I was against the invasion of Iraq because it was based on false concepts.
I'm a Korean veteran and I know that folks don't like to be invaded even by the "good guys.
" I knew that during Bush War I we had killed and maimed many thousands of Iraqis, destroyed their infrastructure (which means their communications, transportation, and hamburger joints), and made their orphans, widows, brother-in-laws, and friends mad as hell.
We would not be welcomed a la Vice President Cheney.
Obviously a lot of those folks are still mad as hell.
Also, I am an engineer and I was not impressed by the WMD presentation at the United Nations any more than Colin Powell was.
Poor Colin "looked the fool" which he isn't.
We could have waited a while for the inspectors to finish their job rather than rushing in hell mell with few friends.
But Bush has a point.
We are in Iraq.
Iraq is very important to us because of their strategic location, and because, as Vice President Cheney and President Bush noticed, they have oil.
They just love oil.
We invaded with considerable force, Saddam's army decided not to fight as he said it would and performed about as well as it did in Bush War I.
Everything looked good and our army armed with a deck of cards started looking for jacks, queens, kings, and aces.
They found a bunch of them and even caught Saddam in a rabbit hole.
His two worthless sons decided to shoot it out a la Japanese.
(I've been watching too many Pacific War documentaries.
) After the war settled down it took a new turn for the worse.
Now a state of civil war exists cheered on by Iran and the Taliban.
President Bush said in his speech that he knows where the Taliban nest is in Iraq.
He didn't mention that it wasn't there when our troops first walked down the streets.
Why should he? I've decided that it is too tiresome to be anti President Bush every day Life is too short.
Besides, he seems to be a likable sort.
Now I wouldn't want to sit in on a discussion on the latest black hole grouping recently discovered related to the origin of the universe, but I would like to sit in a row boat with him, smelling my arm pits as Senator Humphrey once said, catching a mess of mud cats.
The President has a point that everybody agrees with as long as it doesn't mean more troops and longer stays.
We need to stabilize the area.
We need to have a good influence there and we need the oil.
So, what if we do add 20,000 troops to do that? Haven't we spent a huge amount of money and human resources already? Can we let that expenditure become worthless? Many politicians and news people have little hope for President Bush's plan.
But I say, they can not predict the outcome.
It might just work because the darnedest things happen during war.
In Korea we got clobbered at times after "good" planning.
During WW II, our troops were in horrible situations many times.
But they pulled it out just as things looked extremely grave.
Did you happen to watch the Boise State / Oklahoma football game? Both teams had their moments of glory and moment of depression where the outcome was absolutely sure.
The war in Iraq is like that football game: It isn't over until it's over.
As the Boise State quarterback said, "It's not over until the clock says zero.
" So why not give President Bush what he wants plus give him a pat on the back to encourage him to do it right with all of our support? We'll know the outcome before you know it and then the troops can come home.
Well, that will never happen with politicians but it can happen with the American People who sometimes are prone to give a man a second chance.
THE END
I'm a Korean veteran and I know that folks don't like to be invaded even by the "good guys.
" I knew that during Bush War I we had killed and maimed many thousands of Iraqis, destroyed their infrastructure (which means their communications, transportation, and hamburger joints), and made their orphans, widows, brother-in-laws, and friends mad as hell.
We would not be welcomed a la Vice President Cheney.
Obviously a lot of those folks are still mad as hell.
Also, I am an engineer and I was not impressed by the WMD presentation at the United Nations any more than Colin Powell was.
Poor Colin "looked the fool" which he isn't.
We could have waited a while for the inspectors to finish their job rather than rushing in hell mell with few friends.
But Bush has a point.
We are in Iraq.
Iraq is very important to us because of their strategic location, and because, as Vice President Cheney and President Bush noticed, they have oil.
They just love oil.
We invaded with considerable force, Saddam's army decided not to fight as he said it would and performed about as well as it did in Bush War I.
Everything looked good and our army armed with a deck of cards started looking for jacks, queens, kings, and aces.
They found a bunch of them and even caught Saddam in a rabbit hole.
His two worthless sons decided to shoot it out a la Japanese.
(I've been watching too many Pacific War documentaries.
) After the war settled down it took a new turn for the worse.
Now a state of civil war exists cheered on by Iran and the Taliban.
President Bush said in his speech that he knows where the Taliban nest is in Iraq.
He didn't mention that it wasn't there when our troops first walked down the streets.
Why should he? I've decided that it is too tiresome to be anti President Bush every day Life is too short.
Besides, he seems to be a likable sort.
Now I wouldn't want to sit in on a discussion on the latest black hole grouping recently discovered related to the origin of the universe, but I would like to sit in a row boat with him, smelling my arm pits as Senator Humphrey once said, catching a mess of mud cats.
The President has a point that everybody agrees with as long as it doesn't mean more troops and longer stays.
We need to stabilize the area.
We need to have a good influence there and we need the oil.
So, what if we do add 20,000 troops to do that? Haven't we spent a huge amount of money and human resources already? Can we let that expenditure become worthless? Many politicians and news people have little hope for President Bush's plan.
But I say, they can not predict the outcome.
It might just work because the darnedest things happen during war.
In Korea we got clobbered at times after "good" planning.
During WW II, our troops were in horrible situations many times.
But they pulled it out just as things looked extremely grave.
Did you happen to watch the Boise State / Oklahoma football game? Both teams had their moments of glory and moment of depression where the outcome was absolutely sure.
The war in Iraq is like that football game: It isn't over until it's over.
As the Boise State quarterback said, "It's not over until the clock says zero.
" So why not give President Bush what he wants plus give him a pat on the back to encourage him to do it right with all of our support? We'll know the outcome before you know it and then the troops can come home.
Well, that will never happen with politicians but it can happen with the American People who sometimes are prone to give a man a second chance.
THE END
Source...