Sheehan.
May 29th, 2007
It would appear cutting and running isn’t exclusive to Democratic politicians. Now Cindy Sheehan is jumping ship from the anti-war movement and going home.
Quitter.
Welcome! If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
May 30th, 2007 at 3:50 pm
good riddance
May 31st, 2007 at 1:35 pm
In other recent news, I’ve decided to devote my entire support to the war in Iraq. As soon as townhomes start going up, I’m moving there to support a permanent American occupation.
On second thought, since I was recently told by an aquaintance that I am very “green” (intending the political/environmental type green), I guess I’ll continue my adamant opposition to the war.
I don’t want to disrupt appearances.
May 31st, 2007 at 1:38 pm
Well, you can already go over there and walk thru markets, much like you can in any town in the USA. It’s only a matter of time until affordable townhomes start popping up.
May 31st, 2007 at 2:33 pm
Somewhere I heard the phrase once, “When there is blood in the streets, buy property.”
May 31st, 2007 at 3:38 pm
Now might be a good time to start looking at real estate, then.
As of today, 119 Americans have died this month alone.
May 31st, 2007 at 8:02 pm
and how many Iraqi’s ?
May 31st, 2007 at 8:56 pm
Hundreds of civilians die every week in Baghdad alone. Usually, a few uniformed soldiers or civilians just turn up in the streets or river after going missing. Then of course, there are the suicide bombings. It’s hard to keep a reliable count, but over 30 Iraqis died today alone.
May 31st, 2007 at 9:47 pm
and less will die if we leave? Since it’s obviously us doing the killing.
May 31st, 2007 at 10:10 pm
1) Less Americans will die when we leave, by definition. As this “surge” continues, we simply have put more US Soldiers out there as targets for snipers, IEDs, and ambushes. Frankly, that’s all that matters, because:
2) The number of Iraqis that will die will not change significantly either way, regardless of our presence. We have certainly proven, after more than four years, that we cannot effect change insofar as security is related. In fact, the violence has done nothing but increase over time, with attacks against Government & civilians becoming more and more violent and co-ordinated.
You seem to agree that we cannot stop the tide of murders, so why do you think it is best that we stay? To simply keep the status quo? We cannot outkill or outwait the members of a sectarian conflict dating back to the origins of Islam itself. I just got done reading a book by Christopher Hitchens that addresses this conflict’s origin, along with most other religious sectarian violence’s roots … and it’s evident that sending 30,000 more troops won’t be the solution to our problems in Iraq.
We can stay for 7 more days or 7 more years and the final result will be the same - thousands of innocent Iraqis will die, the country will be torn by civil war for quite some time, and at some point, Iran will ultimately exert it’s influence over Iraq and become more powerful than it was before. Funny, by getting rid of one of the ‘axis of evil’ members, we have simply empowered another exponentially.
June 1st, 2007 at 8:04 am
On a lighter note …