Bush was never looking for vindication - that is a liberal angle to it all. The administration had a goal and they stuck to it - no flip-flop, no waiting for the UN, a rock solid goal. I know that millions of Iraq citizens will disagree with the liberals and haters of freedom - too bad.
Someday when things calm down there you and Kerry and Kenneday and all the other anti-liberty types can go to Iraq and give speeches on how you tried to keep their freedom from them. I'm sure you will all be famous there.
No, the point of the question Maddie, was are the Invasion Apologists now looking for vindication? If you weren't, you wouldn't be asking those kinds of questions.
Moreover, if you'd taken any time to look this blog over you'd know that I deplore both Kerry and Kennedy as two of the most reprehensible people alive today. Of course, I put Bush in that same category. I made it every clear that the path to real freedom is won by individuals fighting against state collectivism. War is the antithesis of this.
Now, that said, I won't disagree he had a rock-solid goal in mind, I disagree with said goal. Doing so does not make me anti-freedom, but accusing me of that stance only makes you look really friggin stupid. One can be firm in one's desires, that doesn't make said desires worthy of respect.
I am not in any way against freedom or liberty. I believe in it so passionately that I am unwilling to compromise what I believe in for the sake of expediency, which was the point of my response and the challenge to 'conservatives' like yourself it implied.
Freedom cannot be won the way this government is going about it. No matter, you didn't actually read what I wrote, or have written. You did nothing more than react emotionally to someone who disagrees with this administration's course of action, thereby solidifying my image of you as the reactionary and unthinking warmonger I held previously. As always when that happens, communication has not been achieved.
Ta,
Commenting by HaloScan
