SPONSORS

Staff Infection

COMMENTS

1. 1

   So that’s that, then. Undefeated. Success. Victory.

   Like showing up for a final, having studied the wrong subject, and declaring you’ve passed the test because you correctly answered questions that weren’t on the test.

   Good cause? Sure. Too bad these Marines didn’t need to be there in the first place.

   [report]

   Posted By Andy on February 27th, 2008 at 4:44 pm

    

2. 2

   Way to support the Marines, Andy! It’s attitudes like yours that make me wonder why anyone would want to fight on behalf of this country.

   Are you the type of guy who says he suports the military, but really doesn’t do a tangible thing to reflect that support? Or do you just hate George Bush?

   [report]

   Posted By Tom on March 5th, 2008 at 4:42 pm

    

3. 3

   i dont think the staement is necessarily incorrect, we did win the war, its the occupation we are losing.

   [report]

   Posted By howardx on March 5th, 2008 at 4:52 pm

    

4. 4

   Dear Howard,
   Have you read the news lately about the success of the surge in Iraq? Pick up any paper … like today’s Wall St. Journal.
   How in the world can you say we are losing the occupation? The facts on the ground completely refute that.
   We were before the surge. It’s miraculously turned around now. Ask any respectable journalist.

   [report]

   Posted By Tom on March 5th, 2008 at 4:57 pm

    

5. 5

   I was at that dinner to hear Lt. Col. Rector, who is a great American. I find information far more credible from those in the know vs. our sensationalist media. Whether you agree with the initial declaration of war for it, the world is a much better place without cruel dictators like Saddam Hussein. I learned from Lt. Col. Rector that what’s left now are roving bands of opportunistic gangs, marauding much like what LA gangs would do if there were too few police to stop them. Iraq has a growing police force, thanks in part to Lt. Col. Rector, and with the help of US forces, they are successfully eliminating these gangs of insurgents. It is the opinion of Rector that if we pull out too soon, the police will lose control and the country will be taken over by terrorists who consider it a guaranteed passport to heaven if they kill Americans. Like it or not, we went there, we are there, we MUST stay there and finish or pay horrible consequences. FYI: Rector is the guy on the left, not center in the photo. In the center is a Marine Captain. I am on the right.

   [report]

   Posted By Diane on March 5th, 2008 at 5:38 pm

    

6. 6

   newsflash
   iraqis hate us, dont see us as liberators and want us out of the country. by what metric are you measuring success?

   [report]

   Posted By howardx on March 5th, 2008 at 5:44 pm

    

7. 7

   Sounds like your source is old news, Howard. How many Iraqi’s have you personally interviewed? My measure is the truth from eyewitness account of the several 100’s of Military personel we’ve personally gotten to know through the Patriots Ministry; Commanding Officers, Infantryman, Chaplains, etc. who have all been there for one or more recent tours. Unfortunately, in America good news doesn’t sell as well as bad, so we aren’t always getting ALL the news. Most Iraqi’s ARE glad we rescued them from the cruel tyranny of Saddam anymore. Freedom has come with initial sacrifice, historically it always does. Howard, would you choose to live under a Saddam Hussein or have the hope of freedom and democracy?

   [report]

   Posted By Diane on March 5th, 2008 at 7:18 pm

    

8. 8

   Tom, maybe supporting the Marines means not sending them there in the first place. And, since you’d rather recycle bumper sticker dogma rather than actually thinking before you write, you’d better get your facts straight. None of the initial goals have been met. As with all things with this war, the goalposts are moved to support the outcome. Remember when all the Iraqi oil was gonna pay for this war?

   I don’t need you to tell me how to support my country. I’ve worked in support of our nation’s armed services longer than you’ll ever know. I know how the military beauracracies run and I’ve seen how the grunt on the ground is considered a statistic, a budget item, a means to an end to ensure additional funding. The Air Force just placed a request for $59 million for additional ADVERTISING funding, not additional socks, not additional bullets, not additional benefits for families undergoing hardships because their spouses are serving their third tour, but ADVERTISING.

   http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2008/02/airfo...

   So, do I think this was a recruiting PR effort? Yes, I do. And supporting your troops is not slapping a flag in your yard and forwarding links to Wall Street Journal articles. And, Diane, you seem like a very nice, literate woman, but have you read any international accounts? It’s not a very Pollyanna world out there. But it is convenient to fear those terrorists who will get to heaven by killing Americans…

   Yes, I’m angry, And when someone tells me I’m not supporting the troops, I get furious. These are our bravest men and women serving there, the above Marines included. But I don’t support the “We broke it, we bought it” mentality. It’s beyond that now, we need a differnet solution… but if your yellow ribbon on your Lexus makes you sleep better at night, congratulations.

   [report]

   Posted By Andy on March 5th, 2008 at 7:51 pm

    

9. 9

   Well said, Diane.

   Howard,
   How many metrics do you need? Fewer casualties & attacks on our military and Iraqi civilians, the fact that democrats’ attacks on Gen. Petraeus are now muted, polling results, etc.

   Why do you want to be mired in defeat, denigrating and denying the remarkable success of the U.S. military under exceedingly difficult circumstances; i.e. the lack of support and recognition from Americans like you?

   [report]

   Posted By Joseph on March 5th, 2008 at 7:59 pm

    

10. 10

    “the fact that democrats’ attacks on Gen. Petraeus are not muted”: THAT is a metric of success? Really? That’s what you are clinging to: a temporary, silly, tempest-in-a-teacup assessment of criticism of the General? Seriously?

    Is this just about saving face in front of the opposite party?

    I am so tired of the “look, we’re there now, so just deal with it” line. We didn’t HAVE to be there. And the deed being done doesn’t do ANYTHING to insulate you from the extraordinary anger that is coming your way from all those people who KNEW it was a mistake, KNEW the government wasn’t planning appropriately, and KNEW that the predictions for success were way oversold.

    People have been blown to pieces. You don’t get to dismiss the critics by just rolling your eyes and saying “what’s done is done.” People have a right to be angry, and they have a right to be angry for a long, long time. Admit it: all things being equal, if Bush just happened to be a Democrat you would find plenty to complain about.

    When things blew up in Somalia under Clinton, Republicans were screaming from the rafters. And not a single Republican said, “now, now. we *have* to stay there. getting upset is just going to hurt the troops’ feelings! bringing them home early is just going to damage their self-esteem!” No, they said, “Bring our troops home, for God’s sake!” Which makes perfect sense. Because the troops aren’t preschoolers. They are ADULTS who just want to be home with their families.

    [report]

    Posted By Rachel Powers on March 5th, 2008 at 8:36 pm

     

11. 11

    Well, this has been cross-posted somewhere. The “attack the opposing viewpoints as not supporting the troops” talking points have started. And you thought it was just Rudy Giuliani’s only message.

    Nobody, repeat nobody, is denying the that US Military is the strongest and most capable fighting force in the world. But soldiers, sailors, and Marines are not policy makers, and it is a citizen’s duty to question failed policies that have squandered lives and resources.

    [report]

    Posted By Andy on March 5th, 2008 at 8:39 pm

     

12. 12

    I noticed you didn’t answer the question, Andy. Your non-answer to the question and ad hominem attacks speak volumes.
    Here’s the question again, specifically: how do you tangibly support our soldiers besides questioning “failed” policies and denying and denigrating a complete turnaround in Iraq in the last year by the addition of only 30,000 troops? For example, have you ever sent a contribution to military hospitals or one of the many organizations that help wounded soldiers and Marines. You don’t have to agree with the policy in Iraq to do that. It’s just the right thing to do. Military service men and women don’t like fighting wars and suffering casualties for a predominantly ungrateful and indifferent populace. I think they should all come home now because “citizens” like you, Howard, and Rachel don’t deserve their sacrifice.

    For Rachel, read this article and learn something about your democrat party http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120468439524812...

    Lastly, and quite frankly, I think Bush has been and is a lousy commander-in-chief. He has allowed our troops to be attacked by Iran with their IED’s with virtual impunity. So I’m no fan of George Bush. I just believe soldiers and Marines are caught in the middle and should be supported financially, emotionally, and spritually by we who have it so easy.

    [report]

    Posted By Tom on March 5th, 2008 at 9:17 pm

     

13. 13

    Tom, if “sanctimonious” is an ad hominem attack, so be it. You clearly “know” the only way to support the troops. And nice Fox News “democrat” (sic) party reference. Did you come up with that yourself? Or did Rush tell you to start using that term?

    I did answer your question, but you didn’t like my answer. And I do donate to veteran’s organinizations, even before this war. Why? Because my Dad was a veteran who understood the cost of service. But I don’t think you do.

    As I said, previously, you seem to think that you’re the judge of who supports the troops and how it’s OK to do it. I never criticized this group for their work with the Marines. But do I agree with the Lt.Col.? No.

    And if you’d like to cite statistics from an organization (the WSJ) that has supported the invasion of Iraq since the beginning, and through its many revisions, you might want to find an outlet that has more credibility. Think Bill Kristol supports the troops?

    I’ve been clear–I’m not “ungrateful” and certainly not “indifferent”, and I resent your assertion. I’m sorry you believe that criticizing policy equates not supporting the troops because there is a huge difference. Life is not a tidy black and white, “with us or agin’ us”, half-hour television show. Though it’s easier to go through life that way.

    [report]

    Posted By Andy on March 6th, 2008 at 4:58 am

     

14. 14

    Re: post 8- Andy, this is the real “inconvenient truth”, we are and will be Muslim terrorist targets. I just spoke to a man Sunday who lives in a Muslim country, and he said it is widely known that Muslim men are told to come here, find and marry American women to gain instant long term legal status, to increase their numbers and breed more Muslim boys. Nothing Polyanna about that. I know first hand it’s happening, one of my friends is engaged to a Muslim man.

    And I don’t drive a Lexus, not that we can’t afford it, I’m just more sensible than that, and there is no yellow ribbon on my 3 yr. old Toyota.

    [report]

    Posted By Diane on March 6th, 2008 at 7:16 am

     

15. 15

    OMG.

    [report]

    Posted By Andy on March 6th, 2008 at 7:26 am

     

16. 16

    diane
    forgive me if i dont take what you have heard through the “patriots ministry” as god’s own truth especially when you say something like “Muslim men are told to come here, find and marry American women to gain instant long term legal status, to increase their numbers and breed more Muslim boys.” thats racism diane, clearly you are a racist.

    [report]

    Posted By howardx on March 6th, 2008 at 7:33 am

     

17. 17

    Howard,
    Clearly, you are clueless.

    [report]

    Posted By Joe on March 6th, 2008 at 8:17 am

     

18. 18

    Dear Andy,
    Just so we’re clear, ad hominem attacks are personal insults to “buttress” your argument when you have no facts to back it up. Get it? And your retorts are full of ad hominem. Therefore …

    You may not like what the Lt. Col. said, but he spent four years in the Anbar Province establishing police agencies and working with Sunnis and Shiites, among other accomplishments. He knows far more than you or I about the situation in Iraq, and has sacrificed far more than you or I are willing. Thank God there are men like him around.

    “I never loved the soldier until there was a war.” from Freedom Never Cries

    Try reading this article by Alan Dershowitz (Harvard law professor and no war monger) http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120450617910806...
    Then maybe you’ll be less vitriolic and more supportive of those on the front lines. And maybe not.

    Bye

    [report]

    Posted By Tom on March 6th, 2008 at 8:31 am

     

19. 19

    Just for clarification, it wasn’t throught the Patriot Ministry that I met that man. I am not a racist. Islam is a religion with members of many different races. Again, we all have the choice of gathering information, and making a decision on what to believe. Your choice is differnet than mine. Thankfully, we have the freedom of speech, religion, etc. here in America. This is my last post.

    [report]

    Posted By Diane on March 6th, 2008 at 9:20 am

     

20. 20

    Tom, do you read anything besides the WSJ? It explains where all your ‘facts’ come from. You’re making this too easy…

    You mean the Alan Dershowitz, who championed the war in the first place?
    http://www.alandershowitz.com/publications/docs...

    And again, please explain how keeping our troops there for years this has to do with supporting the troops? Seems to me that a planned exit strategy with an international commitment supports them more than your solution of endless occupation.

    [report]

    Posted By Andy on March 6th, 2008 at 11:48 am

     

21. 21

    Re #14: Oh my God, did you really just say that?

    “I know first hand it’s happening, one of my friends is engaged to a Muslim man.”

    You’re right. You are eminently qualified to assess the threat to the homeland, and to become Immigration Czar. Have you informed your friend that she is going to be harboring a terrorist who will immediately impregnate her with a little Muslim? And how did she take the news?

    As for Tom: I am about to ask you an honest, respectful question. Seriously, no sarcasm intended. I am often confused by the argument that being angry about a war is the same thing as insulting the troops. I swear to god, I don’t understand why one equals the other. So my two questions, to which I would love a serious response: (1) if a government declares war, does that mean that its people are *morally* bound to support that war? To put a shoe on another foot, were the Japanese morally bound to support the emperor after Pearl Harbor? (2) If it is acceptable to express discontent with a war, and to express concern that a mistake has been made, then how should a citizen go about it in such a way that protects the troops?

    [report]

    Posted By Rachel Powers on March 6th, 2008 at 2:05 pm

     

22. 22

    OMG - Did that really happen? 19 Muslim terrorists, lived among us undetected, highly organized, boarded 4 airplanes and willingly flew suicide missions into 3 American buildings, killing thousands of Americans?

    Wake up- It would be great if Diane’s source was wrong, but I doubt it is. Living with your head in the sand, is just plain stupid.

    [report]

    Posted By mcb on March 6th, 2008 at 3:02 pm

     

23. 23

    Dear Rachel,
    Fair questions. First, though, the premise of your questions is not accurate. Being angry about a war is not insulting the troops. It’s how that anger is expressed when the troops are in harm’s way — by no choice of their own — that’s at issue here and in many other forums.
    As to your questions: (1) No. The government is run by men and women who make decisions that, in the case of war, should be based on threats, real or perceived, to national security. It’s their job. That doesn’t make the decision moral, just constitutional and prudent (or not).
    (2) Many ways to express disapproval the “right” way. Vote. Contact elected representatives. Have open and respectful discussions (like you and I are having now). The problem with rank disapproval in a public forum like this and elsewhere — because the internet is so open and accessible — it demoralizes the troops (in harm’s way) who may read the posts and encourages the enemy who may read the posts. And that, among many other things, puts a lot of stress on military families who are already paying a price that neither you nor I are willing to pay.
    I could go on, but I think you get the point. Meanwhile, I encourage you to read Dershowitz’s op-ed piece here http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120450617910806...

    The piece is frightening, and Dershowitz is no war monger. The question I would ask Dershowitz is “Who’s we?” It’s the U.S. military, not him or his friends in academia.

    Pray for our troops. Tell them thanks for being on the front lines. Send a contribution to Walter Reed. None of those choices means you support the war. But at least you’ll stand out from the crowd that says “we support the troops but don’t support the war” and really don’t do a darn thing to support the troops in a tangible way (James 2:14-17).

    You take care.

    [report]

    Posted By Tom on March 6th, 2008 at 3:20 pm

     

24. 24

    Everyone loses in war.

    [report]

    Posted By Jim Hall on March 6th, 2008 at 4:47 pm

     

25. 25

    Tom, I agree with your last paragraph in its entirety. The rest is pompous malarkey.

    Perhaps Senator Webb, who might know a thing or two about supporting the troops, should remove this from his website:

    http://webb.senate.gov/newsroom/record_article....;

    or, how dare he publicly question the success of the surge?

    http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/b...

    And no matter how many times you say Dershowitz “is no warmonger”, it doesn’t make it true (see #18 above).

    [report]

    Posted By Andy on March 6th, 2008 at 7:26 pm

     

26. 26

    Tom–
    I appreciate the response. A few points/questions:

    * Your comments about sending a contribution to Walter Reed, etc., are well taken. I’m not going to pretend that the majority of anti-war folk are sending checks to military hospitals. (I will say, however, that I’ve always been happy to pay my taxes, and have NEVER complained when they’ve gone up, and even though I know that money goes to projects that are ludicrous, I’m very, very happy to know that some money–not enough, apparently–goes towards VA services)

    * I ask that you consider that an *enormous* number of Americans feel *exactly* as if they are being told that anger at the war means that they are insulting the troops. And I ask you to consider that an equally enormous number of Americans feel as if their patriotism is questioned on a daily basis, simply because they feel deeply about this issue. I would hope that you would be willing to acknowledge that their patriotism *is* questioned by some, and that this is a vicious response to political disagreement.

    * It’s not that all of the people against the war want to be cynical, anti-authority college students for the rest of their lives (though there may be some who do). It isn’t that they are pacifists (personally, I enjoyed watching the Taliban get an ass-kicking, and I wish we still had the numbers over to continue in earnest.) It is simply that many of us, when a war with Iraq was first raised as a possibility in early 2002, had a very ominous feeling. And we thought, “oh no, please no. Can’t we look a little longer at Saudi Arabia?” (not that we wanted to go to war there either, but it seemed like that was a link that the administration wasn’t exploring properly). A lot of us felt, from the beginning, that it would be a tragic mistake that would cost many, many more lives (and limbs), both American and Iraqi, than if we continued with diplomatic efforts spearheaded by the UN. And many of us remember how every single disaster in Iraq was predicted before hand, and so we feel extraordinarily frustrated, as if we are watching a train go over the cliff and can’t do anything about it.

    * Voting is important. You are right. I did that. Contacting elected representatives is also crucial. I did that as well, and have the computer-generated letters of acknowledgment to prove it. Unfortunately, we went to war anyway. So my efforts didn’t change the course of history, but I’m a big girl and understand that that’s life.

    * After the voting and letter-writing, what should I do if I still feel a tremendous sense of urgency about this war? What do I do if the carnage is deeply distressing to me–as I’m sure it is to you–and I feel that there is a way to limit it? If I see other options? Aren’t I *morally obligated* to act accordingly if it means that lives could be saved? What do I do if I am a 16 years old, too young to vote, and I’ve got two cousins in the war and I want them home? Do I just say, “well, we’re there now, so I’ve just got to keep my mouth shut”? Imagine that I have lost my opportunity to prevent a war that I feel is unjust: what if I feel that I can help to shorten it by half, and therefor save half of the lives? What do I do if I feel ethically bound to do what I can to shorten the war?

    * I often hear, “well however we got there, we are there NOW, so we need to win.” I agree, in that I would like to be able to see this end with a victory. But what if I don’t believe that it is possible? What if I think that there may be *other* ways of dramatically reducing the risk of terrorism? What do I do if I feel very strongly that, upon finding oneself in a hole, one should resist the urge to keep digging? I’m not trying to be flippant, I’m just trying to find out what a person should do. Perhaps, to many against the war, simply accepting the status quo feels like a violation of moral principle. So how does this get expressed in a serious way?

    * For me, what it comes down to is that the “vote, donate, write letters” suggestion, while crucial, denies opponents of the war of powerful means of political expression. It’s patting them on the the head, and saying “there there, I understand, now just shut up and disagree quietly.” It is, in essence, saying “look, I don’t have a problem with free speech; I just wish that you wouldn’t exercise it right now.”

    Americans *did* vote, and got a new congress. But we are still in Iraq. So what sort of effective political action do we have left?

    And one last question: Aren’t the soldiers adults, and therefore able to put anti-war comments in an appropriate context? Also, when you say that we should vote, and the result is a massive repudiation that results in republicans losing congress, doesn’t that hurt the troops’ morale? Should we stop voting if we think that we will upset the troops?

    [report]

    Posted By Rachel Powers on March 6th, 2008 at 7:44 pm

     

27. 27

    Dear Rachel,
    After wading through that diatribe, I would answer your last question with a definite “yes, in your case”. That’s the other good thing you personally could do.

    Dear Andy,
    “pompous malarkey”? I’m impressed with your rhetorical skills. Did you pick them up in 3rd or 4th grade?

    Cheers to both of you. Perhaps you two should get together at Starbucks. You’re a good match.

    As for me, this discussion has gone beyond pointless and it would be foolish to continue. Adios.

    [report]

    Posted By Tom on March 6th, 2008 at 9:49 pm

     

28. 28

    Well, I spent some time on the ground in Ramadi, in what is commonly called Al Anbar province. I was with 2nd Battalion 5th Marines, Weapons Company.
    If there’s ANYONE who’s seen more shit over there than the Marines I fought with, then I wanna meet ‘em. Because that’s one hard son-of-a-bitch. There are good things about our presence in Iraq. I had Iraqis thanks me personally for ousting Saddam. I saw gold plated bolts on lightposts, where the people outside the palaces had no running water. I’ve met Saddam’s turture victims, and women who still don’t know where their husbands are. I saw the improvements in Ramadi. Children going back to school. Girls, especially, whom some factions want to ban from attending school, or driving. So let not mak eit out to be black and white. We STILL should not be there. Sorry. Its been a hard thing for me to deal with. I sent a dozen buddies home in body bags. I know what human guts smell like. I’ve seen civillians grinded up like hamburger so that you couldn’t tell if the body part you’re looking at was part of a penis or an ear.
    I don’t just support THE troops. I support MY troops. As a Marine Sergeant or Corporal, you lead men into these fights. Your job is to get them back out alive.
    These are my troops. My friends. Men I fought and bled with. Bring them home.
    They’ve had enough.
    In 20 years Iraq will be a huge tourist attraction. “A Marine died here on this spot 20 years ago.” Should we leave them hanging? No. We need to ensure a stable transition, but that’s not an excuse to linger and steal gas while companies like Chevron and Kellog Brown and Root make record BILLIONS. Do you know how many Wendy’s or Subways there are in the middle east now versus 10 yeard ago? check it out for yourself. Do your own homework. Research, research, research.
    Don’t ever talk bad about those boys over there either. They believe in their hearts that they are protecting the farm from terrorists. Maybe because that’s what Fox News and CNN have been telling them. I was in gun battles or missions that were on CNN and Fox. Guess what? You will never believe this…they both told their own version. a version that somehow seemed to parallel their political/corporate ties. God Bless America. Support the troops. All that. just let our sons and daughters, our moms and dads come back home. Screw oil, buy bio-diesel if you really want to support the troops while saving the American economy and the environment. Yeah, right. Next week you’ll still be standing at the pump feeding the machine of war with your ever-so-convenient paypass or whatever. Out.

    [report]

    Posted By Phil Northcutt on March 6th, 2008 at 9:52 pm

     

29. 29

    Tom–
    I’m a little dismayed: I hadn’t meant that to be a diatribe, I wasn’t angry when I wrote it, and every single question was an honest one. But your response was downright nasty.

    I really wanted to know: how does a citizen express displeasure with a policy, once the voting is over?

    [report]

    Posted By Rachel Powers on March 6th, 2008 at 10:10 pm

     

30. 30

    Rachel,
    Do what ever you can. Do something. It seems like maybe you’re doing it, just by creating discussion. The last thing I ever want to see is a war that we ALL agree on. When we engage in any task that has such a huge effect on human life, there should always be someone asking “…are you sure this is right?”
    And if you don’t think its right, you’re obligated to shout it form the rooftops.

    [report]

    Posted By Phil Northcutt on March 6th, 2008 at 10:20 pm

     

31. 31

    Amen, Phil.

    [report]

    Posted By Andy on March 7th, 2008 at 6:25 am

     

32. 32

    It may have come from out of left field, but I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that Tom up and blew a gasket. I suppose the questions hit a major nerve. He couldn’t come up with a single answer that didn’t amount to a request that those against the war submit to group-think, and willingly relinquish their right to free speech, all in the interest of not rocking the boat.

    Members of the armed forces are dealing with the most *appalling* violence, but we can’t ask that this country put an end to it because it might lead to hurt feelings…?!?

    [report]

    Posted By Rachel Powers on March 7th, 2008 at 7:53 pm

     

33. 33

    It is sad that a servicemember may feel hurt by the social conflict created by a war they may be participating in. This is something that I personally have dealt with myself, and has caused me alot of heartache recently. But I signed up for military service as a volunteer.
    I should have considered the very real ramifications of joining an organization whose business is killing. Alot of kids join for vocational training or college money. If you are foolish enough to join the military for those reasons without considering the consequences then you may find yourself dealing with a lot of psychological and personal issues. It sucks to join the military for college tuition only to find to get your college money you had to kill other human beings in some brutal and gruesome way, while your comrades kill and die by your side.
    There is such a thing as taking personal responsability for your actions. Even if you were unable to predict the outcome of your decision making.
    I joined to be a Marine. I thought about the life and death thing alot. But I never knew. I never REALLY knew. Not until I experienced it. Even now I don’t know if I would have chosen differently.
    I hope the things I say about the war don’t hurt our veterans. But I have an obligation to my country, my family, and myself to tell the truth. I fought for the American way of life. In theory, this also includes freedom of speech.

    [report]

    Posted By Phil Northcutt on March 7th, 2008 at 11:19 pm

     

34. 34

    HELLO for those who continuously denigrate the mission in iraq, you may have heard the recent study that was conducted by what I believe was harvard college. The study was based on the reaction by terrorist in Iraq who would commit violence. When some unaware anti-war person would use very negative words about the war, this seemed to motivate the terrorist to make more extreme attacks. So be careful what you say it actually may embolden the terrorists. Also if you read the transcripts from the latest message from Osama bin laden, he even said that Iraq is the central place for the muslims to remove the Nation of Israel from there land and return it to the Palestines. Does that not concern you if we leave? Also if you use this criteria that we should leave iraq because we are losing the war there, than you should also judge the mission in Afghanastan in the same way.

    [report]

    Posted By piet on March 24th, 2008 at 11:25 pm

     

35. 35

    piet
    that sounds like bullshit, got a link to the study?

    [report]

    Posted By howardx on March 25th, 2008 at 7:56 am

     

36. 36

    God forbid that, instead, we embolden stupid people in office who like to start stupid wars. Let’s do a study: when a population shuts up and doesn’t scream about a stupid war, how many war-mongering politicians are emboldened?

    [report]

    Posted By Kelson on March 25th, 2008 at 7:56 am

     

37. 37

    hey piet–
    There’s another study that you should know about: it’s pretty big, and has participants in almost every country on the globe. It’s a longitudinal study, as well. Governments have been super cooperative, too, from King George, to Louis XIV, to Pinochet, on and on and on. Basically, it’s proven that an informed and vocal populace is, like, really important to the health of a nation, no matter what views are being expressed. It’s also given us plenty of evidence that a very popular–and effective–method of quieting down troublesome citizens is to explain to them that the integrity of the nation depends on them shutting up. You know, like “Hey Colonials, don’t you revere your British sovereign? Don’t you think that this is a really inconvenient and dangerous time to start doing something as silly as refusing to pay your taxes? I mean, the survival of the Crown is at stake!” Or “Come on, my fellow Germans, these are dangerous times! And they require that we get our hands a little dirty! We’re under assault by a group that has NO NATION, NO BORDERS, and they insinuate themselves into every aspect of our lives, even through intermarriage and lax immigration laws! Under normal circumstances, of COURSE we wouldn’t conduct an unsanctioned invasion of Poland, or use stress positions on those pesky Resistance members, but the survival of the Fatherland is at stake!”

    I don’t CARE if those examples don’t measure up to the present day situation, in your mind. Principles aren’t always convenient! Democracy is messy! Haven’t I heard that somewhere before?

    [report]

    Posted By Rachel Powers on March 25th, 2008 at 8:59 am

     

38. 38

    …”Be careful what you say, it may embolden the terrorists.” So, if we all shut up, the terrorists will dejectedly lay down their weapons and take up Sudoku?

    Public opinion will help shape the policies that lead to a stable Iraq, and without vocal disagreement about those policies, the current failed policies will continue. Whispering in your congressperson’s ear will do nothing. This “go-it-alone” (don’t give me that crap about coalition) policy put forth by Bush/McCain/et al. cannot succeed without HUGE U.S. casualties for an undetermined length of time. Effecting change to that policy is supporting the troops.

    And, had we focused our efforts on Afghanistan, Al-qaeda wouldn’t be in Iraq now.

    [report]

    Posted By Andy on March 25th, 2008 at 9:34 am

     

39. 39

    “To have war you must first have profit to be made.” -Sun Tzu, “The Art of War”
    We are in Iraq for oil. We are in Afghanistan for the natural gas pipeline. Make not mistake. Anybody here ever heard of Darfur? That real terror.
    There aren’t enough “terrorists” in the world to cause the damage that politicians have. Do you think that terrorists have the power to strip you of your constitutional rights? Never. But the power-hungry petroleum and defense interests that are making record-breaking profits while our country slides into a recession (or “slow down” as Bush called it) can easily (lobbying) strip you of your rights, as you rally behind “the cause” to destroy our unseen enemies. The Patriot Act has done more damage to our country than all the terrorists in the world ever could. You can quote me on that.
    And most people “don’t even know what the hell an Al Queda is”. There are hundreds of real terrorist groups out there. Al Queda is one of them. But to blame every security issue on Al Queda is just rediculous. AL Queda was trained by the CIA to fight the Russians when they tried to seize the natural gas in Afghanistan.
    I could go on forever so I’ll spare you, but the point is that Washington is using Al Qaeda as an excuse to fleece the nation. Check the price of gas and the potroleum companies’ tickers. You are paying at the pump, while your servicemembers pay in blood. Get a grip. Screw everybody’s “feelings.” Even mine. Kelson’s right about that one.
    Doing what’s right is hard… in so many ways.
    Iraq will eventually stabilize just like Vietnam. With or without us.

    [report]

    Posted By Phil Northcutt on March 25th, 2008 at 12:25 pm

     

40. 40

    I guess I hit a nerve. Well the fact that your responses to my critic has got some of you upset, shows me that you were able to speak up without retaliation from the Govt. Speak up! but words do mean things. Have you heard the saying “loose lips sink ships”. To Andy, to answer your statement, that if we all shutup the terrorist would go away and play soduko, I will admit that would not happen but in the same way if we leave or never even went to iraq or afghanastan than they would have left us alone. The terrorist also will use whatever means that would help them win this war. The constant negative images from the liberal media encourages the enemy to continue using tactics that work to turn the American people against the war. For example if you have notice that most troops have been killed by ied’s. An ied will possibly hit one vehicle in a convoy injuring or killing our troops. So if the enemy can kill a few of our troops on a semi regular basis they can discourage us to the point of wanting to leave. The enemy is aware that if they take little bites, with these ied’s and bombings because of what they know from listening to our media and the anti-war folks, they will continue, it has been more difficult for them to kill american troops so they are trying there old tactics by killing innocent civilian, of course this is what got them in trouble with the sunni iraqs who turned against them. Maybe they think this will actually work for those over here who are looking at any form of violence in iraq that would support there anti-war views. For those who think we are there for the oil, than answer me this question, What are we doing in Afghanastan, Kosovo, Phillipines, Germany, Korea? Some of you may say because we want to dominate the world, but obviously some of these places are not because of oil. Speaking on Afghanastan, do you think that this is a worthy war? If you think this is a worthy war than some of your arguments seems to fall on deaf ears, unless you think he went in there to monopolize the camel industry, than I would have to say you have to be into the conspiracy theories. As we are all aware about the gas prices going up steadly lining the pockets of the big oil tycoons and I guess the Neo-cons, just remember one thing the western european countries (most of those who oppose us invading iraq) are paying 3 times the amount that we pay here. Iraq is a central part of the war or terrorism just ask Osama bin laden. I am glad I found this opportunity to sound off and it is nice to get responses, and ultimately we all want to be able to continue to voice our opinion’s and have the freedom to do so. So thanks so much for our wonderful troops who will give that to us. God Bless

    [report]

    Posted By piet on March 28th, 2008 at 1:34 am

     

41. 41

    Piet–

    * Gas prices in western europe are almost exactly twice what they are here–not 3x. And they are paying that much because european governments have high gas taxes, not because of some sort of karmic retribution caused by not supporting the war.

    * Just because people disagree with you, and do it vociferously on a website, doesn’t mean that all of our arguments fall apart. The fact is, you are still here telling us to keep our mouths shut, just like every other conservative. Free speech isn’t some luxury that we can only enjoy when we aren’t in a conflict.

    * You want us to think about what we say? We do. But it says something that you think that the terrorists are paying waaaaaay more attention to us than the US government is.

    * As for “monopolizing the camel industry”: you’re all class, Piet. Why don’t you extend some of that consideration that you save for the troops to the countries that are being overrun?

    * Is Afghanastan a worthy war? In my opinion, it made a hell of a lot of sense to go after bin Laden. Remember him? If some Taliban were crushed in the process, I didn’t shed a tear. It’s a completely different country, with completely different political considerations, and a completely different rationale for military action. All those countries with camels are different, you know.

    [report]

    Posted By Rachel Powers on March 28th, 2008 at 7:57 am

     

42. 42

    Osama Bin Laden?! Are you serious? Do you really think they are looking for Osama Bin Laden? I’m so sure. No one can hide form the military might of the United States. Nobody. If they want you they come and get you in your sleep.
    The intelligence capabilites that our country posesses are far beyond your wildest imagination.
    I think that a positive aspect of the war is the effect it will have on Iraqi society. They will experience more freedom. I know this for a fact. I have seen it in action.
    People have always ranted about removing Isreal. Isreal is mighty military force in and of itself, well respected in the military community for their superior tactics and real-world successes.

    “…European countries are paying 3 times what we pay here…” So what.
    Saudi’s are paying $0.60-$0.70 a gallon!!!!!
    They’re killing eahcother in Iraq because that’s what you do in a CIVIL WAR.
    Americans have almost no knowledge whatsoever of the tribal factions in iraq because the media proudly proclaims all the enemy to be Al Queda. Do you know the difference between a contracted insurgent and a mujahadeen?
    I can tell the difference by the shoes they wear and the weapons and equipment I strip off their dead bodies. I can tell the difference by the types of tactics and military maneuvers they attempt. By the kind of fighting they engage in.
    You can tell by the news reports that are wholly inaccurate anyways.
    I respect your opinion and I’m glad you’re sounding off. To have this discussion is a patriotic act. So you’re doing your part.
    The truth of the sitiuation is that there will continue to be bloodshed in Iraq, probably for a thousand years. The reasons for fighting right now, though are to get a piece of the Iraq pie. Use your head. If they don’t fight for it now and win a piece, they will be mucled out later, and the tribe itself will suffer economically and will become victim to more powerful tribes, who fought harder or bought more weapons or hired more Syrian contractors.
    By the way, conspiracy is as old as the concept of government itself. If you don’t believe governments are well versedin the ancient art of conspiracy then you know nothing about what a government is. Of course you’ve probably never worked as an tasctical operator going into somoene’s house in the middle of the night to snatch them out of their sleep and make them disappear, so its probably all fiction to you.
    I love and respect our troops in a deep way. I feel their pain. We need to bring them home. They are good, honorable men and women who will always give their all to protect and defend our country. They fight wherever Americans asks them to. Shame on America for sending them somewhere without knowing first what was really going on.

    [report]

    Posted By Phil Northcutt on March 28th, 2008 at 8:10 am

     

43. 43

    Piet–

    A carriage return is not just a place to turn in your horse-drawn cart. Try one sometime.

    [report]

    Posted By Andy on March 28th, 2008 at 12:15 pm

     

44. 44

    The desperation of war supporters is painfully clear in this string: like optimists who watch the stock market for any sign of a daily uptick in order to suggest that the underlying, enduring problems in the US economy have been trumped by that afternoon’s good news. Several suggest that we’re actually winning the war. No. 4 tells us any reputable journalist will say the surge has worked. And then comes this . . . .

    Bush: Upsurge in Violence a ‘Defining Moment’ for Iraq
    http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-03-28-voa52...

    So now “surge” has been replaced by “upsurge.” None of this means the U.S. won’t wait it out, of course–for 100 years if necessary, says John McCain. The question is only, “At what price?”

    [report]

    Posted By Will Swaim on March 28th, 2008 at 1:14 pm

     

45. 45

    …speaking of which…I apologize for not checking my spelling. I just get so excited.
    The Markets…geez. The entire US machine called America is losing its value.
    The whole darned thing is slipping down the slope while politicians huff and puff and bluff. Soon the dollar won’t be worth a thing, and foreign interests will have bought us all up, company by company, acre by acre. Maybe then someone will consider this more than a “slowdown.” Chasing a made-up enemy called terrorism is leaving us open to the only kind of attack that could really hurt us. An economic attack. They will buy us up and buy us out, all while the eyes of America stare intently at Fox or CNN telling us the danger is in the Middle East.
    Sure, there IS danger there. But the real threat is the one that comes silently.

    [report]

    Posted By Phil Northcutt on March 28th, 2008 at 1:46 pm

     

46. 46

    so, no link to the “study” you mentioned piet?

    [report]

    Posted By howardx on March 28th, 2008 at 3:21 pm

     

47. 47

    Here is the link you’ve been asking for. It’s the Harvard University Study recently released. It made only some of the news stations. Imagine if the results had been the other direction, we would have heard NOTHING else for days. It supports what has been said in many of these postings that say the terrorists ARE watching us. We wish it weren’t true, but it is.

    http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/iraq/2008/0...

    [report]

    Posted By Diane on March 28th, 2008 at 5:33 pm

     

48. 48

    a. thats a link to usnews and world report NOT the harvard study, the study linked to in the article is by the national bureau of economic research NOT harvard. i have to assume you didnt actually read the article you linked to diane or you would know it WASNT what you claimed. i await a link to the HARVARD study or i call bullshit on this whole “scary terrorists watch our tv” crap youre peddling.

    [report]

    Posted By howardx on March 28th, 2008 at 6:36 pm

     

49. 49

    I did, it was, and here’s the proof. If YOU read it Howard you would see it was a studdy done by two Harvard economists, the paper was written by a Harvard student, but PUBLISHED by the NBER. I said it was a Harvard study, and it is. Here is the first part for those who wish to short cut the link process.

    Are Iraqi Insurgents Emboldened by Antiwar Reporting?
    Economists say their study, with caveats, finds some linkages
    By Alex Kingsbury
    Posted March 12, 2008

    Are insurgents in Iraq emboldened by voices in the news media expressing dissent or calling for troop withdrawals from Iraq? The short answer, according to a pair of Harvard economists, is yes.

    In a paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, the authors are quick to point out numerous caveats to their findings, based on data from mid-2003 through late 2007.

    Yet, their results show that insurgent groups are not devoid of reason and unresponsive to outside pressures and stimuli. “It shows that the various insurgent groups do respond to incentives and shows that a successful counter insurgency strategy should take that reality into account,” says one of the paper’s coauthors, Jonathan Monten, a postdoctoral fellow at Harvard’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.

    The paper “Is There an ‘Emboldenment’ Effect in Iraq? Evidence From the Insurgency in Iraq” concludes the following:

    In the short term, there is a small but measurable cost to open public debate in the form of higher attacks against Iraqi and American targets.
    In periods immediately after a spike in “antiresolve” statements in the American media, the level of insurgent attacks increases between 7 and 10 percent.
    Insurgent organizations are strategic actors, meaning that whatever their motivations, religious or ideological, they will respond to incentives and disincentives.

    [report]

    Posted By Diane on March 28th, 2008 at 7:54 pm

     

50. 50

    OK, I’m convinced: Crush All Dissent!

    [report]

    Posted By Rachel Powers on March 28th, 2008 at 8:31 pm

     

51. 51

    While my buddy and pal howie is patiently waiting for a study that is easily accessed with google, I’ve been waiting two weeks for him to let me know how his life has been ruined because Bush is President. He likes to be tough and demand things of others, denegrade religion, but he’s not much for contributing anything.

    Interesting debate glad most of it has been above the belt with only a few salacious comments that are unwarranted but understandable in the heat of the arguments.

    [report]

    Posted By LBRez on March 28th, 2008 at 9:04 pm

     

52. 52

    Well, that’s okay LBRez, cuz no German lives had been ruined either while their war was going well, too. That is, no *real* Germans’ lives had been ruined…

    Doh. Violated Godwin’s law again… Dammit!

    [report]

    Posted By Kelson on March 28th, 2008 at 11:36 pm

     

53. 53

    diane, thats not a “harvard” study then is it? its a study done by a harvard student for the nber, quite a misrepresentation if you ask me.

    lbrez
    go back and read my comment, i never said MY life had been ruined, i said the country had been ruined by 8 years of republican rule but i think you knew that. if you want me to list the things the republicans have ruined in the last 8 years i’ll be happy to, lets start with the value of the dollar and move on from there. give it up dittohead you’ll lose this one.

    [report]

    Posted By howardx on March 29th, 2008 at 7:54 am

     

54. 54

    the value of the dollar declined
    gas prices soaring (remember bush saying he would “jawbone” the saudis?)
    a major american city destroyed, remains destroyed years later.
    food prices soaring
    food safety an issue (due to the repub penchant for letting businesses regulate themselves in return for campaign contributions)
    4000 dead soldiers
    unemployment way up
    rule of law ignored by white house
    i could go on if necessary

    [report]

    Posted By howardx on March 29th, 2008 at 8:16 am

     

55. 55

    i think i will

    the country lied into an unecessary and probably illegal war
    bush administration spying on americans BEFORE 9/11
    on the brink of a recession if not a depression (again due to the republican “free market” penchant)
    healthcare costs soaring if not completely unavailable for some.
    international position severely degraded due to cowboy diplomacy and the “bush doctrine”
    again i could continue

    ps rez
    i “denigrate” religion not “denigrade” i dont think thats actually a word.

    [report]

    Posted By howardx on March 29th, 2008 at 8:24 am

     

56. 56

    Howardx,
    You are absolutely correct. The country is an absolute mess. The Bush administration has wrecked it. I voted for Bush so you can blame me, too.
    I believed the crap they spewed. But after going serving this administration I can tell you firsthand, its all manipulation of information, propaganda, and just plain lies. But so what?
    Bush’s friends and business associates will have made off with hundreds of billions. Enough to ensure security for their bloodlines for hundreds of years.
    You only have to watch a little TV to see what people will do for a few thousand dollars.
    Imagine what these crooked f!$%ers will do for billions.
    If we continue on this path we will be made vulnerable to a hostile takeover.
    We will be financially unable to defend ourselves. We will be forced to borrow from the Federal Reserve Bank, again. The FRB (private parties) will “own” us all over again. Then we will be forced to pay extra taxes to them just like we do now (IRS).

    [report]

    Posted By Phil Northcutt on March 29th, 2008 at 10:25 am

     

57. 57

    The terrorists are also emboldened when we refuse to shoot into crowds at them.
    Maybe we should start shooting them wherever they are instead of using
    fire control discipline.
    It seems just as silly to me to suggest we attempt to restrict our own freedom of speech.
    Free speech is one of the most powerful weapons man wields.

    [report]

    Posted By Phil Northcutt on March 29th, 2008 at 10:35 am

     

58. 58

    Say, Diane..are you single? (ref post 14) I have some Muslim buddies who are looking to come over here and interbreed to spawn terrorist babies to create havoc at day care centers throughout the country…oh, crap…your vigilance has foiled our plot. Plan B…pet shelters.

    [report]

    Posted By Andy on March 29th, 2008 at 10:44 am

     

59. 59

    HowardX, It’s almost ridiculous, your quest to read only what you want to see. Look again, this time at ALL sentences…..findings are by “a pair of Harvard economists”. Is in that excerpt. My goal was to provide the link you asked Piet for.

    My opinion: We shouldn’t crush free speech, just realize some of it does endanger our military, and know the Terrorists have internet, and may have even read what we’ve written. Interesting paradox, one of the very rights our militray fights to protect, actually endangers them.

    Andy, Your jokes are pitiful, and your nasty sarcasm is very telling. I met that man (he’s Indian) I referred to in Post 14 a few weeks ago. He is a missionary in a Muslim country. He was the one that told me that the purposeful infilitration of Muslims into America IS WIDELY KNOWN. He said we should be wary of the hidden agenda of Islam much like the 911 plot. It is a religious goal to kill the Infidels, WE ARE the infidels. Another source - a Lebanese woman, named Brigette Gabriel who immigrated to the US in ‘89. She is journalist, former middle east news anchor, author, and public speaker. She operates a 501(C)3 called “American Congress for Truth”. He latest book is: “Because They Hate: A Survivor of Islamic Terror Warns America”. She lived it, researched it beyond any of us on this blog. She quotes frightening data from the CIA but I’m sure you would not believe the CIA either.

    There are none so blind as those who will not see.

    [report]

    Posted By Diane on March 29th, 2008 at 1:23 pm

     

60. 60

    Howie thanks for finally providing the MoveOn list, I appreciate it so we can tackle these issues one at a time. Looking forward to Obama or Hillary restoring everything! The amount of blame you can place in one single person is terrific for a democracy, but I know the retort: Bush is an imperialist and with Cheney and Rove kidnapped democracy. All those poor elected Senators and Congressmen without the powers of the Legislative Branch, all those poor judges stripped of their roles in the Judicial Branch. Thank you for the confirmation and the spelling lessons. xoxo Rez

    [report]

    Posted By LBRez on March 29th, 2008 at 1:30 pm

     

61. 61

    i dont blame one person i blame the whole administration, the whole republican party and all its enablers ( that would be you rez) now that ive provided you with the list you seemed to want all you can do is mock it, not surprising really.

    diane
    a study done by “acouple of harvard ecomomists” for the nber is NOT a harvard study, its an nber study. what does the national board of economic reporting doing a study on this anyways? im sure if i looked into the org it would be full of war supporting right wingers who paid to get this study done so pro war people lke you could point to in an attempt to shut people up.

    [report]

    Posted By howardx on March 29th, 2008 at 3:04 pm

     

62. 62

    ps diane
    its a free country, if you want to live in fear, wetting your bed about the “muslim agenda” i wont stop you. i have better things to o than participate in the new cold war.

    [report]

    Posted By howardx on March 29th, 2008 at 3:07 pm

     

63. 63

    So we took out a cruel disctator who killed thousands of innocent victims, just like we did, when soldiers and marines were given instructions to shoot at anyone wearing a burka. This soldier’s statement shows the “don’t tell” attitude that is brewing in our country, in our churches, in our community. We’re told to just shut up and “support the troops,” but who are the troops supporting? It’s not about whether we won or lost the war, it’s about whether it was just, or as the saying goes, “how you play the game.” And as for our “occupation” in Iraq, it’s not about whether you have a job or not, but how you conduct your job. There are business men who make millions from stealing or back handed deals to get to the top. But should we ignore, the innocent by-standards, the fallen Iraqi civilians who were killed because they fit the profile? Should we not be criticle of our occupation, of our leaders, instead of being led by a dictatorship, that we so fought hard to take down? ….oh well that’s just war. We’re in a war against terror, remember. Well, that’s fine, and I thank our government for taking action against terrorists. But isn’t that like saying we’re in a war against “bad people,” or “criminals,” I mean no shit. Hasn’t our military been in a war against terror since the beginning and why did it take so long for them to come out and say it? It sounds for a long time like a public relations campaign or a commercial that we shouldn’t be listening to. We should be listening to the soldiers who have come back without this rosy-painted image of our military. The ones who see faults in the military and are willing to speak up and want to help do something about it, instead of white-washing everything over like everything’s fine. I have a problem with that. I have a problem with a society that either doesn’t care or becomes comfortable with itself. We should never be comfortable, just because it feels good.

    [report]

    Posted By Sean on March 29th, 2008 at 5:27 pm

     

64. 64

    Oh Diane, you are so right! And that’s why all those black men came over here from Africa, too!

    [report]

    Posted By Kelson on March 29th, 2008 at 7:07 pm

     

65. 65

    Kelson- Talk about a non-sequatore! How can you even joke about what Black people (not just men) suffered by being kidnapped and sold into slavery, sometimes by their own people, to greedy people in many countries (not just the US). To denigrate that awful blight on the worlds history to make try to make fun of someone….. that must be due to your lack of an educated dispute.

    If any of you had even one conversation with Brigitte Gabriel that I mentioned in Post 59 the lightbulb would go on. I don’t live in fear, she did for all of her childhood, barely escaped being beheaded at 13. She has studied, reported, written and spoken of it. She has a multitude of links and references to support her research, data, etc. on her website. http://www.americancongressfortruth.com

    Why don’t you spend some time reading, researching what she has to say. If any of you “we’re not worried” bunch have the credentials to dispute what she reports, then make an intelligent argument, not just irrelevant points and sarcastic, caustic remarks.

    A lot has been said about fear, and being pro-war. Just because someone is aware of a potential threat, doesn’t mean they are in fear, just prepared. I am not pro-war. I hate it, I wish it wasn’t necessary… ever. But it is. You arm chair quarter backs should not shut up, just take responsibility for what your complaints and protests could do.

    [report]

    Posted By Diane on March 29th, 2008 at 9:07 pm

     

66. 66

    Please explain to me all your book-learnin’ about the Yellow Peril, too!

    [report]

    Posted By Kelson on March 29th, 2008 at 9:41 pm

     

67. 67

    “How can you even joke about what Black people (not just men) suffered by being kidnapped and sold into slavery, sometimes by their own people, to greedy people in many countries (not just the US).”

    –actually, he was joking about your theory that sex-crazed, murderous arabs are coming to impregnate our women with mini-terrorists.

    “then make an intelligent argument, not just irrelevant points and sarcastic, caustic remarks.”

    –we’ve made a lot of them. We don’t get much in the way of a response, other than pronouncements that you are exiting the conversation once and for all.

    “A lot has been said about fear, and being pro-war. Just because someone is aware of a potential threat, doesn’t mean they are in fear, just prepared.”

    –find me the place where we said anything contradicting this.

    “You arm chair quarter backs should not shut up, just take responsibility for what your complaints and protests could do.”

    –hate to break it to you, Diane, but you are every bit the armchair quarterback yourself. Have you been involved in the fighting? No, of course not: you’ve just had some conversations with people who were. So have we.

    And for Christ’s sake, how many times do we have to explain to you that our complaints and protests are, for us, A MATTER OF CONSCIENCE? Do I think that you are a war-mongerer? A murderer? Absolutely not, but that doesn’t mean that I don’t feel that disagreeing with you may actually save some lives. And by the way, that doesn’t make me a friend of the insurgents.

    I recommend rereading comment #37.

    [report]

    Posted By Rachel Powers on March 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm

     

68. 68

    You mean the same Brigitte Gabriel who said:

    “…you cannot trust having a Muslim in office. When he has to make a decision to either be loyal to the United States or be loyal to Islam.”

    They were saying the same thing about JFK and the Pope. There are rational fears and irrational fears. There will, no doubt, be more horrific violent attacks. But ridiculous prejudices do not contribute to anything except convenient stereotypes and mob mentality…

    Sorry, Diane, no jokes and sarcasm this time. Your narrow world view is just so sad.

    [report]

    Posted By Andy on March 29th, 2008 at 10:52 pm

     

69. 69

    Oh BTW, Diane, what’s a “non-sequatore”? My 10th grade Latin teacher would not be pleased.

    [report]

    Posted By Andy on March 29th, 2008 at 11:20 pm

     

70. 70

    As I read so many of these comments, I notice a consistent thread with those who disagree with my comments, they seem to blame every thing on President Bush and republicans. You might say President Bush has started the war in Iraq because he is lining the pockets of his cronies through the large oil profits which if it is the case than I would say that is evil, and he is evil. I don’t believe that of course which maybe in some of your minds you may think I’m naive. If you agreed in the presidents decision into going into afghanastan as worthy but think the reason for him going into iraq is evil is not logical. Someone who is evil will always make decisions based on there own selfish interest and could not care less how many people are hurt. So lets talk about the Presidents reason for going into Afghanastan and iraq, 9/11 spured this on but just as in iraq there was something left undone. Osama was left in power to doing his evil deeds. He did many evil deeds before the Bush adminstration was in office and of course the worst evil after the change in adminstration happened His plan was not taken seriously enough for many years except for a few bombs. During this time (1990’s) Saddam also was not taken seriously enough, again bombing iraq for 4 or 5 days in 1998. He was still in power and was rattling his saber. After 9/11, we all felt a sense that evil has hurt our land. The possibilty that too many people where unaware of this danger from both adminstrations reveals to me that the President could not leave things undone. We have never been hit like 9/11 before and hopefully we will never get hit like that again. When President Clinton was able to find the perpetrator of the first world trade center bombing he was elated, but did you think that by arresting him was the end to this incident, of course not or if we do get Osama that the terrorist will put there weapons away, I don’t think so. Both adminstration agreed that Saddam was a problem. In fact President Clinton authorized a regime change in iraq. How do you do that ? If president Clinton went into iraq to oust Saddam obviously he would have had to also build up a large enough force to do it. I don’t think that he was willing to because of the risk of losing his popularity. When troops get killed that puts a strain on our country. We are a country of fast food and good times, who’s popular or the latest story to hit the front pages. It would never be popular to go to war for a long period of time. Just look at the swipes the democrats are taking on Sen. Mc Cains comments on the war that he would be willlins to keep the troops in there as long as 100 years to win the war. So many of us were in favor of this war, but because of the violence and “the bad news” we are growing weary. The terrorist who want to kill us are a worldwide movement perpetrated by Muslim extremists. We have to stay on the offense, if we let our guard down once than we will have another 9/11. As one comment I heard that the Patriot Act has hurt Americans more than helped them shows me how we want to go back to making it easier for these terrorist to act. One more thing, another comment I heard is that we are in the way of a civil war. (Sunni against Shite)
    Since Saddam was a Sunni, the Sunni’s had all the priveliges in that country. The shites were treated badly. This rift has always been there, but today Sunnis are working with Shites and Vice a versa. Of course there was alot of violence perpetrated by both groups earlier but this really was spured on by the Al Qaeda by blowing up the shite mosque. Today Maliki is authorizing the iraq troops to take on Sadr’s fighters in Basra. Why I bring this up is because Sadr is a shite and so is Maliki. Sadr was in iran in exile for awhile and Maliki met up with the iranian President, but he is willing to take on these terrorist even though they are shite. That is good news. Until next time, dont forget to Pray for troops.

    [report]

    Posted By piet on March 30th, 2008 at 12:14 am

     

71. 71

    Hey Piet, what’s with the straw man?

    [report]

    Posted By Kelson on March 30th, 2008 at 6:54 am

     

72. 72

    its shiite piet, not shite, not knowing that is another knock to your already dubious credibility on this topic.

    [report]

    Posted By howardx on March 30th, 2008 at 7:53 am

     

73. 73

    Hello howardx, thanks for the correction but I hope that does not close your mind to what I said, please share your thoughts, and kelson the only straw man I know is in the wizard of oz. Good news from iraq, this recent battle has come with success because Sadr is willing to stop fighting. He issued a nine point plan that sounds very encouraging, and just yesterday he refused to lay down his weapons. This is just another reason to stay tough in this battle. Reading the different papers and hearing news reports in the last week since this latest battle begun which by the way was initiate by the iraq govt. seems to spin this story negatively, like violence increases in iraq or did the iraq govt. jump the gun. As I stated before the constant negative news heard from the likes of the media and the anti -war folks does play a factor. I wonder what the papers will write about this particular good news from iraq, and I would like to hear your comments on this topic, since my credibility is in question than please straighten me out, but please use logic and not name calling, thats too easy God Bless

    [report]

    Posted By piet on March 30th, 2008 at 7:57 pm

     

74. 74

    Unfotunately, Piet, there are so many Orwellian points in your posts (failure=success) that I can’t possibly address them all, so I’ll stick with the one that grinds me the most…your beloved “Patriot Act” and the extraordinary abuse of constitutional guarantees and trashing of the Geneva convention. The idea that we can suspend basic civil liberties in an effort to win an undefined victory renders any protection you might currently feel from the “Islamofascist” threat moot.
    The extraordinary executive power that this administration claims to hold has thrashed any thoughts that they are protecting us from an external threat and has shown that they are using it for political expediency.
    We have not won, we have lost. True conservatives understand this, but fear-based, mob mentality fascists are OK with losing their rights when they know the knock on the door, the tapped phone call, or the monitored personal records won’t be theirs. For now.

    [report]

    Posted By Andy on March 31st, 2008 at 4:04 am

     

75. 75

    Way to go Piet! Take the high road, I’m with you. howardx and Andy are big on spelling and name calling which takes no courage from the anonymity of a keyboard. Andy had no response to my post accept to correct my spelling! I was a poor kid who went ot public schools in the 70’s that didn’t offer Latin. In case my poor spelling caused confusion: Non sequitur (Latin) in formal logic, is an argument where its conclusion does not follow from its premises.

    So Rachel- I was offended that Kelson would use slaves who were taken against their will, treated worse than cattle in comparison to the radical Muslims who come here WILLINGLY. I just HAVE to ask one last question. Why would that missionary lie to me, and why was it corraborated from other independant sources if it is so outrageous? And how did we not see 911 coming? Why did we not believe it was possible they could be so cunning, to use our own system of trust to run their agenda of hate? Or do you not believe they hate us.

    BTW Andy- No Catholics under the direction of the Pope or JFK ever blew up a building or high jacked planes to fly into any symbol of commerce or government. I’ve never heard any Pope instruct Catholics to kill Americans as a way to get to heaven. Brigette Gabriel has more credibility than any of you. You can not dispute her experience, her courage (face to face) and her education. If you want to stay misinformed hating your government, with your rose colored glasses on about Islam–go ahead. MY worldview is quite optimistic if the right people (congress and president) who realize who our acutally enemies are and I trust our Military. I dislike how Bush handled many things, it’s embarrassing the misinformation he AND CONGRESS based their decisions on. Of course we can have perfect hindsight to see the mistakes. The truth is we have to leave that Iraq stable.

    I spent the yesterday showing appreciation to 700+ young Marines with a huge party. As always, they were polite, strong, and courageous. That’s how I like to spend my time, off-setting the anti war folks by encouraging them. They hear it and have told us, that when people don’t support the mission they are fighting for, it feels like they aren’t supporting them. That says it all! All the negativity effects them too. I hope you would agree, they don’t deserve that.

    One high ranking officer “in the know” who has read this blog told us that you people have no idea what you’re talking about. That you are nieve and mis-informed. Who should I believe; him and Brigette Gabriel who h