If the murderous bloodshed of September eleven, 2001 had taken spot even though Barack Obama ended up President of the United States, and his response and subsequent retaliation had followed exactly the path that George W. Bush had taken, undoubtedly he would not only have been branded the finest wartime commander in the historical past of all humankind by the mainstream press, but he would have garnered my support without having a scintilla of equivocation. If, yet, below the same exact circumstance, with the rubble in lower Manhattan even now smoldering, President Obama would have known as for an instantaneous summit of Muslim leaders (and a project power or two to boot) to figure out not only why these a tragedy transpired, but exactly what the United States would have to have to change in its foreign policy to continue to keep the peace, I would have said adamantly and ferociously that I did not assistance the President. For this reason, making use of this example, I submit that to claim assistance for the President without supporting his policies is accurately the identical as stating that 1 supports the troops without the need of supporting the war. It is a nonsensical declaration. It is not achievable. It is extremely popular, for instance, to listen to someone say they assistance the war energy in Afghanistan but not in Iraq. Despite the fact that that is not my position, just one is undoubtedly entitled to come to feel that way. If that is, indeed, the situation, then it is intellectually dishonest to say that people who takes that position supports the troops in Iraq..