The audacity of the right never ceases to amaze me

In response to NZ Bear.

What is relevant are answers. Solutions, not a list of problems. Declaring that Iraq is a mess is easy, and worthless. Telling us what we should do to fix it is harder, but far more worthwhile. Don't like the operation in Falluja? Fine: how else would you stop the terrorists? Think we should involve allies more in Iraq? Great. How?

Solutions? How? What should we do? Gee NZ Bear, I honestly don't know why you're asking us. Bush is, after all, you're president. You and your friends are the ones that voted for him. We're the ones who tried warning you before this war started that taking over Iraq is illegal, immoral, would become the next Vietnam, and would be one of the biggest foreign policy blunders in the history of the United States.

But did you listen to us then? No, of course not, because you thought you knew better. Well, guess what? -- You didn't. So my answer to you is to go find your own solution. Not only did you help create the problem, but you won't listen to our solutions anyway. We could have brought more allies into the fold if you would have voted for a president that the world could trust, but you didn't. So don't you dare try to place the burden on me and my people for your mistakes. We warned you about what would happen, but you decided not to listen in the first place, so don't even try pinning the blame on us for Iraq now.

But if you actually want a solution, I got one for you. Quick and dirty: Pull our troops out of Iraq and fight the actual enemy, al-Qa'ida.

Our nation is at war. We are not screwing around; this is not a game. A better decision now means fewer people die later. It's that simple, and that's why we need your help. You will think of things that this administration and its supporters won't --- and can't. If you can get past the knee-jerk urge to slam Bush because --- well, because he's Bush --- you can make a contribution to the safety and welfare of this country. Assuming that still matters to you, even with a Republican in the White House for four more years.

NZ Bear, don't you dare question my patriotism just because I don't agree with you or Bush. Being against the war in Iraq doesn't mean I want soldiers to die; quite the contrary, I want them to live. All of them. I have friends over there too, you know. Do you actually think I want them coming home in a bodybag? Is this honestly the low opinion you hold for anyone who disagrees with you? And do you actually think we're not worried about "the safety and welfare of this country?" What do you think happens at Democrat and Green party meetings, NZ Bear; we sit around, rubbing our hands together mischievously, grinning from ear-to-ear as we plot the demise of this country?

Honestly, let's get serious here.

What I'm most worried about, NZ Bear, is a repeat of the Vietnam war. I know with my mention of the issue, you've probably cupped your hands around you ears and started screaming, "LA LA LA LA LA, I'M NOOOOT LISTEEEENNNIIIINNNGGG!," but I'm just telling you what I believe. It's the same belief I held before the war, and I see no reason to waver from it. I'm well aware that Falluja isn't a game, but I don't think you understand the kind of war we're fighting: Guerilla Warfare. Many of the Iraqis being killed in Falluja are innocent, and for every innocent civilian you kill in a war against a guerilla army, the longer you're in the country fighting this enemy. It's simple math, NZ Bear: They have more people than us, and for every innocent civilian we've killed, we've just galvanized some of his family and friends to go fight against us. We've just created more enemies.

As far as the the operation in Falluja itself, what's the point of it? Who are we fighting? There were rumors that a large scale operation like this would happen after the election, so do you actually think the insurgents we're supposed to fight decided to stick around for the bloodbath? I doubt, as far as military strategy goes, this battle will mean much of anything in the long run. Five years from now, when we have more troops committed to a pointless war in Iraq, who among us will remember Falluja?

The Vietnam War killed over 40,000 of our soldiers, NZ Bear. And because Bush refuses to take the threat of al-Qa'ida seriously, more people on our soil could die from a terrorist attack. The next time you question anybody's resolve for protecting "the safety and welfare of this country" just because they don't agree with you, NZ Bear, maybe you should keep those two things in mind.

12:42 Update - Lauren left a great comment, providing this link to Tom Burka's explaination of Falluja. It. Explains. Everything.

And LM part-time blogger Matt left this comment which I'm publishing because it's so well-stated that I want to get as many eyeballs as possible reading it.

I love the right. They have such valid points. I mean, just because I do not think that Bush is a good president-elect, I must be a terrorist sympathiser. I must hate America and everything here. I must have no morals or values, and must drink baby fat for my evil powers.

Being in the age range that I am, most of the people in Iraq fighting this farse are my age, maybe a few years older, and mostly, a few years younger. Thinking about it this way, it makes we wonder how people in a similar situation, during Vietnam, felt, when they saw that their generation was being killed. Now I know how the British, German, and French felt after WWI, having their entire generation wiped off the face of the earth. Its not a good feeling. I look at the list of soliders killed (whenever it is available, thanks Bush), to see if there is anyone that I knew on there, people I went to school with, people I used to hang out with, and things like that.

Republicans support this war, just because Bush says its good. It is about WMD, well, Saddam, well, Democracy, well.. let's be honest. Oil. Why should my generation be wiped off the face of the earth, just because Bush and his cronies want oil profits? Shouldn't it be a bunch of Republicans over there fighting, because its their cause?

Saddam was no direct threat to the US. Could he have attacked the US? Did he attack the US? No. Osama bin Laden (Usama for you Republicans)attacked the US. Osama can still attack the US, if he wants. Why is he still at large?

Why can't I go and piss on his corpse whenever I want to? Why can't I go throw shit at him when I want to? Because Bush decided that if he caught Osama, his "war on terror" would trickle away slowly, and he couldn't have justified(ha!) invading the soverign nation of Iraq, and murdering ten's of thousands of civilians, which are creating ten's of thousands of insurgants.

As Tas said, you kill 1 guy, you have his/her whole family wanting to see the US fail. You kill a family, you have a whole neighborhood gunning for you. I mean, I'll end with this comment:

The Shi'ites and Sunni's are working together against the US troops. What the fuck? They've been fighting each other for over 1000 years. Why, all of a sudden, are they working together? Because, simply, we are the terrorists. We are killing their citizens. We are the foreign invaders.