[Preechr]

"'Humane conflict effort ' as a substitute for the word 'War' is hysterical in any context, as long as you like black comedy..."~Max

OkOk... So I was trying to make it obvious that I'm not hedging out the various "conflicts" or "actions" we've engaged in over the years by using "conflict effort." We have not actually had an honest to goodness WAR since WWII, if you want to get all squidgy about it... On that note, I'd say NOW is a bit late to worry about Presidents that take on too much responsibility... especially in the light of Wild Bill's war record.

You did hear that rumor that Clinton was responsible for more military actions (all by executive order) during his two terms than all the years till 1992 folowing WWII, right? I never did see that one on snopes, so I'm gonna present it as truth until either I (unlikely) or someone more interested disproves it...

"Not a huge Clinton fan either but the "blowjob lie" never made anybody dead ... well no one I know of anyway..."~kelly

Look up Kosovo. I believe that was the place none of us had heard of that was bombed one night to distract us from Bill's Blow-Job and perjury trial.

So far, Iraq at war has only produced about 5 times the amount of intentional deaths per person as America does in any given year... and that's using death toll numbers from anti-war sources which I'm sure are inflated a tad. That's no accident. I agree that war is bad, but you can surely see that, prosecuted using what has become traditional American tactics, it would have been MUCH worse.

We could have also saved several billions of dollars by using fewer "smart" munitions, but that would have cost MANY more innocent lives. Wouldn't spending billions of dollars to save lives be considered humane? I mean, that's a lot of Oil profits down the drain, isn't it?

"...but you're asking to discount questions of right and wrong is bizarre.

Even if it was right, it's a hell of stretch to use 'humane' as a word to describe the dropping of bombs. If it was wrong, then it's mass murder..."~Max

Right and wrong is a question of politics, and I was trying to separate politics from the deliberate actions of our soldiers and military minds. I've been trying to respond to you in that vein, but it's pretty hard. The only reason I'm attempting it at all is to keep the discussion in the arena of "Not having to agree with Bush," because I know I can't expect that from you guys.

I still don't see me being a sheep here... You want to talk economy or Homeland Security or internal policy in general, and I'll show you the things I dislike Bush for. On Iraq, however, or the middle east in general for that matter, I'm pretty much agreeing with the administration. That alone isn't enough, however, for me to defend the war, since I kinda think an administration should be good at more than just one thing, no matter how good it is at that one thing.

The reason I'm defending the war efforts of THE COALITION here is that I don't like seeing such positive efforts dismissed to off-handedly by partisans intent on smearing Bush just to gain some advantage in some election. War was done, and it was done VERY well. There are plenty of other, more substantial things to criticize Bush for. Maybe you guys should spend your time on that!

Sorry if this is disjointed or incoherent. Trying to do three things at once, and my lunch break is now over...

I'll check back in a bit