McCain: U.S. Lives 'Wasted' in Iraq

What a maverick, huh?

WASHINGTON Mar 1, 2007 (AP)— Republican presidential contender John McCain, a staunch backer of the Iraq war but critic of how President Bush has waged it, said U.S. lives had been "wasted" in the four-year-old conflict. Democrats demand the Arizona senator apologize for the comment as Sen. Barack Obama did when the Democratic White House hopeful recently made the same observation.

"Americans are very frustrated, and they have every right to be," McCain said Wednesday on CBS' "Late Show With David Letterman." "We've wasted a lot of our most precious treasure, which is American lives."

Update: McCain apologizes but damage done. If he were on the upswing it might not matter quite as much. But given his existing issues with the Republican base and the way things have been headed for him, bad timing makes this is a tougher knock.

"Last evening, I referred to American casualties in Iraq as 'wasted'," McCain said in a statement Thursday.

"I should have used the word 'sacrificed' as I have in the past. No one appreciates and honors more than I do the selfless patriotism of American servicemen and women in the Iraq War," said McCain, a decorated Vietnam war hero.

Comments

[Zifnab]

But... but... but... Barak Obama said it toooooO!

"Obama, in an interview with the Des Moines Register right afterward, told the paper, ''I was actually upset with myself when I said that, because I never use that term,'' he said. ''Their sacrifices are never wasted. . . . What I meant to say was those sacrifices have not been honored by the same attention to strategy, diplomacy and honesty on the part of civilian leadership that would give them a clear mission."

[Legalize]

I like the rare occasions when McCain tells the truth - like this time. I'm still not going to vote for him in the General after he wins the GOP Primary, however.

[Darth Malice]

Legal,his dumb ass deserves no votes.I would have to grit my teeth in the general.I don't think he will be our nominee.Thank the stars.

[TallDave]

Thus ends the McCain candidacy.

[Seferas-H.]

"Obama, in an interview with the Des Moines Register right afterward, told the paper, ''I was actually upset with myself when I said that, because I never use that term,'' he said. ''Their sacrifices are never wasted. . . . What I meant to say was those sacrifices have not been honored by the same attention to strategy, diplomacy and honesty on the part of civilian leadership that would give them a clear mission."

Remember: The words that flow from your tongue are nothing but the overflowing of your heart. Obama meant every word he had said and so does McCain. Are they right? No. This just proves we have douchebagn candidates on both sides of the spectrum.

[Jim O'Sullivan]

They will have been wasted, or worse, if let let them beat us there. I expect concessions like that from Kumbaya peaceniks like Obama. If this is a concession from McCain that they've been wasted, then it's a concession that his true plan is to retreat. Remember, a "gaffe" is when a politician accidently tells the truth.

[Legalize]

"Legal,his dumb ass deserves no votes.I would have to grit my teeth in the general.I don't think he will be our nominee.Thank the stars."

I agree. I don't think he'll be your candidate either at this point. But if he was the GOP candidate, you would vote for him?

[Bruce Wilder]

The U.S. involvement has been a massive waste of American blood and treasure. And, now, no one, Democrat or Republican, is allowed to speak the truth.

That's just great.

[JEM]

Wars waste lives, even successful ones. No war is ever fought as efficiently as one might, in hindsight, like it to be.

And when you have a war that drags on indefinitely because the force used was a fraction of what was necessary, because the forces deployed had not been prepared or equipped for the kind of land-mine warfare used against them, because the rules of engagement have left too many factions a free hand, because the planners assumed resurgence of a civil society that did not exist, lives certainly have been wasted.

You learn from that and go on, you don't sit around wringing hands over the use of a word.

I'm not a McCain supporter, but unlike a Jack Murtha his personal and family background does, as far as I'm concerned, give him the status to make judgments on how this war's been fought.

[Zifnab]

"Are they right? No. This just proves we have douchebagn candidates on both sides of the spectrum."

So you're saying the 3000+ soldiers who died in Iraq to make it the flourishing civil war that it is today have died for a good cause? I didn't realize the goal of the US Army was to instigate and perpetuate civil war and sectarian genocide. But, apparently, righties couldn't be more pleased with the results.

More dead brown people means less evil Muslims, right? Even if the dead Iraqi was an eight-year-old child or a mother of three.

I remember when Janet Reno raided the Waco compound, and what an absolute disaster it was. Weapons stockpiles, extremist religions, terrorism. It's like Bush took the Waco disaster and expanded it on a national scale. At least Democrats had the balls to berate Reno for doing such an abysmal job. If Alberto Gonzolas dealt with Waco and had similiar results, they'd be having parades in his honor.

[Steve]

Im a right wing conservative (as opposed to a right wing moderate or a liberal with right wing tendancies). I agree 100% with Mr. Anti-1st Amendment. Im even a military veteran! But our military deaths are a waste if we agree that we are fighting for a Jeffersonian style democracy in Iraq. If we are fighting to keep the oil flowing then that is a waste since it only serves to keep money flowing into the coffers of the barbarians known as the house of saud. If we are fighting them over there to keep from fighting them over here then each death is also a waste since it insulates the increasing forgetful American public of the dangers barbarians present to our way of life. Let them come here and bomb New York city where the media elite work to continually bring down our traditional way of life and mock the values of the majority. Let them bomb LA or San Francisco or any of the major urban areas in the United States that consistently elect politicians who berate our military or blame America for every ill. Let the lessons begin so America can wake up. There are no innocent civilians in this war since it is a war for our survival.

Why do I agree that each life lost in combat in Iraq is a waste?

The majority of Arabs hate the United States as poll after poll show. We are dying for their freedom and they don't even respect us. Therefore our soldiers deaths are in vain and wasted. Quaranteen the arab world by halting all immigration from arab nations to the west and destroy the arab oilfields as an incentive for the west to find ways around it's oil addiction. Arabs don't deserve the sacrifice the best of us are making for them.

A waste.

[Phoenix]

Zifnab,

That kind of hysterical hyperbole just makes you look stupid.

Legal,

If McCain won the primary, would you vote for him? Good question. Ugh.

[Bill Faith]

Which party's ticket is it he's wanting to run on again? I linked at McCain-Feingold announces he's a candidate. --- http://www.smalltownveteran.net/bills_bites/2007/03/mccainfiengold_.html

[seekeronos]

"More dead brown people means less evil Muslims, right? Even if the dead Iraqi was an eight-year-old child or a mother of three."

Technically... Arabs and Persians are considered by some experts to be of Caucasoid racial stock, for the most part. They may tan better than someone from Sweden, but however distantly, they are still largely more white than Meso-American, Asian, Aboriginal Islander, or Black/African.

As for McCain, I wish he would do us all a favour and switch to the Democrat Party already. I'l trade our McCain for your Lieberman. :P

[Andrew]

The prospect of Hillary v. McCain is hilarious. Several right-wingers heads might actually explode (of course nothing would be found inside, but still).

[Legalize]

"I'l trade our McCain for your Lieberman."

No deal; you take Lieberman off of our hands and keep McCain. We'll take Susan Collins.

[JEM]

"So you're saying the 3000+ soldiers who died in Iraq to make it the flourishing civil war that it is today have died for a good cause? "

I don't think anyone's satisfied with the results, and I suspect McCain is more frustrated than most. His family's been fighting for this country longer than most of our families have been here.

Some months back I think it was Newsweek that looked at the size and population of Iraq and determined that it'd take about 450K soldiers on the ground to establish a successful military occupation consistent with past (successful) practice e.g. Japan, German That number seemed about right to me, but the question is where, in this era of shrunken post-Cold-War volunteer forces that cost a fortune to run, we'd ever get that many troops?

The question no one's got an answer for is how you win a 21st century war. The mid-20th-century answer was "You kill people until you've destroyed their will" - and that fundamentally means that factory workers and farmers and truck drivers are as valid as targets as infantrymen are, because a soldier with no bread and no bullets either surrenders or dies.

As nasty as all that sounds, it largely created the pluralistic Western world we have today, a world that's utterly unwilling to use such a strategy against its enemies. I'm not saying that's wrong, but I am saying that we haven't yet found a successful alternative.

[Jeff]

Wow, more lib soldier bashing than I thought. I just learned that my best friend in high school's life has just been wastd in Afghanistan, I'm excited to tell his Mom and Dad.

It's just sick to say that, as someone with many friends in the military I think that anyone who says that lives are wasted if they die for their country... Anyone liberal or conservative who says that is not deserving to be called an American.

[Hard Right]

McCain is an ego-maniacal ass. Our soldiers in Iraq are fighting fo a noble cause. He should apologize for his remarks. It seems he is trying to implode faster than Biden did. I wish him luck in doing so.

[Legalize]

"As nasty as all that sounds, it largely created the pluralistic Western world we have today, a world that's utterly unwilling to use such a strategy against its enemies."

Um, no, what created the pluralistic Western world we have today is adherence to the rule of law, due process, human rights, and transparent governance, i.e. "Western Values." What you are describing is what created National Socialism, fascism, and Stalinism.

"I'm not saying that's wrong, but I am saying that we haven't yet found a successful alternative."

Really? I seem to remember Nuremberg, the Marshall Plan, Eisenhowerian pragmatism, detente, leading by example by actually living up to Western Values, etc. as being really really really successful tactics.

[apetra]

There is a difference between saying, as Obama did, that:

"over 3,000 lives have been wasted"

and saying, as McCain did, that:

"We've wasted a lot of our most precious treasure, which is American lives."

Consistent with what McCain said is a critique that suggests we put too few troops on the ground, and made **less progress for the lives we lost** than we would have had we mounted a larger scale invasion and occupation. It would, for example, be consistent with McCain's statement to suggest that we'd be better off today were the war won and over at the cost of *more* lives.

Being where we are today, considering the number of lives lost, can rightly be criticized as involving wasted lives, as can be any individual mission that goes awry.

Obama's critique is dramatically different. It undercuts each and every sacrifice, every mission, every achievement. Every bloodthirsty terrorist killed, every Iraqi life saved, every child rescued, every calamity averted.

No comparison, whatsoever.

[seekeronos]

Steve & Pheonix:

Hindsight is indeed a bittersweet thing.

I mean, if we could do it again, I'd almost would rather have seen Dubya commit the nation to wartime-economy of energy rationing and development of alternative/renewable/nuclear energy --- whatever it would have taken to to reduce our dependency on Arab oil to a fraction of what it is now, and thereby marginilize that whole region to being the sand hill it had always been for 13,000 years past.

[TallDave]

Even if only to allow the Kurds to build a thriving enclave of civlization, freedom and tolerance, the war has been worth it.

But in fact, the war has been a huge boon to all of Iraq, even with the current violence; the Index of Political Freedom rates the nascent democracy as one of the most free countries in the region. The current sectarian violence pales in comparison to the real civil wars under Saddam, let alone his wars of conquest, none of which were waged with the intent of freeing Iraqis as the current one is. Let's look at the numbers:

Hussein’s regime can conservatively be held responsible for about 2 million deaths, counting his various wars of conquest (the war with Iran alone is believed to have claimed around a million lives), civil wars, and general day-to-day domestic Stalinist brutality. That works out to an average of 83,000 a year over his 24-year reign, and that number is artificially low because he was stifled to some extent since 1991 by the presence of no-fly zones and U.S./U.K. troops. The far-left anti-war anti-military site Iraq Body Count has found a total of around 60,000 civilians killed for the nigh on four years of occupation. With the approximately 20,000 non-civilian casualties, that works out to about a total of about 20,000 killed per year postbellum, making Iraq under Saddam, on average, about four times more violent than it has been since the invasion.

And again, that's besides going from one of the least free countries in the Mideast to one of the most free.

[Steve]

Obama and McCain are both correct.

Our soldiers lives are being wasted and every single one of their deaths is currently a waste. No matter how you spin it wars are won not by dying for your country but by making your enemy DIE FOR HIS COUNTRY.

We aren't winning because Syria and Iran are still successfully engaged in fighting us in this war. In Iran's case, Iran has been attacking the United States for nearly 28 years. Since our political class refuses to expand the war to include these two guilty nations (I counter anyone to call Syria and Iran innocent) then each life lost in Iraq, each US Soldier who "died for his country" is wasted.

[Legalize]

Interesting delusions you are suffering from Tall Dave. Have they been diagnosed yet by a competent professional?

[TallDave]

Those are facts, Legalize. Sorry if they shattered your illusions.

[nova]

Were 56,000 lives "wasted" in Vietnam?
What did we get out of that?

[Steve]

As long as we continue to import oil from the middle east we continue to fund radicalism which hates our way of life. And we continue to waste our soldiers lives fighting for the freedom and security of arabs. Our idea of democracy, Jeffersonian, has nothing to do with Iraq becoming the freeist arab country if it becomes a Shia dominated democracy (or a Sunni).

An Islamic democracy does not guarantee property rights of women, free speech, the free practice of religion. Iran is a democracy in the general definition though it isn't our Jeffersonian style democracy.

This is what our soldiers are fighting for? So Iraq can have a Shia majority democracy? So Afghanistan can make it a crime to convert from Islam? That is an acceptable form of freedom?

[Jeff]

Steve I know the quote by General Patton was "the goal in war is not to die for your country, but make the other bastard die for his."

Still, I would have to say their lives weren't wasted. If their goal was to defend their country at any cost, as my friends was (and he didn't just die, I mistated, he died about 6 months ago, to clarify) their lives weren'r wasted - ended too early - yes. But not wasted, not by any stretch of the imagination.

[TallDave]

Steve,

Our own Jeffersonian democracy initially allowed people to be kept as property, and did not allow women to vote. Give the Iraqis time; constitutional democracy is a liberalizing process, not a magic wand we can wave.

A free society is built on a set of self-perpetuating memes that take a long time to insinuate themselves into a society's consciousness before they are as natural as we take them for today here in the West.

Already, many Iraqi Arabs are starting to look at Kurdistan and saying "Why not here?"

[Legalize]

"Those are facts, Legalize. Sorry if they shattered your illusions."

No, "facts" are verifiably accurate. You are speaking in vague terms of "free" and "not free," as if either term means anything relative to the verifiable facts on the ground in Iraq. You are attempting to rationalize horrible chaos by ostensibly saying, "well we got Saddam." The military doesn't think in those terms; the stopped thinking in those terms about 2 and a half years ago; and even the president has stopped thinking in those terms. In sum, you belong to the camp of neo-con types who have been wrong about every single aspect of this war. Congrats.

[TallDave]

You are speaking in vague terms of "free" and "not free," as if either term means anything relative to the verifiable facts on the ground in Iraq.

No, the Index of Political Freedom is built on very specific, concrete metrics like freedom of pressm, freedom of assembly, and democracy.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4450582.stm

You seem to miss the point re Saddam; the facts show the situtation would be far worse had we not removed him. You look only at the cost of removing him, and ignore the opportunity cost of NOT removing him. That's poor analysis.

[Legalize]

"Our own Jeffersonian democracy initially allowed people to be kept as property, and did not allow women to vote. Give the Iraqis time; constitutional democracy is a liberalizing process, not a magic wand we can wave.

A free society is built on a set of self-perpetuating memes that take a long time to insinuate themselves into a society's consciousness before they are as natural as we take them for today here in the West."

The key term you are glossing over is "self-perpetuating." Constitutional democracy is a concept Jeffersonian types actively FOUGHT FOR. They wanted it; demanded it; claimed it as their own; and implemented it. You can't have liberal democracy without democrats (small 'd'), no matter how many "free elections" you hold. Iraq is facing a grave shortage of "democrats."

"Already, many Iraqi Arabs are starting to look at Kurdistan and saying "Why not here?""

Amazing antecdote. How can you possibly know this to be true, and how can you possibly pretend to prove it?

[Steve]

Jeff,

All war is a waste of lives. Accept that. There is no dishonor of the troops by admiting that and generals throughout history have said similiar things.

[Buzzy]

I don't like McCain and won't vote for him but he's correct about how this war is being fought and that if we don't, as a nation, intend to win a war then all the lives lost are wasted.

The US didn't foster a civil war in Iraq, that has been present but was held in check by tyrant Saddam for decades. In fact a huge civil war has been brewing in the Islamic world since Jimmy Carter took the cap off the bottle in 1979 in Iran and unleashed the Islamofascist regeime of the mullahs on the world. The mistake that George W. Bush made in Iraq was when he injected a democracy into a country where the shi'a majority wants dominate the nation and hand it over to Iran.

Part of the blame for that will have to lay at the feet of the far anti-war left. Let's face it, both sides truly believed that Saddam had WMDs (I still think he did) and both sides are on record as believing that Saddam and Osama had close terrorist ties in Iraq (I still think they did). Clinton made that abundantly clear and Bush used the same intelligence that Clinton used to go to war there. When the Democrats adopted the concept that losing in Iraq was a political win for their party then the lives we lost started being a waste.

Personally I believe that we should have installed a strong Sunni leader close to the UAE and Saudi rulers who wouldn't have made WMDs or buried Shi'a and Kurds in a thousand mass graves in the desert instead of forming a democracy. We then should have assisted the new Iraq in finishing off the fascist Baath party as a political power and kept Iran from fighting a war against the Sunni and Kurds by proxy militias.

The anti-war left and then DNC policy made a war political just as the right and GNC policy thrashed Clinton over Bosnia and bombing Iraq prior to 2000 and I will go on record as saying that playing politics when American soldier's lives are at stake should be a crime.

Had both parties agreed that Clinton was right about Saddam and Bush was right about Saddam I believe we would be in a very different place today in the middle east. I also think that if the Democrats had run someone with an actual plan for Iraq and Afghanistan in 2004 we probably would have a different President today. John Kerry and a lack of a plan in 2004 cost the DEMS the election just as Bush's "stay the course" plan cost the GOP elections in 2006. Now Hillary and Obama have announced surrender as their plans while it looks like Giuliani and McCain are playing the "stay the course" for 2008. Wouldn't we all like someone to have a plan that includes winning.

[TallDave]

"Constitutional democracy is a concept Jeffersonian types actively FOUGHT FOR. They wanted it; demanded it; claimed it as their own; and implemented it. "

In fact, the roots of American democracy go all the way back to the Magna Carta, and had help from many foreign sources; the American Revolution did not happen in a vacuum, any more than the Iraqi democratic beginnings we see today.

"Iraq is facing a grave shortage of "democrats.""

There are several hundred thousand Iraqis fighting for their democratic elected government. They put their lives on the line every day.

"Amazing antecdote. How can you possibly know this to be true, and how can you possibly pretend to prove it?"

Try reading Michael Totten. He's been there and seen it.

[Legalize]

"You are speaking in vague terms of "free" and "not free," as if either term means anything relative to the verifiable facts on the ground in Iraq.

No, the Index of Political Freedom is built on very specific, concrete metrics like freedom of pressm, freedom of assembly, and democracy.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4450582.stm"

That analysis is from Nov. 2005. Need I say more? Oh, other than the Economist Intelligence Unit measures "freedom" in terms of "freedom" for corporate investors.
Considering that the EIU's "findings" tend to contradict the present-day reality in Iraq, why do we care what it has to say?

"You seem to miss the point re Saddam; the facts show the situtation would be far worse had we not removed him. You look only at the cost of removing him, and ignore the opportunity cost of NOT removing him. That's poor analysis. "

This is one of my favorite cultist argument. What "facts" show that the situation would be "far worse" if Saddam had not been removed? You have no way of establishing those facts; true you have plenty of sources willing to speculate til the ends of the earth to forward their partisan interests, but those are not "facts."

Iraq is a disaster. It has none of the necessary elements to carry out the functions of a state. Yes, the U.S. toppled Saddam, and yes that is a good thing, but it's akin to saying "yes I LOVE ice cream, and this ice cream is the best I've EVER HAD. And it only cost me 2 million dollars I don't have. But I do have the ice cream."

[Steve]

TallDave

Im willing to be called a racist but I don't believe Arabs will in our lifetimes develop a democracy that guarantees basic human rights such as the right to practice any religion, the right to criticize any religion, the natural right that women deserve the same protections and consideration as men, the protection of minorities, the right of a citizen to be secure in his own home, the right to due process etc. Yes, it did take the United States nearly a century to end slavery, more to give women the right to vote and even longer to guarantee the rights of the minority but that is because significant numbers of Americans demanded it.

We are a nation of individuals. The arab nation is a nation of tribes.

[Steve]

TallDave

"In fact, the roots of American democracy go all the way back to the Magna Carta, and had help from many foreign sources; the American Revolution did not happen in a vacuum, any more than the Iraqi democratic beginnings we see today."

Those roots you describe come from a European culture and Christian heritage.

Middle Eastern culture evolved differently as did Indo-Asiatic. Values we hold near and dear do not necessarily translate into other cultures as is evident in some Islamic women wanting the head scarf to be mandatory.

[Legalize]

"In fact, the roots of American democracy go all the way back to the Magna Carta, and had help from many foreign sources; the American Revolution did not happen in a vacuum, any more than the Iraqi democratic beginnings we see today."

Tis true. None of which has to do with the fact that the American Revolution was something that "Americans" wanted. The Iraqi "democratic beginnings" were thrust upon them by US. Point of fact - those principles appear to have been roundly rejected by the Suni and Shi'ia who tend to prefer blowing each other up and estblishing their own version of theocracy, rather than "democracy."

"There are several hundred thousand Iraqis fighting for their democratic elected government. They put their lives on the line every day."

Really? You mean the death-squads who have infiltrated the military? You mean the Iraqi fighters who our fellows don't trust in battle and only give them info on a need-to-know basis? Just because guys strap on guns to fight for their country doesn't make them "democrats." It might make them "nationalists," or even "patriots," but it does not make them "democrats." Democracy requires some sort of civil mechanism put in place at the will of the people. This is not happening in Iraq now, any more than it was happening under Saddam.

"Try reading Michael Totten. He's been there and seen it."

I've read Totten many times, and argued with him. He's an idealogue who sees only what he wants to see. He is a good writer and I do not doubt his convictions, but the man is as obtuse as David Brooks, and quite liberal with his interpretation of history to say the least.

[salvage]

They died helping start a civil war that has made the region more dangerous and more of a haven to terrorist, that isn't a waste?

And to be clear it's not the dead soldiers that are to blame nor are they the ones who wasted their lives; it's their leaders and they should be held accountable.

[seekeronos]

I'd have to agree with Steve on the point that Arabs really aren't culturally capable of creating or posessing a repuresentative republic in the same vein as Jefferson.

They do seem, on the other hand, much more ready to settle for nice and tidy Caliphate who will govern them with Sharia Law.

I'd give them about 400 or 500 years to come around though. Maybe they might get the picture if any of us are left alive to talk about it over a bowl of Cous-cous and Turkish Coffee.

[Andrew]

"I just learned that my best friend in high school's life has just been wasted in Afghanistan, I'm excited to tell his Mom and Dad."

I'm gonna call bullshit on that one. HS friend is not next of kin...

[seekeronos]

EDIT: *representative*

[nova]

If our government had the guts to start a draft this war would be over in 3 months.

[Jeff]

"I'm gonna call bullshit on that one. HS friend is not next of kin..."

You're a dick.

[Andrew]

And you're a lying sack of crap. Tell us some more stories.

[Buzzy]

Salvage the mere fact that you obviously think that American soldiers died "starting a civil war" in Iraq shows you don't have a clue about what you're talking about. The great majority of our casualties there have died or been wounded trying to stop a civil war. Why don't you look elsewhere for the cause of this unrest or do you just enjoy America bashing. Somehow you can't see that the Baath Party in Syria supporting the Sunni terrorists or the Iranian supported Shi'a militias as having a hand in this.

[Zifnab]

"Tis true. None of which has to do with the fact that the American Revolution was something that "Americans" wanted. The Iraqi "democratic beginnings" were thrust upon them by US. Point of fact - those principles appear to have been roundly rejected by the Suni and Shi'ia who tend to prefer blowing each other up and estblishing their own version of theocracy, rather than "democracy."

That's entirely unfair. Take Joe Iraqi off the street and ask him what he thinks of insurgencies and death squads, Sunnis and Shia, Al Qaeda and Iran, and I doubt he'd have anthing particularly nice to say about any of them.

You've got a handful of Timmothy McVeighs running rough-shod over the country, causing havok, stealing money, and press-ganging locals into doing their dirty work. The 2 million Iraq refugees who've already fled the country didn't want to blow up their neighbors. The millions who remain, largely, have no quarrel with their neighbors. And I suspect they would live no less peacefully under a Jeffersonian Democracy than they did under a Saddam Dictatorship.

Given a chance to vote, there were millions of purple fingers. But purple fingers don't mean anything when truck bombs are going off at your downtown grocery store. And the guys with guns don't give to flips about what government is in power, because the government can't keep the streets secure.

Iraq's fate will rest in the hands of the man who can make the trains run on time. Until then it will continue to be a bloodbath.

[LOL]

jeff, you realize he wasn't talking about Afghanistan, but Iraq... you're exagerration on your vicarious connection to this war is fascinating to watch however