View Full Version : "We let the soldiers down" Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey.
news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070303/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/walter_reed
"From what I have learned, the problems at Walter Reed appear to be problems of leadership," Gates said.
From what I have learned I have to agree. All the way to the top.
Tell me now and tell me true- who really "supports the troops"? :cuckoo:
Gem
:mad:
From what I have learned I have to agree. All the way to the top.
Tell me now and tell me true- who really "supports the troops"? :cuckoo:
Gem
:mad:
You trolling or what?
I have been one of those "troops" you supposedly support. I'll take the poor conditions at Walter Reed any day over being treated like a second class citizen or even some kind of sub-human by a bunch of anti-war activists and college kids who haven't got the common sense of a rabid dog.
Here is another hot flash for ya...this didn't happen overnight. It takes money to run those care facilities and when the defense budgets get cut so libs can support those no working, lazy ass baby factories EVRYTHING gets cut in the military, including health care.
You can take your politically convenient "support" for the troops and put it where the sun dont shine!
LiberalNation
03-03-2007, 01:54 PM
Humm they should have handled the problem without having to be outed by the media first. Considering even Bush said it was a shame. This guy was right to resign but the general they fired first was just the scape goat.
You trolling or what?
I have been one of those "troops" you supposedly support. I'll take the poor conditions at Walter Reed any day over being treated like a second class citizen or even some kind of sub-human by a bunch of anti-war activists and college kids who haven't got the common sense of a rabid dog.
Here is another hot flash for ya...this didn't happen overnight. It takes money to run those care facilities and when the defense budgets get cut so libs can support those no working, lazy ass baby factories EVRYTHING gets cut in the military, including health care.
You can take your politically convenient "support" for the troops and put it where the sun dont shine!
Maybe those budgets got cut because the military was too busy purchasing $400.00 toilet seats and $150.00 hammers at taxpayer expense to take care of serious business like keeping Walter Reed up to snuff and operationally ready in case of a war- justified or not.
You can take that and stuff it where the sun don't shine too!
Touche', Holmes!
Gem
:salute:
Humm they should have handled the problem without having to be outed by the media first. Considering even Bush said it was a shame. This guy was right to resign but the general they fired first was just the scape goat.
That's a fact! Those conditions at Walter Reed have apparently been an on-going reality for at least twenty years! The way I see it, if they- as in "Bush&Co"- can spend hundreds of billions of taxpayer money to finance a dishonorable war then how is it that they didn't spend at least tens of millions getting Walter Reed up to snuff for the impending invasion and occupation of Iraq? Oh, that's "right"- they were certain that we would be greeted as liberators and be out of there in 6 months- a year tops- so they probably didn't think it was necessary to spend all that money on getting Walter Reed prepared. Besides, all those $400.00 toilet seats for the Officers Clubs and offices adds up quick! :cuckoo:
Gem
:salute:
avatar4321
03-03-2007, 04:44 PM
Humm they should have handled the problem without having to be outed by the media first. Considering even Bush said it was a shame. This guy was right to resign but the general they fired first was just the scape goat.
Considering they already started making repairs before the story broke and it takes considerably time to procur the funds and make plans, I would say they were handling the problem.
Sitarro
03-03-2007, 05:39 PM
That's a fact! Those conditions at Walter Reed have apparently been an on-going reality for at least twenty years! The way I see it, if they- as in "Bush&Co"- can spend hundreds of billions of taxpayer money to finance a dishonorable war then how is it that they didn't spend at least tens of millions getting Walter Reed up to snuff for the impending invasion and occupation of Iraq? Oh, that's "right"- they were certain that we would be greeted as liberators and be out of there in 6 months- a year tops- so they probably didn't think it was necessary to spend all that money on getting Walter Reed prepared. Besides, all those $400.00 toilet seats for the Officers Clubs and offices adds up quick! :cuckoo:
Gem
:salute:
How about the 8 years of Clinton rule, are you excusing him because he was too busy pardoning felons, raping women, giving the Chinese missle design secrets, closing military bases and cutting defense spending, childishly putting cigars in a young woman his daughter's age, most private parts, dodging the lamps thrown by his"wife", testifying in court that he doesn't know the definition of is, taking an entourage of 1200 close "friends" to India at taxpayer's expense, firing millions of dollars worth of cruise missles at an aspirin factory, starting wars in Bosnia and Haiti or beung impeached.
Maybe those budgets got cut because the military was too busy purchasing $400.00 toilet seats and $150.00 hammers at taxpayer expense to take care of serious business like keeping Walter Reed up to snuff and operationally ready in case of a war- justified or not.
You can take that and stuff it where the sun don't shine too!
Touche', Holmes!
Gem
:salute:
You have no idea! Those budget cuts were made to fund welfare, to provide grants to "artists" who throw crucufixes into jars of rine, and to send snot nosed kids who don't deserve it to school. Not to mention provide housing for lazy SOBs who would rather sell drugs than get a job.
I gather from your reply that my assumption about how YOU support the troops is correct. You care far more about the politics than you do about wounded soldiers.
Humm they should have handled the problem without having to be outed by the media first. Considering even Bush said it was a shame. This guy was right to resign but the general they fired first was just the scape goat.
Kinda goes to show ya how much our Democrat pols cared about and supported the troops. Obviously they NEVER visited Walter Reed or they would have been all over this like stink on shit. Same goes for all the libs out there like Gem claiming to support the troops.
Sometimes the hypocricy is overwhelming.
Kinda goes to show ya how much our Democrat pols cared about and supported the troops. Obviously they NEVER visited Walter Reed or they would have been all over this like stink on shit. Same goes for all the libs out there like Gem claiming to support the troops.
Sometimes the hypocricy is overwhelming.
Ever heard the saying that "Those that the Gods wish to destroy they first make angry"? You sound upset, CSM. Why are you so angry?
Hint: Anger is a secondary emotion resulting from an underlying primary emotion. What primary emotion is it that is creating your anger, CSM? Do you know?
Gem
:)
Gunny
03-03-2007, 06:40 PM
Ever heard the saying that "Those that the Gods wish to destroy they first make angry"? You sound upset, CSM. Why are you so angry?
Hint: Anger is a secondary emotion resulting from an underlying primary emotion. What primary emotion is it that is creating your anger, CSM? Do you know?
Gem
:)
Can't speak for CSM, but I get pissed every time you libs try your damnedest to politicize and twist the truth to suit your agenda. The problem with military health care facilities is endemic to military/government bureaucracy, because of the bureuacracy, not a single President and/or member of one political party or the next.
Walter Reed was just as crappy a place for eight years under Clinton, 4 years under Carter, and 7 years under Johnson as it has been the Republican President's during that time.
When you get your happy little ass out their, underfunded, undereuqipped and underarmed, and dependent on substandard medical facilities and care for yourself and your family so some jackoff President can make the numbers on a sheet of paper balance out, THEN you may presume to tell those of us that have already lived that life day-in and day-out "what it's all about," and who caused it.
You have no idea! Those budget cuts were made to fund welfare, to provide grants to "artists" who throw crucufixes into jars of rine, and to send snot nosed kids who don't deserve it to school. Not to mention provide housing for lazy SOBs who would rather sell drugs than get a job.
I gather from your reply that my assumption about how YOU support the troops is correct. You care far more about the politics than you do about wounded soldiers.
I care about the politics because it's the politics of the current Administration that put those soldiers in harms way to get wounded in an unjustified and unnecessary war, and it's the malfeasance of the current administration that has led to this situation at Walter Reed. I know one thing- whenever I embark on an adventure I make sure I have a reasonable contingency plan in place and do my best to make sure all systems are in good working order and ready to go. Obviously Bush&Co were slackin' in that respect. Oh, btw, Clinton hasn't been President in over 6 years. I don't know about you, but I prefer living in the present, not in someone elses past. Bitchin' about Clinton won't do a damn bit of good concerning what it is we need to deal with today. You're lagging behind, brother!
Gem
:coffee:
LiberalNation
03-03-2007, 06:49 PM
Kinda goes to show ya how much our Democrat pols cared about and supported the troops. Obviously they NEVER visited Walter Reed or they would have been all over this like stink on shit. Same goes for all the libs out there like Gem claiming to support the troops.
Sometimes the hypocricy is overwhelming.
The building they had all the politicans vistit was in pretty good shape. it was the one off to the side that they never saw that was the mess.
Ever heard the saying that "Those that the Gods wish to destroy they first make angry"? You sound upset, CSM. Why are you so angry?
Hint: Anger is a secondary emotion resulting from an underlying primary emotion. What primary emotion is it that is creating your anger, CSM? Do you know?
Gem
:)
Yeah, I know exactly where it comes from....it stems from coming home wounded from a war and having arrogant and hypocritical folks just like you spit on me as I walked by. It comes from hearing folks like you call me ignorant and stupid because I think this country is worth fighting for. It comes from people like you who think ideas like freedom, loyalty, and patriotism are mere political talking points. It comes from people like you who tell me that soldiers (many of them my friends) deserve to be killed or maimed because they "volunteered and knew what they were getting into". It comes from people just like you who think they are morally superior to others because you embrace the cause celebre' ... whether said cause makes sense or not. It comes from people just like ou who make talking points out of dead soldiers and their grieving families.
My anger stems from your arrogance, hypocricy and smug ignorance...that is where my anger comes from.
Can't speak for CSM, but I get pissed every time you libs try your damnedest to politicize and twist the truth to suit your agenda. The problem with military health care facilities is endemic to military/government bureaucracy, because of the bureuacracy, not a single President and/or member of one political party or the next.
Walter Reed was just as crappy a place for eight years under Clinton, 4 years under Carter, and 7 years under Johnson as it has been the Republican President's during that time.
When you get your happy little ass out their, underfunded, undereuqipped and underarmed, and dependent on substandard medical facilities and care for yourself and your family so some jackoff President can make the numbers on a sheet of paper balance out, THEN you may presume to tell those of us that have already lived that life day-in and day-out "what it's all about," and who caused it.
So what you're telling me is that it was the military/government bureuacracy that left your ass "out there", underfunded, underequiped and underarmed and dependant on substandard medical facilities and not the liberal anti-war crowd that put you through all that? If that's the case then why aren't you raising Holy Hell with the "Powers-that-be" that left your happy little ass out there to dry? Why blame it all on the liberals, when it was US liberals that were raising Holy Hell about the very same underfunded, underequiped and underarmed situation the Bush Administration subjected presumably you and your fellow soldiers to?
I think it's time for folks like you to put the blame exactly where it belongs, unless it's easier for folks like you to vent your frustrations on "easier" and less "threatening" targets like liberals and the anti-war crowd.
Gem
:coffee:
I care about the politics because it's the politics of the current Administration that put those soldiers in harms way to get wounded in an unjustified and unnecessary war, and it's the malfeasance of the current administration that has led to this situation at Walter Reed. I know one thing- whenever I embark on an adventure I make sure I have a reasonable contingency plan in place and do my best to make sure all systems are in good working order and ready to go. Obviously Bush&Co were slackin' in that respect. Oh, btw, Clinton hasn't been President in over 6 years. I don't know about you, but I prefer living in the present, not in someone elses past. Bitchin' about Clinton won't do a damn bit of good concerning what it is we need to deal with today. You're lagging behind, brother!
Gem
:coffee:
Yeah well when your trip to the grocery store holds the same gravity that runniing the country does, we can all look to you for an example. In the meantime here is another axiom for ya (since you like them so much); "those that ignore the past are doomed to repeat it".
One more thing, I am not nor ever will be "your brother"; I choose my friends far more carefully than that!
So what you're telling me is that it was a military/government bureuacracy that left your ass "out there", underfunded, underequiped and underarmed and dependant on substandard medical facilities? If that's the case then why aren't you raising Holy Hell with the "Powers-that-be" that left your happy little ass out there to dry? Why blame it all on the liberals, when it was US liberals that were raising Holy Hell about the very same underfunded, underequiped and underarmed situation the Bush Administration subjected presumably you and your fellow soldiers to?
I think it's time for folks like you to put the blame exactly where it belongs, unless it's easier for folks like you to vent your frustrations on "easier" and less "threatening" targets like liberals and the anti-war crowd.
gem
:coffee:
Again, you have no clue. YOU and people like you are to blame...I already told you why. Soldiers can overcome some of the worst conditions you can imagine and accomplish their mission; what they cannot overcome is the treasonous ploys of citizens and politicians like yourself.
stephanie
03-03-2007, 07:11 PM
Yeah, I know exactly where it comes from....it stems from coming home wounded from a war and having arrogant and hypocritical folks just like you spit on me as I walked by. It comes from hearing folks like you call me ignorant and stupid because I think this country is worth fighting for. It comes from people like you who think ideas like freedom, loyalty, and patriotism are mere political talking points. It comes from people like you who tell me that soldiers (many of them my friends) deserve to be killed or maimed because they "volunteered and knew what they were getting into". It comes from people just like you who think they are morally superior to others because you embrace the cause celebre' ... whether said cause makes sense or not. It comes from people just like ou who make talking points out of dead soldiers and their grieving families.
My anger stems from your arrogance, hypocricy and smug ignorance...that is where my anger comes from.
:clap: :clap:
trobinett
03-03-2007, 08:19 PM
Yeah, I know exactly where it comes from....it stems from coming home wounded from a war and having arrogant and hypocritical folks just like you spit on me as I walked by. It comes from hearing folks like you call me ignorant and stupid because I think this country is worth fighting for. It comes from people like you who think ideas like freedom, loyalty, and patriotism are mere political talking points. It comes from people like you who tell me that soldiers (many of them my friends) deserve to be killed or maimed because they "volunteered and knew what they were getting into". It comes from people just like you who think they are morally superior to others because you embrace the cause celebre' ... whether said cause makes sense or not. It comes from people just like ou who make talking points out of dead soldiers and their grieving families.
My anger stems from your arrogance, hypocricy and smug ignorance...that is where my anger comes from.
Damn CSM, take the bitch out!
Gem, you haven't a clue, FUCK YOU, and I mean that in the most respectable way.:fu:
Yeah, I know exactly where it comes from....it stems from coming home wounded from a war and having arrogant and hypocritical folks just like you spit on me as I walked by. It comes from hearing folks like you call me ignorant and stupid because I think this country is worth fighting for. It comes from people like you who think ideas like freedom, loyalty, and patriotism are mere political talking points. It comes from people like you who tell me that soldiers (many of them my friends) deserve to be killed or maimed because they "volunteered and knew what they were getting into". It comes from people just like you who think they are morally superior to others because you embrace the cause celebre' ... whether said cause makes sense or not. It comes from people just like ou who make talking points out of dead soldiers and their grieving families.
My anger stems from your arrogance, hypocricy and smug ignorance...that is where my anger comes from.
OK, now we're actually getting somewhere.
And you know what? I hear you!
Sounds like you were in 'Nam, CSM. I think there's something you need to know about me. I lost more than a few friends during that time when I tried to tell my fellow peaceniks that they shouldn't be spittin' on returning soldiers, that they- as a general rule anyway- weren't the problem- that it was the lies and deceptions of those in power and those that stood to gain so much from that military campaign that were the problem. Yeah, you may have thought you were fighting for our country, but the sad fact is you were misled by your own government and fought a war that, in hindsight, never needed to be fought at all. I hate to tell you this, CSM, but you were being used- by your own government and the corporations that made billions off of all those misled soldiers, you included. I also don't believe I've ever said that our soldiers deserved to die because "they knew what they were getting into". You're not the only one that lost friends in that war, CSM- and it hurt me just as bad as it hurt you.
If I come across as "morally superior" to you maybe it's because I've been through my own battles and gotten screwed and hurt and faced death a few times myself. There are many battlefields in the journey of life, CSM, and a lot of those are concerned with learning the appropriate ways of dealing with misfortune and bitter disappointments. It is the battles within that are the hardest battles to win, and to win those battles one must learn to step out of oneself and learn to see the world or a situation through someone elses eyes. It is, in a word, an excercise in getting over oneself and learning to move forward and releasing the anger and pain of previous realities that have caused us pain.
You say you were wounded. Well, you know what, I've been wounded from hostile fire on the battlefield of life too. And you know what? When I returned to that battlefield a month later I wasn't allowed, by law, to carry a weapon on that battlefield. But I returned to that battlefield, unarmed, as required by law, with a paralysed arm and still spitting out chunks of lead, and performed the duties I was ordered to do. There are many forms of courage, CSM. You know, it took a lot of courage to go back on the job, unarmed, by myself, on the graveyard shift, after I'd been hit, point blank, with a 16 guage shotgun in the back and the side of my face. Especially without a weapon with which to defend myself. But I did what I knew I had to do. You know, it took a lot of courage for those flower children in the 60's to walk up to those National Guardsmen that had their weapons leveled at them and stick the stems of flowers into the barrels of the weapons the Guardsmen had leveled at them, knowing full well that the order to open fire could come at any time too. It wasn't a courage born of fear or an instinct to survive, CSM, it was a courage borne of belief and conviction and a knowledge of right and wrong and a desire to do what we knew was right. It was a spiritual courage, CSM, the kind of courage Jesus tried to teach, and there is no level of courage greater than that.
Know why we aren't seeing any protestors spitting on wounded returning soldiers today like we saw during the 'Nam years? It's because we learned the lessons of the mistakes of our past. It has nothing to do with anyone supporting a "cause celebre' ". We know now what not to do. Question is, have those that support Bush&Co and the War in Iraq learned their lessons from the past, as US liberals have? Have they learned what not to do? Have you?
If we come across as being "superior" maybe it's because US liberals are disgusted at seeing our nation and our soldiers duped, not once but twice, in the same way in a single lifetime. This may come as a surprise to you, CSM, but US liberals support our troops and don't like what this administration, and the corporate entities they cater and kow-tow to, are putting soldiers much like yourself through. Instead of all the partisan bickering and hate and resentments from the past taking control of our lives wouldn't it be better to just let a peacenik liberal come up to you and hug you, say what needs to said, offer the deserved apologies and let the tears flow and watch the hatred, angst and bitterness melt away so that we can be one people and one nation once again? That, I think, would be the healing way, and I think both you and I know that there's plenty of healing that needs to be done in OUR country.
I think you also need to know that I haven't written this from a space of ego or superiority. What I have written here comes from the heart. I know you can't see it, but I am wiping the tears of hope and forgiveness from my face as I write these last few words. That should serve as a clear indication of the depth of what I have come to believe and wish to share with you. In the crowd I run with we say that you can always count on your fair-weather friends to tell you what you want to hear, but it's your real friends that will tell you what you need to hear. I really would prefer to be your friend, CSM, but you're going to have to let me be that friend- and that choice would have to be up to you.
Peace, Brother!
Gem
Dilloduck
03-03-2007, 08:51 PM
What I have written here comes from the heart. I know you can't see it, but I am wiping the tears of hope and forgiveness from my face as I write these last few words. That should serve as a clear indication of the depth of what I have come to believe and wish to share with you.
Try using your brain to think and you will see that liberals are using soldiers' lives to obtain power too.
Try using your brain to think and you will see that liberals are using soldiers' lives to obtain power too.
If we are doing what you say, Dilloduck, it would be because we want to gain the power to be in a place to do the next right thing. It does no good, and nothing good can be achieved, if we only judge someone elses outsides by our own insides. People often accuse others of what they themselves would do in similar circumstances. It is a psychological phenomenom known as 'projection'.
Gem
Dilloduck
03-03-2007, 09:07 PM
If we are doing what you say, Dilloduck, it would be because we want to gain the power to be in a place to do the next right thing. It does no good, and nothing good can be achieved, if we only judge someone elses outsides by our own insides. People often accuse others of what they themselves would do in similar circumstances. It is a psychological phenomenom known as 'projection'.
Gem
Right--you're the "good guys" which is why I suggested you think with you brain and not your heart. If you truly believe liberal politicians are any more passionate about helping America rather than themselves you are the victim of another maladaptive coping mechanism--denial.
stephanie
03-03-2007, 09:10 PM
OK, now we're actually getting somewhere.
And you know what? I hear you!
Sounds like you were in 'Nam, CSM. I think there's something you need to know about me. I lost more than a few friends during that time when I tried to tell my fellow peaceniks that they shouldn't be spittin' on returning soldiers, that they- as a general rule anyway- weren't the problem- that it was the lies and deceptions of those in power and those that stood to gain so much from that military campaign that were the problem. Yeah, you may have thought you were fighting for our country, but the sad fact is you were misled by your own government and fought a war that, in hindsight, never needed to be fought at all. I hate to tell you this, CSM, but you were being used- by your own government and the corporations that made billions off of all those misled soldiers, you included. I also don't believe I've ever said that our soldiers deserved to die because "they knew what they were getting into". You're not the only one that lost friends in that war, CSM- and it hurt me just as bad as it hurt you.
If I come across as "morally superior" to you maybe it's because I've been through my own battles and gotten screwed and hurt and faced death a few times myself. There are many battlefields in the journey of life, CSM, and a lot of those are concerned with learning the appropriate ways of dealing with misfortune and bitter disappointments. It is the battles within that are the hardest battles to win, and to win those battles one must learn to step out of oneself and learn to see the world or a situation through someone elses eyes. It is, in a word, an excercise in getting over oneself and learning to move forward and releasing the anger and pain of previous realities that have caused us pain.
You say you were wounded. Well, you know what, I've been wounded from hostile fire on the battlefield of life too. And you know what? When I returned to that battlefield a month later I wasn't allowed, by law, to carry a weapon on that battlefield. But I returned to that battlefield, unarmed, as required by law, with a paralysed arm and still spitting out chunks of lead, and performed the duties I was ordered to do. There are many forms of courage, CSM. You know, it took a lot of courage to go back on the job, unarmed, by myself, on the graveyard shift, after I'd been hit, point blank, with a 16 guage shotgun in the back and the side of my face. Especially without a weapon with which to defend myself. But I did what I knew I had to do. You know, it took a lot of courage for those flower children in the 60's to walk up to those National Guardsmen that had their weapons leveled at them and stick the stems of flowers into the barrels of the weapons the Guardsmen had leveled at them, knowing full well that the order to open fire could come at any time too. It wasn't a courage born of fear or an instinct to survive, CSM, it was a courage borne of belief and conviction and a knowledge of right and wrong and a desire to do what we knew was right. It was a spiritual courage, CSM, the kind of courage Jesus tried to teach, and there is no level of courage greater than that.
Know why we aren't seeing any protestors spitting on wounded returning soldiers today like we saw during the 'Nam years? It's because we learned the lessons of the mistakes of our past. It has nothing to do with anyone supporting a "cause celebre' ". We know now what not to do. Question is, have those that support Bush&Co and the War in Iraq learned their lessons from the past, as US liberals have? Have they learned what not to do? Have you?
If we come across as being "superior" maybe it's because US liberals are disgusted at seeing our nation and our soldiers duped, not once but twice, in the same way in a single lifetime. This may come as a surprise to you, CSM, but US liberals support our troops and don't like what this administration, and the corporate entities they cater and kow-tow to, are putting soldiers much like yourself through. Instead of all the partisan bickering and hate and resentments from the past taking control of our lives wouldn't it be better to just let a peacenik liberal come up to you and hug you, say what needs to said, offer the deserved apologies and let the tears flow and watch the hatred, angst and bitterness melt away so that we can be one people and one nation once again? That, I think, would be the healing way, and I think both you and I know that there's plenty of healing that needs to be done in OUR country.
I think you also need to know that I haven't written this from a space of ego or superiority. What I have written here comes from the heart. I know you can't see it, but I am wiping the tears of hope and forgiveness from my face as I write these last few words. That should serve as a clear indication of the depth of what I have come to believe and wish to share with you. In the crowd I run with we say that you can always count on your fair-weather friends to tell you what you want to hear, but it's your real friends that will tell you what you need to hear. I really would prefer to be your friend, CSM, but you're going to have to let me be that friend- and that choice would have to be up to you.
Peace, Brother!
Gem
:bs1: :puke:
:bs1: :puke:
I would expect nothing less from a sufferer of evil, Stephanie. What can be so bullshit, so pukey, about a recognition of a truth that has saved the sanity, freedom and lives of so many? As we say in the crowd I run with, "Though you may come to scoff may you remain to believe."
Gem
Dilloduck
03-03-2007, 09:35 PM
I would expect nothing less from a sufferer of evil, Stephanie. What can be so bullshit, so pukey, about a recognition of a truth that has saved the sanity, freedom and lives of so many? As we say in the crowd I run with, "Though you may come to scoff may you remain to believe."
Gem
Ya Ya---and your crowd says "Gore was robbed" too ~
Right--you're the "good guys" which is why I suggested you think with you brain and not your heart. If you truly believe liberal politicians are any more passionate about helping America rather than themselves you are the victim of another maladaptive coping mechanism--denial.
Not exactly true there, Dilloduck. What I have learned during the twenty-five years of my current re-incarnation allows me to discern the difference. The problems you allude to are not defined by political or partisan lines- they are ubiquitous human problems, and they will be found among all parties, all nations, races, colors, and creeds. I may be a little more aware of all that than you think I am.
Gem
:salute:
avatar4321
03-03-2007, 09:36 PM
If we are doing what you say, Dilloduck, it would be because we want to gain the power to be in a place to do the next right thing. It does no good, and nothing good can be achieved, if we only judge someone elses outsides by our own insides. People often accuse others of what they themselves would do in similar circumstances. It is a psychological phenomenom known as 'projection'.
Gem
How is it right to attack and undermine those that serve this nation for political power?
If you aren't going to do whats right without power, why the heck should anyone believe you are going to do what's right when you get it?
Ya Ya---and your crowd says "Gore was robbed" too ~
What has that got to do with the price of kumquats in Uganda in Feburary, Dilloduck?
Gem
How is it right to attack and undermine those that serve this nation for political power?
If you aren't going to do whats right without power, why the heck should anyone believe you are going to do what's right when you get it?
Actually US liberals have been asking that same question concerning the hard-core Christian Conservatives for a long, long time.
Gem
Mas :coffee:
Dilloduck
03-03-2007, 09:44 PM
What has that got to do with the price of kumquats in Uganda in Feburary, Dilloduck?
Gem
It was sorta of a commentary on liberals--sarcastic style. You better become familiar with it unless you'd like to get back to some serious debate.
It was sorta of a commentary on liberals--sarcastic style. You better become familiar with it unless you'd like to get back to some serious debate.
I'd love to get back to some "serious" debate, Dilloduck. Question is, would you be able to keep up with me?
Gem
:)
avatar4321
03-03-2007, 09:50 PM
Actually US liberals have been asking that same question concerning the hard-core Christian Conservatives for a long, long time.
Gem
Mas :coffee:
The thing is we do what is right regardless. It's our lives.
Dilloduck
03-03-2007, 09:53 PM
I'd love to get back to some "serious" debate, Dilloduck. Question is, would you be able to keep up with me?
Gem
:)
Sounds great--let's get back to the part where liberals politicians' motives are better for America.
Oh, btw, Dilloduck, I am very familiar with that style of response. I'm plenty seasoned and well equiped to handle it. I can deal. I've already noticed that I can get under your skin- and the skins of a few others- a lot faster than you've been able to get under mine!
Why is that, Dilloduck?
Gem
:)
Dilloduck
03-03-2007, 09:55 PM
Oh, btw, Dilloduck, I am very familiar with that style of response. I'm plenty seasoned and well equiped to handle it. I can deal. I've already noticed that I can get under your skin- and the skins of a few others- a lot faster than you've been able to get under mine!
Why is that, Dilloduck?
Gem
:)
I think it's because you think too highly of your ability to assess the situation.
Sounds great--let's get back to the part where liberals politicians' motives are better for America.
Well, for one thing, most- virtually all as a matter of fact- of my liberal friends, including myself, supported Bush's invasion of Afghanistan after the Taliban refused to turn over bin Laden, as did most of the rest of the world after 9/11. And you need to know that I supported Bush's decision to do so even though I never voted for either Bush in any election. It was when Bush decided to invade Iraq that I broke with him, as did most of the rest of the world. US liberals recognize the fact that there is no sense in making a bad situation worse, as Bush&Co have done. We also recognize that most of the hatred coming from the Middle East was directed at US because of our long-standing support of the policies of the Zionist government of Israel when it has been obvious for decades that what the Israelis have been doing in regards to the Palestinians by not only occupying Palestine but stealing their land was patently wrong. I do not excuse the terrorists for their acts but I can understand their rage and despair, and desperate people often commit desperately outrageous acts. It becomes a vicious cycle of outrage followed by outrage from the other side. One of the stances that a lot of US liberals take is that if we want to be secure in our own nation then we need to break the chain by breaking with Israel until they can demonstrate that they are willing to remove themselves from the occupied zones of Palestine and return the stolen lands back to the original owners and/or their families. I believe that if we publicly announced our decision to do precisely that the Arab world be be stunned at first and would then start to lose their hatred of America. And once they started to realize that we were committted to that action al Qeada and the terrorists would start to lose their power base and recruitment possibilities. That, I believe, would be an excellent start. Unfortunately Bush's invasion of Iraq has only added to their hatred of America and made a bad situation immeasurably worse.
Gem
Still think I think too highly of my abilities to assess the situation, Dilloduck?
Gem
Dilloduck
03-03-2007, 10:34 PM
Well, for one thing, most- virtually all as a matter of fact- of my liberal friends, including myself, supported Bush's invasion of Afghanistan after the Taliban refused to turn over bin Laden, as did most of the rest of the world after 9/11. And you need to know that I supported Bush's decision to do so even though I never voted for either Bush in any election. It was when Bush decided to invade Iraq that I broke with him, as did most of the rest of the world. US liberals recognize the fact that there is no sense in making a bad situation worse, as Bush&Co have done. We also recognize that most of the hatred coming from the Middle East was directed at US because of our long-standing support of the policies of the Zionist government of Israel when it has been obvious for decades that what the Israelis have been doing in regards to the Palestinians by not only occupying Palestine but stealing their land was patently wrong. I do not excuse the terrorists for their acts but I can understand their rage and despair, and desperate people often commit desperately outrageous acts. It becomes a vicious cycle of outrage followed by outrage from the other side. One of the stances that a lot of US liberals take is that if we want to be secure in our own nation then we need to break the chain by breaking with Israel until they can demonstrate that they are willing to remove themselves from the occupied zones of Palestine and return the stolen lands back to the original owners and/or their families. I believe that if we publicly announced our decision to do precisely that the Arab world be be stunned at first and would then start to lose their hatred of America. And once they started to realize that we were committted to that action al Qeada and the terrorists would start to lose their power base and recruitment possibilities. That, I believe, would be an excellent start. Unfortunately Bush's invasion of Iraq has only added to their hatred of America and made a bad situation immeasurably worse.
Gem
It's possible-----It's also possible that the Israeli/Palestinian issue is a big smoke screen for Islamo-facist agression. Do you think that the way to deal with an international dispute is to blow the hell out a couple buildings in New York. Did Bin Laden not think that the US might have taken that as military attack and the response would be a military one as opposed to diplomatic? I mean what was this guy thinking ?
Dilloduck
03-03-2007, 10:35 PM
Still think I think too highly of my abilities to assess the situation, Dilloduck?
Gem
Ya--I do.
stephanie
03-03-2007, 10:39 PM
Well, for one thing, most- virtually all as a matter of fact- of my liberal friends, including myself, supported Bush's invasion of Afghanistan after the Taliban refused to turn over bin Laden, as did most of the rest of the world after 9/11. And you need to know that I supported Bush's decision to do so even though I never voted for either Bush in any election. It was when Bush decided to invade Iraq that I broke with him, as did most of the rest of the world. US liberals recognize the fact that there is no sense in making a bad situation worse, as Bush&Co have done. We also recognize that most of the hatred coming from the Middle East was directed at US because of our long-standing support of the policies of the Zionist government of Israel when it has been obvious for decades that what the Israelis have been doing in regards to the Palestinians by not only occupying Palestine but stealing their land was patently wrong. I do not excuse the terrorists for their acts but I can understand their rage and despair, and desperate people often commit desperately outrageous acts. It becomes a vicious cycle of outrage followed by outrage from the other side. One of the stances that a lot of US liberals take is that if we want to be secure in our own nation then we need to break the chain by breaking with Israel until they can demonstrate that they are willing to remove themselves from the occupied zones of Palestine and return the stolen lands back to the original owners and/or their families. I believe that if we publicly announced our decision to do precisely that the Arab world be be stunned at first and would then start to lose their hatred of America. And once they started to realize that we were committted to that action al Qeada and the terrorists would start to lose their power base and recruitment possibilities. That, I believe, would be an excellent start. Unfortunately Bush's invasion of Iraq has only added to their hatred of America and made a bad situation immeasurably worse.
Gem
Holy shit!
I suppose you believe, we the United States deserved 9/11 also..
:lame2:
Holy shit!
I suppose you believe, we the United States deserved 9/11 also..
:lame2:
I think you are now obligated to show where I've said that, Stephanie. Has it ever occured to you that if someone doesn't like you that you shouldn't go engaging in actions that might piss them off? It isn't that we deserved 9/11, Stephanie, but it is true that our past actions in regards to supporting the Israeli's, plus our placing a military installation 10 miles from Mecca- a direct show of disrespect to the religion of Islam- might have infuriated them enough to want to attack US?
I might be wrong but I get the impression that you may be a biker gal. How would you like it if I went to your clubhouse and started setting my wares up on your bike to sell? Think maybe other people might feel the same way about their own property and personal space?
Gem
Gaffer
03-03-2007, 10:58 PM
Well, for one thing, most- virtually all as a matter of fact- of my liberal friends, including myself, supported Bush's invasion of Afghanistan after the Taliban refused to turn over bin Laden, as did most of the rest of the world after 9/11. And you need to know that I supported Bush's decision to do so even though I never voted for either Bush in any election. It was when Bush decided to invade Iraq that I broke with him, as did most of the rest of the world. US liberals recognize the fact that there is no sense in making a bad situation worse, as Bush&Co have done. We also recognize that most of the hatred coming from the Middle East was directed at US because of our long-standing support of the policies of the Zionist government of Israel when it has been obvious for decades that what the Israelis have been doing in regards to the Palestinians by not only occupying Palestine but stealing their land was patently wrong. I do not excuse the terrorists for their acts but I can understand their rage and despair, and desperate people often commit desperately outrageous acts. It becomes a vicious cycle of outrage followed by outrage from the other side. One of the stances that a lot of US liberals take is that if we want to be secure in our own nation then we need to break the chain by breaking with Israel until they can demonstrate that they are willing to remove themselves from the occupied zones of Palestine and return the stolen lands back to the original owners and/or their families. I believe that if we publicly announced our decision to do precisely that the Arab world be be stunned at first and would then start to lose their hatred of America. And once they started to realize that we were committted to that action al Qeada and the terrorists would start to lose their power base and recruitment possibilities. That, I believe, would be an excellent start. Unfortunately Bush's invasion of Iraq has only added to their hatred of America and made a bad situation immeasurably worse.
Gem
First sign of a jew hater is using the word zionist to describe Israel.
Israel has been repeatedly attacked since its establishment. They have taken land which was important in their security while defending themselves from all the arabs in the region. back in the 90's clinton got things set up for Israel to give back 90% of the conquored territory and all the PA's had to do was recognize Israel's right to exist and stop the attacks on Israel. Arafat walked away from that agreement, because he wanted it all. The arabs don't want conquored lands back, they want ALL of Israel with ALL the jews dead. The koran itself orders all jews to be killed along with all infidels (that's you and me) that don't convert to islam.
stephanie
03-03-2007, 10:58 PM
I might be wrong but I get the impression that you may be a biker gal. How would you like it if I went to your clubhouse and started setting my wares up on your bike to sell?
Gem
:lol:
Wrong....
I guess that's what you get for thinking....:poke:
:lol:
Wrong....
I guess that's what you get for thinking....:poke:
That's why I qualified my initial impression with the acknowledgement that I might be wrong. That's what happens when you really think, Stephanie.
Let me re-phrase it another way:
If you were a biker gal and I did that how would you feel, and what would be your first desire as a response to my actions?
Gem
It's possible-----It's also possible that the Israeli/Palestinian issue is a big smoke screen for Islamo-facist agression. Do you think that the way to deal with an international dispute is to blow the hell out a couple buildings in New York. Did Bin Laden not think that the US might have taken that as military attack and the response would be a military one as opposed to diplomatic? I mean what was this guy thinking ?
Osama is a fanatical religious fundamentalist. What was he thinking? Who knows? But, as is the case with most hard-core religious fundamentalsts he's a couple of cards shy of a deck.
And, yes, attacking the WTC was an act of war, which is why I supported the President I didn't vote for in either election when he went after bin Laden and toppled the Taliban that had been protecting bin Laden. If Bush were to say that he was going to start relocating our forces from Iraq into Afghanistan to resume the hunt for bin Laden and seek the destruction of al Qeada I would still support him in that endeavor. Bush's biggest fuck-up was in straying from the good fight to invade Iraq. True, al Qeada is in Iraq now, but they weren't there before Bush invaded. Think about it for a minute- Saddam was a Sunni, bin Laden is a Shiite. Saddam was a secularist, bin Laden a fundamentalist Wahabi Shiite.
Saddam had precious little use for fundamentalist Shiites, so why would have Saddam welcomed him and his organization into Iraq? I think the most likely scenario is that Osama might have approached Saddam but that Saddam would have declined Osamas offers, whatever they may have been. Considering the long-standing hostilities between the two religious groups I don't think any real level of cooperation between the two would have been likely.
Gem
pegwinn
03-03-2007, 11:26 PM
CSM: System won't let me rep you until I spread it around. Sorry boss.
Did a blog on Walter Reed. I am really surprized at the sheer number of folks going nuts over this.
Gaffer
03-03-2007, 11:28 PM
I think you are now obligated to show where I've said that, Stephanie. Has it ever occured to you that if someone doesn't like you that you shouldn't go engaging in actions that might piss them off? It isn't that we deserved 9/11, Stephanie, but it is true that our past actions in regards to supporting the Israeli's, plus our placing a military installation 10 miles from Mecca- a direct show of disrespect to the religion of Islam- might have infuriated them enough to want to attack US?
I might be wrong but I get the impression that you may be a biker gal. How would you like it if I went to your clubhouse and started setting my wares up on your bike to sell? Think maybe other people might feel the same way about their own property and personal space?
Gem
The US went to saudi arabia at the request of the saudi's to help protect them from saddam. Where the bases were set up was up to them. The collision forces involved in that action were very careful NOT to disrespect anything to do with the muslims and for the most part were well away from any major cities. And ALL forces were withdrwn as soon as the war ended. Any military still in saudi arabia are there by invitation and are on saudi controled bases.
For your information we have been at war with the islamist since 1979. They were a little busy with the russians in afganhistan for ten years but after that they turned their attention back to us. It's just that we are fighting back now instead of sitting wondering where the next attack will be.
CSM: System won't let me rep you until I spread it around. Sorry boss.
Did a blog on Walter Reed. I am really surprized at the sheer number of folks going nuts over this.
Looks like even our own high-level military commanders are going nuts over this, Pegwinn. Heads have been rolling at a rapid pace, in case you hadn't noticed. And it hasn't been the liberals that have made those heads roll- it's been our own military commanders that have been doing that.
Why do you think that is, Pegwinn?
Please post your reply and I'll get back to you later- the lady of the house needs the computer.
Gem
Dilloduck
03-03-2007, 11:33 PM
Osama is a fanatical religious fundamentalist. What was he thinking? Who knows? But, as is the case with most hard-core religious fundamentalsts he's a couple of cards shy of a deck.
And, yes, attacking the WTC was an act of war, which is why I supported the President I didn't vote for in either election when he went after bin Laden and toppled the Taliban that had been protecting bin Laden. If Bush were to say that he was going to start relocating our forces from Iraq into Afghanistan to resume the hunt for bin Laden and seek the destruction of al Qeada I would still support him in that endeavor. Bush's biggest fuck-up was in straying from the good fight to invade Iraq. True, al Qeada is in Iraq now, but they weren't there before Bush invaded. Think about it for a minute- Saddam was a Sunni, bin Laden is a Shiite. Saddam was a secularist, bin Laden a fundamentalist Wahabi Shiite.
Saddam had precious little use for fundamentalist Shiites, so why would have Saddam welcomed him and his organization into Iraq? I think the most likely scenario is that Osama might have approached Saddam but that Saddam would have declined Osamas offers, whatever they may have been. Considering the long-standing hostilities between the two religious groups I don't think any real level of cooperation between the two would have been likely.
Gem
You didn't answer my first question.
pegwinn
03-03-2007, 11:52 PM
Looks like even our own high-level military commanders are going nuts over this, Pegwinn. Heads have been rolling at a rapid pace, in case you hadn't noticed. And it hasn't been the liberals that have made those heads roll- it's been our own military commanders that have been doing that.
Why do you think that is, Pegwinn?
Please post your reply and I'll get back to you later- the lady of the house needs the computer.
Gem
Notice I didn't mention liberals? Don't make the mistake of ascribing labels until you know the poster. As I said, I did a blog on it, read it if you will then perhaps we can discuss it.
Gaffer
03-03-2007, 11:54 PM
Osama is a fanatical religious fundamentalist. What was he thinking? Who knows? But, as is the case with most hard-core religious fundamentalsts he's a couple of cards shy of a deck.
And, yes, attacking the WTC was an act of war, which is why I supported the President I didn't vote for in either election when he went after bin Laden and toppled the Taliban that had been protecting bin Laden. If Bush were to say that he was going to start relocating our forces from Iraq into Afghanistan to resume the hunt for bin Laden and seek the destruction of al Qeada I would still support him in that endeavor. Bush's biggest fuck-up was in straying from the good fight to invade Iraq. True, al Qeada is in Iraq now, but they weren't there before Bush invaded. Think about it for a minute- Saddam was a Sunni, bin Laden is a Shiite. Saddam was a secularist, bin Laden a fundamentalist Wahabi Shiite.
Saddam had precious little use for fundamentalist Shiites, so why would have Saddam welcomed him and his organization into Iraq? I think the most likely scenario is that Osama might have approached Saddam but that Saddam would have declined Osamas offers, whatever they may have been. Considering the long-standing hostilities between the two religious groups I don't think any real level of cooperation between the two would have been likely.
Gem
bin laden is a SUNNI wahabist. And his representatives met with saddams a number of times, even before 9/11. There were lots of al queda in iraq and a al queda training camp in the northern part near the iranian border. saddam was willing to work with anyone that was against the US. There is cooperation going on right now between the two groups. iran is supplying the sunni insurgents with weapons and other equipment and supplying the shites with the same. There are over 40,000 iranian agents in iraq right now helping both sides to destabilize the government and kill US forces. They have a mutual enemy at this time and until that enemy is gone they will fight together. After that they will turn on each other.
As for afganhistan. There are 50,000 NATO troops there now. How many do you think we need? Things are stirring up there again because the taliban and al queda have been allowed to regroup in western pakistan and are now strong enough to launch attacks into afganhistan again. Never hear anything on the news about all the battles fought along that border. Over 4000 taliban and al queda killed in major fighting in the last 6 months and lots more fighting expected in the spring. We can't chase bin laden down when he's hiding in another country and they won't let us go in after him. Unless you are all for invading pakistan?
OK, now we're actually getting somewhere.
And you know what? I hear you!
Sounds like you were in 'Nam, CSM. I think there's something you need to know about me. I lost more than a few friends during that time when I tried to tell my fellow peaceniks that they shouldn't be spittin' on returning soldiers, that they- as a general rule anyway- weren't the problem- that it was the lies and deceptions of those in power and those that stood to gain so much from that military campaign that were the problem. Yeah, you may have thought you were fighting for our country, but the sad fact is you were misled by your own government and fought a war that, in hindsight, never needed to be fought at all. and here is where we differ...I did't think I was fighting for my country ... I KNOW I WAS! I hate to tell you this, CSM, but you were being used- by your own government and the corporations that made billions off of all those misled soldiers, you included. Horsecrap ... I wasn't drafted, I joined. I volunteered (twice) to go over there. I know exactly what was at stake. I was not and am not as stupid or misled as you would have the world believe. I also don't believe I've ever said that our soldiers deserved to die because "they knew what they were getting into". You did not, others like you have. You're not the only one that lost friends in that war, CSM- and it hurt me just as bad as it hurt you. You think so? Did those friends die in your arms? Did you hear their cries of pain and anguish with your own ears? Did you have to wipe their blood and guts off your uniform (or worse, wear it for a few days until you got back to base camp)? Or did you read about it in the home town newspaper as you sat in our college dorm?
If I come across as "morally superior" to you maybe it's because I've been through my own battles and gotten screwed and hurt and faced death a few times myself. There are many battlefields in the journey of life, CSM, and a lot of those are concerned with learning the appropriate ways of dealing with misfortune and bitter disappointments. Do not presme to tell me what is appropriate; you have NO IDEA...none. It is the battles within that are the hardest battles to win, and to win those battles one must learn to step out of oneself and learn to see the world or a situation through someone elses eyes. You yourself may want to do that sometime before you start telling others how they should feel, think or act. It is, in a word, an excercise in getting over oneself and learning to move forward and releasing the anger and pain of previous realities that have caused us pain. Also, do not think you can lecture me with our sanctimonious psycho-babble....
You say you were wounded. Well, you know what, I've been wounded from hostile fire on the battlefield of life too. Battlefield of life??? Do you think that soldiers only fight on some isolated battlefield that has nothing to do with life? My friend, soldiers fight on more battlefields than you will ever know, including the one you call life.And you know what? When I returned to that battlefield a month later I wasn't allowed, by law, to carry a weapon on that battlefield. But I returned to that battlefield, unarmed, as required by law, with a paralysed arm and still spitting out chunks of lead, and performed the duties I was ordered to do. There are many forms of courage, CSM. You know, it took a lot of courage to go back on the job, unarmed, by myself, on the graveyard shift, after I'd been hit, point blank, with a 16 guage shotgun in the back and the side of my face. Especially without a weapon with which to defend myself. Ya know what, if it was a civilian job, you had a choice...you chose to go back into that situation. Just I and many others CHOSE to go back to ours...or perhaps you were misled and used?? But I did what I knew I had to do. You know, it took a lot of courage for those flower children in the 60's to walk up to those National Guardsmen that had their weapons leveled at them and stick the stems of flowers into the barrels of the weapons the Guardsmen had leveled at them, knowing full well that the order to open fire could come at any time too. Horsecrap again...those students never ever believed those soldiers would open fire...not in a million years! They were playing a game. It wasn't a courage born of fear or an instinct to survive, CSM, it was a courage borne of belief and conviction and a knowledge of right and wrong and a desire to do what we knew was right. You are so full of it! Those students were protesting because they thought they were being cute. It was the thing to do in those days. It was a spiritual courage, CSM, the kind of courage Jesus tried to teach, and there is no level of courage greater than that. You can save that too. I have seen the face of courage...all kinds, including spiritual courage.
Know why we aren't seeing any protestors spitting on wounded returning soldiers today like we saw during the 'Nam years? It's because we learned the lessons of the mistakes of our past. It has nothing to do with anyone supporting a "cause celebre' ". Bullshit. You are not spitting on soldier these days because there are those who today will not allow that to happen ever again...and it isn't you or those like you who ensure that.We know now what not to do. To that I can agree; you know that won't win you or "the party" votes. Question is, have those that support Bush&Co and the War in Iraq learned their lessons from the past, as US liberals have? Have they learned what not to do? Have you?
Oh indeed I have! I have learned that the "silent majority" can no longer be silent! They must stand up to the likes of you who have done all that I described before. I will never ever let denigrating comments about soldiers go unchallenged; I will not stand idly by while those like you try to undermine this country in the name of morality, or anything else. I will not let the lies and hypocricy stand in the limelight unopposed.
If we come across as being "superior" maybe it's because US liberals are disgusted at seeing our nation and our soldiers duped, not once but twice, in the same way in a single lifetime. Again the arrogance...the presumption that soldiers are too stupid to know what is right, too ignorant to know a scam when it happens. I too am disgusted...disgusted that once again, those who are interested only in political power turn to those like you to undermine this country. I am disgusted that once again those like you will impose defeat on the United States and then smuggly pat yourselves on the back. This may come as a surprise to you, CSM, but US liberals support our troops and don't like what this administration, and the corporate entities they cater and kow-tow to, are putting soldiers much like yourself through. Guess what, I don't believe ANY liberal truly supports the troops. Your own words and the words of the liberals just like you show how insincere you are! Instead of all the partisan bickering and hate and resentments from the past taking control of our lives wouldn't it be better to just let a peacenik liberal come up to you and hug you, say what needs to said, offer the deserved apologies and let the tears flow and watch the hatred, angst and bitterness melt away so that we can be one people and one nation once again? No, how about letting an old soldier like me come up to you and knock the snot out of you for selling us out those many years ago and then kick your ass for doing it again? That would be far better!
Things need to be said alright but you and those like you will not listen; but then I knew what you meant is that you want to tell me how wrong I am, but you have no intention of letting ME tell YOU how wrong YOU are.... That, I think, would be the healing way, and I think both you and I know that there's plenty of healing that needs to be done in OUR country.
There is indeed healing that needs to be done, but it sure wont happen if you keep sticking that knife in a soldier's back. It wont happen if you and those like you keep aiding and abetting the enemy. It wont happen as long as you and those like you look down your noses and me and those like me.
I think you also need to know that I haven't written this from a space of ego or superiority. What I have written here comes from the heart. I know you can't see it, but I am wiping the tears of hope and forgiveness from my face as I write these last few words. That should serve as a clear indication of the depth of what I have come to believe and wish to share with you. In the crowd I run with we say that you can always count on your fair-weather friends to tell you what you want to hear, but it's your real friends that will tell you what you need to hear. Really? Then you are trying to tell me that you are ready to listen to what I have to say? Or are you so self centered and arrogant that you think it is only YOU that has things I need to hear...I now the answer to that already! I really would prefer to be your friend, CSM, but you're going to have to let me be that friend- and that choice would have to be up to you.
Peace, Brother!
Gem
You want to be my friend? Change the arrogance, quit being a hypocrit, stop looking down your nose at those who do not agree with your politics and lose the hidden agenda when you post. I am more that willing to debate reasonably and as equals BUT not with someone who is thinks I am less intelligent or morally inferior. I will not debate with someone who posts with the presumption that they already have all the answers, that anyone who holds an opposing view was/is misled or stupid or lied to. I will not debate with those whose ONLY intent in posting is to bash the United States or its government. I will debate or discuss with those whom I feel are truly trying to understand and have something to offer me in return (telling me I was misled or stupid isn't it...I heard enough of that in the 60's and 70's...they were wrong then too!). Just know this....I still won't be your brother!
Looks like even our own high-level military commanders are going nuts over this, Pegwinn. Heads have been rolling at a rapid pace, in case you hadn't noticed. And it hasn't been the liberals that have made those heads roll- it's been our own military commanders that have been doing that.
Why do you think that is, Pegwinn?
Please post your reply and I'll get back to you later- the lady of the house needs the computer.
Gem
I will say this: the military can and does hold people responsible. Those that screw up do eventually pay the price. Unfortunately, as has been pointed out, this has been going on for decades and some fish escaped the net, so to speak but maybe now Walter Reed and facilities like it will get the attention they need. I sincerely hope to that this great concern now being expressed by all the do gooders will extend to the VA as well. I'm sure you have already sent your generous donation to help the poor, misled, misused wounded soldier....right Gem?
avatar4321
03-04-2007, 04:37 AM
You want to be my friend? Change the arrogance, quit being a hypocrit, stop looking down your nose at those who do not agree with your politics and lose the hidden agenda when you post. I am more that willing to debate reasonably and as equals BUT not with someone who is thinks I am less intelligent or morally inferior. I will not debate with someone who posts with the presumption that they already have all the answers, that anyone who holds an opposing view was/is misled or stupid or lied to. I will not debate with those whose ONLY intent in posting is to bash the United States or its government. I will debate or discuss with those whom I feel are truly trying to understand and have something to offer me in return (telling me I was misled or stupid isn't it...I heard enough of that in the 60's and 70's...they were wrong then too!). Just know this....I still won't be your brother!
She is just projecting herself onto you. I can't imagine how you feel and I am not going to pretend to. Just know that there are people who do support you and all the troops that have followed and are not just saying that to stay politically viable.
And you are definitely right about one thing. Putting flowers in guns you know aren't going to fire isn't courageous. It's quite childish.
What amazes me about all this is these liberals think they are standing for "freedom and peace" when its the exact opposite. The US military has done more for the cause of freedom and peace than any liberal could ever do. And every time they stab our troops in the back, they are fighting against that cause.
stephanie
03-04-2007, 05:05 AM
She is just projecting herself onto you. I can't imagine how you feel and I am not going to pretend to. Just know that there are people who do support you and all the troops that have followed and are not just saying that to stay politically viable.
And you are definitely right about one thing. Putting flowers in guns you know aren't going to fire isn't courageous. It's quite childish.
What amazes me about all this is these liberals think they are standing for "freedom and peace" when its the exact opposite. The US military has done more for the cause of freedom and peace than any liberal could ever do. And every time they stab our troops in the back, they are fighting against that cause.
They don't care, Avatar..
Gem spoke down in the most demeaning manor that he could , yet they thought they WERE BEING SENSISTIVE.....
That's why I spoke no more to him/ she than was nessarary.....
DO they have no sense of what it is to volunteer to love a Country so much your life is WORTH THE SACRAFICE.....???
They believe the purest form of dissent is railing against ones OWN COUNTRY, calling us baby killers, we are the EVIL....
Do they care about our history.....the millions of men, mostly......but recently the women who have stood up for us,
The United States of America.........
To them....If you can get a bus ticket to a anti-war protest...your are SOMEBODY......
WE KNOW........
WHO THE TRUE PRATIOTS OF THESE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ARE..:salute: :salute:
avatar4321
03-04-2007, 05:08 AM
They don't care, Avatar..
Gem spoke down in the most demeamng mamor that he could , yet he thought he WAS BIENG SENSISTIVE.....
That's why I spoke no more to him/ she than was nessarary.....
They have no sense of what it is to volunteer to love a Country so much your life is WORTH THE SACRAFICE.....
They believe the purest form of dissent is railing against ones OWN COUNTRY, calling us baby killers, we are the EVIL....
They don't care about our history.....the millisons of men, mostly......but recently the women who have stood up of us, The United States of America.........
To them....If you can get a bus ticket to a anti-war protest...your are SOMEBODY......
WE KNOW........
WHO THE TRUE PRATIOTS OF THESE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ARE..:salute: :salute:
20 ¶ Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight! (Isaiah 5:20-21)
It's amazing that we live in a day when things which are good can be considered evil by people and those things which are evil considered good.
stephanie
03-04-2007, 05:22 AM
20 ¶ Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight! (Isaiah 5:20-21)
It's amazing that we live in a day when things which are good can be considered evil by people and those things which are evil considered good.
Amen, my friend...
I would love to be able to love all of mankind...
But I will tell my biggest disappoint of all.....
Is seeing my own people in this great nation, fall into the screamish, anti-American people of this great country....
But, is it inevitable.....??
For the weak here has no sense anymore for standing up for their own country, and it breaks my heart to pieces to see our beloved country being torn down, by it's OWN CITIZENS....
MY TEARS WILL BE SILENCED BY MY DEATH, for I am old now, and can only defend her for so long...
but my children will have to live on in a Nation where it's own citizens can help bring her to it's knees..........'
What a crying shame..
But I will not lay down and sacrifice my life for evil, and not fight back, and if I can help save another's life from it, I will do it if possible...
Even if it means sacrificing my own life...
Because to me.....If you give into Evil, There is no life..
And the United States of America, was worth dying and fighting for....:salute:
Call it stupid, Americanism....Call it stupid to love ones Country so much....
Whatever you want to call it???
Call it a love for ones Country and it's People......
The greatest, the Free, the Best.
avatar4321
03-04-2007, 10:49 AM
Amen, my friend...
I would love to be able to love all of mankind...
But I will tell my biggest disappoint of all.....
Is seeing my own people in this great nation, fall into the screamish, anti-American people of this great country....
But, is it inevitable.....??
For the weak here has no sense anymore for standing up for their own country, and it breaks my heart to pieces to see our beloved country being torn down, by it's OWN CITIZENS....
MY TEARS WILL BE SILENCED BY MY DEATH, for I am old now, and can only defend her for so long...
but my children will have to live on in a Nation where it's own citizens can help bring her to it's knees..........'
What a crying shame..
But I will not lay down and sacrifice my life for evil, and not fight back, and if I can help save another's life from it, I will do it if possible...
Even if it means sacrificing my own life...
Because to me.....If you give into Evil, There is no life..
And the United States of America, was worth dying and fighting for....:salute:
Call it stupid, Americanism....Call it stupid to love ones Country so much....
Whatever you want to call it???
Call it a love for ones Country and it's People......
The greatest, the Free, the Best.
No it's not inevitable that we are destroyed as a nation.
However, we may face a time when we face trial and death before our nation will rise from the ashes.
Gunny
03-04-2007, 11:44 AM
So what you're telling me is that it was the military/government bureuacracy that left your ass "out there", underfunded, underequiped and underarmed and dependant on substandard medical facilities and not the liberal anti-war crowd that put you through all that? If that's the case then why aren't you raising Holy Hell with the "Powers-that-be" that left your happy little ass out there to dry? Why blame it all on the liberals, when it was US liberals that were raising Holy Hell about the very same underfunded, underequiped and underarmed situation the Bush Administration subjected presumably you and your fellow soldiers to?
I think it's time for folks like you to put the blame exactly where it belongs, unless it's easier for folks like you to vent your frustrations on "easier" and less "threatening" targets like liberals and the anti-war crowd.
Gem
:coffee:
Gee, I guess what I posted was too simple for you that you had to go twisting the words around to suit yourself?
Feel free to point out exactly where I said the liberal, anti-war crowd was in and of themselves responsible for bureaucracy. YOU are the one trying to point a finger and misplace blame on Bush and/or his administration, but then, that is hardly a novel concept for you lefties.
Both Democrat Presidents I served under cut military funding to the ridiculous point. Both Republican Presidents I served under ensured we had the manpower and materiel to accomplish our mission, not to mention updated weaponry, better food and clothing. I had more money in my pocket and it went further ... right up to Clinton helping himself to my wallet.
If you don't think cutting military funding exacerbates an already underfunded bureaucratic problem, it's only because it suits you not to, and that CAN be laid at the feet of Democrats who think they can balance the budget and fund their pet socialist programs on the backs of the middle class and the military.
Now that I have covered your piss-poor attempt at deflection, where military healthcare facilities are concerned, it is up to the military to ensure they are adequate, and the bottom-line is, mission accomplishment comes first. Everything else is secondary.
I'd also like to know where the lefty, newfound concern was for inadequate military healthcare before now? There wasn't any. Not until you thought you could use as just another dishonest attack against Bush.
Gunny
03-04-2007, 11:51 AM
OK, now we're actually getting somewhere.
And you know what? I hear you!
Sounds like you were in 'Nam, CSM. I think there's something you need to know about me. I lost more than a few friends during that time when I tried to tell my fellow peaceniks that they shouldn't be spittin' on returning soldiers, that they- as a general rule anyway- weren't the problem- that it was the lies and deceptions of those in power and those that stood to gain so much from that military campaign that were the problem. Yeah, you may have thought you were fighting for our country, but the sad fact is you were misled by your own government and fought a war that, in hindsight, never needed to be fought at all. I hate to tell you this, CSM, but you were being used- by your own government and the corporations that made billions off of all those misled soldiers, you included. I also don't believe I've ever said that our soldiers deserved to die because "they knew what they were getting into". You're not the only one that lost friends in that war, CSM- and it hurt me just as bad as it hurt you.
If I come across as "morally superior" to you maybe it's because I've been through my own battles and gotten screwed and hurt and faced death a few times myself. There are many battlefields in the journey of life, CSM, and a lot of those are concerned with learning the appropriate ways of dealing with misfortune and bitter disappointments. It is the battles within that are the hardest battles to win, and to win those battles one must learn to step out of oneself and learn to see the world or a situation through someone elses eyes. It is, in a word, an excercise in getting over oneself and learning to move forward and releasing the anger and pain of previous realities that have caused us pain.
You say you were wounded. Well, you know what, I've been wounded from hostile fire on the battlefield of life too. And you know what? When I returned to that battlefield a month later I wasn't allowed, by law, to carry a weapon on that battlefield. But I returned to that battlefield, unarmed, as required by law, with a paralysed arm and still spitting out chunks of lead, and performed the duties I was ordered to do. There are many forms of courage, CSM. You know, it took a lot of courage to go back on the job, unarmed, by myself, on the graveyard shift, after I'd been hit, point blank, with a 16 guage shotgun in the back and the side of my face. Especially without a weapon with which to defend myself. But I did what I knew I had to do. You know, it took a lot of courage for those flower children in the 60's to walk up to those National Guardsmen that had their weapons leveled at them and stick the stems of flowers into the barrels of the weapons the Guardsmen had leveled at them, knowing full well that the order to open fire could come at any time too. It wasn't a courage born of fear or an instinct to survive, CSM, it was a courage borne of belief and conviction and a knowledge of right and wrong and a desire to do what we knew was right. It was a spiritual courage, CSM, the kind of courage Jesus tried to teach, and there is no level of courage greater than that.
Know why we aren't seeing any protestors spitting on wounded returning soldiers today like we saw during the 'Nam years? It's because we learned the lessons of the mistakes of our past. It has nothing to do with anyone supporting a "cause celebre' ". We know now what not to do. Question is, have those that support Bush&Co and the War in Iraq learned their lessons from the past, as US liberals have? Have they learned what not to do? Have you?
If we come across as being "superior" maybe it's because US liberals are disgusted at seeing our nation and our soldiers duped, not once but twice, in the same way in a single lifetime. This may come as a surprise to you, CSM, but US liberals support our troops and don't like what this administration, and the corporate entities they cater and kow-tow to, are putting soldiers much like yourself through. Instead of all the partisan bickering and hate and resentments from the past taking control of our lives wouldn't it be better to just let a peacenik liberal come up to you and hug you, say what needs to said, offer the deserved apologies and let the tears flow and watch the hatred, angst and bitterness melt away so that we can be one people and one nation once again? That, I think, would be the healing way, and I think both you and I know that there's plenty of healing that needs to be done in OUR country.
I think you also need to know that I haven't written this from a space of ego or superiority. What I have written here comes from the heart. I know you can't see it, but I am wiping the tears of hope and forgiveness from my face as I write these last few words. That should serve as a clear indication of the depth of what I have come to believe and wish to share with you. In the crowd I run with we say that you can always count on your fair-weather friends to tell you what you want to hear, but it's your real friends that will tell you what you need to hear. I really would prefer to be your friend, CSM, but you're going to have to let me be that friend- and that choice would have to be up to you.
Peace, Brother!
Gem
Are you related by chance to psychoblues? Wonded by hostile fire on the battlefield of life? :lame2:
You come across as being "superior" because quite simply, in your own little mind, you believe you are. Everyone's being duped but you few that are somehow "in the know."
You cannot support the troops while telling them you believe what they are doing is wrong. It doesn't get any simpler than that. NOTHING is going to screw up that young troop's mind quicker than being told he's party to an unjust war. And nothing HASW screwed up more troops' head than just that.
Stick THAT in your peacepipe of superiority and smoke it.
Gunny
03-04-2007, 11:54 AM
I think it's because you think too highly of your ability to assess the situation.
He shoots ... he scores ... and in one sentence.:clap:
Gunny
03-04-2007, 11:57 AM
Still think I think too highly of my abilities to assess the situation, Dilloduck?
Gem
After reading your assessment of the situation, I'd say you might want to consider placing your unfounded pride in an attribute you can actually claim.
Gunny
03-04-2007, 12:04 PM
I think you are now obligated to show where I've said that, Stephanie. Has it ever occured to you that if someone doesn't like you that you shouldn't go engaging in actions that might piss them off? It isn't that we deserved 9/11, Stephanie, but it is true that our past actions in regards to supporting the Israeli's, plus our placing a military installation 10 miles from Mecca- a direct show of disrespect to the religion of Islam- might have infuriated them enough to want to attack US?
I might be wrong but I get the impression that you may be a biker gal. How would you like it if I went to your clubhouse and started setting my wares up on your bike to sell? Think maybe other people might feel the same way about their own property and personal space?
Gem
Has it ever occurred to you that allowing someone's dislike of you to dictate your behavior/actions is cowardice?
Obviously it hasn't occurred to you that supporting Israel is the right thing to do. Your lack of ability to assess the simple situation that so-called Palestinians are in acutality Transjordan Arabs with no more claim to the land occupied by Israel than I have pretty much blows any reasonable conversation on this topic out of the water.
Gunny
03-04-2007, 12:07 PM
CSM: System won't let me rep you until I spread it around. Sorry boss.
Did a blog on Walter Reed. I am really surprized at the sheer number of folks going nuts over this.
Covered.
manu1959
03-04-2007, 12:24 PM
Humm they should have handled the problem without having to be outed by the media first. Considering even Bush said it was a shame. This guy was right to resign but the general they fired first was just the scape goat.
the general they fired was a scape goat? wasn't he in charge? or was this just some random general?
Gunny
03-04-2007, 12:37 PM
the general they fired was a scape goat? wasn't he in charge? or was this just some random general?
Ultimately, the General was responsible for his command. He got fired to appease the headhunters. As I posted in another thread on this same issue (because we can NEVER have enough), they'll move the furniture, dust, slap on a coat of paint, stick another chair-polishing general in command, and wait for the MSM's short attention span to shift to another Earth-shattering event, and it'll be back to business as usual.
This is just another lame attempt to lay something at Bush's feet that doesn't belong there.
One can only wonder what goes through the minds (alleged) of libs when they NEVER attack Bush on the shit he actually does wrong. For some reason they have to fabricate their accusations.
manu1959
03-04-2007, 12:41 PM
Ultimately, the General was responsible for his command. He got fired to appease the headhunters. As I posted in another thread on this same issue (because we can NEVER have enough), they'll move the furniture, dust, slap on a coat of paint, stick another chair-polishing general in command, and wait for the MSM's short attention span to shift to another Earth-shattering event, and it'll be back to business as usual.
This is just another lame attempt to lay something at Bush's feet that doesn't belong there.
One can only wonder what goes through the minds (alleged) of libs when they NEVER attack Bush on the shit he actually does wrong. For some reason they have to fabricate their accusations.
i agree not bush's fault the commander of walter reed fucked up....hell if the democrat controlled congress and senate were as smart as the claimed they would have fixed this in their first 100 hours.....by they way have they fixed anything yet
CockySOB
03-04-2007, 01:06 PM
I'd also like to know where the lefty, newfound concern was for inadequate military healthcare before now? There wasn't any. Not until you thought you could use as just another dishonest attack against Bush.
It's called pandering, something all politicians do. And the only reason the lefties are in an uproar about this, and at this particular time, is because they want to try to use the situation to pander to voters. There's nothing altruistic about it. The lefties have a very flighty sense of what is important. Just let a couple of Hollywood "stars" make a plea for any cause, and the lefties fall on board, raising the clarion call to action. Yet as soon as the issue leaves the major media, the Hollywood activists go back to their cushy lives of abundance, to wait for the next cause to arise.
OK, rant over for the moment.
Gunny
03-04-2007, 01:07 PM
i agree not bush's fault the commander of walter reed fucked up....hell if the democrat controlled congress and senate were as smart as the claimed they would have fixed this in their first 100 hours.....by they way have they fixed anything yet
"Fixing" would require REAL and honest concern .... not politicizing the problem to make lameass accusations.
As soon as they figure out this shit isn't going to stick to the wall anymore than most of the shit they throw at it, they can get back to "important" things like finding out who the father of Anna Nicole's baby is and this will go back to the back of the file cabinet where it started.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.