Do you think it's possible to support troops in Iraq, but not support their mission?

I don't see how can you support the troops by supporting a mission that puts them in unncessarily danger for something that doesn't help America.
 
Again, one more time...........Now concentrate like a laser beam........Saddam had WOMD........He used them on his own people............Do you have a clue how big the country of Iraq is? Its the size of California........The WOMD could be buried anywhere...........Do you even know what constitutes a WOMD? It does not have to be a 50 ft missile............It can be a vail of small pox that could fit in your hand that could kill millions.........What part of that do you Liberals who all said saddam had WOMD not understand?????????

Do you know who Zaquawi is? You did not know of the connection between him and Bin Laden? :rolleyes:

Under your hero Clinton we let the first WTC go unpunished.....We let the USS COLE bombing go unpunished.........Under this president we will not let acts of terror be perpetrated without exacting a consequence to the perpertrator.........

This President believes it is better to fight the war on terror in the streets of Baghdad rather then in the streets of your home town........

Oh and one more thing, since we have carried the war on terror to the terrorists we have not had another attack on this country since 9/11/01.......Who would have ever thought that on 9/12/01?

Thank God we have a president who is not wishy washy like your hero Clinton and when he says something he means it.........
 
I'm still waiting for a explantion as to how you can support the troops by supporting a mission that doesn't help America and gets 1600 of them needlessly killed as well as Hunter's definition of liberal.
 
Then you aren't getting the point. Let's try it this way, do you support 15 pork spending ammendements that are a waste of money and don't contribute to America's doimance when you vote for a bill that has is remotely related because you want the key part of the bill to pass?
 
Voice of Reason: I'm looking for these threaRAB but so far I can't find them. Perhaps you would do me a great favour, and save me a great deal of time and effort, and tell me where to look.
 
I fully support the effort to capture or kill all terrorists involved in 9/11 or terrorists currently planning future 9/11 catastrophes. I did not support invasion of Iraq without a full coalition similar to our coalition in 1991. I did not support the invasion of Iraq after the point of reading all available information about the Bush lie about weapons of mass destruction. We are now at a point where we are over committed to Iraq. The military has admitted to being stretched thin. We need to bring them home, regroup and remoralize our armed services.

When troops are in harms way, they have my absolute, full support to stay alive and well. We are in another Nam and we need to honor troops in the future to keep them out of wars of ambush, no front line and taking the role of police for the political goals of our wimp desk warriors in Washington.
 
You've said this countless times



NO ONE EVER SAID THAT!!!

There is a different between not supporting their mission, and hoping their mission fails. I didn't support them ever going on thie "mission" but I do support the troops. Now that they are there I want the mission to succeed. Still don't support the mission itself, but as long as we've decided to take on this mission, I'd like for us to win. How hard is that to understand?
 
Back
Top