Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
I do too. It was nice that for a while we could send the cruise missles in to pop a target and not worry about what the body count of American soldiers for the next 6 months was going to be. Even the bombing of Lybia was better than what we've got going now in Iraq.
|
I thought that the youtube link I posted to the Ned Lamont campaign ad....might result in discussion of how obvious it is why a majority of voters in the august Connecticut senate primary chose challenger Lamont as the party's senate candidate, instead of Joe Lieberman....and that it follows that the difference between the president's and republican "stay the course" or "cut and run" effort to stifle all debate on more realistic examination, advocated by Ned Lamont and some other democrats...... of the current situation of US military involvement in Iraq, the trends toward an improving situation of stability in Iraq....or not, and when and how to reduce US involvement in Iraq, is a core issue in the coming mid-term election.
The difference between Lamont's position on what to do about Iraq, and Lieberman's/the Bush administration's seems to be made clear by Lamont campaign ad. Lamont's opponent is distancing himself from his earlier attempt to stifle discussion of what to do about the US quagmire in Iraq.... but has no inclination to discuss what to do next, or to examine where we are now....