What's a commie lib politician to do? What they always do. Live in denial. Messrs.O'Hanlon and Pollack would do well to watch their backs now. They are marked men and traitors to the Daily Kos crowd. As is any lib who dares to speak the truth when it disagrees with the moonbats twisted perception of the events of the world.

Speaking of the moonbats, I'm kind of surprised that one of the resident moonbats hasn't stepped forward to take issue with the O'Hanlon and Pollack's assertions.

I read this post at work, and though it is drenched in Steve's typical partisan invective, I thought the topic and article were worth commenting on. I came back here to do exactly that, but after seeing Lisa and Steve's inane additions, I am struck by the pointlessness of doing so.

But since I'm already commenting, I'll go ahead and keep it really brief. First: if these guys are right and things in Iraq are generally improving, and there can be a happy ending, then we certainly should stay. Second: perhaps Steve overestimates the monolithic authority of the New York Times among commie lib moonbats. It's one article -- relax. This is not quite the Proof You've Been Waiting For.

"...it is, in fact, an absurdity to even consider that the finest fighting force the world has ever seen could possibly LOSE this war..."

I'm glad to hear that we're making progress in Iraq. I've supported this war from the beginning, however it was obvious that Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz did not have the commitment when they disagreed with and publicly humiliated General Shinseki about troop levels. Everything since that moment has been an uphill battle.

Steve, your comment is both arrogant and dangerous. It's the same kind of thinking that was displayed by Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz and it's the reason we're in this mess today. Winning this war will not be about technology or military strength. It will be about the enemy's resolve to continue fighting. Most Americans do not want this war and it's reflected in recruiting numbers, which are at an all-time low. One soldier is now suing the government to prevent a fourth consecutive deployment, and quite frankly, I sympathize with him.

We learned nothing from Vietnam. We brought technological & military superiority against the North Vietnamese. Our kill to death ratio far exceeded theirs. Yet, the North Vietnamese had something we did not. They had the will to continue fighting. They never backed down. That's why we weren't successful in Vietnam. That's why we may not be successful in Iraq. And Iraq, I daresay, with an indistinct aggressor, is a much more difficult combat environment.

The other thing that is equally dangerous and I've said it since the beginning... the United States does not respect Islam and Muslims know it. They distrust us. We will never court the Muslim world with the attitude we have today. Free speech should always be tempered with the wisdom of knowing when to shut up.

The United States is not invincible. We have technological and military superiority, but we can still lose this war just as we can lose any war if we don't display the resolve needed to win.

Good thing Some Fella and JNE posted on here; it takes the focus off of the craziness from the original posts and first two responses. Some Fella you are alway refreshing and rational with your responses to the kiddy partisan antics on PME. JNE- Shit, I thought your post was amazing! You hit the nail on the head, unlike Steve and Lisa who don't seem to understand the situation and only want to be able to carry on hating day after day. Thank you JNE for an AWESOME post, I totally agree with it, it's one of the best because of it's short, sweet and to the point nature - great job.

JNE, you say "we learned nothing from Vietnam". We? Who is this "we" you speak of? A great many of us learned exactly why we lost there. It is happening all over again in this war. It is the so-called "mainstream" media's constant drumbeat of death and failure that is once again demoralizing American citizens. THAT, my friend, is why we gave up in Vietnam. Your claim of a lack of "respect" for Islam is so laughable I cannot believe you are seriously saying it. This country falls all over itself bowing down to muslims. As does Europe. Gets us all alot doesn't it? THEY distrust US?!! Are you for real? So JNE, what SHOULD our "attitude" be? Your last sentence is correct, but you don't seem to understand where the lack of resolve is being created, and by whom.

SSE, So tell me why I want to "carry on hating day after day"? On second thought, don't bother. You thoughts aren't worth my time.

Please, nobody waste your time replying to Lisa. The less you talk to her, the less she posts.

I will respond to her.

Lisa, you know very little of Vietnam. Pick up a book written by the men who fought there. Pick up "We Were Soldiers... Once and Young." Not the movie. The book. Listen to what the Generals who fought there have to say. The US did not have the resolve to win. We were fighting on someone elses turf... an enemy who had been fighting there for years against the French, an enemy who could replace one dead soldier with two living ones.

Now, in Iraq, we are facing the same situation... yet there is no clear aggressor. There are no uniformed soldiers. This isnt a question of whether or not the media and nation approves of this war. This nation stood behind the presidency when the war began. It began to falter when it became clear we couldnt control the insurgency. Why couldnt we control the insurgency? General Shinseki said it would take several hundred thousand troops to secure Iraq. Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz thought they knew better and led our nation into a quagmire. We probably could have secured Iraq in the beginning, but our leaders did not have the resolve to do so... to call up several hundred thousand troops. Now we are paying for that mistake. Now the American public is tired ot this war... of the mistakes. The troop surges are helping... but didnt General Shinseki say that four years ago?

Lisa, you do not respect Islam. You have not fallen all over yourself, bowing down to Muslims. That is exactly the attitude I am talking about. No, they dont trust us. Just as you see every Muslim as harbingers of intolerance and violence, so too do they see you in that same light. There are misconceptions on both sides. The difference is that they are not over here trying to build a nation... but that is exactly what we are doing over there. As such, we are the ones who need to gain their trust... not the other way around.

For all your enlightenment, you really are closed minded. Perhaps a bit of prayer might help you to love your fellow man a bit more.

The SOLDIERS in Vietnam did have the resolve to fight. The political leadership did not.

The American public is "tired of this war?" Too bad. We're in it. And if we aren't in it to win, we're in it to lose--and that means a lot more death here at home, a complete breakdown of the stability of the region--which would leave Iran in charge over there for a long, long time--and paint the image of America for years to come as a nation that quits, leaves, and can't be depended on.

Kerry, I said the US did not have the resolve to win the war. I never said anything about the soldiers because every soldier is different. Having said that, there is a reason why a significant percentage of US combatants in Vietnam were draftees. Most of the soldiers after 1965 didn't even know why they had been sent to Vietnam. The only resolve many of them had was to survive. To go home and forget that Vietnam even existed.

"The American public is "tired of this war?" Too bad."

"Too bad" doesn't enourage Americans to line up at recruting stations. "Too bad" doesn't keep out soldiers from three, four or five consecutive combat deployments.

"We're in it. And if we aren't in it to win, we're in it to lose--and that means a lot more death here at home, a complete breakdown of the stability of the region--which would leave Iran in charge over there for a long, long time--and paint the image of America for years to come as a nation that quits, leaves, and can't be depended on."

Obviously. I never suggested giving up. I said I'm glad to see that we're making progress. I said we could have made the same progress four years ago had Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz not been morons. In fact, Iraq would probably be a fully functioning nation today had we depoyed Shinseki's "several hundred thousand" troops.

I meant to include this figure in my last post, but forgot.

The US lost 57,000 soldiers in Vietnam. North Vietnam lost close to 1 million. Yet, with all of our technological and military superiority... with our nearly 20 to 1 kill to death ratio... we still lost. Who do you think had the greater will to win? We didn't lose because of our inability to fight. We lost because we weren't willing to sustain the kind of casualties North Vietnam had incurred. 57,000 soldiers for a cause most of them didn't understand.

Lisa posted a few days ago:

Your claim of a lack of "respect" for Islam is so laughable I cannot believe you are seriously saying it. This country falls all over itself bowing down to muslims.

Today on Foxnews.com front page: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,291982,00.html

presidential hopeful, Colorado Republican Tom Tancredo, also came under criticism Friday by a Pakistani official after saying that the best way to deter a nuclear terrorist attack on the United States would be to threaten to retaliate by bombing the holiest Islamic sites of Mecca and Medina.

Guess it’s not so laughable after all, eh? A candidate for president (albeit not a truly viable one) says this garbage? This is what JNE is taking about, a perfect example of how it can be seen as a total lack of understanding many in our American culture have toward others, especially Muslims.

SSE, you're talking to the wrong people. A lot of people here would completely agree with that statement. It seems psychotic to me.

SSE, Big deal that you can find A politician that threatens to RETALIATE,[key word], against a nuclear attack from terrorists. It actually should be a deterrent if they believed it. Which they wouldn't. So tell me, when did Tom Tancredo become the spokesman for the entire country? President Bush, who IS that, has consistently declared Islam to be a religion of peace, and there are many examples of catering to the religion on many fronts, scholastically and otherwise. Just trash your idiocy about our American "understanding" about muslims. That is not viable.

Lisa, you're right. President Bush has consistently said Islam is a religion of peace. I applaud the President for that. Yet the the general opinion of the conservative right is more in line with the trash spewed from people like Patrick. The President may be the official voice of the American people, but he certainly isn't the majority voice. The "voice" of the US is essentially fractured and that is cause for concern if you're Muslim. Keep in mind, Muslims don't need us. We could leave the middle east and the majority would probably be safer for it. We need the Muslims because if we can enlist their help to preempt terrorism, then we obviously benefit. That's called diplomacy.

JNE, I believe that a "general opinion" from "conservatives" is not what you were referring to when you posted that the "United States does not respect Islam". You seemed to be speaking about the country as a whole. I think just the opposite, at least on the surface, is happening, just as in Europe. I believe we here are falling into the same trap of oversensitivity to muslim concerns. So you think that muslims "don't need us", and the "majority would probably be safer for it". Don't agree with THAT analysis at all, but,how about the Christians living in the middle east? Do they need us? Or don't they count in your world? Enlisting muslim's help in the fight against terrorism is unfortunately very difficult, and NOT because of us. It seems to be something that is outside of their nature to do, whether out of fear of repercussions from Islamists, or something else.