Read the commenting rules carefully because they will be enforced!
I FIND IT PRETTY AMAZING THAT THE LIBERAL BLOGGERS AND THE DEMS JUST DON'T GET. HOW COM SENATOR LIEBERMAN GETS IT. I'D LIKE TO KNOW WERE THE LIBERAL BLOGGERS, MSM AND THE DEMS GET THEIR INFORMATION. THEY ARE ALWAYS QUOTING PUBLIC OPINION. AS YOU STATED HOW MUCH OF THAT PUBLIC OPINION EVEN BEEN OVER THERE OR ARE THEY GETTING THEIR INFOR FROM THE LIBERAL/DEM USUAL SOURCES. IE THE MSM.
KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.
Excellent post..for real..so thorough!..ty for linking this and go Leiberman!
Richard that is EASILY answered. They get their information from places like CNN which has already shown itself to be on the side of our enemies.
Thanks for your kind words.
Thanks Angel!!!!!!
During the campaign, Senator Lieberman insisted that the situation in Iraq had improved to the extent that the US would be able to bring substantial numbers of our troops home by the end of 2006. Now, he is writing op-ed pieces calling for an increase of soldiers who are stationed over there. He's either a liar, or his judgment on Iraq is so wrong that it should be paid as much attention as when John Kerry talks about winning Presidential elections, or Rudy Guiliani talks about the sanctity of marriage.
You guys on the right really need to wake up. We never caught or killed bin Laden, never caught or killed Mullah Omar. And yet we don't even have 50,000 troops looking for them and killing Taliban in Afghanistan, while 140,000 of our troops get to try to referee the latest round of Sunni vs. Shia. And your reaction is to put more of our guys into the middle of a the civil war in Iraq and almost ignore the guy who killed 3000 Americans on 9/11. And why do we want to continue the 3rd longest war in American history in Iraq? So we can prop up a government whose main power comes from a Shia party/militia that calls itself the "Supreme Counsel for Islamic Revolution in Iraq." I can't believe people on the right want our soldiers to die defending that, especially while we're not doing nearly enough to catch the guy who killed 3000 American civilians.
Realists who know war like General Shinseki told us at the beginning that it would require hundreds of thousands of troops, but did the Administration listen? No, no, Shinseki was told he was "way off" and hustled into retirement. All so the all-civilian neocons could put into practice some theory they daydreamed up during grad school classes.
30,000 troops isn't nearly enough. 500,000, at least, thanks to the extent the complete screw-up this Administration has done in Iraq, and even that would take years. And, of course, require a draft. I personally hope that if we have a draft and I get drafted, I'm at least sent after America's enemies rather than being asked to die defending one cleric who hates America in Iraq because that cleric appears to hate our country a tiny bit less than another cleric.
I will say I agree with spree that CNN is awful. However, my complaint with them is their endless parroting of whatever line the Administration puts out that day. For example, how an increase in soldiers in Iraq has come to have the same name as a discontinued soda ("surge").
The war on terror can still be won, but we have to stop making it about pride and hiding our mistakes. If we want to win with an all-volunteer military, we have to start respecting their lives and not wasting them trying to enforce rules in an Iraqi Civil war. And if we want to win in Iraq and put up another Mission Accomplished banner, we need to have a draft. No more of the BS of pretending that a slight tweak of the policy is going to fix things. And if we
want to stay in Iraq, we should all be there, it shouldn't be on a reservist getting stop-lossed into his fourth tour of duty while we argue about it on the web.
Excellent article!
I'll place your Blog on my Link list ASAP!
Cheers, Ronbo
Lets take this piece by piece...first I think it is YOU that needs to wake up Josh and I will tell you why.
First the situation on the ground is continually changing, therefore all plans made WILL need to be adjusted as things change. THAT is common sense.
Second..RE: Bin Laden. An old man, hiding in caves from the last we heard that is simply a figurehead. Yes it would be GREAT to get him, but JUST as important that we have gotten some of the masterminds that actually "planned" the attack on 9/11... Bin Laden ok'd it, he claimed credit for it, but it has already been established he wasn't in any of the planes, it wasn't even his idea originally.
Third:I believe I acknowledged mistakes have been made as have been in EVERY war in history, by virtue of BEING a war, things happen that cannot BE forseen. We can take guesses and IF it happens claim that we forsaw it and if it doesn't happen, shrug and say "it could have". NOTHING in war is written in stone except that both sides have the desire to win.
Further response on the next one due to space limits.
Fourth: Are you IN Iraq or been interacting with the military? If not then perhaps you should check out a few miliblogs and see exactly what the SOLDIERS are seeing on the ground, versus what the MSM has been feeding you.
Fifth:Many soldiers have stated that they would rather have someone that VOLUNTEERED protecting their back, than someone who was forced to be there.
I have seen a couple opinions that conflict with that, but the majority of responses and emails I have gotten have stated the Draft is a BAD idea and the reason I listed above is only ONE of the reasons they have given me.
Since they are the ones that have to trust someone to watch their backs..I would tend to listen to them.
Perhaps on your comment about CNN you shoud see this:
http://wwwwakeupamericans-
spree....rstatement.html
Then tell me CNN ISN'T working with the enemy.
Thanks for stopping by and have a great day!
CNN is a mouthpiece for the Bush administration? What? When did this happen? Did I wake up on the Bizzaro world again?
yup, can't you hear the twilight zone music?
"I'm fallin down a spiral, destination unknown. Come across a messenger all alone. Can't get no connection, can't get through where are you?"
THAT Twilight Zone?
Or did you mean the Rod Serling one...
Rod Sterling
1st point, situation constantly changing: Are you seriously arguing that an increase of 30,000 troops now is the best possible policy? On what basis do you make that recommedation?
2nd point, re bin Laden: I don't know how to make this any clearer, but I'll try. You don't get to head a terrorist organization that kills 3000 Americans and not have your life end with a reckoning of that. You can kill yourself like Hitler did, or surrender like Hirohito did. You don't get to hide out. We find you and make you pay.
3rd point, mistakes in war: Indeed, some mistakes are inevitable. But a lot more mistakes will be made when the advice of generals is pushed aside in favor of the advice of politicians or political operatives. Here is what I see needing to be done: We say to our generals, basically, what is the best we can hope for in Iraq, and what force do you need to accomplish that goal? Then, decide whether its worth it and whether we should do it. Right now we're asking them to do something that I don't believe our numbers are even close to being able to do. We're way short of a soldier to occupied citizen ratio of what we had in the Phillipines, or what the British had in South Africa.
4th: Nope, I'm not in Iraq. Do read military blogs, not the "oh yeah we're all for the surge" stuff that CNN breathless repeats over and over again. It seems to me that some of the soldiers do really believe in staying in Iraq, and some want to get the hell out. Hey, if you're proposing we let the soldiers vote as to what should happen, its unconventional, but I'd be down with that. But the idea that a single blog somehow represents what most troops are thinking seems doubtful to me. Its like saying you can understand what Americans think by reading Redstate or Dailykos. Doubt that either give an accurate view.
Fifth: Very interesting point. Hadn't thought of that, and hadn't seen it. In fact, I think its the best argument against the draft I've seen. But here's the thing: a lot of these guys are "volunteers" only in the loosest sense of the term. They signed up for the reserves for money for college, or the national guard to do some local stuff, and suddenly they're in Iraq. Or they're being stop-lossed and kept there. So are people who volunteered to serve but now wish they hadn't significantly superior to those who were drafted?
Still, that is definitely a strong argument, and Vietnam did show that their are dangers in a draft in the field.
That video CNN's got up is disgusting. Still, to me it says "we're whores who will show anything that we think might hold some fascination for people." I'm not sure it means that they're all watching it in the control room yelling allah akbar!
Anyway, thanks for the responses. The preference of currently serving soldiers for fellow volunteers is definitely food for thought.
On the basis that the colonels, ya know, those military members ON the ground, think they need it.
Unless, of course you think that YOU are better qualified to judge what is and what isn't needed IN Iraq than those soldiers that ARE there.
RE: Bin Laden, did I once mention that we shoudn't catch him? NO. I said that there are other fish to fry ALSO, some people CAN chew gum and walk you understand?
AHHHHHHHHHH, yes your third point, I always SAID that Bush should listen to the generals....but NOW that he is prepared to, ya'll are STILL pissing and moaning...make UP your mind. Either we LISTEN to our military or then Bush was right NOT to... you cannot have it BOTH ways.
The numbers are out there...out of 134,000 troops IN Iraq, 1000 members of the military, only about 1/2 of which ARE in Iraq have made statements and signed letters to their congressmen... You do the math and see how SMALL that percentage is of soldiers saying we should leave.
Overwhelming percentages are proud to be there and can see the progress they are making and they have STATED over and over again, many times I publish their words right here, that the media is REFUSING to tell the whole story and their successes, yes SUCCESSES are NOT being reported on.
Once again, they say it is needed, they should get it and ya'll can just keep pissing and moaning cause it IS what you do best.
I would rather listen to the "majority" that are IN Iraq than assume that you, the arm chair quarterback would know MORE than they do.
WAIT WAIT WAIT: Again I do not know where you are getting your information, but it is flawed. We have the HIGHEST RE-enlistment rate, beating all goals. These are men and women who KNOW they are going back and keep lining up to do so because they BELIEVE in the mission. They believe the Iraqi people are worth saving.
Read some of the soldiers words, I have them on the site, TONS of letters and words from their mouth...ones in Iraq.
The news won't show you their words but they are still out there if you care to look.
It is worth it to see what they think vs what the news tells you they think.
Just something to chew on.
Bed for me, sleep well.
Commenting by HaloScan
