From the HP, read the whole thing.

Mr. Rove, the first thing that I would like to address is Afghanistan - the place that anyone with a true "understanding of 9/11" knows is a nation that actually has a connection to the 9/11 attacks. One month after 9/11, we invaded Afghanistan, took down the Taliban, and left without capturing Usama Bin Laden - the alleged perpetrator of the September 11th attacks. In the meantime, Afghanistan has carried out democratic elections, but continues to suffer from extreme violence and unrest. Poppy production (yes, Karl, the drug trade) is at an all time high, thus flooding the world market with heroin. And of course, the oil pipeline (a.k.a. the Caspian Sea pipeline) is better protected by U.S. troops who now have a "legitimate" excuse to be in that part of Afghanistan. Interesting isn't it Karl that the drug "rat line" parallels the oil pipeline. (Yet, with all those troops guarding that same sliver of land, can you please explain how those drugs keep getting through?)

Now Karl, a question for you, since you seem to be the nation's self-styled sensei with regard to 9/11: Is Usama Bin Laden still important? Lately, your coterie of friends seems to be giving out mixed messages. Recall that in the early days, Bin Laden was wanted "dead or alive." Then when Bin Laden slipped through your fingertips in Tora Bora, you downgraded his importance. We were told that Bin Laden was a "desperate man on the run," and a person that President Bush was not "too worried about". Yet, whenever I saw Bin Laden's videos, he looked much too comfortable to actually be a man on the run. He looked tan, rested, and calm. He certainly didn't look the way I wanted the murderer of almost 3,000 innocent people to look: unkempt, panicked, and cowering in a corner.

Karl, I mention Bin Laden because recently Director of the CIA, Porter Goss, has mentioned that he knows exactly where Bin Laden is located but that he cannot capture him for fear of offending sovereign nations. Which frankly, I find ironic because of Iraq--and let's just leave it at that. But, when you say that "moderation and restraint" don't work in fighting terrorists, maybe you should share those comments with Mr. Goss because he doesn't seem to be on the same page as you. Unless of course, Porter is holding out to announce that Bin Laden is in Iran. (Karl, I want Bin Laden brought to justice, but not if it means starting a war with Iran - a country that possesses nuclear weaponry. The idea of nuclear fallout in any quadrant of the world is just not an acceptable means to any ends, be it capturing Bin Laden, oil or drugs. But, Afghanistan and Bin Laden are old news. Iraq is the story of today. And of course, it appears that Iran will be the story of next month. But, I digress.)

More to the point, Karl when you say, "Conservatives saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and prepared for war," what exactly did you do to prepare for your war? Did your preparations include: sound intelligence to warrant your actions; a reasonable entry and exit strategy coupled with a coherent plan to carry out that strategy; the proper training and equipment for the troops you were sending in to fight your war? Did you follow the advice of experts such as General Shinseki who correctly advised you about the troop levels needed to actually succeed in Iraq? No, you didn't.

It has always been America's policy that you only place soldiers' lives in harm's way when it is absolutely necessary and the absolute last resort. When you send troops into combat you support those troops by providing them with proper equipment and training. Why didn't you do that with the troops that you sent into Iraq? Why weren't their vehicles armored? Why didn't they have protective vests? Why weren't they properly trained about the rules of interrogation? And Karl, when our troops come home – be it tragically in body bags or with missing limbs – you should honor and acknowledge their service to their country. You shouldn't hide them by bringing them home in the dark of night. Most importantly, you should take care of them for the long haul by giving them substantial veteran's benefits and care. To me, that is being patriotic. To me, that is how you support our troops. To me, that is how you show that you know the value of a human life given for its country.

In reality, I find Cheney, Rumsfeld and the boys interesting people. To a man, each of them found a way to avoid military service. Cheney in fact found it "not a priority," when he had his chance to go to Vietnam, and we all know Bush's history. And yet, these men are the biggest chickenhawks of all. Incredible...

Correction: My conservative bretheren have pointed out my error in stating that Sec. Rumsfeld has no military experience. I am thrilled that so many of the boys read my blog. Jeff hasnt commented here EVER I dont think, and tonight he links back to this post. Oh joy... Does he dispute the substance of what the Post is about... Oh no... Instead he points out my lack of research skills. Forgive me Jeff... PLEASE. I admit that I was lazy, and did not bother to google Mr. Rumsfeld's career. Something I hope I have corrected to your satisfaction.

Now that I have, you have any opinion on the other 80% of the post?

Update: While Checking out this site, I noticed a comment from a currently serving vet that suggested that Secretary Rumsfeld had never served in Combat. His Bio does not mention Combat. I wonder if he has served in a combat situation. If he hasn't my comment more or less stands. There is nothing in Rummy's record that indicates he got anywhere NEAR Vietnam!

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.grupo-utopia.com/blog/mt/mt-tb.cgi/367

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference This is good... Real Good...:

» Liberals Lack Basic Research Skills? from Jeff Quinton - Backcountry Conservative
David Anderson In reality, I find Cheney, Rumsfeld and the boys interesting people. To a man, each of them found a way to avoid military service. Cheney in fact found it "not a priority," when he had his chance to... [Read More]

Tracked on June 26, 2005 08:18 PM

Posted by: Chris Short at June 26, 2005 08:10 PM

Posted by: David Anderson at June 26, 2005 08:15 PM

Posted by: David at June 26, 2005 08:41 PM

Posted by: Scott B at June 27, 2005 08:41 PM

Posted by: Scott B at June 27, 2005 08:55 PM

Posted by: David at June 27, 2005 10:15 PM

Posted by: David at June 27, 2005 10:17 PM