"Lionel" wrote in message


Arny Krueger wrote:

"George M. Middius" wrote in message


"President Bush said today that the latest spate of bloodshed in
Iraq reflected the desperation of terrorists who cannot stop the
creation of a free country."

http://tinyurl.com/slic

That is to say that even though Americans and responsible Iraqis and
foreigners are getting mowed down like Custer's men at Little Big
Horn, we are winning the war.

Obviously Middius is oblivious to the events of June 6, 1944.

The enemy is bound to get tired of
slaughtering us soon, and then, of course, they'll surrender in
short order.

It actually works out that way, sometimes. Anybody who thinks that
what's going on now is a slaughter of US soldiers, is totally
lacking in historical perspective. One such person appears to be our
local hero, George Middius.

The big difference is that in Normandie 1944 the US soldiers were
considered as heroes by French people.

Another big difference is that at Normandy the US had about 10,000
casualties in one day, as opposed to dribs and drabs of one to three per
day, with some days zero, in Iraq. The George Custer metaphor Middius uses
is almost as inappropriate, as Custer lost about 300 men in less than a day
at little Big Horn.

Radical liberal posturing about US casualties in Iraq is reaching amazing
heights. Yesterday I was watching some posture-matic guest on CNN who was
seriously comparing Sunday's losses to the Tet Offensive. This guy was
obviously old enough to know better.

If you want to compare apples to apples, compare Iraq to Germany, not
France. Normandy was not primarily about liberating France, that was just a
fortuitous side-effect.

It's not clear how big of a difference there is between Iraq and post-war
Germany. For one thing, it's been said that a lot of these suicide bombers
aren't Iraquis. This is supported by the numbers of innocent Iraquis that
the terrorists kill.

Despite thousands civil deaths in Le Havre, Brest, Rouen, Caen,
Saint-Etienne... bombing by the Brit & USA air forces, the French
people continued to support *their liberators*.

I talked with a WWII veteran who stayed on with the occupation army. He told
me that Germany was a very dangerous place for at least 6 months after the
surrender. There were die-hard Nazis who nurtured dreams of getting back
into power if they could keep things disrupted enough. In Sierra Leone,
Sierra Leonese who cooperated with the rebels and foreign terrorists have
somewhat strangely suffered rather high rates of mortality, once some degree
of order was restored. If you are part of the previous violent government,
its either kill or be killed as there are many accounts that need to be
settled.

I seriously doubt that US army as the same latitude in Iraq or
anywhere else in the Muslim world.

The fact that the US has been able to enlist something like 60,000 Iraquis
to work for them suggests to me that not everybody sees the US as their
oppressor. There seem to be two major sources of disruption in Iraq that
have little or nothing to do with the wishes of the average man in the
street. These are the Baath party members who are likely to become dead meat
in the long run, and foreign terrorists who are full of fundamentalist
bravado and have come to Iraq to go hand-to-hand with the US Military.