I don't feel the anger much any more.
I think you are right to an extent. A lot of the people who are against the Iraq war are also against the bullheaded foreign policy of Bush in general. We are pissing a lot of people off and not accomplishing much while doing it. We are putting our security in a precarious position, stretching our troops and resources thin fighting wars that are getting us nowhere and instigating more conflicts, especially with Iran.
Since the report came out about Iran stopping it's nuclear program, the aggressive rhetoric from the President has seemed to slow to a trickle. Many people are resigned to Iraq now, and are just glad to see our standoff with Iran, which many people saw as pointless, drop to a simmer. It seems to have taken the edge off of the problems we have in the Middle East.
I don't think we should have invaded Iraq to begin with, but now that we are there, what choice do we have but to make the best of it? Personally, at this point, I am more upset about the Patriot Act, warrantless wiretapping, and other violations of privacy in the name of security. I don't see that any of the Republican candidates (except Ron Paul) will stand against these things. Their message seems to be all about national security and law and order. These things are important, but they do not need to be at the expense of the Constitution, our privacy, or our liberty.
I am having a difficult time deciding who to vote for as a liberal who is in favor of strong gun rights. I feel the country is in need of some immediate fixing up and I don't think the leading Republicans are the ones to do it, with their do-anything-it-takes attitude towards national security. None of them invoke Bush much, but they don't seem to depart from his views much either. Of course, the Democrats in congress don't seem to be doing much better at standing up to him.
I'm pretty much disgusted with the whole situation right now. When I was younger, I couldn't understand why people were always so cynical about politicians and politics. I'm starting to understand. Most of my politically aware life has been with Bush at the helm. I'm ready to experience something different. Anything different. Not the same old over-ambitious foreign policy, rampant budget deficits and treatment of Americans like little children. Americans are bad-ass and we love our freedom. We say "let 'em try" to anyone who
wants to take it away and beat the living hell out of anyone who takes us up on the offer, but we don't take freedom away from ourselves to accomplish that. At least that's what I learned from the Revolutionary War books I loved so much as a kid. It seems like nowadays we take every differing opinion from the national community as a challenge that has to be met with a stronger response. If a country wants to mess with us, let 'em try. If they do try, we'll beat the crap out of them. If they don't try, then let's continue business as usual with that country. That's the non-interventionist policy Ron Paul has in mind. It is far from the Isolationist foreign policy that the mainstream media keeps saying he has.
Why are terrorists so different from kids who go shoot up their school and then kill themselves? We have laws to deal with murder, other than that it is a risk we live with. There is no reason to give the government omnipotence with regards to our lives due to terrorism when getting shot by a classmate is a greater risk.
I guess I'd better shut up now. Anyone who read all the way through from semi-coherent start to rambling finish, thanks for reading.
Hector
