1. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Can you support out troops and still be against the war?

Discussion in 'Polls' started by Nammy, Feb 10, 2007.

?

Can you support out troops and still be against the war?

  1. Yes

    76 vote(s)
    73.1%
  2. No

    29 vote(s)
    27.9%
  1. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,624
    Likes Received:
    153
    Would you like a similar list of democrats? Of course, it would be larger. Then there is the fact that the people on this list aren't speaking out against the military, and they aren't pretending to know what the people in the military think about what they are doing like the dems out there who do it day and night 24/7

    By the way, being the sort who doesn't serve and as a result, has no idea about how either the military or the reserves and guard operate, perhaps you should leave bush off your list. He satisfied his requirements. The documentation is all available for anyone who is interested in the truth rather than spreading malicious rumors.
     
  2. Popeye

    Popeye Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    Washington state
    The list is "larger" all right, but not in the way you would like to think.

    Richard Gephardt: Air National Guard, 1965-71.
    David Bonior: Staff Sgt., Air Force 1968-72.
    Tom Daschle: 1st Lt., Air Force SAC 1969-72.
    Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam Jan. 1971 as an army journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade.
    Bob Kerrey: Lt. j.g . Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor, Vietnam.
    Daniel Inouye: Army 1943-47; Medal of Honor, WWII.
    John Kerry: Lt., Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat V, Purple Hearts.
    Charles Rangel: Staff Sgt., Army 1948-52; Bronze Star, Korea.
    Max Cleland: Captain, Army 1965-68; Silver Star &
    Bronze Star, Vietnam. Paraplegic from war injuries.
    Served in Congress.
    Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-53.
    Tom Harkin: Lt., Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve, 1968-74.
    Jack Reed: Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army Reserve 1979-91.
    Fritz Hollings: Army officer in WWII; Bronze Star and seven campaign ribbons.
    Leonard Boswell: Lt. Col., Army 1956-76; Vietnam,
    DFCs, Bronze Stars,and Soldier's Medal.
    Pete Peterson: Air Force Captain, POW. Purple Heart,
    Silver Star and Legion of Merit.
    Mike Thompson: Staff sergeant, 173rd Airborne, Purple Heart.
    Bill McBride: Candidate for Fla. Governor. Marine in Vietnam; Bronze Star with Combat V.
    Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star.
    Pete Stark: Air Force 1955-57
    Chuck Robb: Vietnam
    Howell Heflin: Silver Star
    George McGovern: Silver Star & DFC during WWII.
    Jimmy Carter: Seven years in the Navy.
    Walter Mondale: Army 1951-1953
    John Glenn: WWII and Korea; six DFCs and AirMedal with 18
     
  3. USMC the Almighty

    USMC the Almighty Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2007
    Messages:
    2,070
    Likes Received:
    14
    I don't know where you got your list from but not all of those individuals are supporters of the Iraq War.

    At any rate, what does a handpicked list of 15 random people prove?
     
  4. Popeye

    Popeye Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    Washington state
    You're right, that last list got away from my point, so I deleted it. The list of Republican office holders that didn't serve, as opposed to the list of Democrats who did, is my point. Those Republicans refused to put their own lives on the line, but they can't wait to send others, that's my point as well.
     
  5. USMC the Almighty

    USMC the Almighty Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2007
    Messages:
    2,070
    Likes Received:
    14
    2 things:

    (1) What does choosing whether or not to serve in the military 40 years ago have anything to do with whether or not supporting the current war in Iraq?

    (2) I've never been a brain surgeon. Does that mean I can't support the brain surgeon operating on my cousin?
     
  6. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,624
    Likes Received:
    153

    You, typical of most liberals don't seem to be able to separate your emotions from the reality. You suggest that the republicans "can't wait" to send others when the reality is that they recognize the necessity to confront an enemy that simply won't go away if we ignore it.
     
  7. Popeye

    Popeye Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    Washington state
    Yeah, like the "necessity to confront an enemy", in Iraq, that had nothing to do with 9/11. Meanwhile, the man, we were told, was behind 9/11, Osama Bin Laden, is free to make tapes laughing at our incompetence. Where's the "necessity" there?
     
  8. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,624
    Likes Received:
    153
    "Laughing" from some of the most wretched ratholes in the afghan mountans. "Laughing" from cold and miserable caves because he dare not show is face to more than a select few individuals in the entire world. Impotent laughter is all he has left. His resources have been squandered, his very best people have been killed, he is hated by his own native people, and his reputation is circling the drain.

    He poured his money, weapons, and people into iraq and there he still sits in some sh!t hole in afghanistan because he has been effectively driven from every neighborhood in baghdad. He is laughing because he has nothing else. His organization is scrambling to form some, hideouts equal in wretchedness to his own, in the hamrin mountains while some small number of them remain. Even their former insurgent allies have turned on them.

    His status in the muslim world has dropped off the map because he has failed in iraq. His funding is dwindling because he has no success to show unless you call killing fellow muslims success. Iraq has become a grave yard for his best and brightest.

    His laughter is impotent and hollow, and has the ring of panic and only those who can rightfully claim the title of true idiot believe he is laughing at "our" incompetence from the miserable little sh!t hole he hides in and calls home these days.
     
  9. Popeye

    Popeye Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    Washington state
    Certainly, I would assume, he's not enjoying his previous living standards, but he is still free. The worst terrorist attack, on US shores, in history, and the man responsible for it has yet to be brought to justice. Indeed, the Bush administration would rather spend billions deposing a secular dictator and chase phantom WMDs than do it's duty.

    Do you even care if Bin Laden is captured anymore? Or are you like other war supporters, altering and changing positions, in an attempt to defend the current reality of Bush administration ineptitude?
     
  10. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,624
    Likes Received:
    153
    The man is in a prison of his own making, living in far worse conditions than he would were we to capture him. Daily, he sees his situation become worse and worse. No less than 45 of his leaders were killed or captured in october alone, the bulk of those turned in or captured by muslims. At this point, I personally prefer to see him live like a scared dog as opposed to the life of relative luxury that people like you would provide him should he ever be captured alive.

    And by all means, continue to claim that we are losing the war. Claim it even in the face of victory. Claim it even as the insurgent's ability to cause fear and chaos dwindles. Claim it even in the face of tens of thousands returning home because the violence has fallen off so much. Claim it even in the face of the vast majority of the country living normal lives. Claim it even in the face of 98% of the violence (what little of it there is left) happening within a 50 mile radius of baghdad. It identifies you for what you are.
     
  11. Popeye

    Popeye Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    Washington state
    As I suspected, you are attempting to justify the Bush administration's failure to capture the architect of 9/11. You really don't know how comfortable Osama may or may not be, you're just going on Bush administration inspired assumptions. What you're really saying is, it's okay with you that the mass murderer of thousands remains free. It's just all about politics isn't it? Who cares about justice. I wonder if the familys of the WTC dead would agree with you.

    It's been 2260 days since President Bush said he would get Osama bin Laden "Dead Or Alive." And that's just fine by you. Who cares how he's living, he's free. I don't know about you, but I'd rather spend my time hiding than lose my freedom. How can you attempt to justify such a monumental failure?
     
  12. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,624
    Likes Received:
    153
    I am not attempting to justify anything. That is your department. Let me ask you, exactly how would you go about capturing a man who has gone to ground in an area so remote that a large percentage of the habitants have never even heard of a telephone?

    We had a means to track him down and were closing on him. Perhaps you were unaware, or maybe it is a case of deliberate selective amnesia. We were monitoring and tracking him via his satellite phone activity, but you and yours informed him on the front page of the ny times, so his one real time link with the technological world dried up almost immediately. Now tell me how you would go about finding him after you made him aware that any real time communication with the outside world could be a mortal threat.
     
  13. Popeye

    Popeye Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    Washington state
    Somehow, I think if we had used just a portion of the manpower and billions wasted in Iraq, there is a good chance he would now be in custody.

    Oh, I see, it's the NY Times and the liberals fault that Bin Laden hasn't been captured. That reach is a new low, even for you palerider. Bush is the president, the buck stops with him, period.

    It's now been 2261 days since President Bush said he would get Osama bin Laden "Dead Or Alive."
     
  14. USMC the Almighty

    USMC the Almighty Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2007
    Messages:
    2,070
    Likes Received:
    14
    That's a pretty stupid philosophy and it is not only hypocritical (because you surely wouldn't apply the same principle to Clinton) but it demonstrates a major issue with people's view on the role of government.

    I'm not talking about just the war here but there are 513,000 elected officials in this country. The President is just one (albeit an important one) in this whole system. Why is he the only one to blame when things don't go perfectly?

    Secondly, since he is the most powerful man in the country, a lot accountability ultimately does fall on him but his job could be made a hell of a lot easier if the press and this country's liberals would throw him a bone once in a while.

    The whole "they're doing it for ratings" argument can't even work for the NY Times because everytime they splash another major tool in tracking terrorists all over the front page, they lose a large percentage of readers. (In the last six months, their daily circulation was down 4.51% to about a million readers (1.5 million on Sunday). To put it in perspective, the Drudge Report has 16 million readers a day.)

    The only possible explanation that could be put forth for this is that they hate President Bush so much that they are willing to aid the terrorists in order to make him look bad.
     
  15. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,624
    Likes Received:
    153
    If that is how you really believe things are, then lets move back, to the time when clinton passed on a handcuffed and gift wrapped osama.

    Care to make a guess as to how many "wanted dead or alive" criminals have not been found? If this is the best you have, then, as usual, you have nothing but a silly appeal to emotion.

    And yes, when you tell a hunted man that his satellite phone conversations are being monitored and his capture is eminent, then you are left with little alternative but to accept the responsibility of your actions. He stopped all real time communication with the outside world.

    So I am still waiting for your plan.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice