How the Tone of the Debate Hurts Soldiers
"If the Democrats fail (to end the war), the only option left is revolution and foreign intervention. Tyranny is but assured because Congress cannot and will not exercise it's Constitutional power to end this fascist Coup d'etat.
This is outrageous! The only two options available to Congress, Impeachment and cutting the funds, are now both off the table. What now Democrats? What other magic powers will you invoke? You have taken the only constitutional means you have available to end this fascist train off the table.
"We don't have the votes to do it,"
You don't have the votes to do it because every Democrat is silent on the WAR CRIMINALS that have infested this country. And furthermore, "So what?" Put it up for a vote. Then do it again and again and again. Twenty six times if you have to just like the Arctic Wildlife National Refuge oil drilling agenda.
What up Speaker Pelosi? Are you to be known as the first woman Speaker and last Speaker of the semi-free republic in America? The avarice, the complicity, the cowardice, infidelity, disloyalty, and dishonor on display is a discredit and a disgrace to all Americans and True Patriots.
It is truly nauseating to think that, as this nation sinks down into tyranny and breathes its last gasps of democracy, the democrats have, of their own free choosing, removed from themselves the only two viable options at gaining back liberty.
This is not oversight. This is complicity in war crimes." -- wolverine 06"
Ok, for the more liberal readers of my blog, I want to hear from you: do you believe that "war criminals" have "infested" our country? Seriously? Do you believe that revolution and foreign intervention is necessary?Here is how you can support the troops: let us win the war. Let us do what we have trained to do: take the fight to the insurgents. Rather than talking about cutting funding, as Murtha was doing, how about INCREASING the funding? Send more troops and let's get this thing finished.
Calling us, and our leaders, war criminals is not supporting the troops. Claiming this is a "semi-free republic" is sheer insanity. Who believes this?
posted by Christian | 9:01 AM
4 Comments:
I was thinking of and what you have been writing last nite while watching the NBC news. Brian Williams was in Baghdad along with a retired 4 Star and they were doing the newscast live. They both kept commenting on how quiet and seemingly in order both Baghdad and Sadir City were. They were a little amazed.
And then the 4 Star said it appeared the military had then insurgency on the run.
It must have hurt them deeply to report a success in the effort! But report it they were! And very sincerely, I might add!
I also saw guys from the 1st Cav telling how committed they were to what they were doing on the news a couple of days ago. Might I add that the guys from the 1st Cav looked tough and I am proud that they are willing to serve my country!
So, Chris, the word is getting out here at home--even if it's slow. Your post of a few days ago about changes in the area is now being reflected, even if in a small way, in the network media.
God Bless!
PAGGS
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/27/1454229
Milton, thanks for another link. Fascinating article, but I also think it re-inforces my argument about how those are the left really think about our military. In essence, Mr. Johnson makes the case that our military endeavors endanger our democracy. A few points:
1) Mr. Johnson makes the argument that we are losing our democracy; but didn’t the control of Congress just change hands? If George Bush is an “emperor” he apparently isn’t very good at maintaining control. The US is a wonderful, model democracy. America is far from a tyrannical nation, especially when there are commentators on TV (Bill Maher) saying they wish Cheney had been assassinated in Afghanistan.
2)Having troops stationed in various parts of the world doesn’t make us an empire either. After all, does anyone seriously believe that places like Japan, Germany, Bosnia and Korea are American imperial holdings? Japan can kick out us any time, just like when the Philippines asked us to leave. With North Korea acting up, I suspect Japan isn't eager for us to leave any time soon.
3)If anything, the United States is less imperialistic than at any time in our history. For the first 100+ years of our existence, we conquered land from the Indians, Spanish, the Mexicans and others, and established a large, sea-to-shining-sea nation. When was the last time the United States gained territory through war? Probably the Spanish-American was, 100 years ago.
4)Our endeavor in Iraq is not imperialistic. We have gone in, removed a dictator, and allowed for democratic elections. A true, good old fashioned empire would have seized their oil, and put in a puppet strong-man, or made Iraq a part of our commonwealth, or annexed etc.
5)The comparison to Britain at the end of the World War 2 is a poor comparison for a few reasons. One, we have a much smaller Army, and a much larger nation, population-wise. Second, most of the areas in which we have troops stationed are not being administered by the US. Again, Germany, Japan and Korea are examples. We’re not even in administrative control of Iraq. By comparison, Britain, a relatively small nation, was once in charge of administration of territories such as Cananda, India, Australia, much of the middle east and dozens of other nations. There is nothing comparable for the United States.
6)Finally, we don’t need the permission of other nations to protect our interests, including oil. Mr. Johnson suggests that we haven’t gotten permission from the nations of the Persian Gulf to put aircraft carriers in the Gulf. There are two problems with that: first, we don’t need permission… those are international waters. For example, China and Russia don’t need our permission to sail around the Pacific, just miles off of our shores. Second, he is wrong anyway because there actually are a number of Persian Gulf nations that DO wants us there, and have Americans stationed there: Bahrain, Qatar, Dubai, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia being examples. They want us there as a counter-weight to Iran, for one thing.
Anyway, there is far more in that article that I can rebut in this short space, but thanks for a thoughtful link. It does reinforce my point that those are the left are not just anti-military, but see our military as a threat to our democracy. I just wish they were more open about their opinions at the political level. (i.e., certain politicians ought to quit saying they support out troops when they actually believe our democracy is being destroyed by the military)
Thanks for an interesting read.
I maybe one voice but "get her done" and lets move on. To not finish the job is it not as the farmer who puts his plow to the field and looking back is not fit for service? I thank you for your service now as I served you in the past.
Post a Comment
<< Home