I'm not going to jump on your case
but I do want to point out some flaws. Once again, that makes things way too simplistic.
A couple days ago I saw a rally: Veterans Against War in Iraq. To assume that every soldier is for this war is ludicrous. There are plenty of veterans that aren't, and I'd be willing to bet that there are more than a handful of soldiers over there in Iraq right now that don't agree with the war. But they're doing it because that's their job.
By referring to the soldiers "as fathers, brothers and sons," he left out a very valuable faction of soldiers -- what about the women? A side issue, I know, but I thought it was disrespectful.
I agree that sometimes wars must be fought in order for America to retain its power -- IF our country is being threatened, then wars are justified. This one, in my opinion, was not, because we weren't being threatened.
And it completely ignores the fact that there are many out there who are both protesting AND praying for our troops. The two are not mutually exclusive.
Silver Turtle -- thank you for posting that. I agree with all your anti-war points, and to an extent with some of your pro-war ones. I think there are quite a few protesters out there who DON'T have a clue what they're talking about politically (although I don't think they're in any way the majority -- as usual, the stupider and more extreme you are, the more likely it is that you'll get publicity) . . . but I think that should be okay if they feel in their hearts that war in this case is wrong. Hey, there are plenty of people who are pro-war for the simple fact that they feel it's right, and nobody's questioning them.
I do think oil is AN issue, and anybody who claims it isn't would have to be blind, but it is definitely a side issue . . . I do think Bush has somewhat better intentions than that in leading us into this war, and I don't think he'd start a war solely for the sake of oil.
AlphaGam1019 -- we discussed those interviews (or similar ones, maybe) earlier in this thread. Basically, while they may be true, they are by no means universally true, and thus don't serve as very good evidence. Surely there are people in Iraq who want to be liberated. There are also clearly many who don't, or who don't care, or who would prefer not to risk their lives for the sake of freedom.
From this article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/2895849.stm
a soldier says: "We always had the idea that everyone in this area hated Saddam. Clearly, there are a number who don't." I'm not sure what sparked this response, but it seems obvious that they had found some people who didn't want to be "liberated." I also heard a quote from another woman, who, after being significantly injured by one of the bombs, was being dragged off to get medical attention. Bloody and crying, she screamed to the reporter: "Bush, listen carefully! We don't want your liberation . . . we all love Saddam."
Not exactly what our government has been telling us.