Skip to main content

View Diary: UPDATE: Fight the Veto (321 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Rejoinder (0+ / 0-)

    If this is a war, then who is our enemy?

    Where is the battlefield?

    What territory must we take?

    What would "winning" mean?

    What will we gain when we "win"?

    I opposed the misadventure in Iraq from the very outset.  I still think it was stupid, and morally wrong, and lots of other negatives.  It was a "war" when we were facing the Iraqi Army, and perhaps even when we were hunting down Saddam and his sons.  Not much more than that, though.

    Of course it's messy, and bloody awful.  But we can't "win" because there isn't any military goal.  We're just staying there to prove we can stay there.  It serves no purpose.  

    My main point, though, is that the Repulicons like to frame the mess in Iraq as a "war" because it makes people feel that we have to "win" and that leaving = losing.  And they don't want to "lose."  But if you don't talk in those terms, it's easier to see that leaving is just leaving, and staying isn't "winning."

    You do want to persuade the American people that it's okay to leave, right?  I just think that talking about a "war" isn't an effective way to do so.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site