Matt,
All I can say, man, is very well said and Amen!!!!
-Steve O.
HOOAH
Well said Doc, give em hell!!
You're so right Froggy, you nailed it on the head. I am so damn tired of "I support the troops, but just not what they are doing." What the hell is that suppose to mean? I don’t see how they have the nerve to show up in front of the hospital and conduct themselves like that, it makes me sick.
Julio
P.S. Raider still suck, Go Broncos!!!!
I have to agree-the true colors are shining through and puts the lie to that line of pure BS.
Froggy,
While I disagree with you that one cannot oppose the war and support the troops, I completley understand your feelings, especially in the shameful light you describe.
My own feelings are hard to describe. Do I think we should have taken action in Iraq? No, I don't.
Do I think we should stay the course and remain there until the job is finished, now that we are there? Absolutley yes. I was always taught that we should clean up our own messes. Since we have taken action, we have a responsiblity to finish what we started. I have no idea if this defines me as supporting the war or not.
What I am clear on is my admiration for all of the troops over there who have taken a bad situation and are making something good... no, miraculous of it.
The problems I have in this war are not with those who are fighting it, but with the administration running it. I am, however, encouraged at the recent decsion to send 1500 additional troops to Iraq. There is safety in numbers, and I'd rather my tax money be used in over rather than undercompensating.
Another thing that bothers me is that there seems to be a design that ordinary Americans can go day to day as if there is no war. We are sheilded from the various images, and hear nothing about individual soldiers until something goes wrong. We actually have to work if we feel a responsibility to pay attention.
I'm sorry that there are those who voice their views in a way that spits in the faces of those who did the work which allowed them to do so. They do not respresent all of us who question what is going on.
I'm so disgusted with the Left now I'm speechless. Thank God you're not! Outstanding!
This nails it: "So ingrained in them is a pervasive victim status that they scour the planet searching for persecutors that they might adopt in order to maintain the façade of their own oppression. Decadence of that magnitude is only possible in a place where oppression has been completely eradicated generations into the past."
That really is true. The Greatest Generation is great because they nearly lost everything and they know what's real and what's good and they fought to preserve it. This baby boomer generation of self-centered, whining victims has always had it so easy we are pickled in our own juices of decadence.
I think we're in the midst of the creation of a new Greatest Generation. You can't say much good about the 50 years between.
FYI: We can support the men and women serving the country:
http://defendthewhitehouse.org/
I heard about these lowlifes on Laura Ingraham this morning and nearly choked on my cornflakes. Halfway through her report, I was too furious to eat.
I used words I didn't realize I knew as I talked back at the radio. Froggy, you would have approved.
They shouldn't be able to protest so close to a hospital. Those poor families having to get past the protesters is shameful.
What can those protesters be thinking? That they dishonor the soldiers and their families as they do.
Thanks for your comments Froggy, as usual you're right on.
Very nice rant Froggy. The behavior of those protesters is shameful and vile. Join Protest Warrior. Their message of cowardice and defeat has to be countered. I didn't like it when my Dad was in Vietnam and I don't like it now.
Great post, Froggy!
______________
Cary,
I wasn't going to say anything but, damn, your comments make me want to hurl! What a bunch of unadulterated sophistry!
I'm sick to death of tepid patriots. As Froggy said, "...I think we can pretty much dispense with the whole “Support the Troops but not the War” load of crap."
Yon's post is going to be defining, a call to arms for true Americans, including journalists.
When this war is won Yon will write books about LTC Kurilla and his men and the history of this great operation. The fog is clearing and fast.....
I've been reading about this all summer at FreeRepublic.com. The freepers are the ones organizing the counterprotest across the street from the Code Pinko group every Friday night 6:30-9:30. You can read about it and see photos of their signs at FreeRepublic.com. Every Friday night the freepers out number the pinkos and often have wounded soldiers walk out to thank them for showing up to protest against the pinkos. I'll be in DC this Fall and plan to be there (at the Georgia Ave entrance to Walter Reed) if it is ongoing. Anyone living in the DC area is encouraged to attend.
Dear Cary
After the "War to end all Wars" (for the historically short minded that was WW1" we virtually dis armed. Scuttled ships melted tanks and allowed riffles to rust. Along came our good buddy Hitler. We were not prepared for what was about to come to our shores.
Yes America had to come together to fight that next world war prissily because we were not prepared for war.
Women for the first time had to enter the work force in mass. Gas rationing, tire shortages and so on.
Because of that ill preparedness we suffered an average of upward to 600 causalities per day.
During Nam we got it a little better (about half) unfortunately the "guns and butter" life style allowed for the left wing filth with nothing productive to do but bitch and moan about how rotten the USA was for trying to defeat communism.
Today you Jack Asses needed to wait for a causality count that could resonate with the pubic.
You F###ed up this time. You seem to have forgotten that the USA had over 3000 of our fellow citizens murdered by Islamo butchers. Well some of us have direct contact with those murdered and we will never forget. And please don't give me that empty headed bull crap about how sadam had nothing to do with 911. That argument is so sophomoric.
Anyway today we are prepared for war that is why it doesn't look likes it here. Isn't it great to live in such a country? The next time you see a service member try thanking them for that.
David
Peg C., you have said it for me.
A new low.
But it gets lower.
Anyone recall the poll workers in Baghdad?
http://sayanythingblog.com/2005/...own-in-seattle/
Bloggers strike again. This blogger is a stud for tracking these bozos down.
Froggy, thanks for stating the obvious so eloquently. You have missed your calling, sir. You should run for Congress, and show America what a REAL American is all about. Hell of an orator, sir, and an honor to read your blog
S!
Froggy, I wish you would run for President. We need you and your strength of conviction and superior focus to continue this War on Terror after Bush's term is over. These terrorists are NOT going away, at least not soon.
Nobody likes war, but there has always been war. There will always be war. The biggest error on the part of the liberal left is that they don't believe this. They are totally naive (that is a nice word). In the world we live in only the strong survive.
"Peace Through Strength!"
I sent this report about WRMC to my family yesterday and got a response from one of my sisters and I asked her, in response: Do the code pink people ever wonder if there are soldiers at WRMC who are there from the Afghan front, which had near universal support? or due to a training accident that DIDN'T happen in ANY hot-war theatre? How can they tell? They obviously can't.
Yes. Nothing wrong w/ protests, but like everything else, there is a time and a place. WRMC or any hospital are clearly inappropriate on both counts. Same goes for those that go to the funerals of individual soldiers and protest the war. I cannot finds words to describe the character (or to be more accurate, complete lack of) of people that do this.
Good but sad post Matt,
I can only imagine the disgust you as a fighting man must have felt, just a question – isn’t it illegal to desecrate the American Flag? In the old days we almost got “killed” for allowing the SA flag to touch the ground and I can remember war stories of US Service men dying wile protecting the Stars And Stripes. You guys have a great country and a even greater fighting force, which demands to be saluted. So go kick them hippie’s asses!!!!!
Good weekend all.
It's not illegal at all, Jan.
It is utterly disgusting that people would resort to holding such a protest, in such a place. I won’t even address the ridiculous people that think we should pull out of Iraq immediately; as far as I am concerned that is not an option right now. Then there are those that say they support our troops, but not the mission, BUT yet understand that we cannot leave Iraq right now … How does that make any sense? All of the troops I am in contact with, that are currently serving in Iraq or Afghanistan, are very proud of the work they are doing and see the bigger picture of what they are trying to accomplish. What is that supposed “support” worth when you disagree with what they are putting their lives on the line for every day?!?! Froggy thank you for stating what many of us are feeling right now on such an open forum.
Unreal. Amazing the depths people will go to. The good news is that the Cindy Sheehan thing has once again proven how biased the media is. I think they even convinced some fence sitters this time.
Great post.
I do want to say a word about people who support the troops but not the war. I have mentioned that I'm here in good 'ol BLUE NYC and that I volunteer for Soldiers' Angels (which sends support to troops). When I started doing the SA and Any Soldier thing, I solicited all my friends and family once I saw how much sending five packages a week was going to be. Many people responded (and many did not), included six anti war friends, who gave stuff and/or money. They said "I support the troops, not the war." They meant it. To this day, I collected more monetarily from them than all the others combined. What does it mean? Only that they put their money where their mouths are. The largest gift I got to use from one of these people paid the postage on 65 flat rates being sent (I supplied the stuff inside, she paid the postage). A colleague of mine who travels for work like me, and who doesn't support the war, always checks if I have a soldier from a state she is going to, to see if she can pick up a small gift. I right now have homemade jam from Kentucky to send to a wife whose family is in Germany while her husband is in Afghanistan.
However, I absolutely believe that there is a large number of people who say "I support the troops, not the war" out of OBLIGATION, because they know what a louse they would be/viewed as if they didn't say that. They don't DO anything to support the troops. They are talkers. They sometimes feel glee over bad news they read about the war and cannot admit anything good is happening there. Let me rephrase that; they don't feel glee over people's suffering; they feel glee their point has been "proven" and they simultaneously overlook the horrible situation the people were in before. They have lost perspective.
There is a difference between these people, who make *attractive* point makers to the news-pushers and so they get quotes because they add to the stories value, and the one's that are genuinly conflicted because they do actually wish the troops well, recognize that good things are happening in Iraq, but do not agree we should ever have gone in. They do not make the news as readily because their position is harder to convey and it isn't anti-Bush.
Very well said, Adele, thank you. I totally agree.
As for me, I am simply being honest on why I disagree that one cannot oppose the war and simultaneously support the troops, from my perspective. There is nothing deceitful or ungrateful about what I feel.
I have a hard time understanding how my patriotism can be measured by the amount with which I agree with our leaders.
Come on, whether we agree with the war or not, is it right that we are receiving tax cuts while military bases and VA hospitals are being shut down? How is that supporting our troops?
I am grateful that through the blogsphere, I am assured that media reports of our soldiers being inadequately equipped are exaggerated at best. But can you blame us for getting upset when that’s what we hear?
I come here because Froggy has well written and thought out views from a different perspective than I normally get. If anyone believes that I do not show gratitude to our soldiers, I assure you that you are very wrong.
Please don’t attack my patriotism and character simply because my conclusions and reasoning are different from yours. Tell me WHY I’m wrong, and I may change my mind.
There are already many laws on the books protecting minorities. If the KKK were protesting in front of a black church, I am sure that their protest would violate existing laws. If you hate Jews, go spit on one in front of witnesses and learn what the law can do.
Men and women on active duty are a minority - yet those who hate them are given a free pass to spit on them and protest against them. Bull sh*t.
Anyone guilty of a hate crime against a person on active duty should serve a sentence no less than the minimum enlistment for any branch of the military. What I would like to see is that the penalty would include a forced enlistment in the Army, six weeks of basic training and the remainder of their enlistment in the Fort Levenworth prison and a dishonorable discharge. Throughout their sentence they would have a "peace symbol" on their clothing along with a yellow strip down the back.
Froggy,
I completley agree with your update. I can't imagine any reasonable person, regarless of political persuasion, who wouldn't.
Cary, a brief economic education. Since we got W's tax cuts (make no mistake, they are not due to ANYONE else), tax revenues have SURGED and are way above what they otherwise would have been. Do not deceive yourself that taxes are not going to fund the military that otherwise would have had we not had cuts. Our pols fight with each other over the pork, NOT over the necessities. The only ones historically denying funds to the military or squawking about them are Lefty politicians who hate the military.
It has been proven: raise taxes and suffer reduced revenues. Lower taxes and increase revenues. Works every time it's tried, but in the past 30 years only Reagan and W have had the courage to lower them. Our economy is zooming and no one wants to report it.
Now the idea of "sacrifice" during war -- what mindset is this that promotes this? What do you mean by "sacrifice?" To me it means we have sons and daughters willingly putting their lives on the line while their families wait patiently and pray, and suffer without them. Would you like us all in breadlines? Would you like the rich to lose their homes and all they've worked for? Would you like the rest of us soaked to the max tax-wise so that we decide to work less, produce less, care less? What is sacrifice anymore? This is not the country that sacrificed through WWII. Most adult women already work. Plenty of us give all we can to soldiers' organizations and in fact have stopped any and all political donations as a result (that's me). Our charitable giving in this country is astronomical. Is it sacrifice only if forced on us from above by means of taxes? I totally disagree. This country is sacrificing plenty and pretty much a whole party refuses to see it or admit it. I want explanation for this "we aren't sacrificing" garbage. Speak for yourself. Those of us for whom the world changed forever on 9/11 know exactly what we are sacrificing. You obviously do not. I do not mean to attack you (I was you at your age) but I find what you wrote highly offensive.
As for patriotism, it is high time to define terms. Don't even mention patriotism anymore until you define it. I guarantee you the Left and the Right have very different definitions of it. That's a large part of the problem in this country over Bush and Iraq. For me, patriotism means putting this country and its interests first and believing they are worth fighting and dying for. It doesn't mean each and every one of us must fight and die for it. I support all those who want to lay their lives on the line for the rest of us. For an awful lot of people, patriotism seems to simply and cynically mean the right to dissent from and protest against everything good and right and true. Look at those traitors and Useful Idiots in Crawford and at Walter Reed and tell me I'm wrong.
Sorry all for the rant...this has been festering in me a long time.
Please don’t attack my patriotism and character simply because my conclusions and reasoning are different from yours. Tell me WHY I’m wrong, and I may change my mind.
Cary
Cary, look at the re-enlistment rate in units in Iraq. Look at the number of people who have volunteered to return a second or third time. Look at the number of men who have lost body parts in Iraq and want to go back. From first hand experience they know what we are doing in Iraq and support it with their life. What does that say to you?
In all of my life I’ve never seen things get so loopy. I work for the DoD, so one would assume that we were relatively conservative. Its like my Drill Sergeant said, “Never Assume.” Twice in one day a moonbat has spouted off some crazy anti-Bush crap. It was two different moonbats, but I was stunned into silence both times. The reason I was stunned to silence was that I realized that it had nothing to do with what was being discussed. In one case we were talking about the storm that is dumping water on Florida. The moonbat said, “Yeah, well, W’s brother is the governor, so screw ‘em.” In another, we were talking about office politics (who is the boss’s favorite, etc.) when a moonbat said “There’s just too many republicans that’s why this happens.” These are the kinds of comments that make everyone go “WTFO?” Its almost like the moonbats are looking for an opportunity to spout their crap. Any opportunity will do. “Pass the salt, please.” “Not if you are a pro-Bush, pro-war, religious rightwing zealot who doesn’t believe in gay/lesbian/transgender marriage or the separation of church and state!” Their picture is in the dictionary under MOONBAT.
It has been proven: raise taxes and suffer reduced revenues. Lower taxes and increase revenues. Works every time it's tried, but in the past 30 years only Reagan and W have had the courage to lower them. Our economy is zooming and no one wants to report it.
Peg C.
Peg, you're beautiful when you rant. I love it.
Kennedy, Reagan, and Bush (43) have shown what reducing taxes will do but if you really want to see our economy improve, click on my "Homepage". It is not my homepage but that of the Americans For Fair Tax.
Under our current Marxist tax laws tax payers spend over $250 billion in an attempt to comply with impossible rules. When the Fair Tax replaces our current tax, that expense is expected to drop by 90%. The savings from that one benefit from the Fair Tax would make the money spent on the war in Iraq look like chump change. Since economists expect the passage of the Fair Tax to boost the economy by 7 to 14%, what we saw with past income tax cuts will be greatly over shadowed.
We pay our service members to fight for us and then tax what we pay them. Do we tax our soldiers and workers in attempt to promote what they do? We tax tobacco in an attempt to reduce consumption. I don't think that can work both ways.
Pass the Fair Tax and our fighting men will get to keep all that we pay them. In addition, they would receive a monthly check so that the money they spend, up to the poverty level, is tax free. Since most service member's spending is below the poverty level, they would pay no taxes at all and that includes FICA. Once a year a GI or his employer would file a report of income to the Social Security Administration. If a GI is married and has children, he would file one form listing those in his family and their SSN so that his monthly prepayment of taxes check is adjusted for that size of family.
Passage of the Fair Tax act combined with the Soldiers and Sailors Relief Act just might allow our service members to support their family while they serve on active duty.
Peg,
Thank you for explaining. The idea of less money incoming equates more being able to spend doesn’t make sense to me, but I am open enough to look into it. (I’ve never been very good at math…)
I looked for where I used the word “sacrifice”, and I cannot find it. Perhaps you took it as implied. I certainly am not suggesting that we should be experiencing an economic depression, but I disagree that the economy is booming. I am simply pointing out that it is all too easy for ordinary civilian Americans to ignore that there is a war.
I have a friend who recently returned from doing a USO tour to various US Military bases throughout Europe. She explained how meeting the families of soldiers, especially the children, opened her eyes to what they are giving for us. I have asked her to write about her experience, so that I may post it on my blog, as most of us see nothing of that. The media doesn’t cover that at all, and it bothers me.
I define Patriotism as loving our country enough to involve ourselves in whatever way calls us. To use our voices to speak up and make it better. To discuss the issues with other citizens. To not see each other as the enemy just because we don’t agree. We are still Americans. Unfortunately, it took 9/11 to teach me that.
I’m sorry if I offend you, it is not my intention.
Richard,
I want every single soldier over there to believe 100% in what they are doing. Any doubt or second guessing is a distraction that can prove fatal. This is why I have a personal policy against discussing politics with enlisted soldiers, or those who have just returned home. It is there job to fight a war.
For the rest of us, I feel a duty to ask questions and speak up.
Richard,
Those who step up to serve should absolutley be tax exempt, just as foreign diplomats here are.
"We pay our service members to fight for us and then tax what we pay them. Do we tax our soldiers and workers in attempt to promote what they do? We tax tobacco in an attempt to reduce consumption. I don't think that can work both ways."
See IRS article, "Military Pay Exclusion - Combat Zone Service" at www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=101262,00.html
In my mind, those who proclaim to support our troops and then taunt the injured are no different than those that dragged the bodies of the injured and dead Rangers through the streets in Somalia. Or the scum that hung dead contractor's bodies from a bridge in Iraq.
If you have a beef with the direction of this country work to elect someone who supports your point of view. We gain nothing by attacking those who are unholding their oath to defend this country.
If you "support the troops, but not the war," then your rhetoric should have changed the day American soldiers feet touched enemy soil. If you support the troops, then you want them to live. You want the enemy to feel disheartened, as though they are up against an unwavering will that will crush them. If you support the troops then you want the enemy to think, before blowing themselves up or running into combat, that nothing they do will change the stance of America and its willingness to commit everything to the people of Iraq and the operations there.
Yesterday was the day for discussion, ponderance and decision-making. Tomorrow is the day for reflection, acknowledgment and understanding. Today… today we fight, we unify and we champion for our cause, our people and our victory. If you support the troops.
"With his leg mangled, Kurilla pointed and fired his rifle into the doorway, yelling instructions to the soldiers about how to get in there. But they were not attacking. This was not the Deuce Four I know. The other Deuce Four soldiers would have killed every man in that room in about five seconds. But these two soldiers didn't have the combat experience to grasp the power of momentum." - Michael Yon
If you do support the troops, then grasp the power of momentum. Don’t stand idly by and don’t give the enemy reason to hope.
Sirkyle hits it right on the head.
When I was a Sergeant and the LT or CO said "take that hill and here is how you will do it." I could and did offer my guidance. But it was the CO's call.
If I thought it was stupid to assault over a wall, I voiced my opinion, but if that was the call, then I supported the CO to the hilt and made damn sure I was the first person over that wall as if it had been my idea in the first place.
So even though I disagreed, I did my best to support my leadership and my men.
Same for many other things in life. If you don't like your kid playing football, do you just not show up at the games or not help buy equipment? Or your wife going back to school - do you interrupt her during study times or not provide money for tuition?
To support someone means showing up and helping them out and also defending what they are doing.
My wife, when she hears someone saying they "support the troops, but," she asks them how many soldiers they are writing to over in Iraq.
All have said none, so she tells them to "shut the F** up." It works.
See IRS article, "Military Pay Exclusion - Combat Zone Service" at www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=101262,00.html
Barbara
And what of those who are on active duty but not in a combat zone?
A patient at Walter Reed is not in a combat zone.
What about the other taxes that they pay?
What about the cap on what is exempt?
The Fair Tax does not contain favors for some but not others. A slick sleeve is treated the same as a CSM, General or Commander in Chief. How much they earn in or out of combat does not effect their tax. Only what they spend for new consumable items determines what they will pay in taxes, if any. If the wife of a wounded service man buys a used car so that she can visit her husband in the hospital, 100% of their income is available. Not just their "take home" pay and their is no tax on that purchase.
Check out what some folks are doing to protest the protesters: http://www.protestwarrior.com/
Alos, Peg, please start your own blog!
Cary, you wrote:
"...is it right that we are receiving tax cuts while military bases and VA hospitals are being shut down? How is that supporting our troops?"
You are right; you didn't use the word "sacrifice." However that is how I interpret your reference to taxes - "We've received tax cuts while VA hospitals are being shut down so we are not supporting the troops." I just don't get any of that at all. And it does sound to me like the constant litany I hear from the Left: If we're at war, why are we not sacrificing as if we are?
We are a nation that can be robust economically while fighting a war. We no longer need to have every citizen feeling pain while we are at war. I would think that's a testament to our strength and fiber as a nation. but I guess if we're not being bombed in the dark every night like London during the Blitz, and fighting for gas, bread and sugar, and going hungry, we're not feeling like a nation at war should feel. Obviously a nation at war shouldn't be buying HDTVs and DVDs and going to ballgames and Vegas. In your defense (and thanks to Richard for a post full of education), as a nation we are woefully uneducated in economics -- the market economics that is the engine and lifeblood of this country. More astounding is the pride so many have for their ignorance. It's no excuse. There is all kinds of information online on economics and how raising taxes is a disincentive to hard work. Lowering taxes is the rising tide that lifts all boats. Way back when, Reagan caused an uproar over his "trickle down economics." Not only does the theory work, but the fewer taxes hitting employers and owners, the more capital is freed up for us workerbees and for equipment, spurring on economic growth. We're experiencing this now but the MSM will not report it. Hmm, I wonder why. Their devotion to failure and doom couldn't have anything to do with it...
I do believe you can't support the troops without supporting the mission, but then I support the mission. The troops have NO CHOICE of mission. This they know fully going in. Given that, how can they be divorced from their mission? They ARE the mission. To me, supporting the troops but not the mission is not only weasly craven nonsense, it's also like supporting the mother but not the fetus. Oh, wait, we already have about 30% of the country for whom that is sacrosanct. Nevermind.
Richard, I absolutely believe active duty troops should not have to pay taxes. This has been discussed and discussed and nothing ever gets done. Our Congress is so pathetic and useless I sometimes fear they are our greatest enemy. I'm sending letters on the Fair Tax to my miserable excuses for senators and representatives (I am not joking - I'm in NY).
Red River,
Your wife makes an excellent point. I have a link to Operation Gratitude, where I have posted, as well as visiting soldiers's blogs. But perhaps I can step it up, too. Regular mail is much more personal than the internet. I may be too poor to commit to sending packages on a regularly scheduled basis, but I can certainly afford paper and a stamp. Any suggestions on where to go for info on sending letters?
Peg (I'm assuming that's you..),
it's nice to see that we agree on some things, if not all. As far as our Senators, I've always loved Hillary, but I'm getting turned off as she is becoming less subtle about playing up to Conservatives... she's playing "the game" a bit too much, I'm starting to lose trust. But don't worry, even if Pirro doesn't beat her, she'll at least do adequate damage.
I'm also not voting in the NYC Mayoral Primary, simply because I see no Democrat better than Bloomberg. I don't agree with him on everything, but he has pulled up the city from the ashes.
One more thing, Peg...
Please explain for me how our econmy is robust if we even have to contimplate shutting down Military bases or VA Hospitals. Perhaps my point on tax money is as invalid as you say, but why are we closing these places in the middle of a war?
Cary:
For addresses of soldiers to support check out www.anysoldier.com.
Suellen
Cary, they are closing them to restructure that part of the military. For example, Walter Reed is old and not state of the art. They will reopen a new facilty near the old one. Sometimes that's easier, cheaper, and more streamlined that refurbishing the old facility. Sometimes a base has remained open only because it has a large network of patronage and the elected official would get hell if it closed, so it may have already stayed open longer than it should have. Other times it is all an area has and those times are the saddest.
But, there is room for improvement in what we do for our forces (and other people can comment more knowingly than me on this). I think people feel two things about anyone from the left bringing it up, though:
1) It usually gets brought up when a point is trying to be scored, and since the needs are real, when they get brought up when scoring a point, the main reason of rightly bringing it up is lost, and 2) Generally speaking, the left couldn't care less about military benefits when they don't have a Repub president to fling mud at. So it comes across as disingenuous, which it is. Not in your case, but then you are a unique lefty 
On where to get addresses, go to:
Anysoldier.com
or
soldiersangels.org
You're a sport to share your views here. Hopefully you don't feel attacked! I think we're all on the same page, at least generally.
I do agree with what SirKyle said:
"If you "support the troops, but not the war," then your rhetoric should have changed the day American soldiers feet touched enemy soil."
It's true, once they touch enemy soil, it is a different ball game. I will say that people who don't know a lot of people in the military might not have that perspective, or even a place from where to get it. There's more notches on the ruler when you're pro-military, in terms of how many things there are to worry about, support, think about, etc (maybe even in terms of other things, too ). Maybe I'm not saying that right. I think that a lack of familiarity with military things removes some perspective from anyone who may be supportive but for whom what they know - or don't know - is colored by their not knowing anyone serving. Book smarts versus street smarts. Anyway, what SirKlye said reminds of of why I really was angry at Eddy Vedder when he criticized the President, from London... I have a thing about critizing your own country when your in a foreign land. You don't do it. Reflects badly on your countrymen. And oh, when US citizens apologize to the international community, for us electing President Bush! Wow, that one really gets my blood going.
Ok, here's a very realistic political game plan for dealing with these psychos who are protesting at WRMC (and as a btw, I literally cannot believe how STUPID these numbnuts really are - they just handed the Republican party a PRICELESS GIFT with this one):
1. Legislation introduced (possibly as early as next week), maybe amending the 1994 "Violence Against Women" Act to cover these "protests" at WRMC and all other military medical facilities.
2. The legislation will be "fast tracked" (Bet on it!).
Note: And have this issue come up right in the middle of the John Roberts confirmation hearing - oh, this guy is truely blessed!
3. This legislation will have "talking points" to high heaven, and I will PUT MONEY on it that you will see all those "Cindy" type a**clowns running for cover, because once the Democratic party sees this train barrelling down the tracks, they will send out the message that these witless fools need to DISAPPEAR PERMANENTLY and never, NEVER, EVER pull this type of crap again...
Problem the Democrats will have with accomplishing this is that they are anything but an organized party, and the far left ain't taking any orders they don't like. So it becomes an even bigger circus, which plays perfectly for Republicans.....
Big-time problem for Hillary & the rest of the gang - If this keeps up, I could see her kicking back and wondering why she's running as a Democrat (I'm kidding with that last remark, but just barely).
Also, did anybody see the story on where parents & relatives of deceased soldiers have been removing their crosses from Cindy's "cemetary" because they don't want any part of her "show", and those low-life slime protestors are putting duplicate crosses back in place after the grieving parents and other family members leave with the ones they removed.
I don't even have the words to express my anger over seeing that happen....
Adele,
No, I don't know anyone close to me currently serving. So, my perspective is indeed a bit different. I have an Uncle and a close friend who served 20 years in the Navy (my uncle served in Desert storm), and I have discussed all of this extensively with them. I'm not at liberty to tell you what they think, but I will say that not all vets are on the same page with their opinions.
I understand that when executing orders, one much be 100% commited to their actions, if even the initially disagree. But should that apply to those of us on the sidelines? Granted, we are nothing but armchair quarterbacks who never held a football, but don't we have a responsibility to ask questions? Our Soldiers weren't even being tested routinley for uranium upon returning home until some ranted and raved about it, which I believe is our responsibility to do.
I agree with you regarding criticizing one's own country while on foreign land. Heck, as an actor, I won't trash a show I'm in, even if I don't think it's good. It's just wrong.
I remember the "apology" website, and it just baffled me.
Thanks for understanding where I'm coming from, and seeing that I'm not out to make points against you guys.
I'm running out of town to perform this weekend, but I'll get to those sites and do what needs to be done as soon as I get back.
Cary
Just so you know, in the eyes of the enemy, you are not on an armchair quarterback. Cindy Sheehan is not an armchair quarterback. France is an armchair quarterback. You are on the team and the team needs you to be solid in the effort of winning.
If you understand that pulling out is not an option (which it isn't) then the only acceptable alternative to one who supports the troops is victory. America MUST win. Conveying an image of an America divided only helps our enemy. Do you want to help and encourage the enemy (rhetorical)? If you support the troops, then put on your game face, and make the enemy fear our resolve. THEY WILL NOT WIN.
Richard, I absolutely believe active duty troops should not have to pay taxes. This has been discussed and discussed and nothing ever gets done. Our Congress is so pathetic and useless I sometimes fear they are our greatest enemy. I'm sending letters on the Fair Tax to my miserable excuses for senators and representatives (I am not joking - I'm in NY).
You are absolutely correct. Congress talks and talks but nothing gets done. If the voters put enough heat on them so that they fear being removed from office, then we will get action. Keep after your senators and representatives until they promise to vote for the Fair Tax act. My senators and representatives in Tennessee are still sitting on the fence trying to find out which way the wind is blowing. They will learn.
How sad it is that these protestors and have sunk to the level that they have. They have no shame, no common sense and I say no sincere concern for our troops. If they did, they would not be demonstrating in front of Walter Reed Hospital within viewing disctance of the men and women who are recovering from wounds they received while serving our country, whether that be in battle or a support role, they were still serving. These are very dumb people who have no compassion for others, regardless of what they say their cause is.
CTG - Thank you for posting the information about counterprotests. I will be sure to join the counterprotest the next time in DC. In fact, I will probably make a special trip to do just that. I would be proud to stand in support of those fine men and women who did not ask to be in Walter Reed Hospital by becoming wounded but did so on behalf of all Americans, even the dumba$$ protestors outside their windows.
Rich
Ladies and gentlemen,
As a foreigner I will most likely never understand this, so please do forgive my ignorance. But why all the arguments about who is right and what is wrong, your country is at war making the world for all of us a better and saver place to life in. Use all this energy to support the warriors, fighting will only harm their legacy and turn them into “dogs of war”. Besides once they have completed their mission, there will be plenty of time to point fingers and to defend your actions and views.
Unite as only Americans can and bring calm to the storm raging among yourselves. And stand tall and fast and form a solid “wall” because the world is watching and waiting to see unity, patriotism and the American way to crumble – thus proving them right in their criticism. Don’t give them an opportunity !!!!
And just imagine what affect it will have on the men and woman fighting, if the Taliban or insurgents were to start using images like this as propaganda for their “cause”. As I recall this has happened before.
Regards,
I was appalled when I read the article about the protesters outside Walter Reed. How incredibly opportunistic and insensitive. As far as 'Luke' goes, obviously he has never worn a uniform and wouldn't have first beginnings of a clue as to what that means.
I agree about an exclusion zone for protesters, if not, how about some old fashioned 'dungaree liberty'?
Jan, arguing is what this country does best and always has been. We are nothing if not diverse and argumentative and loud, trying to convince each other we are right. Probably the genetic competitive spirit in us. It's just the way we are, and the depressed and bigoted droning of the Left and MSM notwithstanding, we really get our dander up when injustice is involved. The repugnant haters at Crawford and Walter Reed have deeply offended and outraged a big percentage of Americans and we feel compelled to cry out and support our defenders. I think it's that simple. And we don't take the lies, defeatism and treason of the MSM lying down anymore. We shout out.
Sorry for the 2 anonymous posts above. Unfamiliar laptop and we have no friend called Preview here.
Matt......I was was thinking about how you were comparing what that idiot Luke is doing to our troops at Walter Reed, to a mother of twins, etc.
Well, I'm the father of twins and I imagined my wife in the situation you described, and I have to say that honestly, Luke is far far worse... I just wish there was something I could do to help combat these idiots....
-Dan
WOW!! You guys are right on! Thanks for all the comments too. Keep on supporting the troops anyway you can. They NEED us back here to guard their sixes. Plus we have the holidays approaching and I am already making plans to send packages. Don't forget the wounded in your prayers and thoughtfulness too.
Love you all.
Carol
Dan,
It was the closest thing I could think of. There is clearly no comparison to the depravity of this protest.
Legislation is way too slow, BUT there is another way! Let's turn their own guns on these rotten low life lefties: litigation!
A couple of the recovering wounded could claim, rightfully so I believe, that the actions of the protestors constitute "Outrageous conduct resulting in severe emotional distress", a well-founded tort in many jurisdictions! Join the rest of the soldiers as members of a class, for a class action suit and nail the organizers of thes circuses and as many participating individuals as possible, as defendants.
Then ask for a restraining order/prelim. injunction to keep these sub-humans at bay while the case is being decided in court. This is all perfectly justified amd within the bounds of the legal system which the Left has used for decades to impose their will upon the rest of us!! Turnabout is fair play, I say!
Don't you think a multi-million dollar verdict or even the cost of a few hundred thousand for legal defense would slow these clowns down just a bit?
Come on! The lefties can drag up more than a few lawyers to wage their battles, anyone out with "stones" enough to try? I'm game for it!
Check this out: http://www.iwo.com/heroes.htm
It's a beautiful tribute to our troops in Iraq.
Like my friend, Greg P*, told me: the best thing we can do for the troops is to show active support for them AND their mission here in the states.
*I met Greg Monday at the beginning of the "You Don't Speak For Me, Cindy" Caravan when they stopped in Vacaville and then Sacramento. He had just returned from Iraq for a 14-day vist, and he was at the Rally to surprise his mom (who was going to Crawford with the Caravan). She didn't know he was home yet. The anti-war protestors were coming over and getting in our faces and Greg just started telling them, "Do you know how much you hurt the morale of the troops with what you're doing?"
But, of course, they didn't care about him, only the sound of their own voices.
And P.S. Cindy Sheehan was fine with her visit with President Bush until afterwards, when the Kerry Campaign called her and enlisted her to go and campaign for them and against the war all over the country -- all expenses paid!
Beth, I admit I didn't know about Sheehan's alignment with the Kerry campaign. This has gotten so ugly so fast I have a suspicion the Dems have NO CLUE how bad this will barf all over them. It's not like the Republicans deserve this gift, either - I'm mad as a hatter at them, too. But just when you think they're dooming themselves, the Dems outdo them in the categories of vileness and stupidity. Amazing.
Leftists like Sheehan and Cary are pathetic. Undermining the morale of the troops in the middle of a war! People remember this sort of thing. Treachery in wartime is difficult to forgive.
My *personal* short list of reasons why Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen & Marines deserve the unwavering support of the American people:
(Yes, it's *my personal* list and yes, it's biased...I'll cover that in a moment.)
1. December, 1970:
The Man I proudly call "Dad" wanted a son when he and my mother set out to adopt a child. He learned that a baby girl awaiting adoption lost her biological father while fighting with the 101st AIRBORNE in Vietnam three months after she was born. He tells me to this day that the idea of "His" son fell easily to the idea of ANY soldier's daughter growing up not knowing a soldier's love.
"Dad" was in Korea, in a different division and from different place in history - but because soldiers love each other, I've been able to love two of them as only a daughter can for 35 years.
(Trust me on this one Froggy, she *knows*)
2. September 11th, 2001:
I was rolling 1 3/4" hose line after a "normal" bread & butter structure fire when I heard about the attacks. That is my job. When 343 of my brothers died doing their jobs that day, the men and women of the US military did far more than demand a reckoning. They set out to ensure a future where our professions cross over only on our terms and no one else’s. They have delivered on both counts.
3. Fast forward to August 24th, 2005:
I have “adopted” many individual service members and entire platoons over the last two years and to a man their gratitude for the smallest thought is overwhelming. But on this day I sat in tears reading the most touching thank you note I have ever received in my lifetime. What merited a personal letter of that caliber?
A few pounds of Starbucks Coffee and a card.
I sent those simple things to a group of men who volunteer for training & tours in Hell just to earn the right to demonstrate their intense love of this country. Unlike the folks who sparked this rare rant of mine, their protests signs are written in their *own* blood and no one else’s. They shed it willingly because that is how men of this breed express outrage against terrorism – they act. And in their darkest hour of grief, their commanding officer did not seek public platforms to complain. He shared private moments of hope and pride and gratitude by taking the time to personally thank people like me for a decent cup of coffee, a piece of printed cardboard, and a few words of prayers and appreciation that were woefully shy of the honoring him and his fallen brothers as fully as they deserve.
You may have read about this particular group of men here at Froggy’s Blog. Froggy held our hands while we prayed for them, rejoiced with us as the “ONE” came home, and granted us the privilege, worthy of it or not, to say goodbye to them at their memorial services.
So, you see, for me, this is so very simple and all the debate in the world can’t change it – I love my defenders. I support their mission, their Commander In Chief and in my eyes, there simply is no other way to support *them.*
Yes, this is my personal short list and I have no doubt that my opinion is biased. But I can take away any of the factors that make it so and one final unifying factor remains...I am an American. I know many, many people who do not have the ties to these men and women that I do. To them, it makes no difference. I know many who's ties are much closer and more personal. They do not need them. They all love our troops. They honor and support them just as fiercely as I do. They are Americans...and that is all they need.
Lorraine,
Well said! A beautiful post. You have said it all. Thank you.
Rich
Thanks Lorraine
Simply....I couldn't have said it better myself..BRAVO!!!!
One way the blogosphere can help support the troops in Iraq is to show that their mission is not "in vain." I think it would be great if blogs got together and agreed on one day to publicize stories about two topics:
a) Iraqis grateful for their freedom
b) Iraqi security forces killing terrorists with minimal U. S. help.
If every blog simultaneously devoted one day to thousands of such stories gleaned from other blogs, the foreign press, and personal experience, it would be a watershed event that would shame the MSM totally, and also prove that the blogosphere is a force that can no longer be ignored.
Has anyone told Luke that "pink" is not a good color for someone named Luke?
Code Pinko Luke claims to speak for the wounded and maimed being treated at WRMC. Luke and his pink bag full of crushed a--hole buddies really need to actually go visit a ward and share their opinions with these wounded heros. Go on, Luke, get on up there and show the soldiers your support! What's holding you pussies back?
I would also suggest a televised debate between Cindy, The Fonda Wannabe, and LTC Kurillo on the topic of Iraq's "Noble Purpose." Watch the horse faced bivalve take a dive on that one.
My admiration for Froggy is well known, but I want to thank everyone that reads this blog and comments on its contents. This Froggy Family is a great source of encouragement to me everyday.
One of the things that really concerns me -- especially about those of the Left persuasion, is their incredible lack of knowledge of HISTORY. I'm talking about the World History, American History, and the history of the consequences of the reign of totalitarian dictators such as Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler who murdered MILLIONS and put millions of others in concentration camps for simply disagreeing with them. If they had an inkling about it, they would get on their knees every single day and thank God that they live in a country such as ours, and they would support our troops AND their mission.
Right now I am studying about the history of America's involvement in the Middle East. It actually goes all the way back to 1801 and Thomas Jefferson. I'm doing this because I get so absolutely sick of hearing liberals say so glibly, "It's all Bush's fault. We started it. Etc. Etc. Etc."
I know this isn't true, but I am working on beefing up my knowledge so I can have my guns ready when I go out into the world and talk to those Americans who hate and blame America for all the ills of the world.
I've made a commitment to support our wonderful troops by fighting the Enemy within our borders.
And you know, there is hope. David Horowitz of www.frontpage.com was once a far-left liberal and there are many others like him who have seen the light and are moving towards the light.
I think if we can invite curious people on the Left, like Cary, to a conversation and get them to think about what they REALLY believe, there is definitely hope. I'm not talking about hope to become a Republican (which by the way, I am), but hope to become a Patriot and one who truly loves and appreciates our great country and what it stands for and what the Founding Fathers, by God's grace, brought about at our conception as a Nation. We are the Light on Hill in the World and we have to continue to fight the forces of evil to continue to be that Light. There are many enemies that wish to destroy our country - a land that, for the most part, honors God and godly values. They wish to destroy those who love freedom and democracy: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all.
We Patriots are stronger than ever now.
Tonight is the big rally in Crawford in support of the troops AND their mission. Pray for them. We will not be silent anymore. We will not be passive anymore. Never again!
Lorraine,
I'd like to echo what others have said. Just a beautiful post ~ "it says it all!"
http://www2.operationtruth.com/
b...entry_KEY=19954
Lorraine, that was great. Thanks for sharing it.
Well put, Froggy- keep fighting the good fight...
"I support the troops, but just not what they are doing."
Sounds akin to "I love you but I'm not in love with you."
Have you ever heard the statement anything before and after BUT is a lie?
Lorraine, thank you. That was so beautifully put!
I found (via Hugh) a great post by Jeff Kouba at Peace Like a River on Yon's Gates of Fire post:
link...
As astonishing and moving as Yon's piece is, Kouba adds even more perspective by highlighting certain aspects.
Hugh also posted an email from a "Navy special operator" (if that's not a SEAL I'd sure like to know what is) on Kurilla and "the admiration of those you admire." Short but must reading:
link...
I'm praying for Yon's safety; he is in the thick of it and is a truly essential voice and witness to the courage, bravery and valor of our defenders. Money heading his way...
Well said Lorraine!
Rich,
I've had that same impulse to fly there just for the protest. FreeRepublic.com posted they had about 100 show up Friday night thanks to all the publicity this week by Hannity and others. There are some great photos of the group. The pinkos only had about 15- 20.
I was at the Move America Forward/You don't Speak for Me rally yesterday at Crawford. There were so many people there for the Support the Troops rally they were still arriving as the rally ended. It was awesome!! I'm now looking forward to my DC trip and will definitely join the Freepers at WRMC. I got some great ideas for my protest signs from this weekend.
Photos of both protests can be found at FreeRepublic.com.
A salute from an old Nam Era Vet.
I hate cowards.
Rich,
This made me tear up: A few weeks ago at a Friday night WRMC protest a wounded soldier walked bottles of champagne out to the freepers. Apparently, some of the wounded had accumulated those bottles in advance for the freepers in appreciation of the counterprotest. The freepers finally convinced them to take it back inside and enjoy it for them while they held the line against the pinkos.
I just signed up at Protestwarrior.com. They hold counter-protests all over the country. They contact you when there's going to be an event where the anti-war/America protestors are out in full force so we can, as CTG put it, "hold the line against the pinkos."
They are a great group! FreeRepublic also has a similar notification for events in specific areas. I'm waiting now to hear about a protest/counterprotest at a soldier's funeral in Martinville, Indianna by the slime 'Fred Phelps' organization occuring this afternoon.
CTG -- this is one of the big reasons that the Left will not be able, as hard as they try, to turn the War on Terror into Vietnam.
CTG,
I am glad to hear you got down to Crawford to counter Cindy Sheehan's group and you were joined by many others. I understand that Rev. Al Sharpton has joined her. The rest of his band of idiots may not be far behind him. I guess its a good thing he is not wearing those velour running suits anymore. That Texas heat is a killer.
The actions of the wounded at WRMC which you mentioned of bringing bottles of champagne to their supporters outside says allot doesn't it? While they suffer from their wounds, many literally having lost limbs serving our country, they still have it in them to give back to others. Their act of kindness towards others who are there to support them should be a lesson to the anti-war protestors in itself. Unfortunately, the protestors are blind to reality and suffer from tunnel vision. I for one would be honored and humbled if a wounded soldier took the time and care to thank me for being their to support him or her. If the real supporters of our troops keep growing in numbers to counter the protestors, maybe there is a chance they will at least move on to someplace other than in front of WRMC and would think twice about showing up at such a venue again. Maybe that is wishful thinking but it is worth trying.
Rich
Well said!
Hey Rich, I just thought of something that I read in the Readers Digest a long time ago. Someone was talking to a very attractive business woman who traveled quite a bit on airplanes and he asked her, "Do you have trouble with men coming on to you?" "Yes," she said. "What do you do about it?" She said, "I just look them in the eyes and say four simple words: "Are you born again? That seems to do it."
We should have some folks out there in front of Walter Reed approaching the anti-war protestors with big Bibles and that question, said lovingly and directly. Wonder how long they'd be able to stick around and take that?
Rich,
According to FR every Friday night a soldier or soldier's family walks out to thank the freepers and encourage them to stay the course. The bus that takes some of the soldiers and their families to Fran O'Briens Restaurant each Friday evening stopped in the driveway last Friday night as the 100 freepers filling 3 corners chanted USA, USA...the corner with pinkos (Luke's corner) stood silent. The soldiers were giving thumbs up and waves and smiles. I can't wait to join them.
That's a good idea,Beth.
Beth, love that idea!
You have said what millions are tinking and done it in an exceptional way. I hate when I hear a caller to talk radio make and try to defend the statement that they "support the troops but not the war". Rest assured that there are millions who support the troops and the job that they are doing. I am one who tries as hard as possible to find the positive stories that the MSM doesn't want to tell and the milblogs are the best source of positive news from the troops. Thank you for what you are doing. John
I wish I could be there at Walter Reed to support our troops.
You know, there is only one person that the libs hate more than George W. Bush, and that's the God of the Bible.
CTG,
Glad to hear the counterprotest is actually working. Three full corners to one. I'd say thats pretty good odds. I bet the soldiers and familes on that bus were thrilled to see so many real supporters out there. Hmmm, and the anti-war protestors were silent. See what a little dose of reality can do!!! It is great to know that the soldiers and families know that the supporters out-number the protestors. That might be some of the best medicine those soldiers receive.
Beth - I bet your idea would send the anti-war nuts running. Now that would be a sight to see.
Rich
Matt, thanks for the blog. Insight from true warriors is priceless.
"And what of those who are on active duty but not in a combat zone?
A patient at Walter Reed is not in a combat zone."
Richard
-----------------------------
I agree that there should be tax exemptions for soldiers serving during wartime. There is a much more detailed document in Adobe Acrobat on this issue but I've misplaced the link. If I find it, I'll post it.
As you might imagine, this is quite complicated but understandable nonetheless. Here are three answers that may address the issues you raised.
Q-4: I am a member of the U.S. Armed Forces stationed on a ship outside any combat zone. I fly missions over a combat zone as part of the military operations in that combat zone. Is any part of my military pay excluded from gross income?
A-4: Yes. The combat zone includes the airspace over it, so you are serving in the combat zone. See Q&A-2 above for a discussion of the amount of your military pay that is excluded.
Q-5: If I am injured and hospitalized while serving in the U.S. Armed Forces in a combat zone, is any of my military pay excluded from gross income?
A-5: Yes. Military pay received by enlisted personnel who are hospitalized as a result of injuries sustained while serving in a combat zone is excluded from gross income for the period of hospitalization, subject to the 2-year limitation provided below. Commissioned officers have a similar exclusion, limited to the maximum enlisted pay amount per month. (See Q&A-2 above.) These exclusions from gross income for hospitalized enlisted personnel and commissioned officers end 2 years after the date of termination of the combat zone.
Q-9: My husband is a member of the U.S. Armed Forces performing services related to a combat operation but he is not in the combat zone and he is not receiving hostile fire/imminent danger pay. Is he entitled to the military pay exclusion?
A-9: No. U.S. Armed Forces personnel serving outside the combat zone are not entitled to the military pay exclusion unless they are serving in direct support of military operations in the combat zone for which they receive hostile fire/imminent danger pay. The Department of Defense certifies areas that meet these requirements.
Cary: "The idea of less money incoming equates more being able to spend doesn’t make sense to me, but I am open enough to look into it."
Look no further. When you lower taxes, you don't get 'less money incoming', you get more, particularly if the level of taxation is above the peak on the Laffer Curve -- but that's a bit technical and I'll explain further if necessary.
In a nutshell, a significant reduction in taxes stimulates the economy and expands the tax base. In other words, more people are working and many of those already working start making more money. Even though the tax rate is lower, there are so many more people paying the tax that the total revenue is higher than when the tax was higher.
Even assuming wages don't change, when you add more jobs, you get higher revenues. In other words:
10 people making $10,000 a year at a tax rate of 20% gives you $20,000 in tax revenues.
20 people making $10,000 a year at a tax rate of 15% gives you $30,000 in tax revenues.
Cary: "My own feelings are hard to describe. Do I think we should have taken action in Iraq? No, I don't."
Why not? You also frequently point out that you don't understand why it isn't okay to ask questions about the Iraq Campaign (that's right, it isn't a "separate" war).
Actually, it's perfectly fine. The problem we have is when we give a cogent answer, our opponents tend to plug their ears and hum really loud and then start chanting "No Blood For Oil" and "Haliburton-Haliburton", etc., meaning they're really interested in having a debate, they want only to throw a pie in America's face over and over, telling us how horrible it is that we didn't follow Marx, that this country is the most evil fascist dictatorship in all of history -- and yet, despite all the examples in history (without exception) of people who ACTUALLY LIVED under such governments clogging the roads to leave the country while being strafed by government planes, THEY DON'T LEAVE.
In other words, anyone who says America is a fascist police state and then don't BEHAVE as if America as a fascist police state, is either deluded or lying. Further proof is in the fact that if America was a fascist police state, you would not be able to safely say in public "America is a fascist police state". You would instead be afraid to whisper it alone in your basement at midnight.
Hit me with any and all questions you have about "why we are in Iraq" and I guarantee you I can give you a cogent answer to them all.
I'll add briefly that I think I can speak for most of us here in that we don't have a problem with people disagreeing with the President on foreign policy (or any other issue) per se. It is the REASONS GIVEN for their disagreement that make us question their patriotism, and said reasons seem to change a lot.
Zhangliqun,
I’d like to say that I am grateful for people like you, Adele and others who recognize that I come here, as well as to other conservative blogs (this one being among the best of them), to seek an honest, open dialogue with others who think differently than I do.
Trust me; I know the kind of liberals you speak of. They annoy me as much as they do you, if not more. I remember on election day, after voting for John Kerry, I then had an argument with a very ignorant woman, in which I defended Bush against some of the one sided claims made by Michael Moore.
Yes, there are some on the left who don’t bother listening to Bush or his supporters, simply because it’s Bush. They know they are going to disagree even before they hear it out. Let me assure you, that is not me. (Heck, I even like Judge Roberts…)
Unfortunately, the media only shows you the extreme Looney left, and ignores the complexities of how people actually feel. There seems to be a perpetuation of stereotypes being promoted to both sides. You guys see liberals as hippie pacifist pussy ingrates, while we see conservatives as religious zealots out to bully everyone to your way of thinking. While both of these definitions exist, the fact is that most of us fall into a complex stream of in-between
On the other side of the coin, however, are those who unconditionally support the president without question, simply because he is the president. Now, I understand that for military folk, he’s the boss. But for us civilians, he is a public servant who WORKS FOR US. We hired him with our votes, and we have a duty to speak up if we feel he is not representing our wishes. I’m not advocating all of the blatant hatred that has been hurled upon him from many on the far left, he certainly doesn’t deserve that either. But he is not a Monarch, and his will is not divine.
Now, forgive me for back peddling just a tad. But, the fact is on whether we should be in Iraq or not is something I don’t actually know. I’ve been back and forth on it, and never come up with an entirely satisfying answer. I blogged about this when Iraq had its elections, which you can read here…
http://caryscolumn.blogspot.com/...eedom-
ring.html
I just simply wish to be honest that I believe that one can be conflicted or even disagree with our action in Iraq, and still have unwavering support for our troops. Adele explained it better than I did, that there are some of us who prove as such with our actions. I may disagree with Cindy Sheehan on bringing the troops home now, but I understand why she feels that way. Her son may have volunteered to honorably serve this country, but she didn’t volunteer to lose a son, especially for a cause she herself doesn’t believe in. I’m not a parent, but I can think of nothing worse than outliving one’s children. I’m sure the same grief is felt by parents who totally support the war. Compassion is due to all those who grieve.
But just as you feel that some liberals are unbending in their views, I feel the same coming from the other side. Right in this very discussion, after having conceded many of the points that were made and promising to take action to do more, there are those who not only attack my patriotism, but my intelligence, and even my spirituality. But I believe that in cases such as this, the best defense is no defense. Anyone who takes the time to get to know me knows where I stand on these points.
For the record, I am adding a column on my blog with links to all of the organizations you’ve informed me of, devoted to supporting our troops. If anyone knows of any other links I should add, please let me know.
I’m glad I come here, because I learn a lot about how you guys feel and think. You may not sway me 100%, but the fact is that I’ve come to believe that no matter what I may feel about how we got to this point, the FOCUS need to be on supporting our troops to victory. I came to that conclusion by coming here.
Mayor Bloomberg said it yesterday, "It's not a question of supporting the president, it is supporting our troops,"
I hope that at least some of you are coming to understand my side, as well. Open, honest dialogue seems to me the only way to remain United We Stand.
Cary- I wish there were more on the left like you- political discussion would be more interesting. Your problem seems to be a semantic one- You want to stick with the line "I support the troops, but not the war", yet it seems you really "support the troops, but even though you had difficulty with, even possibly objection to the decisions, you support the war". That's all we really ask of anyone else: support the war, even if you didn't like the decision making that led to it, even if you don't like the president. Once you're in, the only way out has to be total victory. Then if you like, we can debate how we went in. I think those of us who are regulars here know where you stand- on the 'right' side in this case! 
"I just simply wish to be honest that I believe that one can be conflicted or even disagree with our action in Iraq, and still have unwavering support for our troops."
------------------------
Cary, All the wishing that one can be equivocal about the War and still support the troops will not make it so. You may express your views here and on your blog (which you mention fairly frequently) but it will not make them credible.
What you state is simply a regurgitation of what was stated over 35 years ago to derail our military action in Vietnam. The left has attempted to repackage their rhetoric in what they see as "kindler and gentler" terms. They do not fool anyone.
Simply put, you cannot have it both ways. Pseudo support for the troops will get them killed, will embolden the enemy and will lose the War Against Islamic Terrorism. There is no middle ground.
Douglas,
I have to admit that your assessment of my position seems pretty accurate. Thank you. You and SirKyle make very strong points which I have no choice but to concede.
Barbara,
Providing links to blog entries I have already taken the time to write out is just easier than going through the process over again here, when I wish to share my thoughts (I suppose I could also copy and paste). It disappoints me that this seems to bother you. No harm intended.
To all,
Thank you for hearing me out.
Cary, yes it IS possible to question any president's (or general's) prosecution of a war and be patriotic. As I said before, it's not the FACT that people are questioning the president, it's the reasons they give, which in many instances just flat-out step over the line of sedition and treason.
As you readily and quickly concede, Michael Moore is out of his mind. By any reasonable definition – he is a traitor, a Lord Haw Haw or a Tokyo Rose, especially because he refers to the terrorists in Iraq is “their Minutemen”. He is a traitor when he cuts and pastes images, footage, quotes, etc., of the President, members of his Cabinet, etc., to make them mean whatever he wants them to mean. You will not find anyone who will defend Moore on the “facts” of Farenheit 9/11 – they will only change the subject and say he has a First Amendment right to make a movie, which was never in dispute to begin with. He has a long history of doing this, Bowling For Columbine being another example.
For more, check these links:
http://www.davekopel.org/Terror/...renheit-
911.htm
http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/
(The second link is a review by Christopher Hitchens, a pretty hardcore socialist but a rare one who seems to understand how great a threat Islamism poses to both righties and lefties in the West.)
When American Congressmen (Jim McDermott comes to mind) go to Iraq and publicly voice their opposition to their President and their apparent support of Saddam, that is treason by any reasonable definition.
Or when Howard Dean in an interview during the 2004 campaign season gives credibility to the conspiracy theory that 9/11 was a set-up by the government to create an excuse for this war by saying “Some believe that (this is the case)…” without following this comment up with anything, never bothering to tell us what he thinks of it at all, much less that he thinks it’s nonsense.
Or when Noam Chomsky makes up stories that even HE doesn’t believe, like the claim that 3 million Afghanis were going to die of starvation if we invaded, just
In other words, NO COGENT OR EVEN COHERENT REASONS ARE EVER GIVEN for opposing the war, the Iraq Campaign in particular. Just generalized conspiracy-slogans, like No Blood For Oil, claims that it was a cruise missile that hit the Pentagon, and pro-terrorist propaganda like Farenheit 9/11 that are NEVER backed up with anything remotely resembling substantive evidence…more slogans that change every five minutes when the last one is either proven false or just isn’t getting traction with the public…petty gotcha-isms like “No WMD found” (which actually isn’t true) and the fake memo that severely damaged 60 Minutes and CBS and sank Dan Rather…the list goes on and on and on and on. Then you have my personal experiences with people who say things, when I confront them with all this and more, that “well, American just can’t take it.” As if America – or any country – is supposed to just stand by and encourage its enemies to invade and say, look at me, I can take it!
There is only one thing that all these “reasons” could possibly have in common, and that is an anger at America, a desire to see America weakened, if not destroyed – or at least transformed into an America that is no longer American but more like France or Palestine or anything force America to….“take it”.
Cary, I would like to know what it is about the Iraq Campaign (or any other aspect of this war) that makes you feel conflicted. I may answer in the process of dealing with some of the above reasons:
No Blood For Oil: Then why Afghanistan (no oil), and why are we allies with the one country that enrages all these oil-producing countries to no end, Israel, which also has ZERO oil. Don’t you think they might give us free oil for a year if we would just look the other way and let them push Israel into the sea? And is there any evidence that oil companies are making a killing off Iraqi oil?
No WMD?
1) If Bush was “lying” about WMD in Iraq, then so was the ENTIRE WORLD. Every intel agency in the world and the UN itself agreed with this assessment. Not a single member of the Security Council or any other nation in the UN stood up and said, “We have evidence that there are NO bio/chemical/nuclear weapons in Iraq and here it is.”
2) Read this excerpt from the report by Charles Duelfer, from one of the very same reports that the media portrayed as saying there was no WMD problem in Iraq:
"From the evidence available through the actions and statements of a range of Iraqis, it seems clear that the guiding theme for WMD was to sustain the intellectual capacity achieved over so many years at such a great cost and to be in a position to produce again with as short a lead time as possible—within the vital constraint that no action should threaten the prime objective of ending international sanctions and constraints. Saddam continued to see the utility of WMD. He explained that he purposely gave an ambiguous impression about possession as a deterrent to Iran. He gave explicit direction to maintain the intellectual capabilities. As UN sanctions eroded there was a concomitant expansion of activities that could support full WMD reactivation. He directed that ballistic missile work continue that would support long-range missile development. Virtually no senior Iraq; believed that Saddam had forsaken WMD forever. Evidence suggests that, as resources became available and the constraints of sanctions decayed, there was a direct expansion of activity that would have the effect of supporting future WMD reconstitution."
Charles Duelfer Special Advisor to the Director of Central Intelligence Baghdad, September 2004
3) See this link:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Arti...le.asp?
ID=12387
…to an interview with Ion Mihai Pacepa, head of Romania’s secret police under Caucesceau, where he explains how the USSR’s various client states were taught how to make illegal weapons “disappear” so that inspectors could never find them and the “useful idiots” (Western liberals) would pressure their governments to believe it. Learn a new word called “sarindar”…
4) The Mossad, Israel’s intel agcy and the best in the world now, says at least some of the weapons are in Syria. This claim is made more credible by American satellite photos of a convoy of trucks headed west across the Syrian border days before the ground invasion.
5) In April 2004, Jordan foiled a plot by Zarqawi to attack Jordanian secret police headquarters and the American embassy with chemical weapons. Where do you suppose Zarqawi got the weapons?
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/me.../jordan.terror/
Zhangliqun,
I have already openly distanced myself from Michael Moore, Howard Dean, and the conspiracy theories on my own blog quite some time ago. So, hopefully your points can still be made so some other liberal who may be reading. I've been in agreement with you on those points for quite some time.
As for my conflicts, I refer you back to my own blog post whick I have linked above. However, I have already pledged to focus on what really matters: support for our Soldiers and Sailors.
There is nobody (left, right, or center) with whom I agree with 100% on anything, but I appreciate your continued time and effort.
I know and appreciate that you have distanced yourself from the Moore/Dean wing, which I pointed out in my post.
My point was these folks (and the Cindy Sheehan crowd and those at WRMC) are demonstrating precisely the kind of mindset that makes a right wing wacko like myself - or presumably any person of any political stripe not governed primarily by their emotions - start to question their patriotism. It can’t be said that we are accusing anyone of treason who disagrees with the president -- we are basing this assessment on the REASONS THEY GIVE for disagreeing.
As an aside, I would say this mindset is also an indication that we are on the road to a Second Civil War in this country. I am not kidding. It is not just about this war, which has only highlighted a major gulf between two very large segments of the population.
In the "original", the Blue and the Gray disagreed only about slavery, secession, and some economic issues. On everything else they had common ground and were able to fairly quickly re-unite after the war. Today the Blue and the Red really have nothing in common -- and I don’t mean just the war, public policy and politics, etc., but on a much more basic and profound level. On a cultural, philosophical, and moral level, on whether there even is such a thing as right and wrong (never mind what is right and wrong) we have almost nothing in common. We can't even agree on who our enemies are and, as I have pointed out, on what 'treason' or many other previously commonly understood words mean.
You see this Blue-Red split even within the Democratic Party which is about to fall apart.
The Blue and Gray were able to unite once again because they had the same moral code, worshipped the same God, had the same sense of honor, and shared basically the same culture -- but it still took the deaths of 600,000 men to bring them back together. The Blue and Red today are just from different planets with the gulf between them on these and so many other issues looking unbridgeable and growing. It is a tower of Babel. The Judeo-Christian ethic is garbage to the Blue, yet in its place, all they have to offer is a guardrail-free mish-mosh of hedonism, relativism, nihilism and emotionalism, which is premised on the fatal belief that people are basically good (which even a cursory glance at history shows is crap).
Everything is deconstructed for the cause of immediate gratification and zero consequences. Right and wrong/moral and immoral are determined entirely by who has more money and/or power, not by who is…well, right or wrong.
***
Anyway, I did go to your site and there appears, at least in the one article off your link, only one paragraph that gets into the nitty gritty of your problems with the Iraq Campaign:
“I have been back and forth with my opinion as to whether we should have invaded Iraq or not. With a strong outside insurgency, the hunt for WMD's proved futile, the possibility of Iraq dividing into three different countries, and a greater threat seen elsewhere, it would seem our priorities were askew.”
I would counter that:
1) Iraq is proving to be a quagmire for Islamist terrorists who instead roaming freely about the globe blowing up whatever they want are being thrown into a meatgrinder of a fight, like so many sticks into a woodchipper.
2) The entire world believed there were WMD in Iraq, and they may still be right, and that even without them, Saddam had set up a system to reconstitute their stockpiles as quickly as humanly possible after the inspectors left. But I have explained all that in greater detail above. (I beg you to please respond directly to that explanation.)
3) Even if there were NEVER any WMD in Iraq and everyone knew it and said so, WMD was just one of many reasons to go in. Saddam had a long, LONG history of harboring and supporting Islamist terrorists, including Al Qaeda. If you want me to go into detail on that, or to explain how Baathists and Islamists could work together, I can.
4) To defeat Islamist terrorism, we have NO CHOICE but to democratize the Middle East. You cannot stop a malaria epidemic by killing each individual mosquito as it comes into your yard. You have to drain the swamp. Iraq, after Afghanistan, was the easiest domino to fall. (Again, if you want me to go into detail…)
5) For those who genuflect before the corrupt UN, Saddam was openly flouting its authority. It was up to him to PRODUCE EVIDENCE that these weapons were destroyed “or face grave consequences”. (Again, we have this problem of postmodern deconstructionism where words have no meaning anymore – the outrage over Bush inflicting what any reasonable person would consider genuine ‘grave consequences’ on Iraq shows that apparently the UN thinks that “grave consequences” is nothing more than the UN holding several weeks worth of special closed-door meetings and then issuing a “statement of concern”.) It was NOT up to us to PROVE that the weapons were THERE; the burden of proof was on HIM. Everyone with Hans Blix Disease who kept wanting to give sanctions “a chance” (especially in the face of the Oil For Food scandals) to preserve the power and credibility of the UN and the international community were actually GUTTING said power and credibility. The big irony of all this is that Bush has saved the UN, at least for now…
6) So far Iraq is nowhere near dividing into 3 countries. Some of the Sunnis are being a pain in the butt, but there’s nothing new there, and what’s remarkable is that even individual incidents of Kurds and Shia taking revenge are all but non-existent. (I have to confess that I thought the Shia were going to make the streets run red with Sunni blood before the invasion.)
“Still, I have to ask myself; if with the available intelligence given, what would I have done? With the CIA, and other foreign intelligence (including the Russians) all saying there was a direct, imminent threat, it was clear that something had to be done.”
You have fallen for a flat-out lie. Neither the CIA, nor Bush, nor anyone in his cabinet EVER said that the threat was “imminent”. Bush’s exact words were that we cannot WAIT for the threat to be imminent because it will be too late.
“Hell, even the New York Times fell for Chalabi's deceptions. So, should we be there? I have concluded that the best answer I personally can give is, "I don't know."”
Chalabi deceived no-one, and has actually played a HUGE role in pulling Iraq back together. For one thing (among MANY), he’s the guy who talked Muqtada al-Sadr into abandoning violence and getting into politics.
”I do, however, wish that a great number of decisions in implementing this war had been different, including the number of troops and a better exit plan.”
This is mere disagreement and does not qualify as treasonous or seditious (in case you were wondering). Nonetheless, it is mindless nitpicking. Can you name a war where there WAS an exit plan in advance that didn’t have to be abandoned?
There is an old military saying: “No plan of battle survives contact with the enemy”. There are ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS things that happen in war that cannot be foreseen. Anyone who thinks the lack of a clear-cut exit plan that immediately works is proof of poor planning has wasted time playing video games that should have been spent reading history books. We were two years into WW2 (4 years for the Brits) before Churchill and Roosevelt decided that there could be no negotiated peace with Germany and only unconditional surrender would be acceptable. War is dangerous and unpredictable even with the best planning. The left is propagating the fiction that this fact is somehow unique to the Iraq Campaign.
“Supporting our troops should go beyond yellow ribbons.”
If I recall correctly, in one of your earlier posts, you seemed to imply that it was wrong that there wasn’t enough suffering on the home front. First, there obviously is among military families where their loved ones have died or are still over there with their butts flapping in the breeze, like my brother in Afghanistan. He was almost killed back in March, and 4 of his men died right behind him when an anti-tank mine went off under their vehicle. I am supporting him. Then there are endless groups and charities that directly support soldiers with food or cookies or DVD’s or anything to help remind them of home and take their minds off things. That the mainstream media doesn’t put it on the front page doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.
The price of gas is causing a little pain, though admittedly it’s exactly Warsaw under German occupation.
I have seen and heard many people say that something is wrong with us not suffering or sacrificing enough on the home front, that we shouldn’t be living the good life. I counter that:
a) The good life is a big part of what we’re fighting for;
b) It is a silly thing to go around looking for suffering when life has a way of bringing it to your doorstep without your help. Hey, look at New Orleans. And rest assured that 9/11 is not the last time American civilians will get blown up. Our enemies will see to it that we eventually suffer plenty, thank you very much, especially if a liberal Democrat wins in 2008.
FINALLY, I don’t wish to downplay the points you make on your site where you do on some level support Bush, even though you don’t like him and I assume didn’t vote for him.
I also appreciate your civility, and I mean that.
By the way:
"There is nobody (left, right, or center) with whom I agree with 100% on anything..."
This is true of all 6 billion of us, which is to say that we assume that such is the case with you too. Even I don't agree with Bush on everything, but so what? You don't have to agree with anyone 100% of the time (which is a good thing since it's impossible) to generally support him.
If you keep harping on the point that you're not in this or that camp, it starts to look like you have difficulty committing to anything. It's not enough to say "Well, I'm definitely not one of those...or one of those either." At some point the question becomes: what ARE you then?
Zhangliqun,
Wow. I am deeply moved that you took the time to respond to the concerns of 'lil ol' me in such a detailed fashion. All I can say is thank you.
As far as how I define myself. If I have to, I guess I'd say I'm a Moderate Liberal Democrat. But I look at each issue separatley, and often find that my views are among the most conservative among my liberal friends.
And while I don't see the day that I'd be compelled to join the Republican party, I will admit that my faith in the Democrats is increasingly being shaken. Especially being put into the hands of Dean, Durbin, Sharpton, and Ted Kennedy, who prove to be better fuel for comedy than anything else (and yes, I go there!). I'm holding out with hope for Obama.
Zhangliqun,
I have mulling over what you've said, and would like to pick your brain a bit futher on this issue, with your permission.
With current domestic events weighing heavy on me and the fact that I have to perform this weekend, I prefer to hold this off.
May we continue this discussion at a later date?
Zhan,
You are so right about Iraq and the need to remove Saddam. Patton had a similar philosophy regarding WWII, but nobody would listen to him. He felt you needed to: 1) Crushingly defeat your enemy. 2) Humiliate them and their ideology, so as to create an environment in which it would be socially expensive for anyone to offer moral/financial/public support for the fallen enemies ideology. 3) Reconstruct the enemies culture and community in a democratic fashion. If we fail in Iraq it will likely be due to the insistence of non-military peaceniks and the MSM that we respect the ideology of our enemy. It is Post-Modernism at its finest. Views differnt from our own aren't necessaryily wrong or evil, other cultures aren't less desirable than ours, our point of view isn't better and we shouldn't force it on others. Unfortunately, this view will make it impossible for us to make it socially expensive for people to offer support for Islamic extremism. Just look at the public comments of Muslims in London following the subway attacks.
Telefonsex Anal Sex - Telefonsex Fetisch Sex - Telefonsex Girls Live Cams
jkio
You're one pack of sick M---frs! My step-son joined behind our backs AFTER he knew there were NO WMD! He's been dis-onwed!
Hope you all war hungry idiots catch the bullet you signed up for!
A wounded Viet-Nam vet!
Commenting by HaloScan
