Quote Originally Posted by fishbum View Post
YOU LIB's seem to forget that FDR failed to stop Germany early and we ended up losing 250,000 men in a war that we should have helped stop sooner. 20 Million died in a war that should not have occurred. We kept appeasing the dictators and they kept taking more territory and killing more people.
Let's all relax, turn the volume down, and go check our facts. It was England's Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain, not FDR, who instituted the policy of appeasing Hitler and Mussolini. As soon as Chamberlain signed the agreement, FDR ordered an increase in America's defenses, knowing that we would most likely end up going to war. And he tried to get our official Neutrality Law rescinded in 1939, but was stonewalled by Congress. So, while you're correct that there is a lesson there about appeasement, please don't blame FDR. And let's remember that it was his "New Deal," a very "liberal" (tax-and-spend) policy, that rescued America from the Great Depression. On the flip side, there were some somewhat "liberal" democrats (Hillary springs to mind), who voted in favor of the Iraq War. So we can't blame WWII on liberals, nor can we lay Iraq squarely at the feet of the conservatives. But I think we can ALL agree that having it over would be a good thing. So while we of course can't just pull out, can we at least try not to draw it out any longer than necessary? The impression I get is that Bush is resigned to turning it over to his successor, so working towards an actual solution isn't a priority.

Quote Originally Posted by fishbum View Post
I used to be a liberal, I used to believe that there was NOTHING worth dying for, that negotiation could solve any issue.. I WAS WRONG.
I hope you understand that you made 3 separate statements there. In other words, being a liberal doesn't mean you believe that nothing is worth dying for, or that negotiation can solve any issue. I consider myself a liberal, and I believe that some things are worth dying for; I just don't think that oil is one of them, and I think that our dependence on oil is at the root of our involvement in the Middle East. I also recognize that there's no negotiating with some people, such as those raised to believe that it is their duty to God to destroy America and Israel.

Reading back over this, it looks kind of like an attack on Jim. It is not. What I'd like to get across more than anything is that it doesn't pay to pigeonhole people, and both liberals and conservatives are equally guilty of this. Whether it's because they're on the opposite of the political aisle, or because they disagree with you on a particular issue, making assumptions about people's reasons for their views only detracts from the debate.