palin vs protester

http://www.wsbtv.com/video/17639999/index.html?source=CNN

lol i thought that was kind of funny, i know its a short clip but you get the point. atleast she didnt fly off the handle and start yelling like i would have


and for the ones that dont know, that little hand gesture at the end was "i love you" in sign.

Why do they make a big deal in the description of the fact she got cheered? It was a Republican rally, they would have cheered whatever she'd said and It was quite frankly a rubbish retort. If her son, or for that fact, the US Military weren't in Iraq that doesn't mean the guy wouldn't have the right to protest. I'm sick of these people who make out like the military are what give us the air in our lungs and every right we have. If there was a world war going on, maybe a statement like that would be more qualified. But there isn't and it's not.

I didn't say we never had to fight for our rights, read the last two lines+ of my post again.

I have one old friend in the military. I thought he was stupid for signing up and going off to Iraq but hey, it's his choice. I've never ever looked upon it as him fighting for my freedom though.

Your last sentence makes no sense. My point was we have rights no matter what, what she was saying is that the military give us our freedom. Which hasn't been true for the past.. ohh.. 63 years.

Ok I'll put this black and white for you because you've obviously not understood what I'm trying to say.

Palin said her son was in Iraq giving the protester the freedom to speak out against her. When regardless or not of if the US army was in Iraq or had ever been there he'd still have the right to do that. Iraq was never a threat to the average citizen in the western world or their 'rights' because they never had the capability to threaten us or attack us (there was never any credible evidence of WMDs). So irregardless of whether or not we invaded them our 'rights' would never have been threatened. However in WW2 when the Nazis were intent on taking over the whole world and running it their way, that was a threat to our rights and the military stopped them.

So while you may be able to credit the military for our freedom in instances like world war 2 it's certainly stupid to say they've been doing that anytime since 1945. Since then the US army's exploits have just been to attempt to force their ideas on others and throw their weight around.

whos to say that they would have never gotten the capability to become a threat to the U.S. had we never gone over there? i know you could say that about a lot of places but they've been trying to get their hands on something big for a while now.

you and i dont see eye to eye on this, i can see that. so im done.
think what ever you want but i know im proud of them, you dont have to be.........

A country with the military capabilities of Iraq would never have launched a full scale attack or invasion or assault on any European countries or America. They were never a threat. If you can't see that then you really are beyond any sort of reasonable comprehension. That is why what she is saying is rubbish. The US's reason for invasion wasn't defense motivated, it was to get Saddam and so called WMD's that never existed. That alone shows you they weren't a threat to anyone in the west.