Obama and Clinton don’t want to address what is happening in Iraq because they will have to talk about the realities of withdrawing from Iraq and the resulting bloodbath.

So do you think that if Obama is elected, the (and I am not talking about the enlisted men, don't slip out that door) Army, and the Armed Forces in general and their contractors, will be willing to go on fighting the war, and fighting it in the same way, as they have been for Bush? Are you saying that the right-wing noise machine will be willing to overlook the same legions of illegalities they overlook or defend for bush, if Obama was President?

I'm sure the guys fighting the War On Iraq have stopped hoping, in most cases, for a grateful country's highest rewards. But they were counting on at least complete legal immunity, and control of information, all masterfully managed for their benefit by the MSM. They're gonna do this for Obama?

I don't think so.

Frankly, I don't see how the war can last a day after Obama gets elected. If he is, of course.

And Presidents, even if they are the first non-white person elected, with all that entails, are just willing to keep non-declared wars going? My, we have entered a new era of race relations!

Look RMP, lemme put it like this: I predicted earlier, when Obama was bombin' through the primary's, that a result of his candidacy would be a spirited and vociferous defense of the use of the word "ni**er" in American political discourse by all the well-known gasbags. And what do you know, it came to pass. Okay, in March, they're calling him "ni**er", but next January they'll be ready to lay down their lives for him? And as far as the enlisted men go, what was the headline today? Oh yeah, "Most who Die in Iraq Poor White Southerners".

Now are they gonna be eager to take an IED for Obama? Somehow, I don't see it. In fact, just as I could fell that "ni**er" coming, I can see the next right-wing gas cloud taking shape: "Troops don't Respect Obama"

My post, now I read it, looks angrier than it should. It's supposed to be a tone of urgent interrogation. I want to know what you think, and pin down the question. The fact that it reads like an extended self-righteous snark is only one of my disabilities, and I hope you can overlook it, and save your irritation, if there is any, for something that merit's it. I've got plenty of that, too.

You couldn't, just this once and I won't ask again, actually read my question and attempt to answer it or discuss it instead of jumping at a few particular buzz-words and the fact that I do not worship America's brave fighting men and women?

I like 'em well enough, but that's never enough, is it.

And again, the racism or not of the enlisted men is only a most distant side issue.

This is what I find amazing: The War On Iraq has come to be viewed as America's normal state-of-being, and way-of-doing.

Whomever becomes president, they are gonna have to start in, and pick up, right where the Bush Administration left off, or the war collapses. You do not seem to have any idea just how legally and morally far we are from any mormal way, even that of prosecuting a war.

If only I had waited a minute, or even counted to ten! Sorry.

Anyway, if you feel it has any merit, do you know what I'm asking?

You totally avoided answering my question, and in a context which presumes the good will and competence of all involved with the war. Are you sure you are retired? You handled that just like a good Civil Affairs Officer.