LOL! No preaching involved, dragon, and you DID step in it on that crusades comment! Yeah, I know the majority of the wealth was hoarded by the minority, but that's the same everywhere, it's only different in degree.
The crackhouse comment was meant to convey that social problems cannot be solved by violence. You can bomb anything you want, but if the initial conditions for it's existence are still in place, it'll pop right back up. Witness the first gulf war. We won, but left the problem intact. The military is necessary, and we can't do it without you guys, but you can't do it yourselves, either. We have to fight the diplomatic, social, and economic battles as well.

dont get me wrong, im all for the war in Iraq...

Originally Posted by Jamoni

We won, but left the problem intact.

But who wanted us to do that? Two letters .. hint .. begins with a U and ends with an N.

As for the crackhouse comment... Are you inviting us in? I think there's still like 10% of the Army that doesn't have a combat patch... Oh, wait a second, we CAN'T go in... the Democrats and the ACLU won't let us. Believe me, we WANT to fix the worlds problems...

Actually, we can't because of a little thing called the Posse Comitatus Act (1878) and has very little to do with the Democrats or ACLU. It keeps the military from being able to act as a domestic police force .. and helps secure your liberties. I don't know why anyone would feel this is a bad thing.

As for why Iraq .. IMO, Iraq was an easy target. It is located in the middle of everyone and everything we are interested in within the region. The KSA is unreliable, but we depend on them to keep our troops active in the region. If stable, Iraq could be the basing for our eyes and ears within the Middle East. Iraq has ties with terrorisim, I don't care what the pandering left says. Iraq has oil, and not just a lot of oil. They have oil that is easy and cheap to extract. Freeing the Iraqi people was a bonus, but no matter the propaganda - it was not our sole reason, nor even on the top of our list of reasons for going.

THIS is the Last Crusade. I might as well paint a huge red cross on my chest. I'm a Knight Templar without armor in a savage land.

I've been all over that [Iraq] country, and various others since 9/11 .. I don't feel like a crusader. That sounds a little too glorifying to me.

I stand by the Crusader comment (Sorry, Sherman). Not in action, but in Idea. They came over here not to rape or pillage (although, admittedly, it was an effect of thier Crusade), but to take the land back, ultimately to "westernize" the region with thier own people. We're here to "Westernize" the region, in order to create a more stable environment.

I stand by my comment.

Yes, but maybe the people still want to be middle-eastern? I mean, im all for democracy, but if they want to keep their triditions and stuff, let them be. Anyway, the word crussade makes it sound like a religious war, and that is dangouruse.

When you have a child misbehaving then the parent needs to punish it and correct it. A loving parent doesn't let the child continue to be obnoxious because he/she doesn't want the child to get in trouble later in life. The parent knows best whether the child thinks so or not. When we have middle eastern countries out massacring ideologies that don't follow their's that is harmful to them whether they see it immediately or not. Who is going to puhish them? The UN would prefer to be the Freud type parent that says you'll hurt its self esteem if you tell them they are worng. The US and its allies are the only ones stepping up to correct all the countries that aren't being made to answer for its irresponsibilities. The US and allies know whats best because they are living whats best. Why is it that US and allies are the wealthiest and most free nations on the planet? It's not because we are anything like the middle eastern countries that's for sure. Someone must step up. We did. But now we have punished the misbehaving country and are sending people in to rebuild which needs to be done but when we start collecting oil isn't that like selling the child's toys? I am not comfortable with profiting off this war. We have spanked the child and in the process of correcting it but do we need to go behind the childs back and exploit his goods?

Yeah, maybe you're taking the metaphor a bit too far there.

THen how far should the metaphor have gone Redneck?

Personally, I don't believe it has any bearing on the situation whatsoever, unless the "children" are Hansel and Gretel and we are "spanking" the wicked witch that eats children, and then to help the "children" get back on their feet and actually have an economy to support themselves with, we buy parts of the gingerbread house from them.

For clarification in case anyone needs any:
Children=Iraqis
Witch=Saddam & Co.
Gingerbread House=Iraqi oil reserves

Ok then i admit that metaphor sounds better. Though my post sounds better fit to deliver to our enemies