From: (No Email available)

Date: 2004-07-16 17:47:12

Comment:

I suppose you would rather have the Clinton administration back, who's response to 9/11 would have been restricted to a few strategic airstrikes.  Bush's response was to commit troops on the ground to seek out and destroy those terrorist forces that could not be eliminated using pinpoint airstrikes in a select few locations.  Bush understood that the only way to deal with fanactic Islamic terrorists is to kill them, not scare them away with a show of force.  The person who started this thread is exactly right, the horde of American liberals has once again been swayed in their fickleness.  In the days and weeks following 9/11, there was an enormous outcry for the destruction of those responsible for the attacks in New York and Washington, D.C.  However, as soon as the first American troops began to die overseas, the liberals lost the stomach to endure the fight and again cried out, this time for Bush's resignation for mishandling the war.  WAR is not a few smartbombs dropped through the rooftops of suspected terrorist hideouts, WAR is a knock-down, drag-out fight where people die on both sides.  I'm just glad I'm on the side that is dealing the heaviest blows, not recieving them.  Do you really think that Al-Quaeda would be inoperative by now if a liberal were in the White House?