Sunday

As usual on Sunday you know I like to disect Bill O'Idiot and his column in the Los Angeles Daily News.

I'm going to quote what he says and have a comment.

"Despite what revisionist historians say, the USA did not lose militarily in Vietnam. We simply did not defeat the communist enemy, and shortly after we withdrew, they violated the signed treaty and took over South Vietnam"

Now here is what happened: Nixon took the term Republicans like to say about Democrats in Iraq and he cut and ran. We were soundly defeated in the war but if you look today it appears Vietnam is doing decently as a country and communism did nothing to deter it from growth. Mind you the key word is it appears.

"Today we are facing a similar situation in Iraq. The latest opinion research poll says 61 percent of Americans now oppose the Iraq War and just 35 percent support the action. But this is misleading. The opposition is not against the campaign to bring democrat to Iraq: the dissent is about our performance there.

In other words if the coalition were winning in Iraq, the folks would be behind the effort.

The far left is trying to make this a moral issue. It is spinning that somehow America is bad for deposing a murderous dictaor and making free elections possible. If that's bad, George Washington is Satan. That's how dopey the moral objection to Iraq is"

Ok so much here. NO the disagreement with Iraq is not about our performance there. What O'Idiot fails to mention is Iraq actually held elections before we started to occupy the country as we are now. It doesn't matter how the US is doing (not much of a coalition) the people would be against the illegal invasion and now occupation of Iraq. IS this the same far left who were against Clinton when he honored the U.N. request in Bosnia with the real genocide that was there? No it was the far right complaining about that. (For the record I was against that as well).

"There is no question that Iran, the world's most dangerous country, is behind much of the instability in Iraq. If the USA follows John Murtha's advice and pulls out quickly, Iran will partner up with the killer Shiite cleric al-Sadr and dominate Iraq, That will hieghten Iran's power in the Persian Gulf regoin and give Hezbollah and other terrorist outfits, including al-Quada, far more opportunities to devlop their homocidal plots.

So cutting and running is irresponsible and dangerous to America, and anyone who promotes that strategy should be agressivley challenged."

So in one part, this may shock you, O'Idiot is right. I think Iran and Iraq are inevitably going to, at least in part, going to merge whether we are there or not. And yes that will be dangerous if/when that happens. But if say Iran sends hundreds of millions of troops in Iraq that would be a bloodbath for our soldiers who are already stretched to the limit. If you wanna challenge me on that I'm right here.

O'Idiot is so out of touch with reality it's not funny. But hey so is Bush and the republican party.