Well, for the record, we weren't attacked by an Iraqi. Apparently that part of the defense system is working just fine.

Instead, I find it curious that your proposed solution to the mall shooter is ... what? ... more taxes? Diverting taxes from foreign wars to ... what, exactly? Your solution to prevent a whacko kid shooting fellow citizens is ... financial?

You're exploiting a non-political tragedy to toss a political insult. You've rejected logic and compassion, and for what purpose? What did you hope to gain by that post? Surely you don't imagine that you can irritate your audience into a political conversion. I can only imagine that your purpose behind that post is simply to insult "the other side." OK, you've scored your "point." Feel any better?

The sad part is that we're fellow Americans. When it comes to these things, we're supposed to be on the same side.

And the marxist agitprop shines through.

  Ignorance is bliss. It's easier to repeat a mindless slogan than to do some actual research.

Just as a linguistic aside, it's only Jingoism to those who don't believe in it.  >;)

Hehe, get it?

Meh, guess not.

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 

mb, I used to be quite the drinker in college and had - er - adventures, I was happy to forget. However, I have never been so drunk that I would suggest that a liberal group may support this administration.
I meant "liberal group" without the other stuff about supporting the administration. :)

.... I believe it's you. Go clean out your mouth.

___________________________________ 

If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber

"I believe you meant to say that the service men and women entombed in the USS Arizona are there because Roosevelt ignored warnings to move them out of harms way because he needed a pretext to declare war againt Japan, who was fighting to maintain [legal] access to South American raw materials. The CFR had already briefed FDR on how the US and UK were to divide the planet with the US gaining access to all South American and SE Asian areas for pillaging. And the Japanese responded to the US build up of long range bombers [B-17] capable of attacking the Japanese mainland with the same kind of pre-emptive attack the rightards laud Bu$h for. If you support Bu$h invading Iraq BEFORE they could have the capability of attacking the US, then you have to support Japan for bombing Pearl Harbor. "

 Japan was expanding their power in the South Pacific.  They had aquired Manchuria and much of China which allowed them access to materials.  They then joined the Axis Powers in 1940, which gave them access to more materials.  Once France was defeated by the Germans, they aquired Indochina.  However, Japan still lacked oil resources.  The U.S. supplied much oil to Japan, and then placed an embargo on oil to Japan in response to their agression.  This lead to negotiations between the U.S. and Japan, but both sides realized that it was only a matter of time before war would break out.  Japanese military and civilian leaders thought the U.S. was their only obstacle to conquering all of Eastern Asia.  They thought if they attacked and destroyed U.S. Pacific Fleet, the U.S. would sue for peace.  Around the end of November 1941, negotiations broke off, and the U.S. refused to send oil.  Admiral Chuichi Nagumo lead the attack on Pearl Harbor.  The Americans had broken Japanese codes, so they knew an attack was coming, but it doesn't appear that they knew when or where.  Some naval commanders thought Pearl Harbor was difficult to defend, but those in D.C. didn't think the Japanese had the will to attack that far . 

Here is a pretty good link that looks at the myths and uses documentation to dispel the myths surrounding the attack on Pearl Harbor.  The Japanese had been wrong, because it didn't lead to isolationism but lead to a unified country that took action.

http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/myths/index.html