Shapley wrote:I'm merely making an observation based on what I've seen.
No, you're drawing conclusions based on faulty reasoning and doing a good job of accusing people of things you have no call to.
Shapley wrote:I've been called nuts before, and I've been wrong before. In this case, however, I don't believe that I am... I try to look at what has happened in America that has led to such things a mall shootings, university shootings, widespread abortion, abandonment of commitment, high divorce rates, and general rudeness.
I might suggest you take a close look at your accusation and grade it on rudeness.
Shapley wrote:I do think the President Bush has done damage to this nation, but I think he has done so for different reasons than you, OT, or Jamie believe.
I believe he has done some good in ways that OT in particular feels were harmful.
Shapley wrote:I believe, however, that the dishonesty of the Democrats, and their unwillingness to cooperate (while chiding the President for the same thing) has done considerably more damage than anything this President or his administration has done.
I believe a lot of it is payback for all the grief the Republicans dishonestly gave Clinton. Even Barry Goldwater told them to knock it off. I must admit I'm rooting for casualties at this point. There is very little in either party I find palatable or in the best interests of the country.
Shapley wrote:I think the war has not been fought in the best manner, but I don't agree that it should never have been fought.
I believe the search for bin laden was a worthy cause. We failed at that, too.
Shapley wrote:I also believe that, even if this war could have been avoided, because the commitment to engage in it was made, it has to be brought to conclusion, by victory, by negotiated treaty, or by other honourable means. It should not be ended by simply abandoning the cause or, to use the oft-repeated analogy, taking our toys and going home because we don't like the way the game is played.
That's not why I think we should quit. I think we should quit because we're doing more harm than good, both to Iraq and to ourselves. In the process, as far as I can tell, our only hope is to partition Iraq into at least three different territories, perhaps even countries. Civil war will be
the result of our withdrawal, either now or a hundred years from now.
Shapley wrote:The tactics we're seeing in this war are the tactics we will see in the future, whether in the streets of Baghdad, the streets of Tehran, the streets of London, or the streets of New York. We have to learn to counter them, to stop them, to defeat them. If they are allowed to successfully deter us from duty, then there will be more, not less, of them in the future.
And this attempt to deter them has been a step in the wrong direction. By creating chaos and a power vacuum in Iraq, we've simply untied the bonds that kept such activities at bay there. Destroying al qaeda was a good idea. Destroying an already emasculated regime was foolishness.
Shapley wrote:Search your heart, Grasshopper, you know it to be true.
What I know to be true is that staying the course is what the captain of the Titanic attempted. That does not bode well for the course we are on.