fact that there was no evidence of that "fact" either. The mission as stated to Congress and the American People was to disarm Iraq from WMD's, not free the world from an evil dictator and plant the seed of freedom. We had ample opportunity to do the latter after the first Gulf War when MOST of his victims were being killed. I imagine there is still some animosity towards our government that originates from promises following the first gulf war by the earlier Bush administration made to the Kurds to help them fight Saddam. Promises we did not keep and the result of which was to allow Saddam the opportunity to murder them in large numers.</p>
<p>"The rationale as explained by the Bush administration at the outset as explained to the American people, the UN, and the world was that Iraq was an imminent threat to the US by way of weapons of mass destrution." Shogun</p>
<p>Yes, but there was a heated debate about the existance of WMDs at the time, remember Hans Blix and the UN inspectors? Furthermore, these weapons weren't aimed at the United States; Israel was the target. Hamas was another threat to Israel because it supplied the suicide bombers and Saddam supported these attacks by giving the equivalent of $25,000 to families of Hamas suicide bombers. Holy cr*p, now Hamas is in power by virtue of a legitimate election! We have succeeded in completely destabilizing the region and contributed to the election of a terrorist organization. Let's see what spin the Bush administration puts on this latest event. Americans need to turn off Fox news and get some legitimate information. Try reading something like "Foreign Affairs," major newspapers, and reports coming out of think tanks.
The latest price tag in dollars for the war in Iraq is $1 trillion, not to mention the loss of life and our global status.</p>
<p>No one ever answered my question about Secretary of State Colin Powell resigning at the end of Bush's first term!</p>