So much for that "Surge" (1 Viewer)

[Rickboy]

you fail to see that IRAQ had absolutely nothing to do with the war on terror. 9/11 was not polarizing as there has been no talk about leaving afghanistan, where the power base of Al Qaida existed. the issue which has been polarizing, is a stupid war that now we must continue because its the right and moral thing to do. we can not leave a country that is completely decimated by our activities. and to visit the war let us look at a few things.

saddam was a *******, no doubt but he was secular, and was a sunni leader in a shia marjority country. by removing him and installing a weak and incompetent democracy, we effectively created an ally for a fundamentalist country in Iran. I saw this on march 14, 2003 as a lowly enlisted NCO but Rummy had no clue???

What Rummy attempted to do was gut the military. his thought was that we did not need support personnel eating at resources such as retirement and medical benefits and we could effectively replace these people with contracted employees which do not receive long term benefits. he wanted to create a fighting force without support personnel. that means infantry, artillery, MPs, and SF units. common sense tells you that this wouldnt work, especially with a long fight, but Rummy thought the money spent in such a conflict would be saved in times of peace. this is a page straight out of the Leo Strauss guide to screwing Americans...

what you should truly be upset about the administration has nothing to do with immigration, but more to do with faith based initiatives, and a bloated centralized government that has stripped states of their power and ultimately wiped their rear ends with OUR constitution...

i cant wait until McCain or Obama gets elected, assuming McCain doesn't pick Mitt Robot or Huckleberry and Obama picks Edwards. We can finally get back to being respected in the world comminity and ultimately get this budget back under control!!!

conservative my ***!!!

Pretty much dead on...

 

[Superfan]

you fail to see that IRAQ had absolutely nothing to do with the war on terror. 9/11 was not polarizing as there has been no talk about leaving afghanistan, where the power base of Al Qaida existed. the issue which has been polarizing, is a stupid war that now we must continue because its the right and moral thing to do. we can not leave a country that is completely decimated by our activities. and to visit the war let us look at a few things.

saddam was a *******, no doubt but he was secular, and was a sunni leader in a shia marjority country. by removing him and installing a weak and incompetent democracy, we effectively created an ally for a fundamentalist country in Iran. I saw this on march 14, 2003 as a lowly enlisted NCO but Rummy had no clue???

What Rummy attempted to do was gut the military. his thought was that we did not need support personnel eating at resources such as retirement and medical benefits and we could effectively replace these people with contracted employees which do not receive long term benefits. he wanted to create a fighting force without support personnel. that means infantry, artillery, MPs, and SF units. common sense tells you that this wouldnt work, especially with a long fight, but Rummy thought the money spent in such a conflict would be saved in times of peace. this is a page straight out of the Leo Strauss guide to screwing Americans...

what you should truly be upset about the administration has nothing to do with immigration, but more to do with faith based initiatives, and a bloated centralized government that has stripped states of their power and ultimately wiped their rear ends with OUR constitution...

i cant wait until McCain or Obama gets elected, assuming McCain doesn't pick Mitt Robot or Huckleberry and Obama picks Edwards. We can finally get back to being respected in the world comminity and ultimately get this budget back under control!!!

conservative my ***!!!

The Donald Rumsfeld and George W. Bush war plan think tank.

*************************WARNING CLASSIFIED INFORMATION*********************

 

[DadsDream]

So much for that "Surge"

Glee?

 

[City Champ]

yeah, i dont get taking joy in the fact that america has been unsuccessful all to say, "I told you so, my side is right!!!"

what happened to america and why have we allowed ourselves to be viciously manipulated by the left and right wing???

 

[baarbogast]

If the Brits are supplying the aerial support wouldn't they be the ones to put ground troops there if it went bad?

Black Water needs to be disbande!!!! They have done more damage than good there. If a soldier did half the stuff those guys do/did he would be making little rocks out of big ones at Leavenworth.

 

[lazybones]

Disagree. Completely.

There is a huge problem when people look at complex issues as entirely one or the other. You might not be nuanced, but that doesn't mean that something like the current war is not nuanced. The entire nature of the struggle, even if you agree with it, is rife with complexities, issues that cannot be accounted for in "love it or leave it platitudes."

From its inception, this war and the rationale for going to war has never been about an issue that is black or white. What can you possibly boil this conflict down to in terms of singularity?

I am not challenging your intellect or anything - I am genuinely bewildered at how you can look at this war which is full of complexities, most of which we are probably not even aware of, and reduce it to something so simple.

The war has changed fronts. The war has changed primary targets. The war has changed objectives. The war has changed alliances with respect to our recent generational history in involvement in the Middle East.

And I would challenge, heartily, the assertion that this war was not polarizing after 9/11.

This is a DIFFERENT war. We had a target identified as being responsible for 9/11. He and his group took credit. That is who we were targeting. There was a national solidarity in seeking reciprocative justice for the terrorist attacks.

The war then shifted to Hussein and WMDs and everything changed.

This was not an abstract construct of the left.

Any national cohesion that existed, and I believe it did, after 9/11 as we involved ourselves in the search for Bin Laden was erased once the administrative manipulation began and the murky accusations that changed the site and motive for being at war. There was a great deal of doubt and questioning that, retrospectively, ended up being absolutely reasonable.

And that had as much to do with departmental policy as with any media bias.

To remove blame from the administration and place it all on this "left media bias" for the current of anger and rise of protestations is an injustice, I believe. It's a gross oversimplification.

I am reminded of a very very poignant passage from Tim O'Brien's The Things They Carried as the narrator thinks about the people around him after he received his draft notice for the Vietnam War:

For your nuances, I was being fecetious. 2 yes I understand that war is multi fronts, missions, wrong steps and right steps. My black and white is this. We are at war to protect America. You should DEFINITELY be supportive.

I am not putting total blame on the left of the media. Reagan did not capitulate with the libs on the cold war. Unfortunately our current administration, though I have a tremendous respect for "W", did. "W" and Rummy should have put the power on display and take no prisoners. Heck I don't even want to talk about the Boo Hoo of Gitmo.

last point of oversimplification. When someone calls me simple, I take it as a compliment. All leaders do. When you over complicate matters, is when nothing gets done. ----This is business 201. Like it or not war is the business of safety in America.

 

[City Champ]

rummy is a dummy and he led baby bush by his nose...
i am done here...

 

[lazybones]

If the Brits are supplying the aerial support wouldn't they be the ones to put ground troops there if it went bad?

Black Water needs to be disbande!!!! They have done more damage than good there. If a soldier did half the stuff those guys do/did he would be making little rocks out of big ones at Leavenworth.

onepeat this makes my point about rummy. people like this think that war is not brutal and has casualties. I think the fault of the administrations was not leading a more positive campaign about the triumphs in Iraq. philosophies of this nature keep us from finishing our mission.


What exactly is Obama going to do to give us respect. Impugn the elites in Europe for their role in slavery. Come on man. As for JM i am supporting him, hoping he chooses Romney. However he is not a conservative. maybe on national defense, but now conservative. As for me, call me what you want but I am all the way to the RIGHT!

 

[Brandon13]

My black and white is this. We are at war to protect America. You should DEFINITELY be supportive.

Everyone should be supportive of the troops, not the war.

 

[lazybones]

rummy is a dummy and he led baby bush by his nose...
i am done here...

When your rhetoric comes to this, you are a lib.

 

[SaintJ]

For your nuances, I was being fecetious. 2 yes I understand that war is multi fronts, missions, wrong steps and right steps. My black and white is this. We are at war to protect America. You should DEFINITELY be supportive.

I am not putting total blame on the left of the media. Reagan did not capitulate with the libs on the cold war. Unfortunately our current administration, though I have a tremendous respect for "W", did. "W" and Rummy should have put the power on display and take no prisoners. Heck I don't even want to talk about the Boo Hoo of Gitmo.

last point of oversimplification. When someone calls me simple, I take it as a compliment. All leaders do. When you over complicate matters, is when nothing gets done. ----This is business 201. Like it or not war is the business of safety in America.

Please post more.

 

[lazybones]

Everyone should be supportive of the troops, not the war.

I have never understood what this means. Do you support the saints players but not want them to win the game. All I can do is chuckle. The men and woman of the military, at least the ones I know, consider this comment EXTREMELY offensive.

 

[bclemms]

My black and white is this. We are at war to protect America.

My black and white question to you sir is quite simple.

Who exactly are we being protected from?

The last time I checked we blew Iraq's military to shred's in a couple days, they wouldn't even fly their airforce against us because it would have been suicidal. The army was either throwing white flags up and surrendering or just going home in just hours. Their navy, did Iraq even have a Navy? Was Iraq gathering significant arms and a mobilizing force ready to travel around the globe to attack us? We managed to put an end to the greatest military in the world by building a greater military and never firing a shot. We avoided nuclear holocaust while rallying as a country around a cause.

So again, who exactly are we being protected from?

The only plausable answer that can come to me is if you are part of big oil and by saying "we" you are implying the rest of us are in big oil or military contracts. This war is bankrupting our country financially, morally, politically and militarily.

Before you think I'm some "left wing commie" I want you to know I was a Bush supporter, apologist and hard standing Republican just a half year ago. I once supported the Iraq war until I decided to really try and understand the reasons of the war, none of which make any sense to 300 million Billy Joe and Mary Sues that make up the United States of America.

I will likely never vote Republican again and the other side of the aisle doesn't look any better. This two party system is dividing the greatest country in the world while bankrupting from the center (middle America) out. We our sending our jobs overseas while consuming foreign products and devaluing the greatest currency in the history of the world at the expense of the heart of our country.

To support the Bush administration is no different than burning the constitution and the basic fundamentals that our government and society was formed.


Onepeat and Razor, thanks for some of the best posts I have read in quite some time.

 

[RebSaint]

However he is not a conservative. maybe on national defense, but now conservative. As for me, call me what you want but I am all the way to the RIGHT!

Are these the same "conservatives" who are in favor of a smaller, less intrusive governent? Where did these "conservatives" go? How can one be for the continuation of spending billions in arguably one of the largest social welfare program. Liberales to rebuild Iraq?

Some estimates have Iraq eventually costing trillions of dollars. So how can one be conservative and support giving anybody a blank check when it comes to unlimited dollars to spend on babysitting Iraq, which includes money for schools and basic infastructure.

Conservative my ***.

 

[RebSaint]

When your rhetoric comes to this, you are a lib.

I assume that your definition of "liberal" is anybody who disagrees with your view of the world, or anybody who deviates from Rush Limbaugh's brand of conservatism.