|
Not to start a political debate, but IMO...
It does indeed sound dire until you take into account that the overwhelming majority of media reporting is biased and leans toward Democrats and the furtherance of their agenda (i.e.; regaining power in DC). This strikes me as yet another attempt to call into question the actions of the current president.
From the article:
"Thirty-eight U.S. troops have died this month, bringing the number of U.S. troops killed in the Iraq war to 398. Since President Bush declared an end to major combat May 1, 259 U.S. servicemen and women have been killed. "
Sounds to me that the case is being made (in a subtle fashion) that the president is responsible for a decision leading to the majority of all deaths in the Iraq war. In truth, he's responsible for ALL of them because he deemed it better to fight on their soil then ours. Not the perfect solution, granted, but if military personnel (who realize the risk of the commitment they've made) lay down their lives in Iraq so that innocent Americans do not face those same risks on American soil(GOD BLESS AMERICA!), I'd say that it's a reasonable resolution to an unreasonable threat (aka:terrorism).
All this "doom&gloom" reporting doesn't impress me much. I have friends and family serving in Iraq that give quite a different impression than what the media is reporting.
Personally, I think going into Iraq was the best solution for a pending threat-to eliminate the threat of widespread terrorism in the US by attacking it at the source. I hear people that think this was all unnecessary and have to think: "how many 9-11 style incidents would it take to convince them that taking an apathetic stand on this will only lead to more of the same?" For me it only took one. And whether any American reading this agrees or disagrees, remember that we have the right to express our views freely in this country because generations before us tackled these same kinds of issues (both on the battleground and as a society) and gave us Freedom.
| 
Linear Mode
