Thursday was a bad day for anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan.
First, she got booted from the ultra-liberal website Daily Kos (h/t Ace) due to her decision to run against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California).
Then, during a visit to Montgomery, Alabama, as part of her “Summer of Love 2007” tour, Cindy was confronted by a Bush supporter who actually asked a rather cogent question that frankly few on the left or in the media care to address: “What happens to Iraq after we leave?”
This prompted a somewhat predictable exchange wherein Sheehan answered questions with questions rather than address the likely horrific genocide that will follow a capricious American troop withdrawal (video available here with relevant section beginning at minute 3:50, partial transcript follows):
Sheehan: "If you'll be quiet, I will answer."
Vucovich: "Alright, say your piece, go ahead."
Sheehan: "How many Iraqi people in Iraq have you talked to? Zero! The people in Iraq want us out."
Vucovich: "So Saddam Hussein would be better?"
Sheehan: "The people in Iraq want us out."
Vucovich: "What happens in Iraq after we leave?"
(inaudible)
Sheehan: "I'm going to answer you if you'll be quiet. George Bush has killed 700,000 Iraqis."
Vucovich: "George Bush doesn't have anything to do with this."
From what I can tell, outside of Alabama and the blogosphere, few media reported this. Neither did they care about Sheehan’s announcement at Daily Kos earlier in the morning that she was being banned due to her intention to run against Pelosi:
I can't post here anymore because my potential run for Congress
is not on the Democratic ticket.I have been deeply grateful for all of your support over the years.
Your love and kindness helped me through lots of sleepless nights
at Camp Casey '05.If Speaker Pelosi does her constitutionally mandated duty and I don't run,
then I can come back and post.I know a lot of you are hostile towards my candidacy. Please
understand that I am doing it for your children and grandchildren
(and my surviving ones.)Love always,
Cindy
Potentially more interesting was the comments section wherein some Kossacks referred to Sheehan as a troll, and defended “management’s” warnings to Cindy as a result of DKos being a Democrat site created to support Democrats.
This seems somewhat laughable given Kossack efforts in 2006 to defeat Joe Lieberman, a longtime Democrat.
As Robert Stacy McCain pointed out at in the Washington Times’ Fishwrap blog Thursday:
Mrs. Sheehan is banned, but Sen Hillary Rodham Clinton is welcome at Daily Kos -- or, to be more precise, YearlyKos, the second annual "netroots" convention, which will be held this year in Chicago.
And, Allah at Hot Air accurately noted:
She failed the litmus test. And now, my friends, she must pay. Exit question: What happened to the dream of people-powered politics driving complacent establishment Democrats from office?
Good point. After all, Markos Moulitsas’ concept in “Crashing the Gate” was the following:
This book lays bare, with passion and precision, how ineffective, incompetent, and antiquated the Democratic Party establishment has become, and how it has failed to adapt and respond to new realities and challenges.
Right now, it seems that Pelosi and Clinton are the leaders of the ineffective, incompetent, and antiquated Democrat Party. Shouldn’t the netroots be welcoming challengers to these pathetic icons rather than banning them?
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
If you follow the thread to t
July 13, 2007 - 10:45 ET by Ruths husband BenIf you follow the thread to the DailyKos it becomes apparent that Cindy was booted from that forum because she has announced as an independent. Kos is devoted to electing and supporting Democrats. That is the problem when you support an agenda not an idea. Once someone steps out of the agenda, they are demonized, often for the very same things they were lionized while in the fold. Follow the Ace link and see how vicious these folks can be when feeding on one of their own.
"Shouldn’t the netroot
July 13, 2007 - 10:48 ET by contrary"Shouldn’t the netroots be welcoming challengers to these pathetic icons rather than banning them?"
No, as the netroot organizations are more interested in furthering their own agenda anyway they can, and that means sucking up to whoever looks popular. If Sheehan were actually popular, with high voter attraction and not some crazed loon, they would dump Pelosi, et al. It is easy to do when the netroots have no principles
"What happens to Iraq af
July 13, 2007 - 10:50 ET by dscott"What happens to Iraq after we leave?” This question should be followed up with: "Do you really give a crap if hundreds of thousands of Iraqis die if we pull out?
Never mind the other obvious questions since all we seem to do is ask emotional questions leaving long term GWOT strategy in the swamp of minutia. Noel, as I suggested on Brent's thread, we need to put it to Reid and the rest of the Dem leadership, over and over again, the central question until they answer it to the country's satisfaction: "What happens to Iraq after we leave?”
We need to challenge the MSM until they do their J-O-B to ask the questions like "What happens to Iraq after we leave?” and let the public decide for themselves if the answer is satisfactory.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
"Do you really give a cr
July 13, 2007 - 11:09 ET by Prester John"Do you really give a crap if hundreds of thousand of Iraqis die if we pull out?"
Of course Cindy and the Left don't give a crap. They don't care when thousands of people of color are killed by other people of color; they only care when it is Americans who kill terrorists of color, because then it is somehow a great crime against humanity.
To take your point a bit fu
July 13, 2007 - 11:25 ET by ArcherBTo take your point a bit further:
No cost is too great to defeat George Bush and those like him. This means that they would rather see America fail than GWB succeed. This is what BDS is all about. The lives of Iraqis and even Americans are a pittance when compared to this agenda.
If you hamper the war effort of one side, you automatically help out that of the other. --George Orwell
I agree 100%. The kooks have
July 13, 2007 - 12:31 ET by ThisnThatI agree 100%. The kooks have openly declared Bush as public enemy #1. It's really, really hard for me to fathom this, other than coming to the conclusion that these people are truly anti- and un-American in all aspects of their delusional and limited mentality. They truly are the enemy within, and need to be marginalized as soon as possible.
"What happens to Iraq af
July 13, 2007 - 11:12 ET by drillanwr"What happens to Iraq after we leave?”
The Golden Egg the lib/leftist/socialist/antiwar/antiAmerican bunch are craving ... Mass slaughter to use as a political tool. "Look what Bush and the Republicans did!! Never trust them again! ONLY trust us!"
The Libs don't care- look at
July 13, 2007 - 23:05 ET by kathleenirishThe Libs don't care- look at what happened when they defunded the War effort in Viet Nam. 5,000,000 dead in southeast Asia, the rise of Pol Pot. Whatever. Didn't Carter say something about an "irrational' fear of communism? so, Iran and al-Queda are the new face of despots the Left can really get behind...and besides, Bush is the threat to peace, or didn't you hear the proclamations of the sainted Left? as long as they get political capital out of it, it's good for Dems when America goes down. "Screw the USA!": new DNC campaign slogan for 2008.
Anyone who says they support the troops but not the mission is a liar.
The question is, especially o
July 13, 2007 - 11:35 ET by BinxlyThe question is, especially one the vietnam vets that support her will know all too well, 'is 2 million dead in a matter of months better than 700,000 in a matter of 4 years? (700,000 dead being a grossly disputed figure among even the crazed left as erring a bit much on the overexaggerating.)
My point is that if she cares only about casualty numbers, did she forget about the 2+ million South Vietnamese (and many overlooked Vietcong dissenters) that were MURDERED, yes MURDERED after we pulled out? So Bush is a dictator of the worst authoritarian nation in the world (the US) but North Vietnam and our new terrorist enemies, which BTW make GW look as liberal as Hil in comparison, are just our 'misunderstood friends?'
That's what I hate about Vietnam, people overlook WHY we lost. Political hinderances and 'PC pussy-footing' caused us to be restricted, no, banned even from bombing the fringe, unpopulated areas of Cambodia in which the Vietcong were routing their forces through in order to flank our men from behind. Cambodia knowingly allowed them to use their bordering territory to funnel forces through, but we, America, were not allowed to attack, set foot, hell, even THINK of doing anything to the vietcong if they were in Cambodian territory. We played a war where the odds were against us due to politics, much like the same 'hand tying' that Reid and Peluosi want to do to us now.
The only shame is, while this man's heart was in the right place, he makes many mistakes (Ill sign up today! Well, if hes gonna say that, he should, we do need more soldiers and sadly we are, if only slightly under recent recruitment goals.) However, the good thing is this proves, as you can see by the vets getting in his way of just trying to *talk* to Sheehan, that liberals are the ones to fear. They are the ones who want to make civil discourse and debate illegal. A conservative may shrug off a question or give a stereotypical agenda driven answer, but never have I seen the aggression that the left exudes when someone disagrees at all on the right.
Lord help us, if people watch this and STILL think Cyndi isn't crazy, and that her cause isn't just a selfish one anymore, a crusade to be 'the right one' then we're done for. This is no longer a fight of politics for her. Its not even one of principle. She disagrees and is convinced SHE has the end all be all answer. She is going to campaign and bug us all to death until she croaks or until we submit. I for one will still disagree on the day of her funeral. So I guess in this case, she better get busy moving on and shutting up, or get busy dying. (and no I'm not advocating her death, anyone's death, no matter how crazy they are, is a tragedy.)
Well, Binxly, you capture in
July 13, 2007 - 15:29 ET by Space CowboyWell, Binxly, you capture in a few paragraphs the essence of the dilemma that the U.S. faces in Iraq. Your frustration, as well as the frustration of most Americans, is palpable. And you, like many on this thread, want to put the target on Sheehan as the cause of all this.
As I look at the tragedy of the quagmire that we're stuck in, all I can say is Osama ben Forgotten is a strategic genius. He, as well as many in this country on both sides of the aisle, saw the dangers to America of getting caught in an insurgency in Iraq. Certainly all of Bush the Elder’s advisors warned against it, especially Colin Powell.
And OBF understood well the PR victory an American invasion (I’m sorry, did I forget the “coalition”?) and occupation of Iraq would be. Ben Forgotten was even given credit for aiding in the election of George Bush in ’04 by the CIA as detailed in Ron Suskind’s book, “The One Percent Doctrine”. They saw exactly what he was doing when he released that video days before the election.
You don’t have to look further than this thread or today’s headlines to see why this has worked out so well for Al Qaeda. They understood then that Bush was a gift that would keep on giving. The report released yesterday that claims Al Qaeda is stronger than ever supports OBF’s genius. They had almost no presence in Iraq until we invaded and, simultaneously, our invasion took resources that were being used to shut down Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan and transfered them to Iraq allowing OBF to escape and the Taliban to regroup. Both Al Qaeda and the Taliban our on the offense and Afghanistan is another disaster slowly unfolding. America is caught in a trap in Iraq wher we’re damned if we leave and damned if we stay.
The question asked of Sheehan – “What will happen to the Iraqi people?” – is a good one for which no one knows the answer. Are they worse off with us Her assertion that the Iraqi people want us out is accurate. Polls have shown overwhelming support for that idea in Iraq. And our presence there will always fuel an insurgency – as any occupation does – so we will be as much a problem as a solution. The chance that Iraq will devolve into anarchy and become a haven for terrorists is very real. Those arguing for leaving have as many strong arguments as those that argue we should stay.
I come down reluctantly in the "leave" camp and I’ll leave you with part of the transcript from an interview with some American soldiers from yesterday’s Democracy Now! that decides it for me. This is a follow up to the recent piece in The Nation that interviewed 50 soldiers on the record about their experience in Iraq and it supports, in my mind, why we should get out of Iraq ASAP:
JUAN GONZALEZ: And, Sergeant Westphal, we only have about thirty seconds left. I’d like to ask you: you went in in February 2004. Did you ever expect that we’d be in this situation now, more than three years later?
STAFF SGT. TIMOTHY JOHN WESTPHAL: I never imagined that America would ever get to this point. I never imagined that the American public would be so apathetic as they have been, in my estimation. A lot of them don’t listen to the stories we tell. There’s a reason that all these guys got together for this article, because they have a commitment to the truth, and we definitely want the truth to be out there, that America has brought terror to the country of Iraq, and that’s something that we have to deal with.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you think the US soldiers should be brought home now?
STAFF SGT. TIMOTHY JOHN WESTPHAL: Absolutely. You know, I support the United States military. I’m a soldier. I always will be. I’m tremendously proud of the men I served with. However, yes, I do believe that we need to bring our troops home right now, because all we’re doing is making more terrorists and more people who hate America.
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/12/1335208
Reading these stories in the Democracy Now! transcript or The Nation article will break you heart. These poor guys have done their best and been caught in an impossible situation.
Look, I'll admit, part of me
July 13, 2007 - 16:12 ET by BinxlyLook, I'll admit, part of me is saying stay because I care about the people there, yet admittedly, part of me wants to stay as well because each day we don't have an attack here, is one day its worth the crap I have to defend against. I'd love if it was as simple as pulling out, but the problem is America is being flooded by foreign refugees and immigrants because they are the minority in their nation that WANTS democracy, liberty, and freedom. The reason I still believe our cause is a valiant one is in America you are free. Free to love, free to hate, free to apathy. America, however, cannot sustain every freedom loving human on Earth that has the heart and soul to understand that no man is ever born into privledge of deciding another man's fate. Iraq and much of the islamic world stands for everything against that principle. Islamofacism is the new enemy to liberty just how Communism and even before, authoritarianism was in our past.
Again, I would love to pull out and take all those unhappy and wishing for freedom with us, but we simply cannot sustain all these people ourselves. Our best bet is to expand the concept of freedom and help those without a voice, without power, to push forward and let it be known that NO nation has the right to full control of its people. That freedom is not just an American Principle, but a *human* principle, regardless of gender, sex, race, ethnicity, religion, sexual preference, or whether you think Coke or Pepsi is better.
That is why I will always support our efforts in Iraq. Freedom and democracy *will* succeed, but it is a long, and sadly, bloody road ahead for both sides.
Also, while there are some of our own troops like the ones noted who are against the war (and their argument holds a hell of alot more than mine since I've never served) but there are many more who think the war, right or wrong, what we are doing *now* over there (bringing and establishing a free, democratic Iraq) is the right thing to do. People were not created to be ruled over, they were created to work together. I think when the smoke clears decades from now, if we do what we can to support the idea of democracy, not necessarily war (and yes I believe at some point 'pulling out' is still support of democracy in Iraq) we will find it was all for the greater good.
Perhaps you disagree, and that is fine, but remember, its because of our freedom and democracy we wish to spread that we can disagree without one of us ending up dead or 'missing.'
Democracy Now-that is your heartbreaking source?
July 13, 2007 - 16:20 ET by terrigLook SpaceCowboy, have you ever seen their "television" show. We were treated to it three or four times a day on Oleo in Hawaii (the local yackity yack) station. If you have seen them, they really have nothing nice to say about the troops unless it's someone they find who feel like these guys. I don't consider them my brother's in arms because what I see them as doing is making things worse. Now, I've been out for awhile but I can tell you my active duty husband deplores these types too.
We are there, we need to finish the job so we're not back in 12 years. I don't know. We're still in Japan & Germany and how long has that war been over???????
Sheehan, didn't have an answe
July 13, 2007 - 10:53 ET by ForeverOnTheRightSheehan, didn't have an answer for Vucovich, so she answered the question with a question. So has she thought through every angle of what she believes, why she believes in it and the what the end result will be? Probably not.
Yep, and when ultra-liberals
July 13, 2007 - 10:59 ET by CapitalismRulesYep, and when ultra-liberals like Sheehan get stuck, what do they do? Just say George Bush, just say George Bush as if just by saying his name, they don't have to explain themselves or their policies. Why do you want to hurt American troops, their families and the Iraqi people Ms. Sheehan? Answer: George Bush, George Bush.
Some other questions I would
July 13, 2007 - 10:56 ET by BDSome other questions I would like to ask Mother Sheehan.
1.) Was your son living with you when he decided to enlist?
a.) If no, why not?
2.) Were you against your sons enlistment?
3.) Why did your son Re-enlist?
4.) Did you ever visit your son on a military post?
5.) Did you ever meet any of his friends while he was stationed at Fort Hood?
6.) Why do you think your son volunteered for the mission to rescue the stranded patrol when he was killed?
7.) How would you characterize the Mahdi Army extremists who lined up women and children and marched them into the line of fire for protection from US fire during the battle that claimed your sons life. Evil? Freedom firghters?
Cindy:1) the George Bush kill
July 13, 2007 - 11:04 ET by drillanwrCindy:
1) the George Bush killed 700, 000 innocent Iraqis is complete and total BS, in addition to being a bald-faced lie ... and you and the enemy in this war continue to spin it http://patdollard.com/2007/07/13/enemy-forcing-civilians-to-make-false-casualty-claims/
2) Have YOU ever talked to an Iraqi? Ever been to Iraq? Ever talked to our troops over there?
3) Time to share with the public those letters home from your son so we all can see what HE thought and felt about the war in Iraq he so bravely served and fought in. (I'm betting he is totally opposite from you)
4) Got yourself a pushy, black-shirted posse now, eh?
700,000
July 13, 2007 - 11:24 ET by OldSailor88The thing that really ticks me off about this B.S. 700,000 casualty business is the sheer numbers of it. Why don't people put a calculator to it.
War started on March, 20, 2003. That is 1210 days ago. So you take
Casualties: 700,000 DIVIDED BY DAYS 1210= 518.5 Civilian Casualties a day for three and a half years. A catastrophic number like this in reality would be plastered all over the news. Do we see this? Nope. Why doesn't someone put a stop to this madness?
Exactly! Even the cowardly ne
July 13, 2007 - 11:27 ET by drillanwrExactly! Even the cowardly news services hunkered down in their posh hotel rooms in the Green Zone would be able to see the piles of bodies from their windows.
SHOW ME THE BODIES!
700,000 casualties2 BILLION l
July 13, 2007 - 11:31 ET by Jerry700,000 casualties
2 BILLION live earth viewers
scientific concensus
Sheesh..
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
Laughable isn't it? You ju
July 13, 2007 - 11:34 ET by MightyMouthLaughable isn't it? You just can't make this stuff up... wait, I guess you can!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
So in other words, Cindy, our
July 13, 2007 - 11:51 ET by Hero SquadSo in other words, Cindy, our 9/11 would've actually been a pretty good week in Iraq?
*****
"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown
www.brookings.edu/iraqindex
July 13, 2007 - 12:38 ET by Right2thePointwww.brookings.edu/ir...
ESTIMATED NUMBER OF IRAQI CIVILIANS KILLED BY MONTH SINCE NOVEMBER 2006
November 2006 3,500
December 3,000
January 2007 3,000
February 2,500
March 2,750
April 2,890
May 3,000
June 2,600
...and how many of those were
July 13, 2007 - 13:33 ET by Hero Squad...and how many of those were actually killed due to American actions vs. insurgent actions?
*****
"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown
I get estimates from icasualt
July 13, 2007 - 14:24 ET by FastEdI get estimates from icasualties.org -
November '06 - 1846
December '06 - 1752
January '07 - 1802
February '07 - 3014
March '07 - 2977
April '07 - 1821
May '07 - 1980
June '07 - 1255
The numbers include the Iraqi Security Forces and civilians - so I guess it depends where you get the info.
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Look how Sheehan uses the lib
July 13, 2007 - 11:16 ET by GothampcLook how Sheehan uses the liberal's debate tactic of making wild assumptions.
Sheehan: "How many Iraqi people in Iraq have you talked to? Zero! The people in Iraq want us out."
How does Sheehan know what this man has or has not done?
And why is it necessary to talk to the people of Iraq? During WW2, did we talk to the Germans to ask them if they wanted Hitler removed?
And the Kurds have already made a big deal about how glad they are that we are there.
"Look how Sheehan uses t
July 13, 2007 - 11:29 ET by ForeverOnTheRight"Look how Sheehan uses the liberal's debate tactic of making wild assumptions." In my opinion, what your talking about, is just an imature emotional response, when you don't have a calm thought out response.
Yes, you are right. I'm jus
July 13, 2007 - 11:35 ET by GothampcYes, you are right.
I'm just used to watching people like Ann Coulter who never seem to make wild assumptions, but always back up what they say with a well thought out response.
I think I could at least resp
July 13, 2007 - 11:55 ET by ForeverOnTheRightI think I could at least respectfully disagree with a liberal if they didn't make wild assumptions like this, but had an intelligent response. I've seen local politicians discuss issues on a local PBS station. Typically the Democrat will not let the Republican finish their thought, but cut in and talk over the Republican. It’s immature, and rude. It’s another sign that they are loosing the “debate.”
"George Bush doesn't hav
July 13, 2007 - 11:19 ET by fendertele"George Bush doesn't have anything to do with this."
Yeah, right.
I think he was talking spec
July 13, 2007 - 11:23 ET by MightyMouthI think he was talking specifically about the question: "What happens to Iraq after we leave?".
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Well in the avenue of the arg
July 13, 2007 - 11:24 ET by CapitalismRulesWell in the avenue of the argument this guy was making, G.W. doesn't have anything to with what he was saying. Sure, W got us into the war, sure he went after the threat, but what happens when we leave? It does not matter who is office at the time. So if Nancy Pelosi becomes president, when she is asked point blank about what she is going to do on the war in Iraq, she'll just hide under her desk, put both fingers in her ears, rock back and forth and keep repeating George Bush, George Bush, George Bush........
"George Bush doesn't hav
July 13, 2007 - 11:31 ET by drillanwr"George Bush doesn't have anything to do with this."
Yeah, right.
He doesn't. He isn't the one calling for us to cut and run. Why? Because he knows exactly what would happen if we did. The question MUST be answered by those who are demanding cut and run from Iraq. They keep chanting Vietnam, Vietnam ... civilian slaughter is what they want ... they crave Iraqi blood.
Well, if Bush really wanted t
July 13, 2007 - 11:53 ET by fenderteleWell, if Bush really wanted to win this war he'd reinstitute the draft and make every eligible 18 year old available to fight it. We obviously have a shortage of troops there and recruitment numbers are steadily down. Let every 18 year old, both men and women get trained and be battle ready so we can finish this thing off.
And your news comes from??
July 13, 2007 - 11:55 ET by PawpawNAnd your news and thoughts on this come from where? This Army is better than any drafted army. You read and listen to too much propoganda from the MSM!!
Newsflash-federtele the professional military doesn't want you
July 13, 2007 - 12:00 ET by terrigWell, fendertele here is a bit of news for you. The professional military doesn't want losers in their ranks. They only want the winners who want to be there. It was that way when I was in and my husband and everyone else feels that way.
Your comment is an insult to
July 13, 2007 - 12:26 ET by fenderteleYour comment is an insult to veterans everywhere from every era who fought for our freedom.
Well Fender, you're the one w
July 13, 2007 - 12:30 ET by terrigWell Fender, you're the one who wants to bring back the draft, now, today. I said nothing about those who were drafted in previous wars did I? No, like the tool you are you misconstrued it. I was speaking of the professional military of today and how those who don't want to be there are not wanted there. People like you like to say there are other opportunities out there for kids. Well that's correct and if you don't want to serve don't, you're not needed or wanted. Okay, that's all I was saying. But you then again I was a volunteer and perhaps you weren't. I can respect that you went, my brother went and didn't come back. I was speaking in the present tense so get your panties or boxers our of a wad and quit with the false pretensions.
What Fender wants is Vietnam.
July 13, 2007 - 13:05 ET by dscottWhat Fender wants is Vietnam. Fender is frustrated with the average American not protesting a policy where they had agreed in principal was the best course of action at the time. Since people have a choice to go into the military, young people who are the principle targets of the draft, don't feel they are being sucked into someone else's (an older generation's) fight like in Vietnam.
So Fender and people like Rangel are trying to force young people into a situation (via the draft) not of their choosing in the hopes of getting them to back their position. Typical libs, forcing disinterested people minding their own business into something they don't want to be involved in. Sounds like Socialism to me. Only control freaks and creeps force people to do things in which they don't want to be involved. It's a very selfish thing to do. And btw- many draftees in Vietnam didn't want to be there and so they weren't about to perform on the level of competence required to win a war, much less slog it out with the VC.
On the other hand WWII was a totally different story, no opposition press or elected official would have had the audacity to behave as they do now, much less young people of the time who knew what happened at Pearl Harbor.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
fender, how would you know if
July 13, 2007 - 12:41 ET by bassndudefender, how would you know if a comment was an insult to veterans?
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Just plain goofy
July 14, 2007 - 01:30 ET by Sua Sponte 75It's plain to see you don't have much of a clue concerning the military otherwise you would know the overwelming changes that occured with VOLAR and we went away from the draft. True, many draftees served, served proudly, however it's a different story when you have volunteers, people who not only want to be here, but constantly re-enlist, this was not the case with draftees. Look at any conflict and directly following a war the military ranks were decimated. So if you can't decern the differences, might be best just o move along.
"You're either part of the solution or part of the problem"
While your frustration is und
July 13, 2007 - 12:12 ET by CapitalismRulesWhile your frustration is understandable, your proposed solution is misplaced and more than likely it is because of what the TV folks want you to believe. We have a bunch of Iraqi militants and foreign fighters trying to push us out of Iraq to create an Islamic state, the barrier to this is our troops being there. Our guys believe in their mission, they believe in eachother and they are being harassed by cowards in civilian clothes, even if the draft came back and we sent a million troops over there, we'd still be bound by the same rules and regulations about targeting civilians that we as a noble nation have operated under in situations like these. So really the only thing that keeps this insurgency going are the PR victories won by killing innocent people- and who is handing out the trophies?.....the MSM!!!!
Well, if Bush really wanted t
July 13, 2007 - 12:50 ET by drillanwrWell, if Bush really wanted to win this war he'd reinstitute the draft and make every eligible 18 year old available to fight it. We obviously have a shortage of troops there and recruitment numbers are steadily down. Let every 18 year old, both men and women get trained and be battle ready so we can finish this thing off.
Ah, yes! There it is ... The Draft card ... It's the friggin' Joker in the Liberal deck.
You're wrong on the recruitment. Explain WHY troops are re-signing ... even while in Iraq.
And no thanks ... I'd rather have volunteers who know and understand and accept what they are signing on for, than say someone like you being forced into it ... And I believe if you ASK the military members they would all agree they wouldn't want to have someone (wearing a Che T-shirt) who was drafted and peeing their pants covering their asses in battle ...
"Explain WHY troops ar
July 13, 2007 - 12:57 ET by MightyMouth"Explain WHY troops are re-signing"
They may come back with "it's the bonuses" (which are pretty good btw). But I think its much more than that. There seems to be a genuine desire by many of our troops to finish the job they started. The money may be part of the decision, but I think there are a great number of troops that share the same vision as the president.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Fender has no replies just
July 13, 2007 - 13:02 ET by terrigFender has no replies just insults. That's the way though. As for bonuses, Officers don't get them unless special forces ones do. My husband didn't get out when he had the chance because he wanted to finish the job like most of the other people across the board do no matter what their rank.
Froma GAO report, January '07
July 13, 2007 - 14:37 ET by FastEdFroma GAO report, January '07 - " . . For example, the Army is experiencing a shortfall of mid-level officers, such as majors, because it commissioned fewer officers 10 years ago due to a post-Cold War force reduction. It projects a shortage of 3,000 or more officers annually through FY 2013. While the Army is implementing and considering initiatives to improve officer retention, the initiatives are not integrated and will not affect officer retention until at least 2009 or are unfunded." - seems the only shortage of personnel is in the officers corp - and that won't matter, since the demolibs will probably get rid of the military before then anyhow.
terrig - just think, you'll have your other half at home, and won't have to deal with these trolls anymore.
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
As a current member of the US
July 13, 2007 - 18:12 ET by BDAs a current member of the US military, I must say I do not wish to have any sullen draftees standing in the ranks beside me.
"Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,
That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made,
And crowns for convoy put into his purse;
We would not die in that man's company
That fears his fellowship to die with us. "
I think it's interesting that
July 13, 2007 - 11:24 ET by BruzillaI think it's interesting that I've visited or posted on a bunch of conservative, republican, libertarian, etc., forums, and I've never seen one of them ban someone for their beliefs. Granted, libs will get challenged and heckled, but it seems most "Right" forums actually want Lefties to post so it's not so boring always preaching to the choir. But sites like Daily Kos and DU will ban any non-believer in a second just for being there. I guess they never heard that screeching Hillary clip that Hannity always plays, where she rants about being able to debate.
Bruz
July 13, 2007 - 11:29 ET by Noel SheppardBruz,
Exactly. And, we actually do everything possible to keep our liberal posters. This includes sending them PMs and EMs to try to get them to tone down the hateful rhetoric so that they can remain members. Only when this fails is anyone banned here.
Think DK, DU, and HP can make such a claim? ns
You are correct Noel - we abs
July 13, 2007 - 11:38 ET by TruthMongerYou are correct Noel - we absolutely rock here:)!
Trick question: what is the opposite of Love? What is the opposite of Hate?
Gay haters unite!
I answered this already. The
July 13, 2007 - 16:42 ET by RESTLESS 1I answered this already. The answer to both is apathy.
I joined DU a couple of years
July 13, 2007 - 11:51 ET by BruzillaI joined DU a couple of years ago, and made one post. It said "Hi. I'm a Republican in Maryland and I think you all have some interesting views, and I look forward to discussing them with you."
That was my first and only post. The next day when I went to comment on something I read... ACCESS DENIED. So much for open and honest debate.
Oh why must they continue to
July 13, 2007 - 11:55 ET by Hero SquadOh why must they continue to hate people from Maryland? :-)
*****
"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown
Well, Noel, you may feel that
July 13, 2007 - 15:47 ET by Space CowboyWell, Noel, you may feel that way but I guarantee you not everyone does. I get accused of being a "troll" constantly for nothing more than posting something that disagrees with the groupthink of NewsBusters. Makes me feel like they don't want you here unless you agree.
I'll make you feel wanted, C'
July 13, 2007 - 16:44 ET by RESTLESS 1I'll make you feel wanted, C'mon, gimme a hug. C'mon. ;>)
We Are Family.......Make it a
July 13, 2007 - 16:50 ET by bigtimerWe Are Family....
...Make it a huge group hug...
LOL...
Feel better SC?
I get accused of being a &q
July 13, 2007 - 16:50 ET by MightyMouthI get accused of being a "troll"
Hell, accusing you of being a troll is absurdly unfair to trolls.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
SC
July 13, 2007 - 20:26 ET by Noel SheppardSC,
There's a difference between members of a website not wanting you there and the people that run it feeling that way. After all, this is indeed a conservative site, yes? As such, liberal views are not going to be welcomed by most members, correct?
All I can do as someone that wants liberal members is try to make it as comfortable here for them as possible. However, I can't prevent liberals from being badgered as long as it doesn't include vulgarity or threats. Similarly, I don't stop libs from badgering cons unless it's over the top.
Politics unfortunately brings out the worst in people. Yet, what we do here different than most sites is at least we allow those with conflicting views to stay members as long as they don't get abusive. Can you name a liberal site that does that? ns
P.S. In this thread, I saw you engage Binxley and terrig without anybody calling you a troll. Is this a rarity?
Observations:The required Vie
July 13, 2007 - 11:26 ET by QueenMumObservations re: the video:
The required Vietnam vets.
The whiny whimps who question whether others have served and then boast that they haven't served because they don't believe in the Iraq war. How conveeeeeenient.
The standard "Why don't we go into Saudi Arabia, blah blah blah?" If they're anti-war, then this question shouldn't even be asked.
Sheehan speaks of receiving support for her congressional run from people all over the country. Does she understand that she's supposedly challenging Nancy Pelosi's seat and that this means she would be representing the people from a certain portion of California? Does she think that if she unseats Pelosi, she also automatically takes the position of Speaker? What a dope.
We are not interested in the possibilities of defeat. - Queen Victoria
Ms. Sheehan,Our troops are la
July 13, 2007 - 11:26 ET by JerryMs. Sheehan,
Our troops are laying down their lives to PROTECT Iraqi citizens and you have the audacity to blame US for Iraqi deaths? How dare you.
Islamic terrorists are targeting Iraqi women and children and our soldiers are sacrificing their lives to prevent it and you have the unmittigating gall to say we are killing Iraqis?
The only Iraqis we are killing are TERRORISTS and SADAAM loyalists. Ms. Sheehan, you are a disgrace to the memory of your son and you are a disgrace to this nation and the principles in which it was founded.
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
And the Banned Play On
July 13, 2007 - 11:30 ET by Lame CherryFrom the start of this I have advocated that Cindy Sheehan be pitied and have psychological Christian counselling instead of being used as a publicity whore by various sadistic interests. In noting that, there should be something included about what little dictators run some sites having such thin skin they ban people.
I was what I believe banned from Jihad Watch for daring to challenge Robert Spencer with the facts. He and Hugh Fitzgerald were "get of Iraq" with Fitzgerald calling President Bush demented and using the typical leftist diatribes.
Asking the question which Jake Tapper and others are now about what happens when one leaves Iraq along with pointing out the same problems in Israel that Aarron Klein is on World Net Daily had my blogs daily, "put up for review".
Websites are not interested in the Truth, but many times it comes down to selling books to keeping the salivating attack dogs rebbed up so they come back for the hit ads which make money.
I honestly do not see a whole lot of difference in many sites which make money off of specific driven issues as banning people of different opinions is banning people no matter who the webmasters claim to be. Vulgarity is one thing to ban people on, but banning people because they are out debating you is always a loosing proposition as all the intelligent bloggers soon leave.
Frankly KOS would do democrats a huge favor in exposing just what Nance has been up to. (Yes I know her name is Nancy, but in world of Perky, Babs, Di and other Affirmative Action placements she deserves a girls club name as she earned nothing.)
Pelosi in 6 months has driven Congressional support to record lows. Her biggest achievements are a failed coup against Hoyer, screwing up the Syrian Israeli dialogue, flying around so much they are thinking of limiting her provided jet and empowering terrorists.
I have stated from the beginning of this democratic debacle that they have grabbed defeat from their lying jaws of victory. There will be a terrorist hit on America sooner or later and when that happens democrats screwing around meeting with terrorists, electing junior Ellison to the House now calling Bush "Hitler" and all of that adds up to the American public will blame them as they have caused another hit.
If they would have just shut up and let things lay, handled some blue dog measures to improve people's lives and the oil flow problem, Iraq would have remained a Republican problem these democrats created.....now the Republicans are asking the question I started getting banned for 6 months ago and democrats have no response.
In the end, KOS should have kept the in need of help Sheehan on their site to hone Nance into a better leader of the House as she would have had to done more than jet around America blaming Bush. Now Nance and KOS have a growing problem in the Rosie factor of many who have blind love for Sheehan which will transfer to votes.
What I have not looked up but would be interested in seeing, just what are the voting stats in Pelosi's district, because with the kook fringe Sheehan might drain off, Madame Speaker might be back to Madame Housefrau in 2008 with a Republican picking up the win.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
My husband found these somewh
July 13, 2007 - 11:32 ET by HelenSMy husband found these somewhere. I wish I had a link! Maybe they're bogus but I love them. Anyway, these are so cool and if anyone knows if they're legit and where any might be had, I am definitely in the market for several!
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" - Shakespeare
LOL! Those are great!When a
July 13, 2007 - 11:34 ET by JerryLOL! Those are great!
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
And the libs say there is no
July 13, 2007 - 15:05 ET by FastEdAnd the libs say there is no humor among conservatives. (Wonder what happened to "I'd walk a mile to smoke a camel"
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
What happened when we left Vi
July 13, 2007 - 11:39 ET by fenderteleWhat happened when we left Vietnam? Like Chertoff, my gut feeling is this war will end the same way. We'll leave under fire, pulling soldiers off of rooftops and ultimately, our country will be flooded with Iraqi refugees. Leaving a minimum number of soldiers there to "keep the peace" would be the worst thing we can do.
She lost her son in a war tha
July 13, 2007 - 11:49 ET by USnotU.S.She lost her son in a war that no one can actually come out and justify. Now she's treated as a "rag head". I understand even a Scotsman can be called a raghead in the US nowadays.
Give her a break!
Stop asking questions aboiut what will happen when the US pulls out. It wasn't important before. Most of you can't even agree why you/we went there in the first place.
1 Where are the WMDs?
2 Saddam's dead
3 Osama isn't there.
4 Too many soldiers are dying, and many people seem too happy to send cannon fodder.
5 Let's keep pretending it's not about oil.
Newsflash USnotUS-Casey Sheehan isn't the only one who died
July 13, 2007 - 11:54 ET by terrigHere's a newsflash for you, there are a number of Gold Star families that would like to smack Cindy in the face but they are not heard from are they? Case re-enlisted and volunteered to go back so she should respect his decision as should you but I can tell you're an enlightened liberal toad so you know it all right?
Well, since you have all the answers in your little diatribe let me answer some of your faux questions.
1) WMD's are most likely in Syria as there were satellite images of trucks heading in that direction shortly before the war. Also, guess you forgot the late 80's when the Kurds were gassed by maybe you were still in diapers then.
2) So what if he's dead, you forgot Uday & Qusay are however they spelled their names.
3) Who said Osama was there?
4) Guess you'd call my husband "cannon fodder"? What an arrogant arse you are.
5) Where's the cheap gas if it's about oil?
So nice to be lectured to by a liberal goon who doesn't like the direction the US is going in. I didn't like it in the 90's either. So put that in your bong and smoke it.
I think this particular hate
July 13, 2007 - 12:02 ET by USnotU.S.I think this particular hate site needs a bit more focus!
Outside the US, we can all see it's another Vietnam. Inside the US, you see it differently. Pull out, and save your kids.
Don't you love your kids?
USnotUS the world traveler and authority on foreign affairs
July 13, 2007 - 12:04 ET by terrigHey Knucklehead, I love my children and my husband who serves in the US Army and has been there three times. He loves his children so much he doesn't want his son to have to go there 16 years from now.
I have traveled outside the US and really as long as you try to speak their language I don't run into the hatred you do. Seems you're the one with the hateful chip on your liberal toadie shoulder.
We care about our kids more t
July 13, 2007 - 12:08 ET by drillanwrWe care about our kids more than you can even imagine. We ... *gasp* ... TRUST and RESPECT their decisions as adults to sign up for the military and dedicate themselves to loyalty, honor, and duty.
Outside the US?? 10 Of course you would see another Vietnam. But your ideas about Vietnam are completely wrong to begin with. Vietnam? That is exactly what the left has been trying desperately to turn this into.
FYI: THIS is not a hate site. Simply because you make a remark and others debate or counter your opinion, especially with facts. I am so frakkin' sick and tired of your side labeling an opposing view or opinion as "hate".
If you look through this site
July 13, 2007 - 12:11 ET by USnotU.S.If you look through this site, and read peoples' responses to my questions, I think you'll find it's a hate site.
Hey USnotUS, try Kos, DU, P
July 13, 2007 - 12:14 ET by terrigHey USnotUS, try Kos, DU, Puffington Post. There's some real hate for you but you're of the same cloth so don't expect you to see it.
Snot -Please do not mistake o
July 13, 2007 - 12:20 ET by drillanwrSnot -
Please do not mistake our impatience with your juvenile liberal views and opinions with hate. We actually enjoy hearing from folks like yourself (and you are quite mild compared to your like) because it gives us cause to debate you.
It is NOT hate.
drillanwr- there are a few ot
July 13, 2007 - 12:24 ET by CapitalismRulesdrillanwr- there are a few other letters in that name, but I find it interesting that you chose the ones you did. Does that mean You snot! U.S.!!!??? Or Us, Not You, es? Sorry, I'm way off topic here, just a side question.
Kind of just scooped it out o
July 13, 2007 - 13:00 ET by drillanwrKind of just scooped it out of the middle ... like a nickname ... you know? : ^ )
Capitalism, I do belive they
July 13, 2007 - 13:04 ET by bassndudeCapitalism, I do belive they speak for all those not living in the US, or us not the US.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
USnotU.S
July 13, 2007 - 12:22 ET by shawn228That is because most of the time, you do a very anti conservative post and you do not repond to any criticisms. Sort of like a post and run. Can you tell me your opinion about what would happen if we left Iraq right now?
That's right - we hate someon
July 13, 2007 - 15:16 ET by FastEdThat's right - we hate someone who thinks he knows what's best for our country - here's a question for 'ya- is this the future of ANZAC's?
BTW - when was the last time your countrymen came up with anything worth exporting? You pawn off Fosters on us, Australian rules football is really rugby in drag, and you've really stepped in it with the aborigines - so we don't need a lecture from you.
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
What hateful responses have I
July 13, 2007 - 18:57 ET by BDWhat hateful responses have I made to your comments?
And outside the US innocent p
July 13, 2007 - 12:11 ET by Prester JohnAnd outside the US innocent people are getting murdered by the Islamo-fascists:
Bali -- Madrid -- London -- Thailand -- Phillipines -- Morroco -- Algeria -- Afghanistan
I'm suring pulling out of Iraq will stop of all of that and the jihadists will hold then want to hold our hand and sing "Kumbaya".
The only parallel with Vietna
July 13, 2007 - 12:20 ET by FishFace222The only parallel with Vietnam is the spitting on our troops by the looney left.
usnot, just goes to show how
July 13, 2007 - 12:49 ET by bassndudeusnot, just goes to show how blind those of you outside the US are. Iraq is not even close to RVN.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
"Outside the
July 13, 2007 - 16:11 ET by ckc1227"Outside the US, we can all see it's another Vietnam.Inside the US, you see it differently. Pull out, and save your kids. Don't you love your kids?"
Thank you, Michael Moore. For some reason, I suspect the only thing you can see is the inside of your ass.
Another Vietnam? I hope so,
July 13, 2007 - 18:55 ET by BDAnother Vietnam? I hope so, at least in one way. By 1969 we had absolutely destroyed the VC and crippled the NVA. Of course, the press and those on campus would never admit that even now.
Who needs to save our children by withdrawel? I am currently serving and have been to Iraq twice now, probably will deploy back again before it is over. I need no one to "Save my kids" as i am doing it myself.
Don't you love YOUR kids? If you did you would shoulder your rucksack and join me on my next deployment. But you will likely say behind and kibbitz from the sidelines.
She's being ASKED because she
July 13, 2007 - 12:02 ET by drillanwrShe's being ASKED because she has decided to 1) enter the public debate ... 2) has decided to run for political office. Her sorrowful mother personna is now on the shelf. Sorry. Time for Cindy to ACTUALLY start answering hard questions with real facts and figures. If she still has to drag her son's corpse out for a shield she had better give the public his letters home and his emails so we can finally see/hear what Casey had to say about the war he was involved it.
1. Syria
2. GOOD! Damn GOOD!
3. So what??!!
4. Just try and say that to the face of a soldier or Marine and see what it gets you. Exactly what the hell do you people think troops are trained for? Dish washing? You act as if they haven't a clue about the danger and sacrifice they sign up for. PLEASE! Give our fighting men and women MORE CREDIT than that! I do not see us sending mentally retarded people over in uniforms ... I have, however, seen the enemy use mentally retarded to deliver homicide bombs ...
5. So, what if it is about oil? Huh?! Can your mind grasp a scenario if that part of the world suddenly strangles us with their control of oil? Face it, damn it! Oil is and will be for a long time to come the life blood that drives the ENTIRE world. Besides, if it were about oil, don't you think we would have seen the results (that would be a positive for Bush's popularity numbers) at the pump in cheap gas prices? Do you really think this maligned President wouldn't be taking political advantage of all the oil he supposedly went to war for? That whole "It's all about oil" argument is so lame it really needs amputating ...
Don't want to go to war for oil??!!?? Let us drill here! Drill ANWR!!!
Don't try to suggest I don't
July 13, 2007 - 12:06 ET by USnotU.S.Don't try to suggest I don't respect soldiers and marines. It's because I do, that I want them to come home.
I just don't want them to fight a pointless war. Many here do, and will keep throwing other peoples' kids in front of it.
Drillanwar is exactly right!
July 13, 2007 - 12:10 ET by terrigYou don't respect the military. Soldiers and Marines should be capped. But as Drill said, they aren't trained to pick their noses. The fact that the military members are trained to go to war is sickening to you I can tell. You can take your kid to Canada if you'd like now. There are some of us who feel that there is something worth dying and fighting for and I don't expect a toad like you to understand. BTW, as I've said now a few times my husband has been 3X already and is slated to go back in July 09. He will be happy to do it so you can continue to peck away on your keyboard and fight the good fight from your mother's basement.
You know nothing about me, so
July 13, 2007 - 12:19 ET by USnotU.S.You know nothing about me, so don't start all the nonsense about what I think of the military. My country was saved from the Japanese by your brave soldiers, and ours. I know and respect soldiers. They deserve better than to be thrown away by the most ignorant president you've ever had.
It may help you to believe that I am a kid in a basement. Cool, do it if it works. I am 44, and apparently a raghead, a communist, a terrorist, and a hippy all at the same time.....
All because I care about your kids.... on this rotten hate site
I don't want to know anythi
July 13, 2007 - 12:25 ET by terrigI don't want to know anything about you. You should be greatful and cap the word Soldiers over there in the Phillipines are wherever you are. The most ignorant President was Jimmy Carter. Most of this Islamofacist problem can be traced to him. If you don't have a kid, don't worry about it. Okay, it's not your ass going over there so shut up about your respect for the military.
I don't care that you supposedly "care about our kids" nonsense. Okay, we would like for our son to go to West Point or another service academy one day when he's 18 and ready for college. However, we hope he takes up the mantle of service as did his parents, grand parents and great grandparents and on my side those who did all the way to the War of 1812.
Again, let me direct you to KOS or DU. We are not allowed to post there as our posts are deleted and our "memberships" blocked.
If you're 44 then you should remember the gassing of the Kurds but guess you forgot about those kids.
You mean the gas that Donald
July 13, 2007 - 12:49 ET by fenderteleYou mean the gas that Donald Rumsfeld sold to Saddam?
Or how about the Libby scanda
July 13, 2007 - 13:59 ET by BinxlyOr how about the Libby scandal? In all honesty, the MAIN reason all of this is blown out of proportion is there was a paper trail leading back to the Clinton administration of people during his time, his OWN people, yes liberals, were basically selling nuclear materials to the Iraqis. The problem NO ONE gets is that America would LOVE to just all work together and play nice. It will never work. Americans don't shun communism and socialism cause we're greedy, we do so because people DON'T work that way. There's always a lazy one, always one who is incendiary (some even on this site sad to admit) and those who want to enforce their ideals onto others.
The main issue is, *if* we pull out, many WILL die. Many more than we've seen since we've gone over there, and in a MUCH shorter time span, deny all you want, it will happen. Its like this, when you have an issue that needs handled and the outcome is either 'bad' or 'worse' what do you choose? War is not about love and roses. Right or wrong, we're in Iraq and if we leave now, we are choosing the 'worse' option. Liberals act like the kid who has to make a choice where there IS no real 'winner' or 'good outcome.' Knowing this they wanna plug their ears and scream 'nah nah nah NOT LISTENING!! nah nah nah' and try to just turn away and forget the consequences.
Also, if we leave, and immediately we are attacked, I ask you, all of you, and please do answer; what will you say then?
Will it be Bush's fault he didn't 'fight hard enough against public opinion'? What will you say when the battle comes here? Again, this is not a question that has any other answer than the one Im asking. If you think it *won't* happen, pretend it will, what will your response be then?
Something tells me EVERYONE will respond except a couple people here. That said I do agree, some people here who I agree with on issues get very 'name calling' when someone says something rediculous. Its rediculous and factually deficient most of the time, but I agree offering a dissenting opinion and being responded to by names would discourage me too. I think until we just open our minds to the facts on both sides we'll continue to support either side and be blissfully, sometimes knowingly, ignorant to these things.
Fender, I clicked the link ex
July 13, 2007 - 14:33 ET by BinxlyFender, I clicked the link expecting a site detailing the purported sale of these gases. I am not dumb enough to think again we are 100% innocent, but, pictures of two people shaking hands doesn't mean anything. Thats like saying 'you mean when Rumsfeld sold Asian slaves to Saddam for the Iraqi circus!?' and linking to that picture. However, if you *do* have a link, I want to see it. I'm not challenging you, I am honestly out for the truth of every matter and I don't align specifically to one side completely. My mind is open. So please, if you can, get me that link. Even if you gotta PM it. Thanks.
Details, details.
July 13, 2007 - 15:37 ET by Prester JohnDetails, details.
Can you do better fender? I
July 13, 2007 - 14:38 ET by terrigCan you do better fender? I clicked this a bit ago but saw nothing in it worth commenting about. Yes, I know and remember that we backed Iraq in the Iran/Iraq war. Sometimes you make deals with the devil and the devil wins. It would have been better had we not but we did. I don't know your age but if your memory serves you, you should remember that this wasn't too long after the debacle of the Carter years and our fun time with Iran for 444 days. Now, insult me at your will with untruths.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
July 13, 2007 - 15:09 ET by fendertelehttp://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article807098.ece
Further proof of what happens
July 13, 2007 - 15:33 ET by FastEdFurther proof of what happens when talking/negotiating with these guys.
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Thanks Fender, that's quite a
July 13, 2007 - 15:49 ET by BinxlyThanks Fender, that's quite alot to digest I'll admit. While I think it's rediculous we gave them biological weapons, I can understand why we were in support of Iraq at that time. Those people eat their own too, so it's not like we were supporting Iraq because we support their nation and what it stands for, but we knew if Iraq fell, Iran could, and most likely would, appropriate the territory through a sense of Muslim nationalism (a nation unified in its religion) and bringing Iran and its hardlined 'convert-or-die' radical view of the muslim faith near the very borders of its sworn enemy, the Israeli state. We knew this was a stack of dominoes. Again, no 'good' choice, just 'bad' or 'worse.' Choosing the lesser of two evils they call it.
Again, I'm saying I can understand us strategically supporting Iraq and providing them with superior arms, however, I find it appauling that we would even *consider* selling a weapon even we wouldn't use due to its disasterous effect, to a nation that is, at best, friends of convenience.
Thanks again for this link, I'm gonna dig deeper, I want to find out WHY in the HELL we thought selling them biological weapons was even a *considerable* decision let alone a 'good idea.'
This is what I meant by us opening our ears even if we disagree. Fender may have lacked tact in previous posts but he has provided me facts that were unknown to me before and therefore causing me to want to learn more, fact check, and delve deeper to find where this all went wrong. Like I said, neither side is 100% innocent.
"You mean the gas that
July 13, 2007 - 16:20 ET by ckc1227"You mean the gas that Donald Rumsfeld sold to Saddam?"
It would be nice, for once, if you clowns could keep your story straight. Clown number one implies Sadaam never had any WMD, yet here comes clown number 2 proving that he did.
Which is it?
Non-Resident
July 13, 2007 - 12:30 ET by PawpawNSo, you are a non-resident. Our Country saved your country in the past. We must have done something right then, when people thought we were doing wrong. Logic therefore that we must be doing something right now also. & we've got so much oil that we don't need the Middle East oil, just Congress people with enough guts to let us drill for it. Heck, if we're all going to die from Global Warming[excuse me, now Global Climate Change], then we should just drill and use!!
Snot -You really need to stop
July 13, 2007 - 12:35 ET by drillanwrSnot -
You really need to stop feeling so much and begin thinking.
So, your country was saved from the Japanese during WWII by our troops. Well, why is it you are so selfish that you will NOT allow another country to be saved by our troops today? Now, I'm going to ask you to do something you probably might refuse to do ... research exactly how many of our troops were killed or even wounded saving your country and people from the Japanese, and compare that to how many have been killed and wounded in this war (and don't forget to average it out with the timespan of both conflicts) ... You, and all the other like-minded, need to put it into perspective. We lost just as many in the combined Operation Tiger training exercise and D-Day (two days total) in WWII as we have in 4+ years of this war. I really am sorry, and resentful, to have to reduce it to simple numbers, but your antiwar side always insists it be done that way. Look to individual battles and their numbers ... Iwo Jima and The Battle of the Bulge ...
I can accept your concern for our troops ... DO NOT believe for a heart beat that we don't share that concern. Many of us here have or had someone in this war. We don't send them off cheaply ... We send them off with pride and prayer.
However, your claiming our President is ignorant really IS hate speech. Besides, how can he be so damn ignorant and diabolical at the same time? You have absolutely NOTHING to back up your statement that Pres. George W. Bush is the most ignorant President our country ever had.
Besides, how can he be so dam
July 13, 2007 - 12:55 ET by fenderteleBesides, how can he be so damn ignorant and diabolical at the same time?
Darth Cheney.
Oh, come on, fenderbender! Ch
July 13, 2007 - 13:10 ET by drillanwrOh, come on, fenderbender! Change the CD already. That one has a major scratch in it ...
Was America the Evil Empire during Clinton's 8 years of playing war with the military? Hey, I have several Serb neighbors here who left the area when the war over there started (one of them had been a soldier) ... And they say the USA was on the wrong side. Go figure ...
Think I'll change it to "
July 13, 2007 - 15:10 ET by fenderteleThink I'll change it to "Truth" by Jeff Beck.
Or maybe that should have bee
July 13, 2007 - 15:14 ET by fenderteleOr maybe that should have been "Lies" by the Knickerbockers.
Is this this the request hour
July 13, 2007 - 15:55 ET by mulerider24Is this this the request hour? I would like to dedicate "How Can I Miss You If You Won't Go Away?" by Dan Hicks and his Hot Licks to my friend fender.
NEWS FLASH!!!!The vast majori
July 13, 2007 - 12:13 ET by drillanwrNEWS FLASH!!!!
The vast majority of troops DO NOT want to simply come home. They want to finish the job. Just because you are uncomfortable about the war, and casualties doesn't mean we should just walk away from it.
Pointless war? Have you NO perspective on the Middle East? I'm not going to explain it all to you because you are apparently too emotionally distraught over your concern for the soldiers and Marines (so much so that you second guess their ability to fight).
I really hate to compare this to WWII, but I can really hear you saying the same things during WWII ... Which at many times became a major cluster frak for us.
Guess What?
July 14, 2007 - 01:58 ET by Sua Sponte 75"Don't try to suggest I don't respect s(S)oldiers and m(M)arines. It's because I do, that I want them to come home. I just don't want them to fight a pointless war."
I guess I missed the "respect" part of your comments. You just negated yourself there skippy. So you respect us but not our misson, or as you put it, our pointless mission. Okay, so next time you tell a uniformed person that you respect them but think that their mission is pointless, make sure to duck first. It's one of the most asshatted statements I've heard. Drive on hero, drive on......
"72 Virgins Dating Service, We'll hook you up"
Okay, U snot. You've had your
July 13, 2007 - 12:04 ET by QueenMumOkay, U snot. You've had your opportunity to post the lib talking points. Your thoughts are neither original nor thought-provoking. You are encouraged to return to whichever moonbat website you support to report your success.
Have a nice day.
We are not interested in the possibilities of defeat. - Queen Victoria
Cheers!Nice to be blessed by
July 13, 2007 - 12:09 ET by USnotU.S.Cheers!
Nice to be blessed by a queen!
Her post, albeit a bit rough,
July 13, 2007 - 14:18 ET by BinxlyHer post, albeit a bit rough, holds water us. Me personally, I hope you stay, no smarmy comments, I just think, if you have a differing opinion and *real* facts, I think it's great to hear another side. No one side is innocent or correct. That's where partisanship is ruining America. I will have to blame libs more than conservatives but they are both guilty nonetheless. The point Queen brings is, that if you are just going to do post and run 'hits' here and just spout off liberal cliches and fudged facts, and have no real solution, just complaints, then perhaps it is best you return to a site like Huffington or Kos where everyone just complains yet no answers are offered except the cliche 'Impeach Bush' as the solution.
I disagree. I think we all have it in us to learn, grow, and provide differing yet educated points of view to one situation. I think you can offer us some information and points from the 'other side.' I seriously love this site, and you will find, we have people who call names or come off very, well, 'passionate' in their posts but I've learned from being on a liberal blog site that if you can look past the names and see the point of their post, you can maturely deduct why they disagree.
I think you should stay, maybe tone down the 'I know the answer and you're all idiots' attitude that you sometimes come off with and I can promise you, for at least myself, that I will never bring the debate or discussion down to a level of name calling merely because I disagree or think your point is unfounded, no matter how ill-informed or rediculous it may be. Again, as I've said before, people like others to listen or talk to them. Never talk *at* or *down* to them. While I think you can learn from this lesson US and Fender, I also think some of the people on the other side can learn from that too.
This site is created so we can move PAST the bullcrap. Lets not perpetuate it by bringing it down to such a elementary level as 'I disagree so you're a poopy head!'
Binxly....I understand your s
July 13, 2007 - 14:28 ET by Clear thinkerBinxly....
I understand your sentiments, buuuuuuuut I see it differently. How can you get away from partisanship when you know damn well that liberals have a tendency to use extremely bad, or just plain made up info to bolster those claims. We are only left two choices, to either ignore them and let lefties continue to lie, or we speak up so reality can be revisisted. Can you not see the problem?
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
Oh agreed, Im not talking abo
July 13, 2007 - 14:46 ET by BinxlyOh agreed, Im not talking about liberal politicians. I don't trust politicians as far as I can throw them. Its their job to appease their side because if they move away from a main talking point, they are basically ousted. Given this happens much more on the left (I'm thinking Lieberman. He's NO conservative in *any* sense, but is simply branded an enemy of liberals because he actually *thinks* when debating with himself the pros and cons of staying/leaving Iraq)
My point was, liberals, while some can be downright parrots of CNN or whatever MSM outlet you choose, many have good points and can give someone like me (with a career, a college degree, and happily middle class) a viewpoint we may never have experienced (born in poverty, in debt from school and increasingly annoyed with certain policies.)
I'm not saying they are right, but there's alot wrong in America and it *isn't* ALL the liberals fault. It IS their fault however as politicians for only offering *one* solution (socialism) to these problems and making it hell to pass or even work toward any ways to correct them that don't fall completely in step with their strict agenda (again, you don't get more liberal than Lieberman yet because he doesn't want to leave Iraq they took away his DNC card.)
Don't get me wrong clear, I think there's more common sense on the right side of things (conservative right, not 'correct' right) yet I also think there are some liberal ideas that make more common sense, just not as many.
Binxly...Could you give a cou
July 13, 2007 - 14:52 ET by Clear thinkerBinxly...
Could you give a couple of examples of liberal ideas that you like?
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
Im NOT for universal health c
July 13, 2007 - 16:56 ET by BinxlyIm NOT for universal health care, yet, my friend became pregnant and had a child a little over 3 months ago. It wasn't planned, yet she obviously wanted to keep the child. her husband to be is my best friend. Having just graduated college, the two of them had not gotten into a career that offered health insurance until after a probationary period (6 months.) Even after this, the certain stipulations did *not* cover much of her hospital expenses and let me tell you, without health insurance, the act of delivering the baby itself, that whole 24 hour (or longer) period cost them 15 grand. That's just for that day. Not counting the check ups, ultra-sounds, and all else that goes into child birth and its prior moments of carrying the child.
I think we can cut out alot of pork spending on pet projects or endorsements to companies and private businesses who give campaign money to canidates in exchange for these 'favors' or in worse cases, purposeful oversights of certain unethical practices. This money can be spent to bolster our health care system and offer at least a more 'hospitable' (pardon the pun) option than what we have today.
That isn't all though, in the same vein, the conservative camp is correct that litigation America is 'sue-crazy' and medical malpractice suits for ludicrous claims are responsible for alot of the healthcare costs as well.(5.6 million for a stitch that caused a minor infection that lasted a week and was a 'bother' at its worst)
I have a few others, admittedly not many, but I just got slammed at work, I'll post sometime this weekend or at the latest monday some of the things I think we can perhaps move more 'left' on the issue, but until then I'll say healthcare and social tolerance are pretty much the only two main things I think the right sometimes approaches too much from a 'black and white' standard when there are actually many shades of gray.
"Too many soldiers are d
July 13, 2007 - 12:32 ET by pmohbuck"Too many soldiers are dying ..."
give me a break ... as if you ever considered a soldier's life to be important before hollywood told you and your liberal friends what and how to think.
if you really care about our soldiers dying ... why don't you do something about the 2,000+ that die every year that aren't in iraq or afghanistan ... yes, look it up you moron ... peacetime military deaths/year is half the death total of 4.5 years of war.
yes, look it up you moron ...
July 13, 2007 - 13:05 ET by fenderteleyes, look it up you moron ... peacetime military deaths/year is half the death total of 4.5 years of war.
Okay...I'll admit it. I'm a moron. Post me a link.
Amber is correct. Are you
July 13, 2007 - 13:09 ET by terrigAmber is correct. Are you aware of the number of people who die in training accidents, automobile/motorcycle accidents when the troops are in garrison?
i wanted to provide a legitim
July 13, 2007 - 14:52 ET by pmohbucki wanted to provide a legitimate website for you:
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/national_security_veterans_affairs/military_personnel_and_expenditures/
look for this in the middle of the list:
502 - U.S. Active Duty Military Deaths by Manner of Death: 1980 to 2005
its a spreadsheet
Thank you for posting, I've
July 13, 2007 - 14:57 ET by terrigThank you for posting, I've been trolling around looking for a site with these numbers. Well done! (Gee, maybe I'm watching too much "Thomas" with my son.)
You should know that 2,951 of
July 13, 2007 - 22:53 ET by ThisnThatYou should know that 2,951 of the 3,591 U.S. deaths (as of 5 July 2007) are by combat; the other 640 are by other means, including accidents. So when the news media report these numbers, they always use the total, making us think that the total war casualties are greater than they actually are.
By the way, although this comparison is not exactly apples and apples, the number of military deaths during 4 years of the Clinton administration were: 1,245 in 1993; 1,109 in 1994; 1,055 in 1995; 1,008 in 1996. That's 4,417 deaths in peacetime, compared with 2,951 combat deaths since 2003 in the Iraq war.
These numbers should make every American wonder about the statements coming from the mouths of Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, and all the other Dim yahoos in Congress when they continually make statements about the number of soldiers "dying every day in Bush's war". The MSM is simply not providing the right perspective, here.
Wow, aside from 2004, acciden
July 13, 2007 - 17:09 ET by BinxlyWow, aside from 2004, accidents were the #1 cause of death, and even in 2004 accident was a close second. Geez, I guess they should stop protesting the war and start protesting for teaching them to be more careful!
*note: anyone offended by that joke I apologize, each death, accident or not, is a tragedy, but I'm glad someone got these records straight.
How about we pretend the isl
July 13, 2007 - 12:56 ET by danboHow about we pretend the islamo facist aren't cutting off the heads of children in Iraq.
Sorry if you're a coward.
Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of truth and knowledge will be shipwrecked by the laughter of the Gods. Albert Einstein
Answers to your question1)
July 13, 2007 - 12:57 ET by Right2thePointAnswers to your question
1) moved to Syria with the help of the Russians who provided the technology in the 24 month lead up to the war
2) Yup he's gone and so are his sons
3) True and right now it looks like the US and Pakistan are getting ready to do a little housecleaning
4) the death toll for this war is amazingly low and yet we mourn each loss--is it possible for us to a multi year bloodless war against anybody?
5) We can only refine so much oil per year, we already have sources, the oil there is used only for the Iraqis to sell it and provided for their own country since it is their main revenue source.
You really need to calibrate
July 13, 2007 - 12:26 ET by HelenSYou really need to calibrate your gut.
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" - Shakespeare
You are speaking of the "
July 13, 2007 - 18:18 ET by BDYou are speaking of the "Highlights" of the US pullout of Vietnam.
That was not the worst of it.
1.) Hundreds of thousands executed by the NVA. (Including most members of the VC who were considered "Meddlesome.")
2.) Genocide against the Montagnards, Nungs, and others of the hill people in the Central highlands.
3.) Re-education centers installed ala the Gulag Archipelago.
3.) Invasions of Cambodia, Laos, etc.
4.) Boat People....
I think if you were able to get an honest opinion of the bulk of the South Vietnamese survivors today they would tell you they would have preferred we stuck it out in our successful battle to destroy the North.
You live under a rock?
July 14, 2007 - 01:46 ET by Sua Sponte 75Not much of a history person I see. You might want to pick up a couple of books at the local library and read about what happened following our withdrawl from Vietnam. Thousands died because they were left high and dry. It's best to have perspective on what you are trying to debate or whatever point you're trying to make.
"You're either part of the solution or part of the problem"
Okay, NB site isn't allowing
July 13, 2007 - 11:50 ET by drillanwrOkay, NB site isn't allowing me to post links to pictures regarding the slaughter after we cut and ran from Vietnam.
Search for links in pictures of killing fields, slaughter after America left Vietnam ... ANY wording you can think of and loads of links come up with pictures of torture and death in that Holocaust.
As one who lost a brother t
July 13, 2007 - 11:55 ET by terrigAs one who lost a brother there I don't expect the liberals to recognize the carnage they left behind then either.
Oh, no. No, they believe th
July 13, 2007 - 12:17 ET by drillanwrOh, no. No, they believe that if we hadn't gone into Vietnam the killing fields wouldn't have happened (Always our fault, no matter what) As if those people wouldn't have been tortured (re-educated) and killed if we hadn't gone in ... What's the floating figure ... Communism has killed 100, 000, 000?
Let me save you some time.I'm
July 13, 2007 - 12:23 ET by USnotU.S.Let me save you some time.
I'm going to sit here, answering questions, asking more questions, and getting no answers except for "hate mail". Eventually, everyone will disappear.
It's the way it always goes. Just watch.
NEXT?
USnotU.S.
July 13, 2007 - 12:34 ET by PawpawNSee you are a Dim/Lib since you think if you just wait it all out, everything will be fine. All the violence will go away, everyone will love you again, etc. My My, they must have public schools in your country also.
"Eventually, everyone wi
July 13, 2007 - 14:49 ET by QueenMum"Eventually, everyone will disappear."
Get over yourself, U snot. Everyone eventually disappears because it gets tedious going over the same material with you. You're given plenty of information to consider. You ignore the facts in favor of trying to drag people into the same old, tired arguments.
We are not interested in the possibilities of defeat. - Queen Victoria
I told you I'd never be incen
July 13, 2007 - 14:53 ET by BinxlyI told you I'd never be incendiary or rude. However, if its civil debate you want, I had a question; if we pull out and they follow us home, another attack on our soil, what is the solution then?
We can only hope they get to
July 13, 2007 - 15:19 ET by FastEdWe can only hope they get to Australia before getting here - seems it's early on that BIG island.
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Drill, you're right, we can
July 13, 2007 - 12:34 ET by terrigDrill, you're right, we can't do anything that isn't wrong. ;)
From the latest Brookings I
July 13, 2007 - 12:19 ET by Right2thePointFrom the latest Brookings Institute Statistical Report on Iraq
ESTIMATES OF IRAQI CIVILIANS KILLED BY VIOLENCE:
These numbers do not include Iraqi civilians killed during major combat operations March 19, 2003-April 30, 2003.
Iraq Index Estimate using IBC Data – May 2003 – December 31, 2005, not including crime: 19,500
Iraq Index Estimate using IBC Data – May 2003 – December 31, 2005, including crime: 42,100
Iraq Index Estimate using UN Data – January 2006 – December 2006: 34,452
Iraq Index Cumulative Estimate using IBC and UN Data – May 2003 – December 31, 2006: 76,500
Iraq Body Count Cumulative Total Through 15 December 2006: 53,000 – 59,000
Thanks.Not sure of your point
July 13, 2007 - 12:27 ET by USnotU.S.Thanks.
Not sure of your point.
I just know a lot of American service people would be alive if you hadn't gone to Iraq.
It's not like they were invading you. (whoops! that'll get me in trouble! No one ever mentions that!)
People mention that all the t
July 13, 2007 - 12:34 ET by CapitalismRulesPeople mention that all the time. Yep, this was premptive war on all accounts and seemed like back in good ol' aught-three, everyone was cool with this. Well maybe, not you, but Washington D.C. seemed on board. What happend? Oh that's right, politics on the left got outta hand and everything went to hell....
Well technically neither di
July 13, 2007 - 12:37 ET by terrigWell technically neither did Japan or Germany for that matter since Hawaii wasn't a state yet. So we did and saved your ass as you respect "soldiers". So maybe we shouldn't have done that either and you could be speaking Japanese? Don't say I'm knocking the Japanese either. My son is of Japanese descent that we adopted on December 7, 2005, in Honolulu, HI. The Judge who was also of Japanese descent thought it was wonderful how the world had changed and that how 64 years ago we were fighting each other and now a military family was going to give this wonderful little boy a new home with lots of love and lots of opportunities.
Yeah yeah, heard that one. I'
July 13, 2007 - 12:52 ET by USnotU.S.Yeah yeah, heard that one. I'm supposed to lick your boots now, right?
Yawn
That would be a start. By the
July 13, 2007 - 12:57 ET by bassndudeThat would be a start. By the way, if your not American, where exactly are you and where would you be if the US hadent gotten involved in WW II?
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
lErn 2 spel, tHen do pOlityks
July 13, 2007 - 13:12 ET by USnotU.S.lErn 2 spel, tHen do pOlityks!
There's an answer - way to go
July 13, 2007 - 15:30 ET by FastEdThere's an answer - way to go sparkey, misdirect and never answer a direct question.
My dad was on his way to Aussie land before he was shipped home from the South Pacific - had said the Aussies were good fighters. Even he would ask - is this what these guys have become? Too bad you weren't around to spew your swill during WW2 - I wonder how many swirlies you'd have gotten?
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
What is your issue with his s
July 13, 2007 - 18:26 ET by BDWhat is your issue with his spelling?
SeAL stands for Sea, Air, Land and is the nom de Guerre of the world Famous "SEALS."
That's it? That's your rebu
July 13, 2007 - 12:57 ET by CapitalismRulesThat's it? That's your rebuttal. Wow, and I've tried to defend you on this site too......man, you disappoint, my friend.
Yes, that would be nice and
July 13, 2007 - 12:59 ET by terrigYes, that would be nice and while you're at it it's obvious you don't give a whit about those who serve. I'm glad that you in the Phillipines are wherever you are are doing well. That being said, it's true, why did we save your country or whatever place you're from if we didn't have to. So sorry we did because my Aunt lost her first husband in the Pacific Theatre, perhaps he was fodder to you too?
U snot: Have you ever taken t
July 13, 2007 - 12:39 ET by QueenMumU snot: Have you ever taken the time to see what our "cannon fodder" is actually doing in places like Iraq? Since you seem to find it difficult to read much of anything factual, I thought I'd provide you with some photo essays.
We are not interested in the possibilities of defeat. - Queen Victoria
"cannon fodder" K
July 13, 2007 - 12:54 ET by Carl Kolchak"cannon fodder"
Keep in mind cannon fodder are soldiers that have little chance of not being a casualty. I don't think US soldiers are rushing the enemy in waves with most of the front lines being gunned down. Cannon fodder is usually used to attack in waves with the hope that the second or third wave can attack and defeat the defenders. Pickett's Charge from the Battle of Gettysburg was a disastrous example of cannon fodder. The British on the first day of Somme in WW1 was another disastrous example of cannon fodder. The Red Army during the opening days of Operation Barbarrosa used a tremendous amount of cannon fodder. The Chinese during the Korean War used a tremendous amount of cannon fodder.
I'm sure BD could give us a pretty good account of the type of body armor and armor for machines that would show that our troops are prepared adequatley and not cannon fodder.
"I'm a man of means by no means, King of the Road" 'King of the Road'
Well done, Carl.But the Uname
July 13, 2007 - 13:03 ET by QueenMumWell done, Carl.
But the Unamerican snot likes to throw out those boilerplate lefty terms that seemed to work well during the Vietnam era. What she doesn't realize is that many of us were actually around at the time and can see that the anti-Bush, anti-war lefties have no new ideas. Most of these moonbats know only the history they've been taught by liberal idealists. They have no critical thinking skills and little desire to spend the time to do research beyond what the anti-American websites recommend. JMO, of course. ;)
We are not interested in the possibilities of defeat. - Queen Victoria
Of course I'm unAmerican! I d
July 13, 2007 - 13:16 ET by USnotU.S.Of course I'm unAmerican! I don't live there! 94% of the population doesn't live there!
So What?
USnot - don't be shy . . . End your cover up!
July 13, 2007 - 13:44 ET by Free StinkerWhere do you live?
Why do you hide it? Are you (ha ha) ashamed?
"Of course I'm unAmeri
July 13, 2007 - 13:51 ET by MightyMouth"Of course I'm unAmerican! I don't live there! 94% of the population doesn't live there!"
Well, why do you feel the need to express an opinion about a country:
1. You can't vote in.
2. Don't like.
3. Have no vested interest in it's security.
4. Disagree with at least 50% of it's people.
All on a blog about media bias whose media you don't care to watch?
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Thank you, Queen Mum.It will
July 13, 2007 - 13:27 ET by USnotU.S.Thank you, Queen Mum.
It will take me a while to look through the whole lot, but what I have seen and read is astounding. You get me wrong. I just want all those brilliant, brave people to be proud.
I want them to know they aren't in another Vietnam. That's all.
What's wrong with that?
Thank you!
U Snot, I would be right th
July 13, 2007 - 13:38 ET by Conservative VoiceU Snot, I would be right there agreeing with you if it was true (our soldiers being cannon fodder). But this isn't another Vietnam, other than the media and our politicians making it into a vietnam. The media claims it, and Congress tries to do the very mistakes that got us in trouble. So your anger should be with the media and Congress, not our President or people who want to finish the war on our terms not on our enemies terms.
Everyone here wants our soldiers to come home...but only after the job is done, otherwise all the lives spent and will be spent will be wasted. It will get ugly if we pull out, not just for the people in Iraq who are risking their necks to support us...but us. Because a third world country took on big bad America and won. Not a good message to send. We need to win. Or even more lives will be destroyed.
Pulling out now means the soldiers who died were cannon fodder.
Don't worry, U snot. Our mili
July 13, 2007 - 14:35 ET by QueenMum" I just want all those brilliant, brave people to be proud."
And what makes you think they're not? And what makes you think that they need the likes of yourself to boost their morale?
Don't worry, U snot. Our military know exactly where they are and what they're doing. I'm sure you've heard it before, but one of the major differences between Vietnam and the current deployments is that America now has an all volunteer army. Many of the anti-war people during the Vietnam era were disgruntled draftees or draft dodgers.
I don't know how long it's going to take for people like you to understand that. We don't need you to "rescue" the men and women in our military. They are not victims. And they're offended by people like you who suggest that they're nothing but a bunch of hapless dopes who need whiny anti-war liberals to save their lives. Do you realize what a joke it is to think that your sort of hearts and flowers provide some sort of solace to the American military.
If you want to help our military, how 'bout you donate some Euros to the USO.
BTW, in response to your accusations that all you find here at NB is hate: I personally hate it when people who are not Americans avail themselves of our hospitality and then use the opportunity to crap in the swimming pool.
We are not interested in the possibilities of defeat. - Queen Victoria
WTF?
July 14, 2007 - 02:13 ET by Sua Sponte 75Aren't you the same clown that just a couple of posts ago said my mission was pointless?
"You're either part of the solution or part of the problem"
Germany didn't attack us in W
July 13, 2007 - 12:42 ET by drillanwrGermany didn't attack us in WWII, but we went after them.
Actually, Iraq (under Saddam) was NOT as innocent as your side always claims. They not only broke the cease fire treaty they agreed to after Desert Storm, but pooped all over multiple UN sanctions, attempted to assassinate one of our former Presidents, were making big bucks (along with France and others in the UN) in the Oil For Food crapper, and WERE training and housing terrorists (Now, exactly WHO do you think those terrorists were training to attack? France?!) ...
So, Iraq (under Saddam) HAD done a hell of a lot more than Germeny did to deserve us going to war with them.
"Germany didn't attack u
July 13, 2007 - 13:01 ET by Carl Kolchak"Germany didn't attack us in WWII, but we went after them."
Germany declared war on the US soon after the Japanese attack at Pearl Harbor. This is considered one of the biggest blunders Hitler made. OBL also delcared war on the United States and our allies back in 1997 or 1998.
There are also many people who think FDR knew about the attack on Pearl Harbor just so the US could get into the war. Sounds like those who think 9/11 is a conspiracy. I give FDR more credit than that, but from what I've read the Americans and the British had broken Japanese codes and knew an attack was coming after diplomatic relations with Japan had broken off. It appears that they didn't know when or where.
"I'm a man of means by no means, King of the Road" 'King of the Road'
"I just know a lot of Am
July 13, 2007 - 12:49 ET by amber"I just know a lot of American service people would be alive if you hadn't gone to Iraq."
Yup, you are right, but a lot MORE would be dead if they had not gone to Iraq. Deaths across the military have gone DOWN since the war on terror. More soldiers died when they were not deployed.
"Not sure of your point.
July 13, 2007 - 12:54 ET by QueenMum"Not sure of your point." - Quote U Snot
"George Bush has killed 700,000 Iraqis" - Quote Cindy Sheehan
We are not interested in the possibilities of defeat. - Queen Victoria
Just debunking that wildly wr
July 13, 2007 - 13:00 ET by Right2thePointJust debunking that wildly wrong 700,000 number so many throw out there.
I know a lot of US service me
July 13, 2007 - 18:23 ET by BDI know a lot of US service members would be alive today if we had not supported the UK, Protected Australia, South Korea, Soviet Union, liberated France, Germany, Italy, Japan etc in WWII.
So therefore we should not have fought WWII?
Right: Can you provide any nu
July 13, 2007 - 12:42 ET by QueenMumRight: Can you provide any numbers which include a breakdown of confirmed enemy casualties vs. innocent civilian casualties?
We are not interested in the possibilities of defeat. - Queen Victoria
Get the pdf file atwww.broo
July 13, 2007 - 14:24 ET by Right2thePointGet the pdf file at
www.brookings.edu/ir...
It comes out each month I believe , lots of stats of what is happening
I don't have enemy casualties but the numbers I posted in an earlier reply show losses for civilians each month no where near what they would have to be each day to get the rediculous 700k number.
Repeating the earlier reply here
ESTIMATED NUMBER OF IRAQI CIVILIANS KILLED BY MONTH SINCE NOVEMBER 2006
November 2006 3,500
December 3,000
January 2007 3,000
February 2,500
March 2,750
April 2,890
May 3,000
June 2,600
And I get different numbers.
July 13, 2007 - 15:37 ET by FastEdAnd I get different numbers. I get estimates from icasualties.org -
November '06 - 1846
December '06 - 1752
January '07 - 1802
February '07 - 3014
March '07 - 2977
April '07 - 1821
May '07 - 1980
June '07 - 1255
The numbers include the Iraqi Security Forces and civilians - so I guess it depends where you get the info.
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
I wonder if Cindy Sheehan eve
July 13, 2007 - 12:50 ET by GalvanicI wonder if Cindy Sheehan ever considered that the handling she'd get from the Dems once they were done exploiting her, would be more painful than anything the pro-war activists cranked out.
By staying true to her message and expressing utter disgust with the Dem elites she feels partly responsible for empowering in '06, Sheehan wore out the DP welcome mat, and has now been abandoned by the very political party that once courted her.
Now that Obama-Clinton-Edwards have been caught conspiring to cutthe 'lesser' DP candidates out of the debates, will Kucinich ally with her?
libs not good at long term planning
July 13, 2007 - 13:54 ET by bulbasaurThat's the whole point. The common lib is unable to think beyond the next 10 minutes. Of course neither Cindy nor her democrat overlords thought about the long term consequences of their fling.
Liberals are very easy to understand once you recognize that it is a psychology of perpetual adolescence. The tantrums, the lack of foresight, the impulsiveness, the self-centeredness. The sense of entitlement. It all makes sense.
"will Kucinich ally with
July 13, 2007 - 14:57 ET by QueenMum"will Kucinich ally with her?"
I could see that happening. That way good ole Dennis doesn't have to bother getting himself a new dummy. Picture it: Cindy and Dennis on the road in the Wesson-mobile; Cindy on Dennis' lap opening and closing her mouth while Dennis provides the voice and the words. It's a match made in heaven, I tell ya.
We are not interested in the possibilities of defeat. - Queen Victoria
I wonder if Cindy Sheehan eve
July 13, 2007 - 15:20 ET by drillanwrI wonder if Cindy Sheehan ever considered that the handling she'd get from the Dems once they were done exploiting her ...
You mean just the way the Clinton machine did after he was done with his conquests? (See: Nuts and sluts ... trailer park trash)
Now that Obama-Clinton-Edwards have been caught conspiring to cutthe 'lesser' DP candidates out of the debates, will Kucinich ally with her?
Hell, he'll probably take her on as his VP running mate.
North Vietnames assisted Pol Pot
July 13, 2007 - 13:08 ET by Carl KolchakFrom the below link to the Time Magazine.
"The Vietnamese communists swiftly allied themselves with the Khmer Rouge--as Sihanouk had dismissively labeled Pol Pot's group--against the new regime in Phnom Penh. The Vietnamese provided the rag-tag Khmer Rouge with arms and training."
http://www.time.com/asia/asia/magazine/1999/990823/pol_pot1.html
"Blood in the streets runs a river of sadness" 'Peace Frog'
wake of chaos
July 13, 2007 - 13:47 ET by bulbasaurDeep down, libs know their policies and programs leave a wake of heartbreak and chaos. So they expend a lot of effort to either deny they did any damage (Cambodia, banning DDT, the disasterous welfare state, the Great Society) or else they re-engineer society to allow quick clean up of their mess (abortion).
Their reckless cut & run obsession shows they lack the capacity to learn from experience. This is sad.
What is too funny about thi
July 13, 2007 - 19:31 ET by The PhoenixWhat is too funny about this site is that it failed to mention when this chickenhawk was asked by some Vietnam vet when he served he seemed taken aback and went into some lame excuse about Oh I'm too old at thirty they don't want me. Then a vet told him that they are taking guys up to 40 and then he said that if George Bush was asking for more troops that he'd sign up in a minute. The Vets pointed out that GB <i>has<i> asked for more people to sign up especially since the military has been having trouble making quotas recently even with relaxed standards. And this guy says that "Oh no he hasn't " or something to that effect.
This site yet again shows its stripes as a propagana and spin tool for Neo Con(vict) ideology
No, what's really funny is
July 13, 2007 - 21:49 ET by OldSailor88No, what's really funny is that you are so pitifully misinformed just like all your liberal buddies including Miss Sheehan. All you have is bad facts and talking points. All branches of the Military are meeting monthly quotas, and retention is at the highest level it has ever been. Which means bad news to you chickenhawks. Not only do real Americans not mind joining the service, we believe in what we're doing and we're staying in. Phoenix, if you bust away from the Daily Kos and the HuffPo once in a while, you may get some fresh air and new ideas. Who knows. Eventually you may be able to think for yourself.
Cindy???
July 13, 2007 - 20:56 ET by LionKingAs much as I would love to see Pelosi taken out, Cindy does not have a chance if she cannot answer a question...even if it is a BS answer. Typical liberal though...all emotion, no rationale.
Freedom isn't Free !!!
Go, Cindy, Go! (you loon!)Any
July 13, 2007 - 22:56 ET by kathleenirishGo, Cindy, Go! (you loon!)
Anyone who says they support the troops but not the mission is a liar.
Mrs. Sheehan uses her dead so
July 14, 2007 - 10:41 ET by Mike BrattonMrs. Sheehan uses her dead son's coffin as a soapbox.
--Mike
www.thebrattonreport.com