Libertarianism is at the core of conservative politics.
Howard ("Screech") Dean, Richard ("This disturbs me")Durbin, Benny Arnold Murtha, and John ("I was a Viet Nam war hero") Kerry have an extremely nuanced, yet dark and obscured view of supporting our troops.
Labels: Democrat, Dick Durbin, John Kerry, Murtha
posted by VPCheney @ 1:39 PM
11 comments
I'm dedicated to keeping America safe, strong, and productive, and to counter liberal or socialist misconceptions and misrepresentations with Solid Logic and the facts. I do not speak for the Vice President, but have very similar viewpoints on issues. ************ My E-mail privacy policy: I may use all or any part of an email tip in a blog post, unless requested specifically not to. NO email addresses or identities will ever be posted or shared.
11 Comments:
Love the pic.
He who could not earn the respect of the men under his command cannot give respect to the men who serve at the president's command.
How do you say, "I surrender" in french?
A better question is how do you say "Keep dying for the cause boys, we'll figure out what the cause is one day, and sometime after that, how to win the cause"
3 more deaths today, no end in sight. Stay the course they're someone else's kids.
How do you say, "I surrender" in french?
I don't know the French term, but "Murtha, LaMont, or Cut and Run" seem to be some appropriate American synonyms.
Glad to see you back, LR!
You're cowards, the both of you.
So what is your beef? Part of supporting the military is supporting the mission. We as a nation are safer now than before 9/11. Not safe, but safer. Homeland Security, the Patriot Act, and better intel. Financial tracking... Another big part is because we are taking the fight to them. What American citizen would prefer we let the terrorists choose the venue? Like maybe Ohio? Georgia? Illinois?...
Iraq is just one more (important) part of the War on Terror. Is this what we disagree about? Winning, or walking away with terrorists at our heels?
PFC, I admire your bravado in calling LR and I cowards. Bold. But how does that advance any ideas or enhance discussion?
How does suggesting war heroes such as John Kerry and John Murtha wanting to plant a knife in the back of US troops advance anything? What pisses me off about you people is that you are always so eager to attack people who have served our country with bravery, yet you stand behind a bunch of chickenhawk leaders who wouldn't do it themselves. I guess cowards run together, but on to the point.
Is there any quantitative proof that we are safer now than we were prior to 9/11, the fact that terror plots are being are seemingly being found everywhere would suggest we are less safe rather than more safe. If I live in a neighborhood and there is a burglary once every few years, I wouldn't think much of it, it would shake me up a little when it happens, but I wouldn't feel too unsafe in my house, but when burglars start getting arrested all over the neighborhood casing houses, it would make me start thinking my neighborhood isn't that safe. However when it comes to terrorists interrupting all these plots means we're safer, I don't think so. To me that shows their is a bigger threat then there was before.
Iraq isn't one more part on the war in terror, I'm still not sure what the hell it is, but I'm sure of what it isn't, or I should say what it was. What it was, was not a part of the war on terror. What was once a crappy regime bent on terrorizing its own people has decompsed into a bevy of militias fighting for control of a country, and at the same time fighting us. I don't remember that being there before, or hey really any terrorist threat from there, but I guess it's just the pesky details getting in the way. I would like to think Afghanistan was the major theater in the war on terror, seeing as how it was the hosting grounds for Al-Qaeda prior to 9/11, but we gutted that mission before we could finish it in favor of Iraq. Now, I feel wary that we're ignoring the new theaters in teh war on terror just to keep the beast that is OIF fed with troops. But OPSEC rules the day.
"With 130,000 soldiers still in the heat of battle in Iraq and more fighting and dying in Afghanistan, the Bush administration sought this year to cut $75 a month from the "imminent danger" pay added to soldiers' paychecks when in battle zones. The administration sought to cut by $150 a month the family separation allowance offered to those same soldiers and others who serve overseas away from their families....
Until protests led to a policy change, the Bush administration was also charging injured GIs from Iraq $8 a day for food when they arrived for medical treatment at the Fort Stewart, Georgia base where most injured are treated....
[T]he White House is refusing to provide more than 40,000 active-duty troops in Iraq with Kevlar body armor, leaving it up to them and their families to buy this life-saving equipment."
--Imperial America, pp. 25-27
You're right--it's the Democrats stabbing the military in the back.
Where to start???
PFC...
"...you people is that you are always so eager to attack people who have served our country with bravery..."
Are you talking about Kerry? Bravery? His service was not for his country, it was to advance his political career. Check with the Veterans who served with him on the Swift Boats.
Speaking of Iraq...
"...What was once a crappy regime..."
We agree. The Saddam Iraq was crappy. To imply that it was harmless to us belies the fact that he was shooting at our Air Force, paying families to donate homicide bombers to kill civilians, defying numerous UN resolutions, and shipping his WMD to Syria while the French and the Liberals held up enforcement of UN sanctions.
Safer? I still say that we ARE safer than before President Bush declared war on terrorism. The fact that the terrorists saw the 911 attacks as a way to get a load of virgins is part of why there are more plots uncovered now. In regards to your "neighborhood" security, it is like burglars finding out that an Ipod can magically open door locks. More burglars will become more emboldened. I would hope and expect the police to pay more attention to this threat, and busting the "casing" burglars would be a big part of that.
Laurie, I'll try to respond to your post in the next reply.
Where in the world to start. First, PFC, you can stop with the "someone else's kids stuff." I am a Marine combat vet, and fully support this war. I want to send someone else's kids only because mine are not old enough to serve yet. I have a daughter who wants to go to ROTC when she starts college, and I encourage her decision. If I were not old and fat, I would have been gone to Iraq. If my son were 18 and going to Iraq, I would support him fully and be proud that he believed in something bigger than himself.
It is stabbing our troops in the back when you go on national television and accuse them of terrorizing women and children in the middle of the night.
You assert that the presence of terror plots conveys logic that we are in more danger. I posit that since we are uncovering them BEFORE they are carried out, unlike 9/11, and the fact that this latest plot was discovered from a prisoner, that we are much safer. There is no more planning than before 9/11, but far fewer attacks between 9/11 and now, than between 1996 and 9/11.
You may live in a state of terror, but I don't. I refuse to participate in mass hysteria. I want every terorrist in the world to go to Baghdad. Easier to kill them all in one place than to have them scattered.
Laurie, that $8 a day thing isn't the BUsh administration. It is the law. It can be waived, but he didn't create it. A democratic congress did.
"It is stabbing our troops in the back when you go on national television and accuse them of terrorizing women and children in the middle of the night."
But some of our troops have done just that and worse. That's not stabbing in the back--that's called reporting.
"Laurie, that $8 a day thing isn't the BUsh administration. It is the law. It can be waived, but he didn't create it. A democratic congress did."
What about the Veterans' benefits being cut into for tax cuts for the wealthy? An administration claiming to value its military can't simultaneously neglect their welfare and purport to be shocked when someone screams, "Hypocrite!"
Robert,
I'd say you are far different then the leaders in Washington. You maybe eager for your children to join the military, and I think that is a great thing. But I don't think our leaders are eager to see their children in the military. Disagree?
Post a Comment
<< Home