View Full Version : Expendable Soldiers
Our body count has surpassed the 2500 milestone recently. The new press secretary referred to this milestone as just "a number". Is that all this is? Do we continue to do the carrot trick on these guys mand make no plans for exiting Iraq? Will we continue to offer no concrete mission or objective?
On this Father's day, we have many fathers mourning for their lost loved ones. We have many loved ones mourning for the loss of their fathers.
I hope that the message we give to them is not that their loss was one of convenience for corporate America.
Our nation's treasure and blood has been squandered more by this stubborn Texan President than any since Johnson, who was also Texan, also stubborn.
Quote[/b] (n9xr @ June 18 2006,12:34)]Our body count has surpassed the 2500 milestone recently. The new press secretary referred to this milestone as just "a number". Is that all this is? Do we continue to do the carrot trick on these guys mand make no plans for exiting Iraq? Will we continue to offer no concrete mission or objective?
On this Father's day, we have many fathers mourning for their lost loved ones. We have many loved ones mourning for the loss of their fathers.
I hope that the message we give to them is not that their loss was one of convenience for corporate America.
Didn't you KNOW?
For Democrats and Republicans alike, we are a spendible resource.
Currency
We are the currency you spend
For freedom, fear or oil;
Our blood, the coin you pay,
Dark on some foreign soil.
Do not give medals for our death;
Where we are, we won’t know.
Do not wave flags or hold parades;
Where we are, flags can’t go.
We ask but one thing of our land,
Who sent us out to fight;
Be worth the limbs we lost,
Be worth eternal night.
And know our living always watch;
They ask, as we would do:
Is what you are, worth what we paid?
Is what we paid, worth YOU?
We are the currency you spend
For freedom, fear, or oil;
Our blood, the coin you pay,
Dark on some foreign soil.
© Cortland Richmond (revised 2005, 2006)
May be used if reproduced with copyright and attribution.
k4kyv
06-18-2006, 06:03 PM
Quote[/b] (ka5s @ June 18 2006,10:50)]We are the currency you spend
For freedom, fear or oil;
Our blood, the coin you pay,
Dark on some foreign soil.
Do not give medals for our death;
Where we are, we won’t know.
Do not wave flags or hold parades;
Where we are, flags can’t go.
We ask but one thing of our land,
Who sent us out to fight;
Be worth the limbs we lost,
Be worth eternal night.
And know our living always watch;
They ask, as we would do:
Is what you are, worth what we paid?
Is what we paid, worth YOU?
We are the currency you spend
For freedom, fear, or oil;
Our blood, the coin you pay,
Dark on some foreign soil.
© Cortland Richmond (revised 2005, 2006)
May be used if reproduced with copyright and attribution.
From the VietNam era:
We are the unwilling
Led by the incompetent
To do the unnecessary
For the ungrateful
500 more and The Decider has killed as many Americans as Osama did.
KG6JTB
06-18-2006, 06:27 PM
Quote[/b] ]I hope that the message we give to them is not that their loss was one of convenience for corporate America.
Typical liberal perspective. Is that all the military is good for, defending the private sector?
This statement does as much to damage the purpose and scope of the U.S. military as it attempts to do honor to it.
Dave
KG6JTB
Typical Lib reaction of the Military. #This is an all volunteer force who have chosen to fight for their country and what they believe in. #They are taught to kill people and break things, that is what war is all about. #War, while not a pleasant choice, is, sorry to say, #sometimes the only choice. #The death of one soldier is tragic, it has nothing to do with numbers except when the Libs and the far Left in this country want to attack the Commander-in-Chief. #While he may not have made it well, it is exactly the point Snow was trying to make about the libs and their numbers game. #When is the last time you heard a Lib say a good word about the military. #When was the last story played in the main stream lib media about the good being done in Iraq. #
The hate Bush, hate America, hate the Military crowd keeps on playing the same old tune, it's time for new one.
In case you might have missed it, on June 16, the House voted on a pull out (cut and run) in Iraq, and it failed, with 42 Democrats voting with Republicans. #There has always been a plan for Iraq it's called VICTORY.
N0WVA
06-18-2006, 09:03 PM
If you dont hate Bush and cant see he is a traitor to this country, along with the rest of his Skull and Bones buddies, then Id say you need a wake up call.
Bush is Anti anything this country stands for, he wants unlimited free trade, he wants to bring it to its knees. And its about time we stop trying to divide ourselves over political lines and start understanding that both parties are not in our best intrests. Now, just what are we gonna do about it?
Quote[/b] (KG6JTB @ June 18 2006,14:27)]Quote[/b] ]I hope that the message we give to them is not that their loss was one of convenience for corporate America.
Typical liberal perspective. Is that all the military is good for, defending the private sector?
This statement does as much to damage the purpose and scope of the U.S. military as it attempts to do honor to it.
There is unfortunately some truth to it. Check out
The Savage Wars of Peace. (http://www.futurecasts.com/Book%20review%207-2.htm) U.S. Marines in 1920's "Banana Wars (http://experts.about.com/q/Central-South-American-673/Banana-Wars.htm)" sometimes cynically referred to themselves as "US Colonial Forces."
More recently, invasion vets might remember that SecDef Rumsfeld's insistance on a more-combat-less-support invasion force was responsible (IMO for political motives) for units running out of
food and water (http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/wood012204.html) during the invasion.
A debate (http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/10/pentagon.armor/) continues -- with politics driving things -- about whether civilian leadership is shortchanging our military on resources for political or even economic (my buddy sells it?) purposes. New scandals do nothing to diminish suspicion, and whether one is liberal or conservative, being in uniform under fire and not getting what's needed to do the job goes beyond who accuses whom.
I am a retired soldier, so I take the view that we are NOT getting a good deal -- here at home -- for our lives and limbs. I am also cynical enough to think Congress will at a critical moment decide to count the dead and wounded as political casualties and back out with the job unfinished. They did in 1973, and turned fifty-eight thousand sacrifices into wasted deaths. They'll do it again -- and claim what they think is credit for the deed.
Cortland
KA5S
Quote[/b] (ka5s @ June 18 2006,10:50)]Currency
We are the currency you spend
For freedom, fear or oil;
Our blood, the coin you pay,
Dark on some foreign soil.
...
That's strong Cortland. Wow! You really hit the emo button with that.
ai4ep
06-18-2006, 10:15 PM
...sitting there in front of a monitor aint going to do any good.
Yep...YOU.
Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ June 18 2006,14:15)]...sitting there in front of a monitor #aint going to do any good.
Yep...YOU.
no, YOU!
Quote[/b] (K3XR @ June 18 2006,12:27)]Typical Lib reaction of the Military. #This is an all volunteer force who have chosen to fight for their country and what they believe in. #They are taught to kill people and break things, that is what war is all about. #War, while not a pleasant choice, is, sorry to say, #sometimes the only choice. #The death of one soldier is tragic, it has nothing to do with numbers except when the Libs and the far Left in this country want to attack the Commander-in-Chief. #While he may not have made it well, it is exactly the point Snow was trying to make about the libs and their numbers game. #When is the last time you heard a Lib say a good word about the military. #When was the last story played in the main stream lib media about the good being done in Iraq. #
The hate Bush, hate America, hate the Military crowd keeps on playing the same old tune, it's time for new one.
In case you might have missed it, on June 16, the House voted on a pull out (cut and run) in Iraq, and it failed, with 42 Democrats voting with Republicans. #There has always been a plan for Iraq it's called VICTORY.
Typical reaction of someone who has overdosed on talk radio, WorldNetDaily and NewsMax.
Who said anything about "critizing the military"? It's the administration policy that's flawed and being critized.
Bush deserves the criticism he gets, we're not just doing this for the hell of it.
BORING on the "where's the good" argument. There isn't much "good" going on in a country that is overrun by chaos.
Can't some of you guys think without consulting your Fox "News" or the radio? The continual use of RNC talking points is getting to the pathetic stage. (Getting to?)
Explain to me WHERE "hate America" is derived from an expression of dissent. You can't, because all you're doing is parroting talkings point spewed by some idiotic talking head who is making money selling books to sheep.
Perhaps YOU can explain the path to "victory". The Bush administration sure can't.
Dave WX7B
Sonoma County, CA
Quote[/b] (WX7B @ June 18 2006,17:28)]Explain to me WHERE "hate America" is derived from an expression of dissent. You can't, because all you're doing is parroting #talkings point spewed by some idiotic talking head who is making money selling books to sheep.
Dave WX7B
Sonoma County, CA
This is where we get the idea that you guys hate the military:
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/1984/1202074img7sr.jpg
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/4874/1202061img9ex.jpg
As for making money selling books.....
http://img224.imageshack.us/img224/2397/img34347ng.jpg
Quote[/b] (al2i @ June 18 2006,17:55)]That's strong Cortland. Wow! You really hit the emo button with that.
"Dear Abby" ran an except (butchered, natch) a couple of years ago. Expurgated.
Look, it's merely the truth. If politicians spend us for political or economic gain, can they expect we'll like it? If demonstrators take up "Support the Troops" banners when what they want makes the sacrifice of life and limb useless... do they deserve admiration? Everyone dies, sooner or later. Sometimes for a good reason. Sometimes that's all there is..
Cortland
KA5S
wa6ccw
06-19-2006, 02:14 AM
Quote[/b] (al2n @ June 19 2006,08:58)]Quote[/b] (WX7B @ June 18 2006,17:28)]Explain to me WHERE "hate America" is derived from an expression of dissent. You can't, because all you're doing is parroting #talkings point spewed by some idiotic talking head who is making money selling books to sheep.
Dave WX7B
Sonoma County, CA
This is where we get the idea that you guys hate the military:
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/1984/1202074img7sr.jpg
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/4874/1202061img9ex.jpg
As for making money selling books.....
http://img224.imageshack.us/img224/2397/img34347ng.jpg
BRAVO, AL2N!
w5klb
06-19-2006, 04:24 AM
Quote[/b] (k4kyv @ June 18 2006,11:03)]500 more and The Decider has killed as many Americans as Osama did.
Don't think so...
How many people did "The Prince of Al Queda" kill before we sent him to have a little "heart to heart" chat with Allah? Thousands? And all with the "Bearded Wonder's" blessing.
If we cut and run, like "war hero" John "ABSCAM" Murtha would like, how many more will die for not adhearing to Usama's "brand" of "Islam"? Once in control of Iraq, they will have a "platform" to lauch MORE terror attacks and "we the people of these United States" are at the TOP of their "hit list".
I see very clearly that understanding "geopolitics" is NOT a high priority for the liberals.
Remember that the brave lads and lasses who are fighting that war for us are ALL VOLUNTEERS. And they are re-enlisting #to GO BACK to Iraq and continue the fight. They must believe progress is being made although you wouldn't know it by listening and watching to the socialist propaganda outets like "Air(head) America", See-BS, or any of the rest of the liberal press.
WX7B re-asks the same question many of us have been asking for some time and have no response. It is the basis of the opposition to the Liberal stance on our occupation in Iraq. That question is just this; What are the conditions and objectives for "Victory". To me, it is obvious that we have none. If it is to clean up street violence, it will be a long occupation as we have not cleaned it up in this country, much less exhibit any progress in cleaning it up in Iraq.
We have attained victory in Iraq. We assured the world that there are no WMD in Iraq. We have Saddam out of power, Iraq has a new constitution (at least one), and they have elected officials as well as US trained civil and military forces. Cut and run? It does not sound like these US forces, if they leave today, have cut and run. They have been over there running thier bums off for our country and for Iraqi friendlies. To say that we will "Cut and run" is a slap in the face to the people we depend on today. These patriots have been working hard to get these objectives completed.
We need to show our support by at least acknowleging what they have accomplished. But, instead, we get a longer stick with a carrot tied on the end and tell them that they haven't accomplished squat, and we won't give them a laundry list of what needs to be done to leave.
Some gave all, the Decider cut and run in the early 70's to go snort coke with James R Bath. There's victory for you.
k0ews
06-19-2006, 01:46 PM
Quote[/b] ]What are the conditions and objectives for "Victory". To me, it is obvious that we have none. If it is to clean up street violence, it will be a long occupation as we have not cleaned it up in this country, much less exhibit any progress in cleaning it up in Iraq.
We have attained victory in Iraq. We assured the world that there are no WMD in Iraq. We have Saddam out of power, Iraq has a new constitution (at least one), and they have elected officials as well as US trained civil and military forces. Cut and run? It does not sound like these US forces, if they leave today, have cut and run. They have been over there running thier bums off for our country and for Iraqi friendlies. To say that we will "Cut and run" is a slap in the face to the people we depend on today. These patriots have been working hard to get these objectives completed.
You have a brand new democratic style government, who just took power 2 weeks ago. There are still vulnerabilities in the government, and definite factions along ethinic/religious lines there. The army, while not 100 percent, is better than it was a year ago. You have a strong nation-state next door, namely Iran, who would love nothing more than to take Iraq. Iran-Iraq-Syria would be a very powerful alliance, and one that could threaten the region both militarily and economically for generations.
We stayed as a military presence in Western Europe for the very same reason, to check the Soviet Union. This is nation-building, and as much as I'd like to see the troops come home, setting a deadline would be a very wrong move right now. I guess the conditions and objectives for Victory would then be the ability for the new nation-state of Iraq to defend itself. That being said, I think we will always have a base of some sort there. We still have bases in Europe, the Pacific, Cuba and Kuwait. I think we will always have some military presence there too.
How many years did it take for the good ol US of A to form a stable government?
Was more than 3 for sure.
EWS. Specifically, to what level do we need to patch vulnerabilities? What percent does the Army need to be? How ho we help or hinder the Syria Iraq Iran relationship? I am looking for specifics.
al2n, I forgot about the country who occupied the US for the nation building process. I do not remember that one in school. I thought we kicked out an occupier to start our nation building.
I seem to remember something about there being more French soldiers than Americans at the battle of Yorktown.
Washington had 11,000 men engaged in the battle, while the French had at least 29,000 soldiers and sailors. The 37 French ships-of-the-line played a crucial role in trapping the 8,700 strong British army and winning the engagement.
Plus you need to factor in the fact that even though Yorktown was where we won the war in October of 1781, it was not until 1783 that the final treaty was signed and a month later the last British forces left New York. There were French forces still around as well, the last of them leaving in 1784 or 85, would need to look it up.
So yes, America was occupied territory for awhile after the Revolution was won.
Quote[/b] (al2n @ June 18 2006,17:58)]Quote[/b] (WX7B @ June 18 2006,17:28)]Explain to me WHERE "hate America" is derived from an expression of dissent. You can't, because all you're doing is parroting #talkings point spewed by some idiotic talking head who is making money selling books to sheep.
Dave WX7B
Sonoma County, CA
This is where we get the idea that you guys hate the military:
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/1984/1202074img7sr.jpg
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/4874/1202061img9ex.jpg
As for making money selling books.....
http://img224.imageshack.us/img224/2397/img34347ng.jpg
These photos don't prove anything.
Where is the "hate the military" aspect of the photos?
This is dissent, period. It's obvious to me they are protesting the policy.
As usual, AL2N, you are trying to place anyone that disagrees with you and your far right wing view into a box with extremists on the other side. Anyone that doesn't agree with you is automatically labeled a "communist" either directly or indirectly.
That's extremely weak, but typical from those on the right.
Dave WX7B
Sonoma County, CA
It's typical of your
And anyone who does not agree with you is labeled a far right winger.
Pot.
Kettle.
Black.
If you cannot see the anti-military aspect of the photos, you really need to get out more.
Quote[/b] ]We stayed as a military presence in Western Europe for the very same reason, to check the Soviet Union. #This is nation-building...
"Nation-building" was one of the very things the hard right has been against for some time. It's interesting they all are now converts when it comes to Iraq.
Quote[/b] ]I guess the conditions and objectives for Victory would then be the ability for the new nation-state of Iraq to defend itself.
The Iraqis need to sort out whether or not a contiguous Iraq is still viable in a post-Saddam world. Iraq was able to survive as a sole entity in the Saddam era due to iron fist rule, much like Yugoslavia held together under Josef Broz Tito.
Short of the emergence of another Saddam (which we won't allow) or the permanent occupation of Iraq by American troops, Iraq will split up along ethinic/religious lines. this will lead to an ever bigger mess than we have today. The Turks will not tolerate an independent Kurdistan, as the Turks have many ancestral Kurdish lands within their borders. The Sunnis and the Shi'ites will clash with the Kurds over the partition of oil from the old Iraqi state. It's a mess that George W. Bush and the United States of America will have put into motion.
It's unbelievable to me with all the resources and brainpower available to the Bush Administration they chose to take a path that will saddle the citizens of the United States with a conflict that will last generations. To add insult to injury, the administration #violated previous stands taken regarding nation building to go on this misadventure.
Dave WX7B
Sonoma County, CA
W8EFA
06-19-2006, 02:49 PM
Quote[/b] (al2n @ June 19 2006,10:00)]How many years did it take for the good ol US of A to form a stable government?
Was more than 3 for sure.
How many other countries stepped in for us, deposed the British for us, and wrote our constitution? #
We did it ourselves which is what the Iraq people could have done on their own if they wanted to be free. #Instead we are trying to build a democracy at the end of a gun.
Iraq is a political battle at this point. #There is nothing more we can do, #it is up to the Iraquis. #If we told our military we wanted the Shiites to win they would take care of it. #However now they are between different "tribes" with no purpose except to be targets and try to round up bad guys WHICH WILL NEVER END.
Quote[/b] (al2n @ June 19 2006,06:42)]And anyone who does not agree with you is labeled a far right winger.
Pot.
Kettle.
Black.
If you cannot see the anti-military aspect of the photos, you really need to get out more.
Wrong.
Your words speak for themselves. I'm not going to be labeled in the same rhetorical world as you.
I don't go around implying right wing types as "fascists" the way you imply "communism" when speaking of people to the left of you.
As for getting out more, I get out a lot. I do significantly more than parrot right wing talking points from some radio program as you do.
Dave WX7B
Sonoma County, CA
Quote[/b] (WX7B @ June 19 2006,07:39)]Where is the "hate the military" aspect of the photos?
If you are supporting armed resistance in Iraq, you're supporting people killing/maiming our soldiers.
Not a difficult or unreasonable parallel to draw, that these people hate the US military.
You're being coy here, Dave. A lot of these protestors _do_ hate the military. Many are anarchists or utopian socialists. They hate all militaries.
k0ews
06-19-2006, 03:00 PM
Quote[/b] ]Specifically, to what level do we need to patch vulnerabilities?
The Iraqi government is a work in progress. The vulnerabilities remain to be seen. It has, however, survived 2 free elections, the formation of a constitution, and the formation of a working government. Prospects for a working government at this point are good.
Quote[/b] ]What percent does the Army need to be?
The Iraqi army should be able to complete 100 percent of the missions, and require no help from the coalition in the way of intelligence, logisitcal support, training, etc. Right now, it appears that they are improving, but it does take time.
LINK (http://usinfo.state.gov/mena/Archive/2006/May/18-114573.html)
We would hinder the Iran-Iraq-Syria relationship by maintaining a strong presence in the region, militarily and economically, much like we did with the Marshall Plan in post WWII. A free and democratic Iraq isolates both Iran and Syria.
Every free country on the planet owes much of its freedom and prosperity to American blood, sweat, and ideals.
Quote[/b] (k0ews @ June 19 2006,02:00)]Quote[/b] ]Specifically, to what level do we need to patch vulnerabilities?
The Iraqi government is a work in progress. #The vulnerabilities remain to be seen. #It has, however, survived 2 free elections, the formation of a constitution, and the formation of a working government. #Prospects for a working government at this point are good.
Quote[/b] ]What percent does the Army need to be?
The Iraqi army should be able to complete 100 percent of the missions, and require no help from the coalition in the way of intelligence, logisitcal support, training, etc. #Right now, it appears that they are improving, but it does take time.
LINK (http://usinfo.state.gov/mena/Archive/2006/May/18-114573.html)
We would hinder the Iran-Iraq-Syria relationship by maintaining a strong presence in the region, militarily and economically, much like we did with the Marshall Plan in post WWII. #A free and democratic Iraq isolates both Iran and Syria.
So you are saying that we really have no idea what our goals are and we set expectations to 100%. Our own military is not at 100%. We have lost over 2500 soldiers in this occupation. That is not 100% success. No operation runs at 100% success. Even your own post here is not at 100%. You misspelt logistical. When will you have occupiers come into your home and watch over your posts to assure 100% correct spelling? 100% is a lot to expect from anybody. I mean, I really don't care that much about poster's spellings as I have my fair share of typos. But if you are expecting 100%, I don't think you understand what 100% really is.
What a joke. This proves what I said about bouncing the carrot in front of the troops and then pull it away. The objectives are not realistic. This equates to the fact that we do not have a plan, objective, or a mission.
Quote[/b] (AK7V @ June 19 2006,07:59)]Quote[/b] (WX7B @ June 19 2006,07:39)]Where is the "hate the military" aspect of the photos?
If you are supporting armed resistance in Iraq, you're supporting people killing/maiming our soldiers.
Not a difficult or unreasonable parallel to draw, that these people hate the US military.
You're being coy here, Dave. A lot of these protestors _do_ hate the military. Many are anarchists or utopian socialists. They hate all militaries.
Well Jason, as I know you see quite clearly, Mike's post had no logical merit: it created a strawman and then built an ad hominen attack out of that. That sort of guilt by association rhetorical attack is used all of the time here, even though it is a classic logical fallacy.
P.S. My comment is not to be taken as endorsing Dave's response!
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif
k0ews
06-19-2006, 04:46 PM
Quote[/b] (n9xr @ June 19 2006,10:02)]Quote[/b] (k0ews @ June 19 2006,02:00)]Quote[/b] ]Specifically, to what level do we need to patch vulnerabilities?
The Iraqi government is a work in progress. The vulnerabilities remain to be seen. It has, however, survived 2 free elections, the formation of a constitution, and the formation of a working government. Prospects for a working government at this point are good.
Quote[/b] ]What percent does the Army need to be?
The Iraqi army should be able to complete 100 percent of the missions, and require no help from the coalition in the way of intelligence, logisitcal support, training, etc. Right now, it appears that they are improving, but it does take time.
LINK (http://usinfo.state.gov/mena/Archive/2006/May/18-114573.html)
We would hinder the Iran-Iraq-Syria relationship by maintaining a strong presence in the region, militarily and economically, much like we did with the Marshall Plan in post WWII. A free and democratic Iraq isolates both Iran and Syria.
So you are saying that we really have no idea what our goals are and we set expectations to 100%. Our own military is not at 100%. We have lost over 2500 soldiers in this occupation. That is not 100% success. No operation runs at 100% success. Even your own post here is not at 100%. You misspelt logistical. When will you have occupiers come into your home and watch over your posts to assure 100% correct spelling? 100% is a lot to expect from anybody. I mean, I really don't care that much about poster's spellings as I have my fair share of typos. But if you are expecting 100%, I don't think you understand what 100% really is.
What a joke. This proves what I said about bouncing the carrot in front of the troops and then pull it away. The objectives are not realistic. This equates to the fact that we do not have a plan, objective, or a mission.
I guess I didn't make myself clear in a way that you could understand. Sorry. By 100 percent, I meant that the Iraqi forces would be able to operate on their own, 100 percent of the time, requiring no outside help.
You tend to misdirect, and to twist words. You asked a simple question, and I attempted to explain. I am sorry it was not to your satisfaction. It occurs to me that no matter what I may have said, you would twist the answer into something that you would like to hear. Nobody will change your opinion of President Bush, and nobody should try. It's been my experience that most people who don't like him haven't liked him for quite some time. You are free to believe what you want, but where you step over the line in in the way that you make out an opposing opinion to be either crazy, uneducated, evil, or some other rationalization as to why there could be anyone out there that can't see things the way you do. I'm sorry that you are so closed-minded, but you really are. I think you are just a bitter old man.
I will not attempt to discuss anything with you anymore. You are a true believer, and no discussion in the world will change that. Just remember, as strongly as your opinions are to you, others are to them. Shame on you for twisting my words, and shame on me for taking the bait.
Quote[/b] (al2i @ June 19 2006,09:29)]Well Jason, as I know you see quite clearly, Mike's post had no logical merit: it created a strawman and then built an ad hominen attack out of that. #That sort of guilt by association rhetorical attack is used all of the time here, even though it is a classic logical fallacy.
P.S. #My comment is not to be taken as endorsing Dave's response!
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif
Absolutely. #I admit to picking at 7B specifically because he differs from me politically, he's smart, and when he rhetorically dismantles me (or anyone else), I usually learn something.
One could say that pointing out these protestors and implying that they are the Democrat's base (or the embodyment of their core philosophy's logical conclusions) is just like bringing up abortion clinic bombers or Fred Phelps as Republican poster-children. #Not fair, not accurate, and not limited to one side of the political debate. #But I don't know too many on the right who will deny the blatant repugnancy of Phelps, for example, like Dave apparently denys those protestors obvious wish for harm to US soldiers.
Quote[/b] (k0ews @ June 19 2006,03:46)]Quote[/b] (n9xr @ June 19 2006,10:02)]Quote[/b] (k0ews @ June 19 2006,02:00)]Quote[/b] ]Specifically, to what level do we need to patch vulnerabilities?
The Iraqi government is a work in progress. #The vulnerabilities remain to be seen. #It has, however, survived 2 free elections, the formation of a constitution, and the formation of a working government. #Prospects for a working government at this point are good.
Quote[/b] ]What percent does the Army need to be?
The Iraqi army should be able to complete 100 percent of the missions, and require no help from the coalition in the way of intelligence, logisitcal support, training, etc. #Right now, it appears that they are improving, but it does take time.
LINK (http://usinfo.state.gov/mena/Archive/2006/May/18-114573.html)
We would hinder the Iran-Iraq-Syria relationship by maintaining a strong presence in the region, militarily and economically, much like we did with the Marshall Plan in post WWII. #A free and democratic Iraq isolates both Iran and Syria.
So you are saying that we really have no idea what our goals are and we set expectations to 100%. #Our own military is not at 100%. #We have lost over 2500 soldiers in this occupation. #That is not 100% success. #No operation runs at 100% success. #Even your own post here is not at 100%. #You misspelt logistical. #When will you have occupiers come into your home and watch over your posts to assure 100% correct spelling? #100% is a lot to expect from anybody. #I mean, I really don't care that much about poster's spellings as I have my fair share of typos. #But if you are expecting 100%, I don't think you understand what 100% really is.
What a joke. #This proves what I said about bouncing the carrot in front of the troops and then pull it away. #The objectives are not realistic. #This equates to the fact that we do not have a plan, objective, or a mission.
I guess I didn't make myself clear in a way that you could understand. #Sorry. #By 100 percent, I meant that the Iraqi forces would be able to operate on their own, 100 percent of the time, requiring no outside help. #
You tend to misdirect, and to twist words. #You asked a simple question, and I attempted to explain. #I am sorry it was not to your satisfaction. #It occurs to me that no matter what I may have said, you would twist the answer into something that you would like to hear. #Nobody will change your opinion of President Bush, and nobody should try. #It's been my experience that most people who don't like him haven't liked him for quite some time. #You are free to believe what you want, but where you step over the line in in the way that you make out an opposing opinion to be either crazy, uneducated, evil, or some other rationalization as to why there could be anyone out there that can't see things the way you do. #I'm sorry that you are so closed-minded, but you really are. #I think you are just a bitter old man.
I will not attempt to discuss anything with you anymore. #You are a true believer, and no discussion in the world will change that. #Just remember, as strongly as your opinions are to you, others are to them. #Shame on you for twisting my words, and shame on me for taking the bait.
Eric, This article from some unreliable source http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif states that the Iraqi forces are only allowed on 80% of the missions as it is. When will they be allowed in 100% so we can gage how long this will take.
I swear to you, when GWB took office, he said that he would run this country like a corporate CEO. How many CEO's will sit back and let a division of their company take off on some half-baked project with no concept of the amount of time or money, but the division expects a blank check and an open ended schedule? You are not going to be able to name one because the board of directors will fire that CEO. The board of directors are the people who pay very close to the heartbeat of the company and continually check it's pulse. This country has no responsible board of directors.
I did not misdirect or twist your words. I have not been voicing my "opinion" of President Bush. I am stating fact. You call it opinion because you want to cover your ears and stick your head in the sand. Indeed I step over the line by stating the truth. People glued to the "liberal media" all day are programmed to believe Bush can do no wrong and truth speakers are "over the line".
I will state fact again. There is no plan in Iraq. No mission. No list of objectives. I am not "baiting" anybody. I have stated on here what the objectives were in 2003, and they are all met. We are done. Now, I am looking for the new list. What is it today? Where do we go from here? Is there something tangible, or do we have to admit that the Bush Admin is clueless?
N4AUD
06-19-2006, 06:29 PM
Quote[/b] (AK7V @ June 18 2006,10:47)]Fred Phelps as Republican poster-children.
Fred Phelps' is NOT a Republican, he actually calls himself a Democrat. Just a point of clarification. I doubt anyone wants to claim Fred as their own.
Note: edited
Quote[/b] (K1ALK @ June 19 2006,11:29)]Quote[/b] (AK7V @ June 18 2006,10:47)][quote=al2i,June 19 2006,09:29] Fred Phelps as Republican poster-children.
Fred Phelps' is NOT a Republican, he actually calls himself a Democrat. Just a point of clarification. I doubt anyone wants to claim Fred as their own.
That is not anything I wrote unless someone is using my login.
Quote[/b] (K1ALK @ June 19 2006,05:29)]Quote[/b] (AK7V @ June 18 2006,10:47)][quote=al2i,June 19 2006,09:29] Fred Phelps as Republican poster-children.
Fred Phelps' is NOT a Republican, he actually calls himself a Democrat. #Just a point of clarification. #I doubt anyone wants to claim Fred as their own.
Many extreme right-wingers around Lawrence and Topeka refer to themselves as "Jeffersonian Democrats". And, yes, they get slaughtered in the primaries in which they run. Their idols are Republicans. But, no, Republicans do not claim them.
Well, I think I'll start making up quotes by K1ALK.
Quote[/b] (K1ALK @ June 19 2006,11:29)]Bush is a creep!
I am glad to see you have seen the light!
Quote[/b] (al2i @ June 19 2006,05:51)]Quote[/b] (K1ALK @ June 19 2006,11:29)]Bush is a creep!
I am glad to see you have seen the light!
You are encouragable.
N4AUD
06-19-2006, 07:03 PM
Quote[/b] (al2i @ June 18 2006,12:50)]Well, I think I'll start making up quotes by K1ALK.
Sorry, I was trying to cut out the rest of a post just to clarify one point. I don't want to attribute anything to anyone who didn't say it. Bad computer skills.
Fred Phelps claims to be a Democrat, not a "Jeffersonian Democrat" or any other kind...just a plain old Democrat. Fred Phelps hosted Gore campaign workers in 1988, and Fred Phelps Jr. was a Gore delegate at the Democratic National Convention that year. Fred Phelps IS a registered Democrat, and ran for political office as a Democrat, but of course didn't support Clinton/Gore because their views on homosexuality. I doubt he supports ANY mainstream political candidate since he pretty much hates everybody nowadays.
I don't think the Democrats would claim him anymore, or the Republicans. I just wanted to point out that he isn't and never has been a Rebublican and doesn't support the present administration or probably any administration that is likely to get elected.
N4AUD
06-19-2006, 07:05 PM
Quote[/b] (al2i @ June 18 2006,12:51)]Quote[/b] (K1ALK @ June 19 2006,11:29)]Bush is a creep!
I am glad to see you have seen the light!
I did not intend to attribute any statement to you that you did not make.
http://homepage.mac.com/johnwirzbicki/iblog/CTBlue/C1885336264/E20060118210944/Media/kiss-lieberwhore.jpg #Are you talking about the same Gore who ran with this guy? #Yeah, Gore had many latent republican buddies.
N4AUD
06-19-2006, 07:19 PM
Yes, Al Gore.
Anytime I see Fred Phelps mentioned in a forum or an article I read it to see what craziness he's been up to lately. Fred Phelps is a truly evil person, IMHO.
He's not a "conservative" or "liberal" or Republican, and even though he is registered as a Democrat and calls himself that, I don't think anyone else would think he's a Democrat. He's just a nut.
Go ahead and argue that he's a Republican if you want. I'm not a Republican, so I don't care. I just wanted to point out a FACT.
Quote[/b] (K1ALK @ June 19 2006,12:05)]Quote[/b] (al2i @ June 18 2006,12:51)]Quote[/b] (K1ALK @ June 19 2006,11:29)]Bush is a creep!
I am glad to see you have seen the light!
I did not intend to attribute any statement to you that you did not make.
Well, it was a fun, non-adult moment for me! I now return the thread to its regularly scheduled partisan battles.
73,
Dave/al2i http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif
Quote[/b] (n9xr @ June 19 2006,12:14)]Yeah, Gore had many latent republican buddies.
Jerry -- Is Gore too right-wing for you?
Quote[/b] (al2i @ June 19 2006,06:54)]Quote[/b] (n9xr @ June 19 2006,12:14)]Yeah, Gore had many latent republican buddies.
Jerry -- Is Gore too right-wing for you?
Well, let's put it this way. When people call me "socialist", I am not too offended.
I would support Gore again if he would put his hat into the ring. This "guilt by association" thing is a multi edged sword. It cuts in many directions for those who choose to use it.