Just to make it clear . . . liberals are not talking about not defending America and not fighting terrorism. We're saying we have to be smart when we do so.
We cannot fight them half-feartedly or with pumped up patriotism (see the South prior to April 1860.
We have to be smart--nee' smartER.
If we are indeed destroying terrorists at a slower rate than they are joining up--we are failing.
This was one of the blunders of the British army in the American Revolution. Our Continental Army didn't line up on one side and blast away til last man standing--they fought undercover and smarter and the British didn't/couldn't adapt.
The same is true now, NO I am NOT saying our Continental Army were terrorists but they were insurrgents. We have to SHOW that we are smarter than the British were in the 1770's. We must adapt and we must fight the terrorists smarter. Fear mongering, holding on to failed policies and not approaching the quagmaire of Iraq honestly will not help. AND let me ask everyone--"Would the surge be as effective if Muqtada al'Sadr hadn't also declared a cease fire around the same time?" Petreus, McCain and the rest of Bush's war machine aren't mentioning that!
By the way--I am a pacifist personally--but am practical that war is not always avoidable.
I would just hope we would never enter into it casually (oops to late) or fight blindly (dang, two for two).