Remarkable that the left wanted the memorial so we could remember how many died for the cause and then vandalized what they insisted we build. I guess it's a right-wing monument now. Good.
Hi Shoprat: Authorities don't know who attacked the monument. But I don't put it past the radicals.
I just visited Washington last month. I wish I could attend the counter-demonstrations this weekend.
Move America Forward will be joining Gathering of Eagles and on the 17th and 18th, Vets For Freedom, Iraq and Afghanistan veterans will also be on the hill.
Many people will be there to counter ANSWER.
Thanks for the mention :o)
Keep up your work, Spree!
I blogged on this today as well, I wish I could be there as well. I heard about the Sacramento rally too late to be able to attend, dang.
I also posted on that alleged dust up between Adm. Fallon and Gen. Petraeus posted at Fire Dog Lake last night.
Thanks Goat: I'll be over at your page later!
I was planning to be there ... but family matters are precluding me from going. If that changes, I will report.
Last March 17, the pro-victory contingent outnumbered the pro-peace-of-the-graveyard-and-gulag crowd by 3-to-1.
(I do understand though, that incliment weather stripped the ANSWER mobs of the fashion sheep that normally swell their ranks, back then.)
Even if the moonbats arrive in greater number, one thing is for certain ... they no longer have a monopoly on the public square, when it comes to protest.
And they can be repelled. I saw it happen on the front lawn of Halliburton, when Protest Warrior showed up in greater and greater numbers, and the moonbats eventually ceded that significant location to the pro-victory contingent there.
Blogs these days: too much quotation and not enough theory. Why are the actions of protesters so outlandish, but the actions of our military not?
Blogs these days: too much quotation and not enough theory. Why are the actions of protesters so outlandish, but the actions of our military not?
(the other post had an incorrect link)
Our military is securing life and liberty. That is not outlandish.
The protesters are securing ... what? The Legacy of Woodstock Nation?
Hey Don and others that wish we could be there with Tom in DC this weekend, send him a guest crosspost invite, I did. Michelle Malkin and HotAir will be on the ground, as well, and you know the Zombie will be lurking. This is a great week for a conservative blogger lets make the absolute best of it!
Our military is securing life and liberty. That is not outlandish.
What makes you think our militarism is securing life and liberty at the moment? Vandalism is a violation of property rights, and I think it's wrong, especially if the bit about the memorial is true. Yet this is like comparing a shoplifter with a school shooter. How many US troops are currently on trial for killing innocent Iraqis? How and when did al Qaeda come to Iraq again, anyone?
Get over yourslf, accumensh, video and pictures from many sources prove that it happened. Clueless lies don't get very far here. In answer to your question, 1. Do you have anymore Moveon talking points to offer? Try being obvious next time.
Get over yourslf, accumensh, video and pictures from many sources prove that it happened. Clueless lies don't get very far here. In answer to your question, 1. Do you have anymore Moveon talking points to offer? Try being obvious next time.
Oh I see, so everything I said what a talking point.
In case you didn't notice, the blog said protesters were "suspected" of vandalizing the Vietnam Memorial. And I just alluded to this with the same level of suspicion and said it was wrong of them if true. I don't know what I'm supposed to get over, Goat.
You're so full of yourself you can't respond to my criticism, and you simply call it a MoveOn talking point. (In fact I never read from MoveOn.org.) Why are so many neocons like you guys so unreasonable?
How many US troops are currently on trial for killing innocent Iraqis?
Very, very, very few ... and they are ON TRIAL, not promoted like they would be if they were on the side of the enemy.
Since wanton killing is counterproductive when executing a counterinsurgency strategy (as Al Quada is now finding out regarding insurgency, in spades, in al-Anbar and elsewhere), our military leadership takes this seriously.
They were even on top of Abu Grahab BEFORE the press got involved and applied the techniques of Tabloid TV to make it a household word.
And many of these, are being acquitted based on the evidence.
How and when did al Qaeda come to Iraq again, anyone?
A few were already there ... Zarqawi, who was already tied to AQ before OIF started, was in Iraq prior to the war.
Others CHOSE to come there ... and if it was to defend Iraq from us, they have a real weird -- and tragic -- way of going about it that even the Iraqis are now rejecting en masse.
Acumensch ... take a look who has been doing the "vandalism" in Iraq, via knife, AK-47, and IED. It is not the guys with the American flags on their shoulders.
Yes ... many of them are AQ.
They are not "freedom fighters", for if they were truly concerned about peace and freedom, they would not intentionally target the innocent, or use them as defilade.
The violence and carnage would IMMEDIATELY stop if the true "vandals" stopped.
And we facilitated the capture, trial, and execution of the ultimate shooter in that school ... Saddam Huessein.
Like Goat said -- take your MoveOn talking points and MoveOn. You are a prime example of one who confuses intellect with wisdom.
If you really seek peace ... protest the terrorists.
There's actually over 300 awaiting trials for abusive behavior, including murder and rape. And this is thought not to reflect the amount of incidents which happen, since polls have shown troops were very unlikely to report incidents if committed by their own units.
Yeah I agree, it's VERY counterproductive, and no other OECD country has had problems like this in policing missions. Why aren't the Gathering of Eagles protesting this? We need to seriously show everyone that the United States does not tolerate acts of abuse by its own defenders of freedom because this is part of the reason we have lost so much 'credibility' in this part of the world.
And many of these, are being acquitted based on the evidence.
These are military trials, mind you. They have an incentive to minimize the appearance of peacekeeping incompetence. Often even convicted soldiers get away with slaps on the wrist.
A few were already there ... Zarqawi, who was already tied to AQ before OIF started, was in Iraq prior to the war.
It's been said he started a 'sleeper cell' (and those are practically everywhere: Frankfurt, most recently) in Baghdad. But as a force and even a political party, AQ in Iraq came to Iraq in 2004. Have you read the 2007 NIE on Iraq. That document comes from the DIA and CIA, and it says this too.
The violence and carnage would IMMEDIATELY stop if the true "vandals" stopped.
That's diplomacy for toddlers. Terrorists are insanely stupid, reactionary, and are attracted to the violence we cause. And our violence is out of protest to how violent the terrorists are. It's pointless to say "they started it" at this point because, don't you see, Israel has never defeated the terrorists either using the same tactics and justifications?
We can't be just as reactionary as them. We should very simply be more intelligent than them. We can't count on any unreasonable paramilitary force to simply stop fighting and let us claim "victory". Did we say to the North Vietnamese that we wouldn't stop fighting until they stopped fighting? And didn't they say they wouldn't stop fighting until we stopped fighting?
If you really seek peace ... protest the terrorists.
Well, realistically, that would send the message that I also support our occupation of Iraq. So I wouldn't do that, even though terrorists are criminals and should be condemned like everyone else who commits heinous acts. The best way to influence terrorists at this point is to refrain from provocation, since they're an idiotic bunch who don't know how to settle disagreements civilly. Provocation leads to recruitment.
Acu, re: "These are military trials, mind you. They have an incentive to minimize the appearance of peacekeeping incompetence. Often even convicted soldiers get away with slaps on the wrist."
Oh. Well, that certainly explains everything! They're military trials! OMG... the fox is watching the henhouse!
Earth to Acu... military courts marshall are much [i]picker[/i] than civilian courts. You not only have the law of the land, but you also have the UCMJ.
There is a rule of thumb in the legal trade... If you are innocent, you're better off in a military court marshall, and if you are actually guilty, you're better off in a civilian court.
The reasoning behind that is that not only the law of the land but also the UCMJ has to be answered to the letter in a court marshall. Details are picked apart in a way you would not believe, so if you are actually not guilty, the evidence that supports the "guilty" view will be taken apart eventually.
But how many genuinely guilty perps have been released on a technicality by a civilian court? How many innocent people have been convicted by the emotions of a civilian jury?
In a court marshall, the judges advocate are thinking about the law and the UCMJ, not their emotions. They are thinking about the details of the evidence.
You seriously need to rethink your view of courts marshall. You have your notions ass-backwards.
Whups... italics OFF!
300 ... out of 150,000, and even many of those 300 are being acquitted?
Care to cite a source ... and compare that proportion to other wars? Methinks you won't get the spin out of this you want.
And they are in a war zone ... where even those involved in incidents like Haditha could be easily hidden from our view ... if you are right about how our military treats these matters.
The fact that these incidents are public at all, gives the lie to your assertions.
Well, realistically, that (protesting the terrorists) would send the message that I also support our occupation of Iraq. So I wouldn't do that.
Bullcookies!.
You can't even protest BOTH sides for the violence each has been part of ... let alone tell the difference between what we are doing, and what the enemy is doing?
You are inconsistent, at the least ... more likely extremely myopic in terms of judgment and morality.
Terrorists are insanely stupid, reactionary, and are attracted to the violence we cause. And our violence is out of protest to how violent the terrorists are.
Then why do they go out of their way to target their OWN, innocent people?
They are not merely reactionary ... they seek to impose totalitarian rule as far as they can. They are PROACTIVE.
Your pseudointellectualism has blinded you to true wisdom.
Military court marshalls are not any more rigorous. That's why someone who could have potentially sabotaged an entire peacekeeping effort, like those administering Abu Ghraib, were given little or no punishment.
There's at least 300 US military soldiers with upcoming trials. And none of them have been acquitted. I'll find my source when I get home.
You can't even protest BOTH sides for the violence each has been part of ... let alone tell the difference between what we are doing, and what the enemy is doing?
My assumption, and I think you would agree, is that we are more reasonable than the terrorists. I can't go to the terrorists and appeal to the rule of law, or justice, or anything like that. Maybe if I were a member of an NGO then I could. But I'm not, and so I can only say to my own government that I think its actions are making the situation worse, which NIE reports verify. And, hopefully, my government will listen.
You are inconsistent, at the least ... more likely extremely myopic in terms of judgment and morality.
Okay, so what does that make you?
they go out of their way to target their OWN, innocent people
Right, because they are insanely stupid, and they're only doing it to recruit more terrorists.
They are not merely reactionary ... they seek to impose totalitarian rule as far as they can. They are PROACTIVE.
The Jordanian government, one of the targets of their terror, has never fallen prey to these Islamo-Fascist tactics. Yes, terrorist groups have these outlandish goals and aspirations, but in the face of something emotionally appealing like US occupation that they become even enthusiastic about Jihad. They provoke Jordan all the time, yet the government remains cool, and prosecutes them as criminals, and this way they don't become as fanatical as when a Western country declares all-out war on their ideology. It's so easy to play victim when that happens, Israel is beginning to learn this, but it already has a long history of mistakes that the terrorists draw from.
Your pseudointellectualism has blinded you to true wisdom.
LoL, okay, then tell me what is true wisdom?
Acu, re: "Military court marshalls are not any more rigorous. That's why someone who could have potentially sabotaged an entire peacekeeping effort, like those administering Abu Ghraib, were given little or no punishment."
Uh... the administrators of Abu Ghraib were given the sentence that was actually comensurate with the crime... the general in command lost her job.
You are forgetting that the inmates of Abu Ghraib were frightened and embarassed, not actually "tortured" or anything similar. The people responsible for those acts are in prison.
What else do you want?
Did you want the military judges advocate to emote over how much damage was done to the effort over there? That isn't how it works, AND that was already clear to everyone involved.
The court marshall concentrates on evidence.
Emoting is for civilian courts.
Emoting is for civilian courts.
...and blog readers & writers.
Mama: "Emoting is for civilian courts."
Repsac: "...and blog readers & writers."
But not for a military court marshall. That is the distinction.
Military bearing is the order of the court marshall.
I don't know enough about courts marshall to know either way... My gut tells me that cases where it's the military against___, there could be bias in favor of the military. When the accused is part of the military too, there could be some degree of the thin green line, again doing whatever most protects the institution... Like I said, I'm not claiming to know, but I don't buy that anyone loses their degree of human failibility by virtue of choosing a noble profession. Politicians, priests, and generals have the potential to commit bad acts and do inappropriate things just like the rest of us, and I've no doubt that some do.
That said, I agree that those empaneled for a court martial are probably less swayed by appeals to emotion than civilian judges or juries.
Before 9/11 I used to hate the military. The more that I have educated myself about them the more I like 'em.
It was ignorance that marked my old beliefs...
Anyways, how are the protesters going to end the war? Are they going to give Al Qaeda knitted mittens and Iran some weapons-grade nuclear fuel?
you will find no favoritism for defendants in military courts
Commenting by HaloScan
