OK, I'm quite fed up with this group with all the people against this so-called "war" in Iraq. They say they support the troops but not the war, which is fine-- but they disrespect them at the same time. So, I really don't understand how you can support the troops but be dead set on them being over in Iraq doing their jobs. I mean, lets break this down. By definition of war its :is a prolonged state of violent, large-scale conflict involving two or more groups of people. Wars may be prosecuted simultaneously in one or more different theaters. Within each theater, there may be one or more consecutive military campaigns. Individual actions of war within a specific campaign are traditionally called battles, although this terminology is not always applied to contentions involving aircraft, missiles or bombs alone in the absence of ground troops or naval forces. So, if we're so-called terrorists of Iraq, wouldn't England, Canada and Australia be terrorists also? And if the Iraqi people felt threatened by us being there, don't you think their government and military would fight us? Instead of working alongside us? So, isn't it kind of redundant that the Iraqi military would be letting the innocent 'people' of Iraq to defend themselves? If this were true, that we 'were' terrorists, why would the Iraqi military fight the 'innocent'as some people (in the US claim them to be.) When they should be fighting for them. Isn't that what a military is suppose to do? Seriously, if we were the 'bad' people in Iraq, we'd be fighting with their military, not joined up with them. ♥Zaphara
