On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 11:57 AM, Michael Grant [Modus I.S.] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Are you arguing we shouldn't have went in, shouldn't win or can't win? >> Or all of the above?
I'm trying to get you to focus. If I say we might be winning, you say we shouldn't have fought. Then the discussion just wanders all over the place and becomes pointless. > 1. Shouldn't have gone in. OK. > 2. How does one qualify "winning" when you've set back American foreign > policy more than 50 years? Explain that. > 3. How does one qualify "winning" when not even your oldest allies trust you > anymore? I think you're wrong. > If "winning" means Americans not dying in the 68th month of it's three month > war... then fine... you're winning. When people stop dying in war it's a plus yes? > One step forward, four thousand two hundred and four steps back... and > counting. Now you've jumped the shark ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:281364 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
