Trickle down warfare

The last time this nation got into a war and than became unwilling to support the war or the troops was the Vietnam War. To start with, this was a war we got into wherein we were not, as a nation, directly attacked by such country. Iraq was not the first time this happened--nor was George W. Bush the the first one to do so. Our nation, for the most part has always gone to War, not for our national preservation or even for our countries intent to conquer another nation. We have been in most of our wars sent to help a country or countries that were under attack by a nation(s), willing to overthrow such country or conquer it/them for territorial gain . As such we were, in most cases, there to defend and protect the rights of other people and their nation as well. No other nation on this planet, has done as much. Im our wars, like with Iraq, we entered that war not for the self-defense of this nation but, for the most part, to help the people of that country, that were being tortured, raped and killed by their leader(s)--Saddam Hussein. In this respect it has been determined that their were over 300,000 that were massacred under his reign. President Clinton, for the vary same reasons, went to war in Kosovo/Serbia, supposedly because l7,000 were killed or were killed by their government. Not a peep out of our nations do-gooders, about this war. However, when it comes to GWB, he was being persecuted beyond all sense of reasoning, for doing the same thing as Clinton, but protecting a major and larger population. Also this nonsense that there was no Weapons of Mass Distruction found in Iraq. By whose standards? To a fireman, a match, can be a weapon of mass destruction, to a person, in an Air Raid, being bombed, a plane is a weapon of mass destruction. Maybe, there were not Atomic Bombs to be found, but we did find many of his Airplanes buried in the Desert. Tell me these were not weapons of mass destruction. Today while our man are in harms way, failing to give them the protection and support they need could, because of a lack of leadership cause mass distruct of our men in battle. In short, Obama, by failing to act in a timely manner, he could be considered a primary cause of our troops being massively harmed or killed. President Obama is on the verge of doing so! Is this the change in leadership many of you asked for. I doubt it. http//themessengerpage.blogspot.com The Messenger