gandalf: Geez, you always throw lots of stuff out late at night. I’m reading this really good book and now I’m torn between reading that and responding here.
So, I’ll do the compromise thing and address part of what you said and come back to the remainder tomorrow.
As far as Iraq goes: I am torn, mainly because I did support the case for war and not due to the rationale of having a forward base of operations. I did find the casus belli somewhat compelling and, after Halabja and chem use during Iran-Iraq War and Saddam’s attempts to weaponize botulin, etc, etc, etc, I thought that removing him would have a salutary effect on the region. Had the war been prosecuted more efficiently (according to the DepState plan) we might be looking at a different equation. Of course, as my uncle said, If your aunt had wheels she’d be a teacart, and we’re not. I think we finish what we started and GTFO as soon as proves practicable (and by that I would defer to the theater commander).
Shit. I didn’t want to do chapter and verse on Iraq, but wanted to address the baby boomer question. I agree. I’m 43 and pissed at hell at these self-indulgent, Harley driving, Viagra popping, little pissants. Let the 60s and Vietnam go, man, and get with the program. I am all for new blood and remembering that 1968 is 40 years in the friggin’ past now. That is my major issue with these aging, counterculture “red diaper baby” leftists. They are all rooted in the past, with a soundtrack provided by Bob Dylan, but they all drive Benzes or Beemers and have vacation homes and mutual funds. Viva la revolucion, baby!
I’m with you on the issue of change, I just don’t agree that the agent of change is Obama. It sure as hell ain’t McCain, either (obviously).
