I hear the following meme over and over again: losing in Iraq is not an option. I have a question, how much longer does it have to go on before we have to conclude that Cheney, Rumsfeld and all the other delusional incompetent neo-cons have screwed it up so bad that winning is no longer an option?

It has never been about people’s right to support the war, or their qualifications to discuss it. I don’t know why someone as smart as Stephen, thinks,

“Goldstein demolishes the “Chickenhawk” rhetoric.”

since his argument just rewarms and serves up the same gruel that pro-war bloggers have been serving up, every since The General started the Yellow Elephant meme.

My personal criticism is directed at all the YOUNG Republicans, and the Karl Rove’s of the world who talk the talk, but don’t walk the walk. If one thinks the war is such a noble cause, why not show your support by volunteering to contribute to it’s success.

This does not mean that one is not entitled to their opinion, or that there opinion is somehow invalidated because they refuse to serve. What it does demonstrate however is an unwillingness to back up their rhetoric, with action.

For those who have a real passion about the “rightness,” of the conflict, they come of as a bit hypocritical when they are not willing to fight it themselves, provided they have no physical reason that they can not.

Rhetoric is rhetoric, and while I agree that it can get a bit ridiculous at times discussing this issue, I believe the assumption that those most strongly advocating something, should be willing to sacrifice themselves for the cause they advocate… Is not an unreasonable position.

Crossposted to ISOU