Just Another Reason That We Should Have Stayed Out of Iraq

[Beetle Bailey]

What game is that?



"The whole world" might be assuming that...



The same mainstream media that is dominated by liberals who are hostile to Bush to begin with. Yeah, I am sure they gave him a fair shake.



Being wrong or having a strong opinion doesnt make him a liar. I have yet to see evidence that he said anything that he knew to be false.



1% of the population fighting the other 99% is not a Civil War. Sorry.

And I dont accept you as an interpreter for the average soldier.



I do not share your pessimism. And in any event, the alternatives are worse.



It is their job though. I didnt force them to sign up.

More than that, I believe the vast majority would agree with me that it's their job.



In a sense it is. They chose a job that carries high risk. Most likely it was because they wanted to defend their nation. It might have been simply because they wanted money for college. But either way, they signed up of their own free will, knowing the potential consequences.

To me it seems demeaning to them to say they are fighting for nothing, or that they are merely puppets of the Bush administration.

Typical example of what passes for patriotism these days. With feeble equivocation and tortured logic he struggles to come to terms with his own lack of intestinal fortitude. It's so easy to be a cheer leader. Easy to exort others to do your fighting for you. Particularly when you risk or sacrifice nothing. It is painfully apparent that all your military experiance comprises what you have read or seen on TV. Your opinions about people who defend this country are completely irrelevant; as you obviously have no way to put any of it into a real context.

 

[Castle]

Your opinions about people who defend this country are completely irrelevant; as you obviously have no way to put any of it into a real context.

Humor me and help put all of "it" into context for him. I'm curious as to what direction you're trying to take this.

-Castle

 

[Sadistic Savior]

This must be the new standard for excellence of leadership in America. Just try and prove that our leaders lied.

The concept of "innocence until proven guilty" is really new to you?

Pretty low standards for a democracy.

I dont consider "innocent until proven guilty" to be a low stanbdard for a democracy. Quite the opposite.

The world doesn't have to assume anymore. It's just not a big secret.

Yeah, no proof necessary eh?

You know there are many, many Republicans that have said the exact same things the media has.

Irrelevant even if true, and for the same reasons. Bush is not guilty merely because they have the opinion that he is guilty.

It's not a fair shake or an unfair shake. The truth is the truth.

And the "truth" just happens to mirror your own opinion. How terribly convenient for you.

I don't get swayed by the far Right or Left...

That has not been my observation so far. But maybe you'll surprise me. I've only been here less than a week after all.

Bush Now Says What He Wouldn’t Say Before War: Iraq Had ‘Nothing’ To Do With 9/11 President Bush was in the midst of explaining how the attacks of 9/11 inspired his “freedom agenda” and the attacks on Iraq until a reporter, Ken Herman of Cox News, interrupted to ask what Iraq had to do with 9/11. “Nothing,” Bush defiantly answered. Watch it.

Yeah, I am sure it was completely in context.

Me: It is their job though. I didnt force them to sign up.

No you did not. They still deserve a fair shake. They didn't get that going in with poor armor and a pack of lies. They're not getting that with our current policy.

I disagree. They are fulfilling the obligation they chose to bind themselves to.

As to the government not supporting them enough, I have no argument with that. I agree that they deserve the tools necessary to do their job (such as the armor). I agree they deserve the best medical care. I agree that they should be paid more for what they do.

But either way, they knew what their obligations were when they signed up. They were not lied to.

I think this has been addressed. I don't believe you are really as heartless as you might appear.

Heart is irrelevant. I am merely stating the facts. Whether it is "fair" or not is entirely subjective. But they knew in advance that this was a possibility. They were not decieved. That is my only point.

My position has been consistent on this issue from the beginning. I have always been pro-military. Like most Neo-cons, the one area where I dont mind spending money is on the military...including medical care, pay, and supplies (such as that armor). When it comes to funding the military, neocons are far more in favor of it than the Paleocons, the liberals, or just about anyone else.

These are peoples sons and daughters.

These are grown adults, with their own thoughts. They are not robots that are programmed by the media or by something Bush said. They have their own opinions, their own dreams, their own desires, their own views. It is insulting IMO to imply that they are so weak they can be mind-controlled by the media or the Bush Administration.

I respect them on THAT level. Knowing the consequences, they still chose this high-risk line of work. I respect them the same way I would respect anyone who chose high-risk work.

They are not just disposable because they signed up.

I have never even implied that I see them as disposable.

It's so easy to be a cheer leader. Easy to exort others to do your fighting for you.

Its also easy to give up.

 

[michaelr]

I think I'll try to get this thread back on track.
Kurds report Turkish, Iranian shelling in northern Iraq; wider conflict feared
Christopher Torchia, Associated Press
Published: Friday, June 08, 2007
ISTANBUL, Turkey — Turkish artillery shelled suspected positions of Kurdish rebels based across the border in northern Iraq on Friday, according to reports. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned Turkey that it risked expanding regional tensions with any “robust” move of troops into Iraq.

Turkey has been building up its forces along the border with Iraq, and its leaders are debating whether to stage a major incursion to pursue Kurdish rebels from Turkey who rest, train and resupply at bases in Iraq. Such an operation could ignite a wider conflict involving Iraqi Kurds, and draw in its NATO ally, the United States.

Rice, speaking in New York to a panel of journalists and editors from The Associated Press, said it’s “not good for anybody for a robust move across the border.” She described it as “not good for Iraq and not good for Turkey.”

The statement by Rice suggested Washington has acknowledged that Turkey might conduct limited incursions across the rugged frontier against the separatist Kurdistan Workers’ Party, also known as PKK.

Iran has also clashed with Iranian Kurd fighters who have bases in remote, mountainous areas of northern Iraq, and Iranian forces reportedly participated in the overnight shelling.

Tension and violence involving Kurds, who have long sought autonomy, have ebbed and surged in the past century in Turkey, Syria, Iran and Iraq. In Turkey, Kurds make up about 20 per cent of the country’s population of more than 70 million.

The Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, or PUK, the party of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, reported the overnight Turkish and Iranian shelling on its website. Turkish military authorities at the General Staff in Ankara were not immediately available for comment.

Iranian officials in Tehran could not be reached for comment late Friday. Iranian media contained no reports on any shelling, and usually wait several days to report such incidents.

The PUK said artillery shells overnight hit some areas in the Sidikan area in Irbil province, where the borders of Turkey, Iran and Iraq converge, and that nine villages were affected. It was unclear whether there was any degree of co-ordination among Turkish and Iranian gunners.

“Huge damage was inflicted on the area,” the PUK said, citing what it described as an unidentified “source” in the area. “The source said that residents have left their houses, fearing for their lives.”

Lt. Ahmed Karim of the Iraqi border guards force told the AP that seven Turkish shells landed on a forest near Sakta village in the Batous area, but no casualties were reported.

Belgium-based Firat, a pro-Kurdish news agency that Turkey says is a rebel mouthpiece, said Turkish forces shelled areas in Iraq for three hours beginning at 11 p.m. Thursday. It said there were no reports of casualties.

On Friday, Turkey’s military declared its “unshakable determination” to defeat Kurdish rebels, and a fourth soldier died of injuries from a roadside bomb in a new Turkish security zone north of the Iraq border. The bombing Thursday was blamed on Kurdish separatists.

On Wednesday, Turkish security officials and an Iraqi Kurdish official said Turkish soldiers had crossed into Iraq in pursuit of rebels based there. Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul denied such a raid took place.

Turkish forces occasionally have pursued Kurdish rebels just across the border, but rarely announce the operations.

© Associated Press 2007

 

[top gun]

Sadistic Savior;12801]

Like most Neo-cons, the one area where I...

Ok... now I see the problem . I'm sorry... I was trying to work toward a reasonable understanding. I now see why that will be impossible.

 

[Sadistic Savior]

I was trying to work toward a reasonable understanding. I now see why that will be impossible.

Glad I could help to clarify your position.

 

[Beetle Bailey]

Humor me and help put all of "it" into context for him. I'm curious as to what direction you're trying to take this.

-Castle

I think the intent of my post is pretty obvious. Doesn't really require much interpretation. So I guess "humor" is the right word. Although I don't find this to be a very humorous subject.
The "it" you refer to includes a number of human attributes, sorely lacking in our society these days. "It" includes having a sense of personal responsibility. Having the courage of your convictions, and acting upon them. It means risking everything and possibly sacrificing for what you believe. It means having some real life experiance to be able to put all these qualities into context. Qualities that apparently elude so many neo-con rhetorical warriors. You know. Like the one's posting here.
I wonder how some one like that can honestly question the motives of people who actually serve our country? While having no shame about not serving. It's the kind of glib cynicism that seems to be the standard for morality now. As exampled by our current leaders.
It's almost too funny to watch these guys wriggle and squirm to avoid dealing with the fundemental issue. Which itself is indicitive of neo-con rationale.
If you support the war in Iraq, and are capable of fighting, but won't volunteer to serve; that can only be defined as hypocritical and cowardly. How is that a morally sustainable position? It's not.
People like this just talk about supporting the troops. But they don't really support anything or anyone. They mock the troops. They dishonor the troops. It's the sort of mentality that dishonors all Americans. They are the sort of people not worthy of good people's sacrifice.

 

[Sadistic Savior]

If you support the war in Iraq, and are capable of fighting, but won't volunteer to serve

So if I refuse to join the police force, does that mean I really dont oppose crime? Your logic makes no sense.

 

[Beetle Bailey]

So if I refuse to join the police force, does that mean I really dont oppose crime? Your logic makes no sense.

See what I mean?

 

[Sadistic Savior]

Not really. Clarify.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

So if I refuse to join the police force, does that mean I really dont oppose crime? Your logic makes no sense.

If you're daughter is having brain surgery, and you're not a brain surgeon, then you don't support the surgeon performing on your daughter. Clearly.

 

[Beetle Bailey]

I think it's cute when they play dumb. Or, maybe they are not playing. Hard to tell. As if the comparisons with police officers and brian surgeons are in any way relevant. As if these kind of of infantile equivalencies actually address the issue. I don't think these sort of childish rhetorical devices actually fool many people any more. But, going on the assumption that their comments might actually be based on ignorance, I will repeat the point again for their benifit.
If you publically extol the virtues of the war in Iraq. If you exhort others to do your fighting for you. If you are physically and mentally capable of volunteering for military service, but refuse to do so; you can only be described as a hypocrite and a coward. If any one else has any more questions about this point, I will be only too happy to elaborate.

 

[top gun]

I think it's cute when they play dumb. Or, maybe they are not playing. Hard to tell. As if the comparisons with police officers and brian surgeons are in any way relevant. As if these kind of of infantile equivalencies actually address the issue. I don't think these sort of childish rhetorical devices actually fool many people any more. But, going on the assumption that their comments might actually be based on ignorance, I will repeat the point again for their benifit.
If you publically extol the virtues of the war in Iraq. If you exhort others to do your fighting for you. If you are physically and mentally capable of volunteering for military service, but refuse to do so; you can only be described as a hypocrite and a coward. If any one else has any more questions about this point, I will be only too happy to elaborate.

Mr. Bailey sir... may I take a stab at this one for you? Try and break it down to it's lowest common denominator and see who can do the math?

Everyone talks a good fight when they don't have to back it up!

There... that seems pretty basic... they should get that...

 

[michaelr]

Mr. Bailey sir... may I take a stab at this one for you? Try and break it down to it's lowest common denominator and see who can do the math?

Everyone talks a good fight when they don't have to back it up!

There... that seems pretty basic... they should get that...

Well said.

 

[Castle]

I think the intent of my post is pretty obvious. Doesn't really require much interpretation. So I guess "humor" is the right word. Although I don't find this to be a very humorous subject.
The "it" you refer to includes a number of human attributes, sorely lacking in our society these days. "It" includes having a sense of personal responsibility. Having the courage of your convictions, and acting upon them. It means risking everything and possibly sacrificing for what you believe. It means having some real life experiance to be able to put all these qualities into context. Qualities that apparently elude so many neo-con rhetorical warriors. You know. Like the one's posting here.
I wonder how some one like that can honestly question the motives of people who actually serve our country? While having no shame about not serving. It's the kind of glib cynicism that seems to be the standard for morality now. As exampled by our current leaders.
It's almost too funny to watch these guys wriggle and squirm to avoid dealing with the fundemental issue. Which itself is indicitive of neo-con rationale.
If you support the war in Iraq, and are capable of fighting, but won't volunteer to serve; that can only be defined as hypocritical and cowardly. How is that a morally sustainable position? It's not.
People like this just talk about supporting the troops. But they don't really support anything or anyone. They mock the troops. They dishonor the troops. It's the sort of mentality that dishonors all Americans. They are the sort of people not worthy of good people's sacrifice.

It appears we are both correct with respect to humor here. Your response did humor me but humor is the last word I would use to describe the subject matter.

How clever you are to paint all "neo-cons" with the same venomous brush. I assume grouping most conservatives together in one big ball is your intent as this is the norm on most political boards.

I am curious how you will diminish the positions of those of us that have served our country and are insulted by the defeatist leftist mentality that rains down on all the brave men and women sacrificing for us now. While they have served, they may disagree with you completely. Does that fact preclude them from voicing an opinion as well? Or are they simply dishohorable?

You use words like dishonor, hypocritical and cowardly as if they were always connected to a certain political affiliation. A common mistake but one that so many are comfortable making over and over. You are certainly encouraged by me to express your views whether they come from first hand experience or not. It is unfortunate that you appear to feel differently.

-Castle