Gallup Daily: McCain 48%, Obama 43%

[nowhereman 1]

Another example is the war in Iraq... McCain knows damn well that the Bush administration started the war based on false intelligence (its not the liberals who think this, its pretty much an accepted fact, as no WMD's were ever found) yet McCain will never say this.

Hey, you're a veteran of the Iraq War, right? Weren't lot of troops in MOPP gear during the invasion? Why were ADA troops sent to Israel in 1998? Why were Iraqi generals wondering chemical weapons were going to be used? There is little evidence for false intelligence but there is a case for bad intel. There is a difference.

He also knows that despite the improvements in security, the Iraqis have done next to nothing to improve conditions in Iraq (the surge was intended to give the Iraqis breathing room to make these changes).

So it's all a waste ot time and you and your brothers-in arms did nothing that mattered in Iraq. If that's the case then wait for the same reception Vietnam vets got as losers for losing a war. I don't buy it but I can see that attitude developing if Iraq goes the way of South Vietnam after we pulled out.

Hussien had chemical weapons (he used them on the Kurds) but we had credible evidence that he got rid of the chemical munitions prior to the invasion (the Bush administration knew this) but he sent in our military anyways. The intel was BS, but the intelligence community was either too afraid to say anything or coerced into going along with what the Bush administration wanted. It was a classic case of group think & not a proud moment in our history.

As for your second comment that is typical Republican rhetoric... ignore the facts & use the "if we get out now it's retreat" approach. How about put just a little emphasis on the fact we went there based on bad/false intel (you can argue honest mistake or intentional lie) & then Rumsfeld totally screwed up the execution until he was forced out of office (thank God). As for camparing Vietnam to Iraq you are dead on with that one... we went to war with Vietnam based on BS as well (Gulf of Tonkin).

So yea on a strategic level my time in Iraq was wasted. My company helped stand up a medical/dental outpatient clinic for Iraqis and that was worthwhile, so at least I can say we did something positive. If you are going to go to war with another country it should be for a valid reason (like WWII) and not for some concocted BS to achieve whatever ulterior motives you have (I believe Bush was trying to establish a strategic foothold in the Middle East & saw 9/11 as an opportunity to play off the increased patriotism to garner support). Now if Rumsfeld had actually done this competently the fact that we went there under false pretenses would be a mere * (nobody would care) but he screwed it up in almost every possible way.

Finally the American public (and I tend to bash them but they got this right) understands now that the Military men & women are doing a great service to our nation, regardless of how we feel about our government. For example I joined the military long before Bush was in office, so the fact that I am serving is in no way a seal of approval from me concerning his administration.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Another example is the war in Iraq... McCain knows damn well that the Bush administration started the war based on false intelligence (its not the liberals who think this, its pretty much an accepted fact, as no WMD's were ever found) yet McCain will never say this.

Hey, you're a veteran of the Iraq War, right? Weren't lot of troops in MOPP gear during the invasion? Why were ADA troops sent to Israel in 1998? Why were Iraqi generals wondering chemical weapons were going to be used? There is little evidence for false intelligence but there is a case for bad intel. There is a difference.

He also knows that despite the improvements in security, the Iraqis have done next to nothing to improve conditions in Iraq (the surge was intended to give the Iraqis breathing room to make these changes).

So it's all a waste ot time and you and your brothers-in arms did nothing that mattered in Iraq. If that's the case then wait for the same reception Vietnam vets got as losers for losing a war. I don't buy it but I can see that attitude developing if Iraq goes the way of South Vietnam after we pulled out.

Hussien had chemical weapons (he used them on the Kurds) but we had credible evidence that he got rid of the chemical munitions prior to the invasion (the Bush administration knew this) but he sent in our military anyways. The intel was BS, but the intelligence community was either too afraid to say anything or coerced into going along with what the Bush administration wanted. It was a classic case of group think & not a proud moment in our history.

As for your second comment that is typical Republican rhetoric... ignore the facts & use the "if we get out now it's retreat" approach. How about put just a little emphasis on the fact we went there based on bad/false intel (you can argue honest mistake or intentional lie) & then Rumsfeld totally screwed up the execution until he was forced out of office (thank God). As for camparing Vietnam to Iraq you are dead on with that one... we went to war with Vietnam based on BS as well (Gulf of Tonkin).

So yea on a strategic level my time in Iraq was wasted. My company helped stand up a medical/dental outpatient clinic for Iraqis and that was worthwhile, so at least I can say we did something positive. If you are going to go to war with another country it should be for a valid reason (like WWII) and not for some concocted BS to achieve whatever ulterior motives you have (I believe Bush was trying to establish a strategic foothold in the Middle East & saw 9/11 as an opportunity to play off the increased patriotism to garner support). Now if Rumsfeld had actually done this competently the fact that we went there under false pretenses would be a mere * (nobody would care) but he screwed it up in almost every possible way.

Finally the American public (and I tend to bash them but they got this right) understands now that the Military men & women are doing a great service to our nation, regardless of how we feel about our government. For example I joined the military long before Bush was in office, so the fact that I am serving is in no way a seal of approval from me concerning his administration.

SPIN CYCLE! sheesh!

[IAMX 3,055]

Another example is the war in Iraq... McCain knows damn well that the Bush administration started the war based on false intelligence (its not the liberals who think this, its pretty much an accepted fact, as no WMD's were ever found) yet McCain will never say this.

Hey, you're a veteran of the Iraq War, right? Weren't lot of troops in MOPP gear during the invasion? Why were ADA troops sent to Israel in 1998? Why were Iraqi generals wondering chemical weapons were going to be used? There is little evidence for false intelligence but there is a case for bad intel. There is a difference.

He also knows that despite the improvements in security, the Iraqis have done next to nothing to improve conditions in Iraq (the surge was intended to give the Iraqis breathing room to make these changes).

So it's all a waste ot time and you and your brothers-in arms did nothing that mattered in Iraq. If that's the case then wait for the same reception Vietnam vets got as losers for losing a war. I don't buy it but I can see that attitude developing if Iraq goes the way of South Vietnam after we pulled out.

Hussien had chemical weapons (he used them on the Kurds) but we had credible evidence that he got rid of the chemical munitions prior to the invasion (the Bush administration knew this) but he sent in our military anyways. The intel was BS, but the intelligence community was either too afraid to say anything or coerced into going along with what the Bush administration wanted. It was a classic case of group think & not a proud moment in our history.

As for your second comment that is typical Republican rhetoric... ignore the facts & use the "if we get out now it's retreat" approach. How about put just a little emphasis on the fact we went there based on bad/false intel (you can argue honest mistake or intentional lie) & then Rumsfeld totally screwed up the execution until he was forced out of office (thank God). As for camparing Vietnam to Iraq you are dead on with that one... we went to war with Vietnam based on BS as well (Gulf of Tonkin).

So yea on a strategic level my time in Iraq was wasted. My company helped stand up a medical/dental outpatient clinic for Iraqis and that was worthwhile, so at least I can say we did something positive. If you are going to go to war with another country it should be for a valid reason (like WWII) and not for some concocted BS to achieve whatever ulterior motives you have (I believe Bush was trying to establish a strategic foothold in the Middle East & saw 9/11 as an opportunity to play off the increased patriotism to garner support). Now if Rumsfeld had actually done this competently the fact that we went there under false pretenses would be a mere * (nobody would care) but he screwed it up in almost every possible way.

I wouldn't even suggest he was trying to establish a strategic foothold. Given how early on the "Mission Accomplished" bullshit occurred, he had no idea whatsoever what he was up against, no real plans, beyond convincing the public to go in there. He told his autobiographer/ghost writer before he was even elected he would go back to Iraq. The Administration had said even prior to 9/11 that Saddam had no capability of anything because his own armies were in chaos and disarray. Then 9/11 happens and wham like a magician he conjures up WMD's out of his a$$. Whoever questioned his motives for Iraq, like myself and others, were certainly in the right, while the idiots who were just spoon-feeding from the idiot's mouth were more or less contributing to the deaths of many Americans in Iraq for nothing. This administration is as serious about rooting out terrorism as Pat Robertson is tolerant of the non-religious. If anything it's shown it just uses terrorism as a justification for dropping bombs on people and taking more civil liberties away at home.

You're absolutely right to question your government, regardless of what people who try to trivialize your service try to suggest, that you should blindly serve. People were right to question Vietnam, people were/are right to question Iraq. There's plenty of illegitimacy in these politically based wars. If Bush was indeed serious about rooting out terrorism regarding 9/11, he'd have pursued those responsible for planning and attacking 9/11 until the end. Not diverted us to Iraq like he planned on doing, using 9/11 as an excuse.