Dennis has his points. There are two sides to every issue. I guess where I stand is as a proud American. I support my country no matter what. I have a full understanding that innocent lives are lost in warfare, but at the same time I feel that what we're doing is necessary. I just wish terrorism was taken more seriously in the past, because it's now a global issue. Terrorist networks are everywhere.
Never again will I complain about having a bad day.
A TRULY bad day is being in the thin, sub-zero air of the Afghan mountains south of Gardez, lugging a 75 lb. pack, having al-Qaida bullets slam into your flak jacket, alternately experiencing sand storms, blizzards and burning sun...while trying to keep from stepping on mines or setting off booby traps.
I believe the real reason we're in Afghanistan is for oil, and I blame Bush for the cruel deception that's put our troops into such a dreadful situation.
This is the most outrageous statement I've read lately...
I believe the real reason we're in Afghanistan is for oil, and I blame Bush for the cruel deception that's put our troops into such a dreadful situation.
What was I thinking as I watched televison accounts of the 9/11 horror? Virtually the verbatim response as from many who've subsequently written on the matter in columns posted on antiwar.com, the fine libertarian website: "It's a wonder it took this long."
Though I'm a leftist, we have a shared appreciation of how often and thoroughly the U.S. has self-interestedly nosed itself into other countries' affairs, and how our general, insufferable arrogance, together with gratingly offensive cultural impositions and a definitely one-sided, exploitative economic relationship, have built up sharply warranted international hatreds against "ugly" Americans.
The bulk of humanity lives in desperate poverty, not so much because of factors such as climate. The world's impoverished are KEPT poor, by a global economic injustice that routinely sees the West not making the world safe for democracy, as piously claimed, but of making the planet's human and natural resources cheaply and readily available to multinational-corporate interests. Our wealth is largely derived from the piratic success we've long enjoyed in ripping off foreign workers and natural resources, with little given in return except addictions for Coca-Cola and Marlboro, as our movies and music have affronted native religious and cultural sensibilities with a steady stream of sexually explicit and gratuitously violent overloads.
All this as ragged children dig in garbage dumps for sustenance, while the comprador class that betrays its own people by profitably siding with Western neocolonialists, often through brutal repression that quashes any prospect of dissent, lives in oppulent luxury.
Thus, as American kids barely past the joys of high school hunker down in fear in Afghan mountains beneath al-Qaida guns, I confess to feeling considerably more resentment toward the business-puppet administration that ordered them there -- as part of an overall goal of getting U.S. hands on somebody else's oil -- than I do toward their combat opponents themselves.
I'm tired of people all over this planet being hurt and killed either in furtherance of, or in resistance to, my own country's never articulated but nonetheless definite status of being history's objectively widest-grabbing and ultimately most destructive imperialism.
Those who perished on 9/11 may have died, directly and immediately, at the hands of terrorists.
But it was our government, and the legacy of immoral policy our Enron-style special-interest, ruling hierarchy is greedily devoted to...that put them inexorably in harm's way.
Admit it or not, we've become an unprecedented combination robber/tryrant which no amount of glorifying, myth-based rhetoric, or our standing as the sole remaining super power, can keep the world's people from finally dealing with in victorious retribution.
You can't win when you're on the wrong side of history.
It's plainly time for doing the right thing, for our own societal salvation.
The Taliban commander quickly sent 10 of his best soldiers over the dune. A gun battle broke out and continued for a few minutes, then silence. The voice called out "One Minnesota soldier can whip a hundred Talibans."
Furious, the Taliban commander sent his next best 100 troops over the dune, and immediately a huge gunfight commenced. After 10 minutes of battle, silence again. The voice called out again. "One Minnesota soldier can whip a thousand Talibans."
The enraged Taliban commander mustered 1000 fighters and sent them across the dune. Cannons, rockets and machine gun fire rang out as a huge battle was fought. Then silence.
Eventually one wounded Taliban crawled back over the dune, and with his dying words told the commander, "Don't send any more men. It's a trap. There's twoof them."
Dag nab it, Bill, please let me retire without having to come back here to correct errors.
The Spanish-American War and the Philippine Rebellion were two separate entities, with some overlap.
Put "600,000 killed in Philippine Rebellion" into Google's search field and you'll come up with many confirming results.
That's what I did, since the figure DID seem inordinately high.
But it's tragically true, as such highly reputable groups as the Christian Aid charity plainly state:
"By a quirk of fate, the war for independence coincided with the 1898 Spanish-American war over Cuba. The Spanish navy in the Philippines was attacked by US forces in the Battle of Manila Bay in 1898, and American assurances to the Filipino revolutionaries that they came as liberators, not conquerors, resulted in the occupation of Manila by US forces. Although Independence was proclaimed by Filipino General Emilio Aguinaldo on 12 June 1898, the USA, recognising the strategic importance of the islands, failed to keep their word and promptly purchased the islands from the Spanish for US$20 million. The Filipinos reacted by declaring Aguinaldo President of the First Philippine Republic, and the country was plunged into another war. This second war of national self-assertion was even more costly than the first. The casualties eventually included approximately 600,000 Filipinos and 4,234 Americans. The US finally conquered the Philippines after three years of war and it was another 11 years before the previously unconquered Muslim areas were pacified. It was one of the most brutal wars seen in the region, with concentration camps and civilian executions commonplace." --Christian Aid (UK)
Now fast forward 44 years when we also fought off the Japanese from the Philippenes. They were tortured, murdered, raped and starved by their Japanese occupiers and they were damn glad to see us kick them back off of their land. Now I'm not saying that the war in 1898 was a good thing, but sadly the Philppenes would have been occupied by someone else anyway, they lacked the military strength needed to keep most nations at bay. I'm not saying it makes it o.k and or justifies it, not at all. If it had never been a U.S territory and Japan or China etc. taken them over and kept it as part of thier homeland I wonder what kind of life the islanders would have had? Everything comes full circle eventually and wether you want to admit it or not, they were better off at the time under our protection. Fast forward to today and they are gaining more independence, they will have to decide whom to ally itself with. Are we without sin in the whole matter, God no. I have been their and most of the people were very friendly to U.S troops, maybe because we spent gobs of money there I don't know they probably smiled, took our money and then went and washed their hands. But I think they are much better off today because of our past involvement as well. I know you will never see any good come out of it because to you we do no good.
BTW I noticed on your list of see how bad we are and attrocities we apperantly or alegedly committed you left out all of WW2, why is that ? Was that the only time we were justified?
Cmdr. Speicher was declared killed in action in 1991 after his F-18 Hornet was shot down over Iraq. But last year he was re-classified as "missing in action" by the Pentagon, based on information from an Iraqi defector.      According to U.S. intelligence officials, the British intelligence information was based on an additional intelligence source — someone who had been in Iraq and said he had learned that an American pilot is being held captive in Baghdad.      The British report stated further that only two Iraqis were permitted to see the captive American pilot: the chief of Iraq's intelligence service, and Uday Hussein, son of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, said the officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity.      The new intelligence has led some Pentagon officials to believe Iraq is holding Cmdr. Speicher prisoner.
Mellow out, Bill, before your galloping heart pops.
This will be my absolute last post until such time as the folly George Bush has unleashed upon us smokes America's butt like lit dynamite that Daffy Duck was too slow in throwing.
Then, I'll calmly and graciously say:
"Whoo-hoo! Who da man?! Yes sir, Jack! Told ya so, didn't I?! Huh?! Huh?!"
(Actually, no. Nobody can take satisfaction in myopic misleadership resulting in massive harm.)
I would think it very strange to reclassify him as MIA after declaring him dead.
They originally thought he was dead and probably rushed to do so. They got info shortly after that he was possibly being held in Baghdad. They blew it off as being from a bad source. (Bad mistake) Then they got the same story two other times from more credible sources and reclassified him. It is not the norm, usually they classify someone as MIA and then KIA when they get info. MIA is alot harder on the families since their is always the lingering hope or questions. So I'm sure they wouldn't have done it without credible evidence, it can be a political firestorm. Sadly our govenrment I think has failed our MIA's and thier families miserably.
Have you seen "We were soilders" yet ? It was a very good movie. I would rate it in my top ten or even 5 of all time. The other night on the history channel they did a history or hollywood ? segment about that battle with a group of vets who were there in the Ia Drang valley during the battle. They all said it was mostly history and noted the exceptions were probably due to time constraints. It's nice to at least see the history part of it being stuck too instead of some wacky Oliver Stone psuedo reality. It shows that although a wrong and unpopular war that many or the majority of men who served did so with bravery and honor. Perhaps this movie will shed some light on a far too often overlooked fact. It's only a movie but it's a step. To anyone who hasn't seen it I would say go. I took my wife and she thought it was an excellent movie as well and she is not the type who would normally go to a "war" movie.
One of the few -- very few -- uses of tax money of which I approve is support of our military. When you have been injured while serving in the military, spend most of your time volunteering to help other active and retired and disabled service men and women, and are able to speak intelligently and articulately on behalf of those people, I might pay as much attention to your posts as I do to Bill's.
I noticed, Bill. I also wondered why Sloop jumped in assuming I was talking to him, when I referred to "Jeb Franklin's" post with his tag line, Hey Dude
Now if GDubbya would just TRY to improve the pay and housing and other benefits that he SAID he was going to do for our LIVING Veterans and active Service members... That, would be something!
Bill Fold,
The bill is in the house, it's now up to them. Hopefully they can iron out differences over it. First of all keep in mind which party is hmmming and hawing over wether or not to approve it. (Tommy boy Daschle comes to mind.) The guy in the white house the previous 8 years did little to improve the living conditions when he was the top bananna. It's not an anti Clinton rant and I don't want to start that up again. I was still active in his first and a few months into his second I saw the cuts or no increases firsthand, it had some devastating effects on readiness morale and retention. It was one of the reasons I decided not to do another 4. Not all of the reason but part of it. ask any active duty personal if they see conditions and morale improving? Chances are most would say yes. I hope that the senators and congress members do what's right. The vets and the active soilders deserve better than they have been getting for the last few years.
So men can't respect women and women can't respect men because they have no expierence being the other?
I think you misunderstood my statement. Dubya had the opportunity to serve and instead went AWOL in the Texas National Guard. His own cowardice shows he has no respect for those in the military.
To be honest with you I haven't heard anyone complain about living conditions or pay improving. I don't think it matters to a guy with a faimily. GW served albeit in the national guard. His predecessor who had no problem using us like police, was at Oxford smoking a big fat one and protesting. Most people never got really bunched up about that, they just wanted better living conditions and didn't get them. Personally I don't think someone has had to be in the military to be president. It would be helpful but shouldn't be a prerequisite. However all the men and women in the U.S armed forces ask for is a little better pay and living conditions so that they can more esily stay. It's about TIME someone in the white house at least show them some consideration.
I believe the song about people like Bush was, "Fortunate Son".
His daddy used his power to keep W safe.
While we're on the subject, can anybody tell me why bin Laden was THE most important man for us to get 6 months ago, and now he's irrelevant?
And why is it every time Clinton enforced no-fly zones in Iraq, people screamed he was wagging the dog, but now that Bush has miserably failed in his attempt to bring the real terra-ists to justice, he's being cheered on by the same people to 'get' Hussein?
Take the AWOL charge out of it then. He still bailed on Vietnam. No he went into the National Guard. One allegation was that GW was suspended from the Guard. GW's opponents couldn't prove their case and that was why the whole matter was mostly ignored.
Jethro, did you get my message? Yes. I tried to respond. I am not sure it worked.
First of all, welcome to the board, Glad you are here !
You might want to check into people claiming about Clintion wagging the dog. The only time I ever heard it was when he bombed that evil asprin factory on the day of his impeachment proceedings. I never heard it when we were enforcing the no fly zone not once. Find me a source or anyone who was claiming that when we were enforcing the no fly zone.
While we're on the subject, can anybody tell me why bin Laden was THE most important man for us to get 6 months ago, and now he's irrelevant?
To whom is he irrelevant ? I must have missed that news report that we aren't looking for him and pulled out of Afghanistan. Their are plenty of people looking for him. Where you get the idea that he's irrelavent or make that leap is astounding. He's not the only one we need to get but I haven't heard anyone say he's irrelavant. Wow.
Uh, yes. We seem to have done the same thing a while back with Hussein. And yet..... And yet..... here we are being told that bin Laden is no concern while that pesky Hussein needs to be dealt with.
Bush told us bin Laden was the devil, and needs to be killed, and willbe killed or taken into custody.
Bush told us bin Laden was the devil, and needs to be killed, and will be killed or taken into custody.
I agree! He needs to be killed. As do the bankers that finance him and hide his money for him. As do those politicians that support him. As do his supporters in general.
Kill everyone, let God sort em out. Am I right boys?
Osama bin Laden is no longer a threat - he's no concern anymore." -- George W. Bush  Â
Could you source that ?
Bush told us bin Laden was the devil, and needs to be killed, and will be killed or taken into custody.
And I think one of the two will happen.
Uh, yes. We seem to have done the same thing a while back with Hussein. And yet..... And yet..... here we are being told that bin Laden is no concern while that pesky Hussein needs to be dealt with.
Yes because unfortunately we stopped. Alot of it had to do with the shock at the highway of death. alot of it had to do with pressure from our Arab allies. alot of it had to do with pressure from the morons at the U.N. And it all came down to Bush Sr. He should have said no to the political pressure and some advisors. He made a bad mistake. And now we will probably have to go back. Hopefully we haved learned from history.
Not a concernreal video file from the press conference, about 17:30 in.
So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you. I'm more worried about making sure that our soldiers are well-supplied; that the strategy is clear; that the coalition is strong; that when we find enemy bunched up like we did in Shahikot Mountains, that the military has all the support it needs to go in and do the job, which they did.
And there will be other battles in Afghanistan. There's going to be other struggles like Shahikot, and I'm just as confident about the outcome of those future battles as I was about Shahikot, where our soldiers are performing brilliantly. We're tough, we're strong, they're well-equipped. We have a good strategy. We are showing the world we know how to fight a guerrilla war with conventional means.
Q But don't you believe that the threat that bin Laden posed won't truly be eliminated until he is found either dead or alive?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I say, we haven't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don't know where he is.I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him.
Thanks for the link, it's nice to look at the whole quote.
Well, as I say, we haven't heard much from him.
True
And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure.
True.
And, again, I don't know where he is.
True.
I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him.
True. if you don't take it out of context. The way I see it he means about him being able to organize. >He also says he's been marginalized. You don't think that's true?
I can tell you, partially... They don't want to see us go back, but they DO want to see the job done RIGHT this time, if it must be.
That is for the most part how I feel. of course no one would want to go back into that hell hole. But would like to see the Job completed.
Timothy. You are correct I will agree that Saddam was "marginalized" in a way. He certainly wasn't able to threaten his neighbors after that. But we did err in letting him stay in power. It wasn't as simple though as Bush Sr. telling us to hold up. There were numerous Arab allies who were opposed to us going in and taking him out. Then there was also the U.N who had only resolved to remove Iraq from Kuwait. Saudi Arabia was more than happy to see us stop him because they were next. Suddenly now, we get the double talk from them. I think it was the perfect example of why the U.N can be a weak and worthless organization at many times. I don't think Bush Sr. should have listened to them. Then we would have been accused of being imperalistic. etc. You can't win.
As far as Osam goes I can tell you that he IS our biggest target. We can't find someone wanted in this country many times let alone in a land where he has many Allies. We need to find him and his organization leaders and members as well. As fate would have it, they captured the man believed to be his successor this weekend. So apparently from what you hear or believe, we are still looking for him and his people.
Dennis has his points. There are two sides to every issue. I guess where I stand is as a proud American. I support my country no matter what. I have a full understanding that innocent lives are lost in warfare, but at the same time I feel that what we're doing is necessary. I just wish terrorism was taken more seriously in the past, because it's now a global issue. Terrorist networks are everywhere.
I will be waiting anxiously to hear the apologies from those sympathizers and an admission that they were WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!
Never again will I complain about having a bad day.
A TRULY bad day is being in the thin, sub-zero air of the Afghan mountains south of Gardez, lugging a 75 lb. pack, having al-Qaida bullets slam into your flak jacket, alternately experiencing sand storms, blizzards and burning sun...while trying to keep from stepping on mines or setting off booby traps.
I believe the real reason we're in Afghanistan is
for oil, and I blame Bush for the cruel deception that's put our troops into such a dreadful situation.
But those are worried mothers' precious boys.
Salute!
And may they safely return home, soon...
This is the most outrageous statement I've read lately...
I believe the real reason we're in Afghanistan is for oil, and I blame Bush for the cruel deception that's put our troops into such a dreadful situation.
I won't even bother to comment...
where would a guy start...
What was I thinking as I watched televison accounts of the 9/11 horror? Virtually the verbatim response as from many who've subsequently written on the matter in columns posted on antiwar.com, the fine libertarian website: "It's a wonder it took this long."
Though I'm a leftist, we have a shared appreciation of how often and thoroughly the U.S. has self-interestedly nosed itself into other countries' affairs, and how our general, insufferable arrogance, together with gratingly offensive cultural impositions and a definitely one-sided, exploitative economic relationship, have built up sharply warranted international hatreds against "ugly" Americans.
The bulk of humanity lives in desperate poverty, not so much because of factors such as climate. The world's impoverished are KEPT poor, by a global economic injustice that routinely sees the West not making the world safe for democracy, as piously claimed, but of making the planet's human and natural resources cheaply and readily available to multinational-corporate interests. Our wealth is largely derived from the piratic success we've long enjoyed in ripping off foreign workers and natural resources, with little given in return except addictions for Coca-Cola and Marlboro, as our movies and music have affronted native religious and cultural sensibilities with a steady stream of sexually explicit and gratuitously violent overloads.
All this as ragged children dig in garbage dumps for sustenance, while the comprador class that betrays its own people by profitably siding with Western neocolonialists, often through brutal repression that quashes any prospect of dissent, lives in oppulent luxury.
Thus, as American kids barely past the joys of high school hunker down in fear in Afghan mountains beneath al-Qaida guns, I confess to feeling considerably more resentment toward the business-puppet administration that ordered them there -- as part of an overall goal of getting U.S. hands on somebody else's oil -- than I do toward their combat opponents themselves.
I'm tired of people all over this planet being hurt and killed either in furtherance of, or in resistance to, my own country's never articulated but nonetheless definite status of being history's objectively widest-grabbing and ultimately most destructive imperialism.
Those who perished on 9/11 may have died, directly and immediately, at the hands of
terrorists.
But it was our government, and the legacy of immoral policy our Enron-style special-interest, ruling hierarchy is greedily devoted to...that put them inexorably in harm's way.
Admit it or not, we've become an unprecedented combination robber/tryrant which no amount of glorifying, myth-based rhetoric, or our standing as the sole remaining super power, can keep the world's people from finally dealing with in victorious retribution.
You can't win when you're on the wrong side of history.
It's plainly time for doing the right thing, for our own societal salvation.
250,000 homeless veterans?
Bill, that is a horrendous number.
As a veteran - I agree...
but even more to the point...
250,000 homeless Americans (Vets or not) is horrendous...
the question is...
what do we do about it...
Give them homes.
The Taliban commander quickly sent 10 of his best soldiers over the dune. A gun battle broke out and continued for a few minutes, then silence. The voice called out "One Minnesota soldier can whip a hundred Talibans."
Furious, the Taliban commander sent his next best 100 troops over the dune, and immediately a huge gunfight commenced. After 10 minutes of battle, silence again. The voice called out again. "One Minnesota soldier can whip a thousand Talibans."
The enraged Taliban commander mustered 1000 fighters and sent them across the dune. Cannons, rockets and machine gun fire rang out as a huge battle was fought. Then silence.
Eventually one wounded Taliban crawled back over the dune, and with his dying words told the commander, "Don't send any more men. It's a trap. There's twoof them."
Give them homes.
Pretty simplistic, Dennis...
So we givea home to every homeless person in the US...
I presume we heat those homes for them and provide them food and clothing as well...
do we make sure that their homes come with a 2-car garage that they can use for the cars we must give them...
by the way - why work?
Dag nab it, Bill, please let me retire without having to come back here to correct errors.
The Spanish-American War and the Philippine Rebellion were two separate entities, with some overlap.
Put "600,000 killed in Philippine Rebellion" into
Google's search field and you'll come up with many confirming results.
That's what I did, since the figure DID seem inordinately high.
But it's tragically true, as such highly reputable groups as the Christian Aid charity plainly state:
"By a quirk of fate, the war for independence coincided with the 1898 Spanish-American war over Cuba. The Spanish navy in the Philippines was attacked by US forces in the Battle of Manila Bay in 1898, and American assurances to the Filipino revolutionaries that they came as liberators, not conquerors, resulted in the occupation of Manila by US forces. Although Independence was proclaimed by Filipino General Emilio Aguinaldo on 12 June 1898, the USA, recognising the strategic importance of the islands, failed to keep their word and promptly purchased the islands from the Spanish for US$20 million. The Filipinos reacted by declaring Aguinaldo President of the First Philippine Republic, and the country was plunged into another war. This second war of national self-assertion was even more costly than the first. The casualties eventually included approximately 600,000 Filipinos and 4,234 Americans. The US finally conquered the Philippines after three years of war and it was another 11 years before the previously unconquered Muslim areas were pacified. It was one of the most brutal wars seen in the region, with concentration camps and civilian executions commonplace." --Christian Aid (UK)
Bill Fold, I gotta hand it to ya' :)
Dennis,
Now fast forward 44 years when we also fought off the Japanese from the Philippenes. They were tortured, murdered, raped and starved by their Japanese occupiers and they were damn glad to see us kick them back off of their land. Now I'm not saying that the war in 1898 was a good thing, but sadly the Philppenes would have been occupied by someone else anyway, they lacked the military strength needed to keep most nations at bay. I'm not saying it makes it o.k and or justifies it, not at all. If it had never been a U.S territory and Japan or China etc. taken them over and kept it as part of thier homeland I wonder what kind of life the islanders would have had? Everything comes full circle eventually and wether you want to admit it or not, they were better off at the time under our protection. Fast forward to today and they are gaining more independence, they will have to decide whom to ally itself with. Are we without sin in the whole matter, God no. I have been their and most of the people were very friendly to U.S troops, maybe because we spent gobs of money there I don't know they probably smiled, took our money and then went and washed their hands. But I think they are much better off today because of our past involvement as well. I know you will never see any good come out of it because to you we do no good.
BTW I noticed on your list of see how bad we are and attrocities we apperantly or alegedly committed you left out all of WW2, why is that ? Was that the only time we were justified?
Pilot believed alive, held in Iraq
Cmdr. Speicher was declared killed in action in 1991 after his F-18 Hornet was shot down over Iraq. But last year he was re-classified as "missing in action" by the Pentagon, based on information from an Iraqi defector.
     According to U.S. intelligence officials, the British intelligence information was based on an additional intelligence source — someone who had been in Iraq and said he had learned that an American pilot is being held captive in Baghdad.
     The British report stated further that only two Iraqis were permitted to see the captive American pilot: the chief of Iraq's intelligence service, and Uday Hussein, son of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, said the officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity.
     The new intelligence has led some Pentagon officials to believe Iraq is holding Cmdr. Speicher prisoner.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20020311-40815350.htm
Mellow out, Bill, before your galloping heart pops.
This will be my absolute last post until such time as the folly George Bush has unleashed upon us smokes America's butt like lit dynamite that Daffy Duck was too slow in throwing.
Then, I'll calmly and graciously say:
"Whoo-hoo! Who da man?! Yes sir, Jack! Told ya so, didn't I?! Huh?! Huh?!"
(Actually, no. Nobody can take satisfaction in myopic misleadership resulting in massive harm.)
In the meantime, have an uplifting Easter...
The new intelligence has led some Pentagon officials to believe Iraq is holding Cmdr. Speicher prisoner.
I would think it very strange to reclassify him as MIA after declaring him dead.
Next thing I wondered was, "If they had life insurance, would they have to pay it back because of the reclassification?".
THX,
They originally thought he was dead and probably rushed to do so. They got info shortly after that he was possibly being held in Baghdad. They blew it off as being from a bad source. (Bad mistake) Then they got the same story two other times from more credible sources and reclassified him. It is not the norm, usually they classify someone as MIA and then KIA when they get info. MIA is alot harder on the families since their is always the lingering hope or questions. So I'm sure they wouldn't have done it without credible evidence, it can be a political firestorm. Sadly our govenrment I think has failed our MIA's and thier families miserably.
Bill Fold,
Have you seen "We were soilders" yet ? It was a very good movie. I would rate it in my top ten or even 5 of all time. The other night on the history channel they did a history or hollywood ? segment about that battle with a group of vets who were there in the Ia Drang valley during the battle. They all said it was mostly history and noted the exceptions were probably due to time constraints. It's nice to at least see the history part of it being stuck too instead of some wacky Oliver Stone psuedo reality. It shows that although a wrong and unpopular war that many or the majority of men who served did so with bravery and honor. Perhaps this movie will shed some light on a far too often overlooked fact. It's only a movie but it's a step. To anyone who hasn't seen it I would say go. I took my wife and she thought it was an excellent movie as well and she is not the type who would normally go to a "war" movie.
You deserve all the payments you can get, fold.
by the way - why work?
Fold and THE REPOMANS new motto...?
Hey Dude
One of the few -- very few -- uses of tax money of which I approve is support of our military. When you have been injured while serving in the military, spend most of your time volunteering to help other active and retired and disabled service men and women, and are able to speak intelligently and articulately on behalf of those people, I might pay as much attention to your posts as I do to Bill's.
Until then, GFY.
Wishing you well is attacking?
Interesting.
I was responding to Jeb Franklin
I noticed, Bill. I also wondered why Sloop jumped in assuming I was talking to him, when I referred to "Jeb Franklin's" post with his tag line, Hey Dude
Great site, Bill...
I'll be in Florida soon...
maybe I'll see ya there...
by the way, I am looking for a repo that skipped from here to Orlando...
wanna make some money and help me find this clown?
Bill Fold,
The bill is in the house, it's now up to them. Hopefully they can iron out differences over it. First of all keep in mind which party is hmmming and hawing over wether or not to approve it. (Tommy boy Daschle comes to mind.) The guy in the white house the previous 8 years did little to improve the living conditions when he was the top bananna. It's not an anti Clinton rant and I don't want to start that up again. I was still active in his first and a few months into his second I saw the cuts or no increases firsthand, it had some devastating effects on readiness morale and retention. It was one of the reasons I decided not to do another 4. Not all of the reason but part of it. ask any active duty personal if they see conditions and morale improving? Chances are most would say yes. I hope that the senators and congress members do what's right. The vets and the active soilders deserve better than they have been getting for the last few years.
Funny how a pro-military President picks up the morale in the armed forces.
Not a President who USES the military, but one who respects it.
Who you talkin' bout, Muskwa?
AWOL Dubya?
The current President, call him what you will.
I'd argue that Dubya's military service (or lack thereof) shows he has no respect for those in the armed services.
But I don't really want to get into it right now.
:-)
So men can't respect women and women can't respect men because they have no expierence being the other?
So men can't respect women and women can't respect men because they have no expierence being the other?
I think you misunderstood my statement. Dubya had the opportunity to serve and instead went AWOL in the Texas National Guard. His own cowardice shows he has no respect for those in the military.
That charge has not been substantiated.
Take the AWOL charge out of it then. He still bailed on Vietnam.
Jethro, did you get my message?
JT,
To be honest with you I haven't heard anyone complain about living conditions or pay improving. I don't think it matters to a guy with a faimily. GW served albeit in the national guard. His predecessor who had no problem using us like police, was at Oxford smoking a big fat one and protesting. Most people never got really bunched up about that, they just wanted better living conditions and didn't get them. Personally I don't think someone has had to be in the military to be president. It would be helpful but shouldn't be a prerequisite. However all the men and women in the U.S armed forces ask for is a little better pay and living conditions so that they can more esily stay. It's about TIME someone in the white house at least show them some consideration.
I believe the song about people like Bush was, "Fortunate Son".
His daddy used his power to keep W safe.
While we're on the subject, can anybody tell me why bin Laden was THE most important man for us to get 6 months ago, and now he's irrelevant?
And why is it every time Clinton enforced no-fly zones in Iraq, people screamed he was wagging the dog, but now that Bush has miserably failed in his attempt to bring the real terra-ists to justice, he's being cheered on by the same people to 'get' Hussein?
Take the AWOL charge out of it then. He still bailed on Vietnam. No he went into the National Guard. One allegation was that GW was suspended from the Guard. GW's opponents couldn't prove their case and that was why the whole matter was mostly ignored.
Jethro, did you get my message? Yes. I tried to respond. I am not sure it worked.
Timmy, if you read the news maybe you would have the answers to your questions.
Yes. I tried to respond. I am not sure it worked.
It worked. I replied. Thanks.
Timothy,
First of all, welcome to the board, Glad you are here !
You might want to check into people claiming about Clintion wagging the dog. The only time I ever heard it was when he bombed that evil asprin factory on the day of his impeachment proceedings. I never heard it when we were enforcing the no fly zone not once. Find me a source or anyone who was claiming that when we were enforcing the no fly zone.
To whom is he irrelevant ? I must have missed that news report that we aren't looking for him and pulled out of Afghanistan. Their are plenty of people looking for him. Where you get the idea that he's irrelavent or make that leap is astounding. He's not the only one we need to get but I haven't heard anyone say he's irrelavant. Wow.
"Osama bin Laden is no longer a threat - he's no concern anymore."
    -- George W. Bush
"No concern" sounds very similar to irrelevant.
If you break up his army and take away his money could he be relevant?
Uh, yes. We seem to have done the same thing a while back with Hussein. And yet..... And yet..... here we are being told that bin Laden is no concern while that pesky Hussein needs to be dealt with.
Bush told us bin Laden was the devil, and needs to be killed, and willbe killed or taken into custody.
Bush told us bin Laden was the devil, and needs to be killed, and will be killed or taken into custody.
I agree! He needs to be killed. As do the bankers that finance him and hide his money for him. As do those politicians that support him. As do his supporters in general.
Kill everyone, let God sort em out. Am I right boys?
Timothy,
Could you source that ?
And I think one of the two will happen.
Yes because unfortunately we stopped. Alot of it had to do with the shock at the highway of death. alot of it had to do with pressure from our Arab allies. alot of it had to do with pressure from the morons at the U.N. And it all came down to Bush Sr. He should have said no to the political pressure and some advisors. He made a bad mistake. And now we will probably have to go back. Hopefully we haved learned from history.
Not a concernreal video file from the press conference, about 17:30 in.
So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you. I'm more worried about making sure that our soldiers are well-supplied; that the strategy is clear; that the coalition is strong; that when we find enemy bunched up like we did in Shahikot Mountains, that the military has all the support it needs to go in and do the job, which they did.
And there will be other battles in Afghanistan. There's going to be other struggles like Shahikot, and I'm just as confident about the outcome of those future battles as I was about Shahikot, where our soldiers are performing brilliantly. We're tough, we're strong, they're well-equipped. We have a good strategy. We are showing the world we know how to fight a guerrilla war with conventional means.
Q But don't you believe that the threat that bin Laden posed won't truly be eliminated until he is found either dead or alive?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I say, we haven't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don't know where he is.I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him.
He also says bin Laden is "marginalized".
Timothy,
Thanks for the link, it's nice to look at the whole quote.
True
True.
True.
True. if you don't take it out of context. The way I see it he means about him being able to organize. >He also says he's been marginalized.
You don't think that's true?
Yes, Luv2Fly, Osama has been marginalized. Saddam Hussein was alsomarginalized by Bush Senior. And here we are, gearing up for an assault on Iraq.
250,000 homeless veterans?
Bill, that is a horrendous number.
Bill Fold,
That is for the most part how I feel. of course no one would want to go back into that hell hole. But would like to see the Job completed.
Timothy. You are correct I will agree that Saddam was "marginalized" in a way. He certainly wasn't able to threaten his neighbors after that. But we did err in letting him stay in power. It wasn't as simple though as Bush Sr. telling us to hold up. There were numerous Arab allies who were opposed to us going in and taking him out. Then there was also the U.N who had only resolved to remove Iraq from Kuwait. Saudi Arabia was more than happy to see us stop him because they were next. Suddenly now, we get the double talk from them. I think it was the perfect example of why the U.N can be a weak and worthless organization at many times. I don't think Bush Sr. should have listened to them. Then we would have been accused of being imperalistic. etc. You can't win.
As far as Osam goes I can tell you that he IS our biggest target. We can't find someone wanted in this country many times let alone in a land where he has many Allies. We need to find him and his organization leaders and members as well. As fate would have it, they captured the man believed to be his successor this weekend. So apparently from what you hear or believe, we are still looking for him and his people.