What does it mean to be "strong on defense"? I'm against this war and...

[fujiyama]

and consider myself "strong on defense" and I have no interest in being lectured by the likea of PNAC Marshall and From and several posters here on DU whose names I won't mention.. I'm tired of these ass holes questioning anyone's patriotism.

The DLC, like Bush talks a tough talk of being "tough on defense". Well, guess what? This government ISN'T tough on defense. In fact they've squandered it. We haven't laid a hand on Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, the latter of which is a country that almost every major terrorist attack in the last ten years leads back to.

Instead I've been told that because I found it fuckin stupid to invade a nation which posed no major threat to us, that I'm "soft on defense".

Well, here's a response. Fuck YOu. Yeah, I'm not going to mince words. I'm tired of being smeared with Zell Miller talking points, which Marshall and From are so fond of using.

[BrainRants]

1. Iraq is not a war of defense, it's a war of offense.

So I don't think it's accurate to conflate the topic of "defensive strength" in a discussion about Iraq. At least that's my frame of the issue.

On the other hand, I strongly supported the war with Afghanistan, which was a war of defense against the Taliban, who are now regrouping and gaining strength again. This clearly puts Republicans claims of defensive strength in tatters.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

2. AHAH!

you figured out just how they stole the "logic" of most of the country.

Only trouble is that soft on defense means, drop your pants and bend over. I doubt, from the little I have seen here, that anyone is soft on defending against a real, recognizable threat to our country.

Iraq has nothing to do with defense.

[Jacobin]

3. Currently, that phrase means that you approve of using

appealing but misleading words to describe your true intent of world conquest and domination.

See: "Patriot Act"

[sweetheart]

4. It goes hand in hand with "the best defense is a strong offense."

And deductively, those who rely on the "strong on defense" thinking are...
"OFFENSIVE".

They think war is football, and have totally lost the plot.

[fujiyama]

5. .

[Guaranteed]

6. You're strong on defense. We need more like you. nt

[fujiyama]

8. I'm tired

of having the likes of From and Marshal question my patriotism. The thing that really set me off was them stating that we've had "some success in Afghanistand and Iraq".

These idiots still can't get it in their head that Iraq has nothing to do with the "war on terror". As long as they have conceded that point, we will continue to lose and deservedly to some extent.

[Guaranteed]

10. Dead on. nt

[seabeyond]

7. so this is what the to do with dlc has created. now we get from our

own dems if we see repugs fuckin up iraq. and know they went in without warrant. and know every step of the way has been greed. and we know they arent taking care of soldiers over there or once they get home. we know they have allowed an atmosphere to create iraqi's as less than human and have promoted torture putting soldiers in a lifetime of guilt and pain for follwing order, whether they see it now or not. we know they dont have exit plan. we know they arent going to win. we know innocent babies, and children and women and men will be murdered and mutilated. and we know there isnt any decent living enviroment for the iraqi's.

then our FELLOW DEMS are saying we are soft on defense.

is this what dlc wants me to buy. is this what i am going to get from dems.

i call bullshit too

[leesa]

9. Bombing countries to end terrorism has worked really well, don't you think

I wonder if Americans have learned anything during this adventure?

[stevietheman]

11. Totally agreed

The Iraq war was illegal naked aggression without rationale that the American people were lied into.

After all we know today, there's no way around this. And anyone (even including Democrats) who still supports the criminal Bush regime and this failed adventure in Iraq are the unpatriotic ones.

Being "strong on defense" does *not* mean that the United States should be an offensive aggressor. It *should* mean that the U.S. will *defend* itself against *real* enemies. And it that respect, I am indeed "strong on defense."