--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Brian Horsfield wrote: > > Richard, are you seriously supporting the McCain > > doctrine for continued war? > > > So, we are agreed that the U.S. is in a war. Then, > I'm thinking of voting for the candidate who can win > the war, not lose it. Ron Paul has zero experience > winning any wars and apparently has no plan of how > to win this one. I want to vote for a winner, not a > loser, don't you?
You miss the point. Wars against non nation state enemies are pretty much unwinnable since there is no definable enemy. You have to essentially kill everybody to truly declare "victory". The war on terror is not supposed to be won - a permanent war. Cheney more or less said as much. The US has LOST every war since WWII. McCain should know that. Paul voted against the war in Iraq and against the Patriot Act showing true courage and leadership to follow the Constition rather the fear mongering promoters of war. McCain has the most experience in > fighting wars and the most experience in the U.S. > Congress. And McCain is electable - I think he could > be a winner. > > Hillary Clinton may be an electable candidate and I > could vote for her as well. She supports the war and > wants to win it - she supports regime change and voted > to authorize the President to use force against Saddam > Hussain. Bill Clinton thought Iraq had something to > do with the war - he bombed Iraq and destroyed a soap > factory and killed a camel. >
