After an exhausting session with Victoria's Secret Police, Ed Rasimus
confessed the following as a follow-up to Walt:

Do you seem me assigning the term to Juvat, or am I pointing out the
rhetorical weaknesses of his argument?

Uhhh, well I actually thought you were calling me a "dedicated
liberal." But I am not offended by that at all. I confess I also
thought you meant it in a pejorative context. Which made me laugh, "If
Ed thinks that'll hurt my feeling, he's crazier than I thought!"

He failed to address the question and he couched
his comments in the terms I indicated.

Pffft. Ed you must have missed my long retort on 25 May (that you
didn't respond to) where I clearly disabused you of the notion that
ONLY liberals refer to Bush's elite as neocons. I cited The American
Conservative magazine (which you **should be aware of** if you are
indeed a "dedicated conservative" as you profess) and Karen
Kwiatkowski (LtCol USAF-Ret). Neocon is a term used by Pat Buchanan...

March 24, 2003 issue
Copyright © 2003 The American Conservative

[title]Whose War?

A neoconservative clique seeks to ensnare our country in a series of
wars that are not in America’s interest.

"Not in our lifetimes has America been so isolated from old friends.
Far worse, President Bush is being lured into a trap baited for him by
these neocons that could cost him his office and cause America to
forfeit years of peace won for us by the sacrifices of two generations
in the Cold War."

Hmmm, Ed it would appear that you were not aware that some
"traditional conservatives," consider gwb's top advisors NEOCONS.

Trust me, I care very much about the folks in uniform. I understand
very well the difficulty in being at the point of the spear of
national policy. I also understand very well the difficulty of being
out there at the point while nay-sayers, pacifists, defeatists and
"America-lasters" undermine the support of the mission. Been there,
experienced it first hand.

This is where I'll raise the BULL**** flag. It's BULL**** to say
opposition to flawed foreign policy should take the blame for that
flawed policy. Next you're gonna tell us that our negative thoughts
are gonna get troops killed (like we're holding an RPG aimed at US
troops). That is just so intellectually weak. Blame the French, blame
the Germans, blame the liberals and the folks at The American
Conservative.

That is so friggin lame to blame voters for this **** up...okay let me
rephrase that, you're right to blame the voters that voted gwb into
office for this ****ed up foreign policy. But don't blame folks like
me that oppose gwb (and his neocons as described by the American
Conservative).

Our military is undefeated on the battlefield since Korea. We'll kick
ass and take names (and strip'em, cuff 'em, pose them in sexual
positions etc) but we won't lose on the battlefield. Ten thousand
attaboys and one "aw-****" wipes the entire slate clean. This is a big
"aw-****!"

The Sadaam regime was toppled in ten days, not ten weeks, months or
years. If that equals mismanagement, then your standard is different
than mine.

I'm pretty sure he was addressing the events following those
fortuitous 10 days. Things like the looting in cities to which
Rumsfeld correctly observed, "Democracy is messy." Sure but Iraq is
not a democracy yet...not even close. The USA is a democracy, it's
messy, and it surely beats all of us singing the praises of gwb and
the neocon advisors.

The situation in Iraq is not a made-for-TV scenario. There are three
distinct factions competing for supremacy--Shi'a, Sunni and Kurd. They
don't much like each other, and it isn't suprising that they also
don't like an occupation force trying to keep things balanced.

So Ed, did you assume that we would be greeted as liberators? I
didn't. Nor did I expect to see photos of US troops abusing prisoners
(another "aw-****")

Have we heard from the opposition in America what they would
specifically do different? Cut and run? Turn it over to the UN--those
are the folks that gave us "oil-for-food" and made billionaires out of
several less than savory functionaries.

Well during the 2000 campaign gwb expressed the opinion that the USA
should not be in the business of "nation building." And yet here we
are. I think he was right...that we should not be in the business of
nation building.

Sincerely. I don't think any of us, (what were the terms you used for
us? oh yeah) nay-sayers, pacifists, defeatists and "America-lasters"
would have invaded Iraq. So to ask what we would do NOW...good
question. Kinda hard to blame us for opposing a course of action that
we wouldn't have taken (I personally wanted UN support before we
kicked SH's ass). gwb squandered all that international goodwill we
had earned becasue of 9/11...poor diplomatic skills.

Trust me. I teach political science at the local college. I teach
international relations as part of the job....
I am not particularly prone to emotionalism...

But like all of us, you are not without this personal failing from
time to time regardless of what you might wish.

and I like to couch my political discourse in objective
analysis...

Interestingly enough, you give the short shrift to mere mortals here
but gladly acknowledge that Generals (Zinni, Clark) can have a
difference of opinion (offering the same critiques).

I respect you, I respect you're opinion. I'll not change your opinion,
nor will you change mine.

Have a Great Weekend.

Robey