From someone who's normally a big fan of military surges:
>
>formatting link
This is the opposite of what Our Great Leader told us, and you are a traitor.
{burp}
From someone who's normally a big fan of military surges:
>
>formatting link
This is the opposite of what Our Great Leader told us, and you are a traitor.
{burp}
Judging from several of author Gary Brecher's other columns, he appears to possess a surprisingly good understanding of war and military, despite his neocon-like credentials (a hawk with no war service record).
A certain amount of that knowledge comes from common sense, and doing something alien to 54% of voters: Reading just a little history.
So, your assertion is that a hawk with no war service record is a neo-con? Or does is it required for a neo-con to have no war service record and be a hawk?
Which unproven assertion is your definition?
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required