| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Total Eclipse of the Son | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 31 2006, 04:38 PM (1,289 Views) | |
| mrenaud | Apr 1 2006, 12:59 PM Post #26 |
|
Middle Aged Carp
|
Linking the revolutions in the Ukraine or Georgia to Bush's policies seems a bit far-fetched at least. Schröder's defeat was more narrow than had been expected and might have been even bigger, had his opposition against the war not actually gained him votes (in fact, his party still has enough seats in the Bundestag to form part of the government), and Italy's Silvio Berlusconi is very likely to lose in the forthcoming elections (and his opponent Romano Prodi certainly doesn't quite like Bush as much as Berlusconi does). Like Bush or not, but his list of achievements/failures (pick your choice) is not that large, and he didn't invent sliced bread either. |
| Why is it that the world never remembered the name of Johann Gambolputty de von Ausfern Schplenden Schlitter Crasscrenbon Fried Digger Dingle Dangle Dongle Dungle Burstein von Knacker Thrasher Apple Banger Horowitz Ticolensic Grander Knotty Spelltinkle Grandlich Grumblemeyer Spelterwasser Kurstlich Himbleeisen Bahnwagen Gutenabend Bitte ein Nürnburger Bratwurstle Gerspurten Mitz Weimache Luber Hundsfut Gumberaber Shönedanker Kalbsfleisch Mittler Aucher von Hautkopft of Ulm? | |
![]() |
|
| FrankM | Apr 1 2006, 01:35 PM Post #27 |
|
Senior Carp
|
deleted |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Apr 1 2006, 01:36 PM Post #28 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
Beats bombing an aspirin factory, don't you think? |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| George K | Apr 1 2006, 01:49 PM Post #29 |
|
Finally
|
This is just person's opinion. Take it for what it's worth. I took care of a lady yesterday (for the 2nd time) whose husband is in Iraq. He has volunteered for his second tour. He drives heavy equipment in the Army Reserve. Tractors, backloaders, and the like. I asked her how things are there. After the joke about her husband playing with his Tonka Trucks, she told me that he doesn't understand all the negative press that she reads. Of course, there's horrible things there - he uncovered some mass graves. Of course it's still a war zone. However, the portrayal that she sees on the press is not the image that he sends her. The amount of progress in infrastructure, utilities and the like is unbelievable. The US army is welcomed almost everywhere that he goes. He says that, to him, it's obvious that it's a good thing that we're doing. Just one opinion. That of a wife of a soldier. |
|
A guide to GKSR: Click "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08 Nothing is as effective as homeopathy. I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18 | |
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Apr 1 2006, 02:12 PM Post #30 |
|
Thanks for sharing, one of the most credible posts you'll read on this subject. |
![]() |
|
| George K | Apr 1 2006, 02:21 PM Post #31 |
|
Finally
|
Some other soldiers on the Iraqis: Marine Corps News CAMP AL QA’IM, Iraq (March 24, 2006) -- They came from far and near and waited hours in long lines under a hot Iraqi sun in hopes of joining the Army. Nearly 400 Iraqi males – some as young as 15 – showed up for an Iraqi Army recruiting drive held at the Marines’ battle position in this region along the Euphrates River in western Al Anbar Province. Of the 400 men who showed up to enlist, 179 were accepted – a substantial number, according to Coalition and Iraqi Army officials. The drive, conducted by Iraqi soldiers and Coalition Forces, was an attempt to bolster numbers in one of several Brigades within the Iraqi Army’s 10 divisions, according to Army Capt. Jack S. Rebolledo, one of the Military Transition Team training advisors for the Iraqi Army unit here. The recruitment drive was part of an Iraqi Army recruiting campaign aimed at incorporating more Sunnis into Iraqi Security Forces, according to Coalition officials. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Now, how can that be? Why should Iraqis join the American sponsored military? To hear the critics, the American military has killed more than 100,000 innocent Iraqis in the past three years as we've blundered about the nation terrorizing and torturing...shouldn't the Iraqis want to fight us, rather than join us? What does make an Iraqi risk his life for far less money than the terrorists would pay him for setting IED's for American and Iraqi military forces? Of course, this is a highly biased source, the US Marine Corps, and everything they say should be taken with suspicion. After all they're just genuflecting at the altar of Bush. |
|
A guide to GKSR: Click "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08 Nothing is as effective as homeopathy. I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18 | |
![]() |
|
| kathyk | Apr 1 2006, 02:43 PM Post #32 |
|
Pisa-Carp
|
You can find just about as many accounts from disenchanted returning troops. In fact, I was reading the other day about the growing number of returning veteran's groups opposing this war. That said, there will probably never be as many who vocally oppose the war as those who support - there is a real factor of cognitive dissonance to overcome in doing so. These guys are putting their lives on the line and, understandly, want to believe it's for a noble purpose. In short, one person's anecdotes or anothers is not very compelling evidence of how things are shaping up over them. |
| Blogging in Palestine: http://kksjournal.com/ | |
![]() |
|
| apple | Apr 1 2006, 02:48 PM Post #33 |
|
one of the angels
|
2nd hand information is much better.
|
| it behooves me to behold | |
![]() |
|
| kathyk | Apr 1 2006, 02:57 PM Post #34 |
|
Pisa-Carp
|
I think a better marker of how well our little (400 billion dollars-worth) democracy spreading experiment is going is the latest story of Bush bullying the democratically elected Iraqi leaders about who may or may not lead the country. Mother May I? I'm suprised no one here picked up on this story - or if you did, I missed it. Bush Opposes Iraq's Premier, Shiites Report By EDWARD WONG Published: March 29, 2006 BAGHDAD, Iraq, March 28 — The American ambassador has told Shiite officials that President Bush does not want the Iraqi prime minister to remain the country's leader in the next government, senior Shiite politicians said Tuesday. It is the first time the Americans have directly expressed a preference in the furious debate over the country's top job, the politicians said, and it is inflaming tensions between the Americans and some Shiite leaders. The ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad, told the head of the main Shiite political bloc at a meeting on Saturday to pass on a "personal message from President Bush" to the interim prime minister, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, said Redha Jowad Taki, a Shiite member of Parliament who was at the meeting. Mr. Khalilzad said Mr. Bush "doesn't want, doesn't support, doesn't accept" Mr. Jaafari as the next prime minister, according to Mr. Taki, a senior aide to Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, the head of the Shiite bloc. It was the first "clear and direct message" from the Americans on a specific candidate for prime minister, Mr. Taki said. The Shiite bloc, which won a plurality in the parliamentary election in December, nominated Mr. Jaafari last month to retain his post for four more years. American officials in Baghdad did not dispute the Shiite politicians' account of the conversation, though they would not discuss the details of the meeting. A spokeswoman for the American Embassy confirmed that Mr. Khalilzad met with Mr. Hakim on Saturday. But she declined to comment on what was said. "The decisions about the choice of the prime minister are entirely up to the Iraqis," said the spokeswoman, Elizabeth Colton. "This will be an Iraqi decision." In Washington, the State Department said it would not comment on diplomatic conversations, but Adam Ereli, the deputy spokesman, reiterated American support for "a government of national unity with strong leadership that can unify all Iraqis." The Americans have harshly criticized the Jaafari government in recent months for supporting Shiite militias that have been fomenting sectarian violence and pushing Iraq closer to full-scale civil war. Mr. Khalilzad has sharpened his criticism in the last week, saying the militias are now killing more people than the Sunni Arab-led insurgency. American officials have expressed growing concern that Mr. Jaafari is incapable of reining in the private armies, especially since Moktada al-Sadr, the anti-American cleric who leads the most volatile militia, is Mr. Jaafari's most powerful backer. Haider al-Ubady, a spokesman for Mr. Jaafari, said the prime minister had received the ambassador's message and accused the Americans of trying to subvert Iraqi sovereignty. Tensions between Shiite leaders and the American government, which had been rising for months, boiled over after an assault on Sunday night by American and Iraqi forces on a Shiite mosque compound in northern Baghdad. Shiite leaders say at least 17 civilians were killed in the battle, most of them members of a Shiite political party. American commanders say the soldiers fought insurgents. The reported American pressure over Mr. Jaafari's nomination is another sign of White House impatience over the deadlocked talks to form a new government. American officials say the impasse has created a power vacuum that has encouraged lawlessness and civil conflict. The nomination has become one of the most contentious issues in those talks, with the main Kurdish, Sunni Arab and secular blocs calling for the Shiites to replace Mr. Jaafari. On Monday, Shiite leaders suspended their participation in the negotiations, saying they were enraged by the assault on the mosque complex. In Baghdad on Tuesday, at least 21 people were abducted in four separate incidents in the biggest wave of kidnappings in a month, an Interior Ministry official said. In one incident, 15 men in Iraqi Army uniforms dragged at least six people from a money exchange shop and stole nearly $60,000. In two other cases, people wearing Interior Ministry commando uniforms snatched victims from two electronics shops. The police in western Baghdad discovered 14 bodies on Tuesday, all killed execution-style with gunshots to the head, apparently the latest victims of sectarian bloodletting. On Monday, Iraqi forces found 18 bodies near Baquba with similar wounds. Earlier reports of 30 beheaded bodies found in that area were wrong, the Interior Ministry official said. An American soldier was killed Tuesday by small-arms fire in Baghdad, and another was killed and three were wounded by a roadside bomb outside Habbaniya, the American military said. The Iraqi security minister, Abdul Karim al-Enizi, said on the state-run Iraqiya network on Tuesday night that the Iraqi forces who had raided the mosque compound in Baghdad were not part of the Interior or Defense Ministry. A survivor said the soldiers did not speak Arabic well, implying they may have been Kurdish militiamen working with Americans, Mr. Enizi said. At the Pentagon, senior officials defended the raid, releasing photographs they said proved that weapons and bomb-making materials had been seized inside the compound, which they described as a school complex that had been turned into a base for a "hostage ring." When the soldiers entered the compound, "they found that there was a building there that had a small minaret and a prayer room inside it," said Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "Some people are calling that a mosque." The surge in violence has shaken confidence in Mr. Jaafari, who has been widely criticized by Iraqis for failing to smash the Sunni-led insurgency, letting Shiite death squads run rampant and doing little on reconstruction. Mr. Jaafari won the Shiite bloc's nomination for prime minister by one vote in a secret ballot of its members of Parliament, beating out the deputy of Mr. Hakim, the bloc's leader. As the largest bloc, with 130 of the 275 seats, the Shiites have the right to nominate the prime minister. But a two-thirds vote of Parliament is required for approval of the new government. As long as the other major blocs oppose Mr. Jaafari, the process is at a standstill. Thom Shanker and Steven R. Weisman contributed reporting from Washington for this article. |
| Blogging in Palestine: http://kksjournal.com/ | |
![]() |
|
| FrankM | Apr 1 2006, 02:59 PM Post #35 |
|
Senior Carp
|
You are so consistently negative about every facet of our middle east involvement, you end up with zero credibility even when the points you make are valid. I've stopped reading any but your shortest posts because they take essentially no time to read. You so obviously have an axe to grind that I automatically assume you've twisted every fact to suit your case. Take that as a constructive criticism and a clue as to how you might moderate your posts to provide a more credible viewpoint. And don't tell me that others here do the same thing. I don't care what others might do. I'm talking to you, not them. |
![]() |
|
| kathyk | Apr 1 2006, 03:17 PM Post #36 |
|
Pisa-Carp
|
You bet I'm consistently negative about this war. I was adamently against it before it started. I saw through the false pretenses used to justify it (there, I didn't call them lies - is that moderate?) and many of the predictions I made and were laughed at for making by you hawks proved true. So yes, I remain adamently opposed to this war - actually make that passionately. If that makes me lack credibility in your eyes, so be it, at least I'm consistent. Here's a page from a forum from an Iraq Veterans against the war site for Apple and others who like first hand accounts. Forum page Another interesting page This was the first thing I came across when Googling. I guarantee you, there are many more out there, and the numbers are growing. |
| Blogging in Palestine: http://kksjournal.com/ | |
![]() |
|
| John D'Oh | Apr 1 2006, 05:39 PM Post #37 |
|
MAMIL
|
I didn't mean that it shouldn't be taken in perspective. Yes, Saddam was a monster, and it is arguable that by invading we are saving some lives. However, people are still dying as a direct result of the invasion, people who wouldn't have died otherwise. In the long run, it may be worthwhile, but it may not. If America fails, and again I think that whether this happens is currently unknown, there could be a huge bloodbath. After much soul-searching, my opinion is that Bush probably went in with well-meaning intent. I'm very cynical about the intentions of politicians, and to be honest I don't have much time for Bush at all, however I am willing to admit he probably meant well in this instance. Whether it was a strategically good move is open to debate. I personally think that it was a blunder, and my rather gloomy prediction for the future is that at some point in the medium term America and the allies will leave Iraq (too soon) and there will be a massive civil war followed by a fundamentalist muslim or secularist dictatorship government. If I'm right, I can honestly say that I will get absolutely no pleasure from the fact. Winning a political argument is irrelevent if millions of people die. If this happens, will the invasion have been worthwhile? Who knows what could have happened if the US didn't invade? It could have been worse. I sometimes wish life was a computer game. If you screw up, hit reload and try again. On that cheery note, I'm off for a drink. |
| What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket? | |
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Apr 1 2006, 07:16 PM Post #38 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
Tit for tat. Bush doesn't want Jaafari as the next prime minister. It appears the majority Shiites don't want Bush's Ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad. Shiite Clerics' Criticism of U.S. Intensifies American efforts to broker a compromise among Iraq's groups has made some bitter. By Borzou Daragahi, LA Times Staff Writer April 1, 2006 BAGHDAD — Shiite Muslim religious leaders ratcheted up their rhetoric against the U.S. during Friday prayers amid ongoing sectarian violence and faltering talks over the creation of a new Iraqi government. One leading Shiite cleric, Ayatollah Mohammed Yacoubi, called on Washington to remove U.S. envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, who is perceived by some Shiites as biased in favor of Kurds, Sunni Arabs and secular Iraqis. The United States "should not yield to terrorist blackmail and should not be deluded or misled by spiteful sectarians," he said in a statement read at mosques, according to the Reuters news agency. "It should replace its ambassador to Iraq if it wants to protect itself from further failures." The occasionally vitriolic anti-American sermons, many delivered by clerics close to radical Shiite cleric Muqtada Sadr, were the latest sign of souring relations between U.S. political and military leaders and the country's majority sect, which initially welcomed the U.S. effort to topple the Sunni-led regime of Saddam Hussein in 2003. Shiite political parties, many of them with religious and family ties to powerful clerical clans in shrine cities in Iran as well as Iraq, have been angered by U.S. efforts to broker a compromise between Iraq's squabbling political blocs. Kurds, Sunni Arabs and a secular coalition led by former Prime Minister Iyad Allawi oppose the Shiite nomination of interim Prime Minister Ibrahim Jafari for a full term in office. This week a Shiite politician leaked word that President Bush had sent a message through Khalilzad that he, too, opposed Jafari's candidacy, a move that angered Shiite leaders. Khalilzad, speaking to a group of Iraqi women Friday inside the tightly secured Green Zone, took his own swipe at Iraqi politicians. "Iraq is bleeding while they are moving at a very slow pace," he said, according to a transcript provided by the U.S. Embassy. Shiite religious leaders throughout the country also condemned a U.S.-Iraqi raid on a Shiite house of worship in northern Baghdad on Sunday that left at least 16 dead. "This grisly crime was committed by the occupier and its mercenaries," prayer leader Mohammed Tabatabai told worshipers in Sadr City, a Shiite slum in Baghdad. "America is taking on the role of pharaoh to the world. America came to kill the believers." Other Shiite leaders called on the Iraqi government to stop sectarian attacks on Shiite villagers in the countryside. The International Organization for Migration, a multinational group that helps refugees, estimates that at least 4,000 families throughout the country have been displaced by sectarian violence or fear. In Basra, Sheik Abdul Karim Ghizzi demanded that the government help Shiite victims. "We condemn and denounce the disastrous security situation in the country," he told worshipers. Iraq's Sunni Arabs, once viewed as the primary perpetrators of ethnic violence, have increasingly become victims as shadowy groups with possible ties to official security organizations have launched a campaign of abduction and killing. Authorities discovered at least five corpses Friday, at least three of them with handcuffs and signs of torture in what has become the signature of the death squads operating in religiously mixed provinces of central Iraq. Commandos of the Shiite-led Interior Ministry as well as Iraqi soldiers were said to have arrested the husband of a Sunni legislator Thursday night. "A large number of forces in 15 cars came in armored cars and ambulances," Amal Siham Qadhi, a Sunni elected official, said Friday. "He was arrested without charges and without any warrant from a judge." At the Umm Qura Mosque, among the country's most important Sunni houses of worship, Sheik Mahmoud Sumaidaie called for help from other Arab countries. He criticized leaders of countries such as Egypt who did not attend the recent Arab League summit in Khartoum, the capital of Sudan, a forum that was to focus this year on the crisis in Iraq. "Other nations have interests in Iraq, so they interfere," Sumaidaie told worshipers in an unsubtle swipe at Shiite Iran. "They kill, detonate and plot while the Arab leaders are asleep at their summit." Insurgents killed at least three Iraqis in Baghdad on Friday as an 8 p.m. curfew went into effect. Rockets and mortar rounds struck several neighborhoods in the capital, killing two and injuring two. Insurgents killed a police officer in downtown Baghdad. Two car bombs in southern Baghdad injured six. In the northern city of Bayji, relatives and friends of eight employees of an electricity generation plant who were killed Thursday set up funeral tents. The men were driving home from work when they were ambushed by gunmen, said Lt. Mohaned Ahmed of the Bayji police. |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Apr 1 2006, 07:32 PM Post #39 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
The problem I have, 89th, is that no one seems to know what winning is -- so you are probably right in saying no one can say if we are winning or losing. There is no obvious goal against which we can measure progress or lack thereof. I think, though, it is very clear that with the increasing sectarian violence (for your sake I won't call it a civil war) we are not moving in the direction of the original goals and expectations Bush laid out for us when he invaded and occupied the country. It is on this basis that I see us as losing. So, the question is, 89th, can you tell me what winning in Iraq is for the US? Is is still a stable democracy? If so, how likely do you think this is? Is it just a stable government of some sort? If so, how likely do you think this is? Does the government need to be pro-American? What if they choose their own but it is pro-Iranian? Would this still be a win? Is it possible that we are at a point where success is just that the Iraqis stop killing each other long enough so we can make an exit? (BTW, thanks for your comments to Larry. This is not the first time you have done this. I appreciate it. ) (And a BTW to FrankM...you should not have deleted your post. It was very good). |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Apr 1 2006, 08:03 PM Post #40 |
|
First of all, Bush invaded, LIBERATED, and is now stabilizing the country. The goal he set out was to liberate the country (check) and set up a stable democratic government, with a full sovereign military to supplament it. We are making progress toward that last goal, every day. We have had 3 successful elections, a constitution, and a military in training. We have lost minimal soldiers in the process and are currently fighting rogue insurgents who don't want to see us succeed. The insurgents know that we're tightening our grip every day. Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Pakistan, India, etc...are all moving (or have moved) forward as allies of the USA....AKA, against evil regimes and totalitarian dictatorships, toward western democracies and freedom. I know that's a broad statement and each country is different, but my point is that these insurgents know that their ticket is up, and they need to make a stand in Iraq (long enough until the USA loses it's resolve and pulls out early, like alot of liberals want), so that they can set up camp and force the current Iraqi government (that's still an infant but growing fast) out.
We aren't losing and we haven't won. But we ARE winning. So many success stories are there and so many goals have been met. It hasn't been easy...and for us to win, we need to stay there for another year, or two, or three, and slowly decrease our presence there as the Iraqi military slowly steps up. Pulling out now would honestly be the dumbest mistake possible. |
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Apr 1 2006, 08:08 PM Post #41 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
Is this what you are saying we define victory as? |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Apr 1 2006, 08:13 PM Post #42 |
|
When we achieve that....yes, I say that's a victory. |
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Apr 1 2006, 08:15 PM Post #43 |
|
Also, we fought Iraq. We beat them in a few weeks. That was also a victory. In my opinion, we won the Iraq War in 2003. What we are doing now, is making sure we give Iraq the best chance at being a successful democracy. If that requires us helping them build their infrastructure, guide their constitution, train their military, and police the streets....so bet it. |
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Apr 1 2006, 08:21 PM Post #44 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
Would you then say that if we do not achieve this, we are not victorious/suucessful? Is there something less which you would say is also a victory/success? Or is anything less a loss/failure? And I am wondering if the others on here who say we are making progress also define victory hence success in this way? Or do others have a different definition of what victory/success is for our troops in Iraq? |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Apr 1 2006, 08:46 PM Post #45 |
|
These are good and valid questions Rick. I wouldn't say we weren't victorious if we do not achieve that goal. (Sorry for the triple negative) However I WOULD say we failed IF we leave too early and let insurgents or other terrorists take over the country. |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Apr 1 2006, 08:48 PM Post #46 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Poll on Iraq War cost: http://s10.invisionfree.com/The_New_Coffee...?showtopic=9363 |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Apr 1 2006, 11:38 PM Post #47 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
This is typical thinking for a lunatic fringe leftist - when your view doesn't agree with theirs, since it's not possible for them to be wrong, they tell you you hold your "incorrect" view because you aren't smart enough to see it their way.... The number of soldiers coming back from the war that oppose it are a tiny minority. You will *not* find just as many who oppose it as support it, and the only person who could believe such a thing would probably think Jim Crow was a real person..... Oh wait.... *you* thought Jim Crow was real, didn't you?.... Or did he spell it "Crw"? |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Jolly | Apr 2 2006, 03:33 AM Post #48 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
My advice to you is to quit reading and start talking. To real people. To guys that have served in Iraq, or worked there...and no, I'm not talking about some hand-picked idealogue that has the stamp of approval from some political group. You might hear some things you really wouldn't like. Some things like pride in country, commitment to duty, and a more realistic appraisal of this country's efforts in Iraq. To the person, every sailor, soldier, airman or marine I've talked to - and God knows since Katrina/Rita we've had the opportunity to drink coffee with a bunch of them - is much more optimistic than the usual stuff you trot out. Talk to people...and try listening... |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| kathyk | Apr 2 2006, 05:30 AM Post #49 |
|
Pisa-Carp
|
Jolly - I get around more than you may realize. I live in a blue collar community. Most of my clients are working class stiffs. The local newspaper is full of editorials from every day, middle class people - and yes- there have been numerous accounts from vets and their families - voicing sentiments toward this war similar to my own - often much more angry. As I said, I tend to take their accounts more seriously because they *are* going against the grain by speaking out. They are speaking out notwithstanding the cognitive dissoance of doing so; i.e., they put their lives on the line and want to/need to feel it was for the greater good. Not to mention the fact that part of military training is to never question authority - all the way up to the commander in chief. In my mind the people who have been there, come back and have the courage to speak out are the bravest of the brave. Aside: Read in my local paper this morning that nearly 20% of returning vets from Iraq are battling mental disorders. I wonder how that segment is portraying things in Iraq. |
| Blogging in Palestine: http://kksjournal.com/ | |
![]() |
|
| JBryan | Apr 2 2006, 06:20 AM Post #50 |
![]()
I am the grey one
|
And, it would appear, are the only ones who have opinions worth listening to by your lights. |
|
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it". Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody. Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore. From The Lion in Winter. | |
![]() |
|
![]() Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today. Learn More · Sign-up Now |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |










10:34 AM Jul 11