Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Julihya]

• ?????? ??????????? ????? ... by Julihya
  [Today at 11:07:33 AM]
• ?????? ???? ???????? ????... by proertenumb
  [May 30, 2024, 02:52:04 AM]
• ??????? ?????? ??????????... by Evasoz
  [May 28, 2024, 03:41:43 PM]
• The Apparently Necessary ... by Carmelasew
  [May 28, 2024, 12:33:17 PM]
• ?????????? ?????? ???????... by Andreasgds
  [May 28, 2024, 08:27:19 AM]
• One Trade Perks of Puttin... by Carmelasew
  [May 25, 2024, 06:54:05 PM]

Members

• Total Members: 4983
• Latest: BrianVet

Stats

• Total Posts: 129680
• Total Topics: 7210
• Online Today: 151
• Online Ever: 1013
• (January 12, 2023, 01:18:11 AM)

[Demosthenes]

As there is a clear political purpose behind these shirts, I'll concede that point, but I still feel that it's no worse than the tactics currently being used by the current administration.  In fact, it doesn't even come close to that level of depravity.

[reimero]

As there is a clear political purpose behind these shirts, I'll concede that point, but I still feel that it's no worse than the tactics currently being used by the current administration.  In fact, it doesn't even come close to that level of depravity.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

But three lefts do  

[Demosthenes]

True.

Also, there is no "I" in "team".

But there are two "i's" in "martini".  




Anyway, I was feeling that the political bias of the shirt idea was justified because of the gross misconduct of the political opposition, but I appear to have fallen victim to one of my own pet peeves.  The ends do not justify the means.

And that's true in this case as well.  

[Rico]

I never called anyone unpatriotic.  All, I said was that I despise the idea of using dead soldiers as a political tool.  I did say that people should have more respect for our political leaders.  I never liked Clinton, but he was the President, and I had enough respect for that fact not to bash him.

Go ahead and buy your T-shirts, though.  Free country.  You can also burn a flag while you're at it, if you like.  I guess everyone has just forgotten that those guys had friends, mothers, fathers, kids, and spouses.  Maybe they would really like it if you paraded their death around in front of their families for them.  I'm sure they'd be tickled that you're blatently mocking them for following orders.  What's next?

Have you asked any soldiers if they wanted to be on these t-shirts?  No.  One stood up and told you how much it bothered him though, and now it's boiled down into a stupid political discussion.  Don't you see how belittling that is?  You'd rather argue about how much you hate the current political system, than think about the fact that maybe these servicemen and women never wanted to be on those shirts.

Cry about politics all you want, though.  It falls on deaf ears.  You get who you vote for, and if the majority of people think Bush has done the right thing, then he'll be there again.  I will tell you right now.  I think John Kerry is a despicable person who sold out his oath and fellow servicemen.  If he's becomes President, you won't hear me say the like again until he's out of office.

Anyway, ya'll have fun debating the merits of what equates to graverobbing.  I'm going to bed.

EDIT:

Demo, I just saw the above post.   Thank you, that was the ONLY point I had intended to make.  You know preachy I can get when discussing politics, though.

[reimero]

So have we reached that happy place where we can hold hands and sing Kumbaya now?

[Demosthenes]

I never called anyone unpatriotic.  All, I said was that I despise the idea of using dead soldiers as a political tool.

I despise the idea of sending soldiers to their deaths for political purposes.

It's so obscene that I feel that it's tantamount to treason for Bush to have done so, along with any Congressman that was negligent enough to allow -- or worse, endorse -- such a tragic abuse of power to occur.

 I did say that people should have more respect for our political leaders.  I never liked Clinton, but he was the President, and I had enough respect for that fact not to bash him.

As a voter, I reserve the right to bash any president.  I don't personally think we've had a good one in this generation.  Or the last generation.  Or the one before that, for that matter.

Go ahead and buy your T-shirts, though.  Free country.  You can also burn a flag while you're at it, if you like.  I guess everyone has just forgotten that those guys had friends, mothers, fathers, kids, and spouses.  Maybe they would really like it if you paraded their death around in front of their families for them.

Rico, that's exactly the point of this.  It seems that only the friends, families, and spouses of these brave men and women are aware of the real loss and tragedy of this disastrous course of action.  Letting others know those soldiers had names brings that loss and tragedy home for everyone.

Something the current administration has been doing everything it can to stop.

Wonder why?

I've conceded that using their names for political purposes is a disservice, but so is willfully suppressing the names of those honored dead.  In my opinion, that's a much greater disservice, and that's why I felt this wasn't that inappropriate.

I was wrong about the appropriateness.  But I'm still pretty pissed off at the situation, and I still feel that the public needs to put a face on this war, and I don't know of any other way of doing that.

 I'm sure they'd be tickled that you're blatently mocking them for following orders.  What's next?

I'm doing no such thing, and I resent that very much.  You know damn well that I have nothing but respect for the soldiers themselves.  

Let me put this as clearly as possible:  It is my respect for our military that pisses me off the MOST about the Bush Administration.

We have hundreds of thousands of fine, brave people that volunteered to serve their country.

And what does our president do?  He gets them killed.

For nothing.

FOR NOTHING.

Cry about politics all you want, though.  It falls on deaf ears.  You get who you vote for, and if the majority of people think Bush has done the right thing, then he'll be there again.  I will tell you right now.  I think John Kerry is a despicable person who sold out his oath and fellow servicemen.  If he's becomes President, you won't hear me say the like again until he's out of office.

I don't like Kerry either.  That's why I'm not going to vote for him.

Demo, I just saw the above post.   Thank you, that was the ONLY point I had intended to make.  You know preachy I can get when discussing politics, though.

I know... but I still get the idea that you don't understand where I'm coming from on this.

We've discussed the topic before... I resent the implication that I'm somehow less patriotic or "un-American" because I despise the politics or decisions of our elected leaders.

My primary concern in the Iraq conflict is the safety of our troops.  I support our troops.

But I don't support their current mission.  It was poorly planned, poorly executed, costly in terms of taxpayer money, alliances with our friends in the international community, and most importantly American blood.

The best way to "support our troops" is to not get them involved in political personal grudge matches that result in their coming home in flag-draped boxes.

I apologize if my wanting to support the use of their names to achieve that end offended, but at this point, I think a lot of people (myself included) are really grasping at straws to come to terms with some of the jaw-droppingly stupid things coming out of Washington in the past few years.

That pretty much makes discussing the subject impossible to do without politics being involved... it was politicking on the part of the Commander In Chief and his staff that got us into this mess.

[Joe Mama]

Rico, I understand your position.  However, I have just been annoyed by the out of sight out of mind mentality of the administration.  They won't allow any of the american coffins to be shown, they rarely if ever discuss the casualties in Iraq.  Its as if they never occured.  This to me is the greatest tragedy.  These men deserve recognition.  Bush should go in front of the country and list off each and every one of their names, their ranks, their accomplishments, what kind of people they are.  Instead, he stands up and says how great and noble he is for fighting this war on terror.  He gets a custom air force uniform made at the taxpayer's expense so that he can go over to Iraq on Thanksgiving and pretend he is some sort of hero.  But no mention of the fallen soldiers.  It doesn't seem right to me.

[pbsaurus]

Yup Barbara Lee is the only congressman with any balls.

[hackess]

Thank you, Demo. You somehow always manage to say, far more eloquently than I could, what I'm thinking.

[MISTER MASSACRE]

My President has said to go, and we go.  I will back him with every fiber of my being, because backing him is backing my country.  

(emphasis mine)

I would agree with that if your President had some degree of competence when it came to the management of your country's affairs, but a quick look at the global environment will tell you quite plainly that he does not. Whether it be by incompetence or some malice, the fact remains that Bush has done nothing but fuck up the goodwill America had garnered.

Rico, stalwart loyalty in this mercurial day and age is an attribute to wear with pride, but Bush has done nothing but spit on that loyalty. He has sent good people overseas to die for reasons that he and his administration have been unable to defend or define. He has changed terms, lied, altered conventions and broken accords. He has contradicted himself. Again and again.

These shirts may be insulting to you, but I fail to see how they aren't paling in comparison to the constant smirking insults that are delivered everday in the media: GW assuring us the war (sorry--"major conflict") is over, then extending troop deployment. The government-enforced media black-out over coffins and all signs that good people have died for their country. The FUCKING RIDICULOUS underplanning, underequipping and complete lack of foresight.

Your President is either incapable or unwilling to act in the best interest of your country.

The people making those shirts are drawing attention to the fact--in an unpleasant and perhaps insulting way, yes--but they are drawing attention.

And right now, people need to pay attention.

[Rico]

Don't mistake my disagreement for accusing anyone of being unpatriotic.  That's not true at all.  All, I'm saying is choose your battleground as somewhere else.  All I keep hearing, for the most part, is they did "this," so it's okay for me to do "that."  It does not matter what the administration is doing with the bodies as they are being brought home.  It is NO reason to start using dead Soldiers as some sort of political device to get your opinion across.

I think that a lot of my disagreement with you all comes from my support of this war.   I feel very strongly that we did the right thing, though we may not have done it as we should have.  Everyone seems to want to make it out as if this was some masterminded plot by an evil man for nothing more than political gain.  It wasn't and that's a silly thought.  Clinton thought there was WMD in Iraq, so did Bush Sr., and so did Reagan.  It's nothing new.  They used it once before, and based off of intercepted transmitions released to NATO and the UN, there was EVERY reason to believe they still had them.  Now, Iraq has WMD AND they're training and funding terrorists.  Add to that the fact that they have publicly stated their despise of the US.  There was, and continues to be every reason to believe that Iraq had those weapons.  Hell, everyone seems to gloss over what happened to the Kurds.  Forget what was used on them, or do you think that they just used the last of their stock killing a bunch of drifters?

Tell you what though.  I'm going to see several people in all four branches today.  I'll ask them these two questions and see what they say.

Was the war the right thing to do?  What do they think about this shirt idea?

I'll try to stay awake long enough to post the results.

[Rico]

Hey, folks.  Got released early today.  I didn't have time to ask as many people as I would have liked, but here's what I DID find out.

Army:  

All four people asked were for the war, though had problems with the way it has been waged.  Three of the four had come straight form Iraq, with the fourth being just from Korea with me.  Also, all four agreed that it is an American's right to buy or wear the shirts, but none of them wanted their name on them.  They were also a little upset at the idea that some of the people that they had been serving with when they died would be on those shirts.

Navy:

I only got to ask three Navy personnel since that's all I saw that early in the morning.     Two of the three were totally against the war, one of them having recently returned near Iraq.  The one remaining person was undecided on their stance on the war, and also unsure of how they felt about the shirt.  The other two sailors were dead-set against the idea of the orange shirt.

Air Force:

One for the war and one undecided.  I also asked three guards that just came from Iraq.  They all were against the war, but admited that a few people they knew over there were for it, just didn't want to be the ones doing it.  Of the five Airmen I asked, all of them were against the idea of a t-shirt.

Marines:

I never was able to hunt any of them down, but I'll keep an eye out for them and ask them what they think when I do see a couple.  I would guess you'll find about the same opinions from them as you would the Army.


Now, I would like to say that the question about the war was strictly whether they believed it right or not, not whether they liked the way it was waged.  Some people went on to explain their answer, others just kept it to themselves, but there seems to be a pretty even divide on how the war is being waged by those that agree with it in general.

When I asked about the shirt, I mentioned how the people doing it were using it to point out their disatisfaction with the current administration's habit of supressing facts about the numbers dead.  I described the shirt, and then asked how they felt about it.  Several were violently against it and visibly upset at the notion, while most were against it, but maintained that it wasn't their place to tell civilians what to do, only that they didn't want themselves or fellow servicemen being used in that manner.  No one was for the shirt, and only one undecided.


Now, the poll about the war was mostly for me.  I was currious how the various branches felt and if there was a difference in branch.  I found that their was.  I'm not trying to run down the AF or Navy, they are very important and really help save lives, but I don't think anyone will debate the fact that it's mostly Soldiers that die in this kind of war, if not war in general.  I find it interesting that those that have the greatest chance of being killed are also the ones that are most for the war and believe in it.  I'm a little curious to talk to those coming home, though and find out if there is a difference between Soldiers who have gone over there and those that have not.

My question about he shirt is much more simple.  I'm sure that I'm not the only serviceman to hear about it, and I'm sure the makers of the shirt have heard from several of my brothers and sisters, as they are about to hear from me, and I have to wonder if it makes any difference.  Knowing that those who are serving feel this way about the idea of those shirts, will they contiue to produce them?  Whether they do, or not will show you just how much they care about those that are dying for their freedom to wear those shirts.  I think that will speak louder than anything I could ever say about it.

[Demosthenes]

Whether they do, or not will show you just how much they care about those that are dying for their freedom to wear those shirts.  I think that will speak louder than anything I could ever say about it.

I take issue with that.

How does any soldier's death in a war we should not have been involved in to BEGIN with make anyone here "more free"?  How does that "defend our freedoms"?

From what I've seen, read, and heard, the invasion of Iraq has become a beacon, uniting hundreds of small, formerly insignificant terrorist groups under one big banner and cause.  It has alienated our allies, and it has made us less safe.

The government's response to that "less safe" state has been to crack down on our freedoms, our privacy, all in the name of greater security... but the amount of abuse that is occurring in the name of increasing that security and "safety" is unprecedented.

Soldiers fighting and dying right now in Iraq aren't protecting freedom.  They're not defending the United States.  They aren't making us more free.

They are being used for political ends.  They are dying for nothing.  That is what so many find appalling.

Lacerda put it quite well when he said:

These shirts may be insulting to you, but I fail to see how they aren't paling in comparison to the constant smirking insults that are delivered everday in the media: GW assuring us the war (sorry--"major conflict") is over, then extending troop deployment. The government-enforced media black-out over coffins and all signs that good people have died for their country. The FUCKING RIDICULOUS underplanning, underequipping and complete lack of foresight.

Your President is either incapable or unwilling to act in the best interest of your country.

I've already admitted that the shirts are probably not appropriate in that yes, they are being used for political purposes.  In my eyes, that's wrong.

But I'm trying to understand how you can see that being even CLOSE to as wrong as the smug, self-righteous asshole in the Oval Office right now sending young men and women to die on foreign soil for his own personal agenda.  

I honestly cannot fathom how you can so willingly accept being placed in harm's way for nothing but that.  Or accept seeing so many other Americans falling needlessly.

Everyone seems to want to make it out as if this was some masterminded plot by an evil man for nothing more than political gain.

That's exactly how this appears to many Americans.  There's a saying that I'm fond of that goes, "Never assume malicious intent when gross incompetence will suffice".... well, Dubya's fucking things up pretty badly.  In my view, he's either

A) Doing this out of malice
B) Doing this out of sheer incompetence

Either way, he shouldn't be soiling the noble office of President with his presence.

It wasn't and that's a silly thought. Clinton thought there was WMD in Iraq, so did Bush Sr., and so did Reagan. It's nothing new.

But they didn't invade based on "we thought they had them".  

They used it once before, and based off of intercepted transmitions released to NATO and the UN, there was EVERY reason to believe they still had them.

"Believe" is one thing.  Actual evidence is another.

War is a serious thing.  You can't just invade another country because you "believe" they have something they shouldn't.  You'd better be damned sure they do before you commit American lives to a conflict that could potentially claim them.

To do so anyway, without any real justification comes back down to what I just said.

A)  Malice

or

B) Incompetence

Now, Iraq has WMD AND they're training and funding terrorists.

I'm sorry... I must have missed that in the news.  No weapons of mass destruction have been found yet, in over a year of occupation.  And the White House itself is now saying that they never knew of any connection between Hussein and Al Qaeda.

Justification then for invasion?  Anyone?  Bueller?  Bueller?

Add to that the fact that they have publicly stated their despise of the US.

If we were planning on invading every country that despises the U.S., we'd better get started... we have about 120 more to go...

There was, and continues to be every reason to believe that Iraq had those weapons.

Except for actual evidence.  Physical proof.  The tangible presence of said alleged weapons.   Not to mention a means of delivery to US soil.

Without BOTH of those things, Iraq was not, and is not a direct threat to us.

No WMD.

No link to Al Qaeda.

No evidence of either.




How, again, is this connected with "The War On Terror™"?

How, again, does this war make us "more free"?  How does this "defend our country"?


I'll answer those.

It ISN'T connected with "The War On Terror™".

It has so far had the effect of making us LESS FREE.

It has created so much instability and fervent hatred of everything American that it has made us LESS DEFENDED.


Keep in mind that most of our military is now tied up in Iraq.

If anyone else were to try anything right now, we would have almost no military to speak of left to defend our actual country from foreign threats.

And how many of the rest of the world's countries would put their own troops in harm's way right now to help us if that were the case?

We've never in the past century been so defenseLESS.

So again, I say that this is all the fault of the guy in the White House.  It's a pretty fucked up situation.  Considering that it's resulted in over 800 military deaths and over 3800 military personnel being wounded, I'd say that this is the largest disaster directly caused by a US president since LBJ decided to commit to a full escalation in Vietnam back in the early 60's.

So again, given the indisputable disastrous state of affairs, which can this be subscribed to?

A) Malice

or

B) Incompetence?

[Binoboy]

Wow Demo, you can get away with saying alot. I wonder if people assume you're an anti-soldier hippie.

[reimero]

I guess it's safe to assume Demo isn't planning on voting for Bush in November.

[Demosthenes]

Wow Demo, you can get away with saying alot. I wonder if people assume you're an anti-soldier hippie.

 

What's that supposed to mean?

It wouldn't be a very good assumption.  I'm very pro-soldier.

That's why I'm anti-Bush.  He's done more harm to the military than Clinton had, and that's saying something.

Don't forget that veterans' benefits are getting a big, hefty cut at Dubya's hands as well.

And as for "hippie", I don't think much could be further from the truth.

I'm not a pacifist.

I'm not "anti-war".

I'm not "anti-military".

And I'm more of a capitalist than any Republican currently holding federal office... with the notable exception of Ron Paul (R-TX), and that's just because he's actually a Libertarian in Republican clothing.  



I'm actually pro-military.  Pro-defense.  Pro-American.

And most importantly, pro-Constitution.

Being "pro-" all those things pretty much means I have to be anti-Bush.  Considering that Bush seems to be either through malice or incompetence anti-military (since he's doing them grievous injury and slapping them in the face), anti-defense (since he's misappropriating our defensive forces elsewhere, leaving us fairly unprotected, militarily), and anti-American (since he's causing irreparable harm to the country as a whole), and quite clearly anti-Constitution (since he's been doing everything in his power since taking his oath of office to violate the Constitution).

*shrugs*

Seems pretty clear-cut to me.

[Binoboy]

Seems pretty clear-cut to me.

You misoverestimate the intelligence of the American public.

[bobo]

I like the idea behind the t-shirts..just seems wrong though. It has the outward apperence of " i died for my country and all I got is this lousey t-shirt" I do agree something needs to be done about making people aware of the deaths over there. I can't say,  I will vote Kerry but I am pretty I can't vote for Bush. Maybe i will sit this one out. Seems like the most honest thing to do. I was kind of pulling for Clark...oh well

[MISTER MASSACRE]

Rico, the survey of the people in the military vis a vis the shirts is a cool idea: if they really don't want their names on those things, someone should start a petition and tell the makers to shut it.  I'd like to chip in my two cents about how I would feel about it (I'd like to be remembered, if even only as a name) but I've never served in the military, and likely never will. So my opinion is moot.

Notice how most of the people you talked to, whether or not they were for the war, had problems with the way it's being run. Even if you disregard the fact that it's a questionably good idea, the fact remains that things are not being done properly. When people's lives are on the line and the professionals are wondering about the significance of their orders, you have to admit there's something that's terribly wrong.

I've read extensively on both Gulf wars, and though reading about it isn't the same as being there - not by any measure - it does give a good objective view of what's actually going on. Things are released years later amidst zero coverage. The stuff that came out over the first Gulf war is particularly depressing, and that one was a celebrated victory. Ever hear the story about Iraq I soldiers being given anti-nerve agent drugs (pyridostigmine bromide, anyone?) without being told what they were taking or any of the potential side-effects? It's nasty stuff. And this is back when Iraq was posing a clear and present threat to Kuwait  (though arguably not anyone else's business, save the UN's) and the mission outlines were obvious.

There aren't any WMD that have been found. (Regardless of whether or not they actually are found at some point, the entire idea was that Saddam definitely posed an IMMEDIATE threat and that's why invasion was necessary.)

There are no proven ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda. (Despite what Bush and Cheney might have said in the past, every other research team and all credible intelligence have shown that while Al Qaeda approached Iraq some years ago, they were turned away.)

13 out of 15 terrorists who hijacked the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center were SAUDIS. You know, from Saudi Arabia. Where many of the high-profile people doing business in America (and with the Bush family--see Bush Sr.) currently reside. Osama, anyone?

Let's say this war was designed as a show of force (perhaps a 'Shocker and Awe-er', if you please) and that was meant to cow America's enemies and stop them from even thinking about messing with the Land of the Free. Even if that's the case, it was severely misguided. Anyone who knows anything about the mindset of Fanatical Islam (and apparently I know more than the U.S. Government? The hell?) knows that this is the absolute wrong thing to do. The Qu'ran literally states that if an enemy attacks you, you wipe him out. No surrender. You wipe him out until there's nothing left.

This war has been a rallying clarion call to all who were undecided about the 'Great Satan'. It's a fuck-up of epic proportions, and I wish degaillo was here.

[Demosthenes]

I miss Paco.  


I hope he's all right.  I hope he's nowhere near the shit going down in the Middle East.  He had plans on bugging out and never going back, but then we stopped hearing from him, so I've been concerned that he may have encountered problems with that.

[MISTER MASSACRE]

I miss Paco.  

Me too. He was only on HN for a very brief time, but he filled the place with inordinate awesomeness while there. That was a fun time.

I hope he's all right.  I hope he's nowhere near the shit going down in the Middle East.  He had plans on bugging out and never going back, but then we stopped hearing from him, so I've been concerned that he may have encountered problems with that.

I occasionally worry about some of the posters who were regulars and then disappeared, but none more than degaillo because of his occupation. I really hope he made it back.
 

[Demosthenes]

Particularly considering his rather tenuous position... he was in pretty serious violation of Saudi law by what he was doing.

And I think something scared him, because without warning, he suddenly took great pains to delete every single post and thread he ever made on HN.

I think he would have done the same here, except that at the time, users couldn't delete posts entirely, nor threads.  We can now, but not then.

That makes me think he was trying to hide a few things... not from us, but from others that may have been a little too interested in his online activities.

Or maybe I'm just paranoid.  But I think there was good reason to be in that case.

[Rico]

Guys, are you denying that the Iraqies used WMD on the Kurds?  Do you REALLY think some one just decided to use the last of their stock-pile on what they concidered a bunch of vagrants?

I'm sorry.  Say for instance, that I say some one has a towel.  I know that they have popped people in the ass with that towel several times in the past.  I also have heard them talking about how they intend to use that towel in the future.  Then I break in to their house and look and round and for the life of me, I can't find that towel!  They either hid it, used it, or gave it away.  Don't you think it's a good idea to figure out what they did with that towel before they pop us with it?

Notice that no one ever discussing the war ever mentions that Iraq used WMD on the Kurds and Iranians?  I guess they must have just run out or something.  Everyone just wants to close their eyes and pretend it doesn't exist, or that it magically disapeared some how.  We tried that with the Russians, remember?  We're still looking for several of those nukes, or had you not noticed?

Reagan didn't do anything about it because he was dealing with Lybia and had the Communists on his ass.  Bush Sr. didn't do anything about it because he had just finished up with Kuwait, but had hoped that UN inspectors would do his job for him.  Clinton had his own problems, and I can't say that he really intended to do anything about it.  I DO remember at least one speach in which he condemed the Iraqies for their continued stockpiling of WMD.

People will always look for reasons to blame the President for everything, no matter if it was his fault or not.  There were, and probably still are, WMD in Iraq.  Intel was firm on that.  Everyone seems to think that Al-Queda is the only terrorist organization in the world.  Supprise it's not, and while I grant you that the link may have been made between Iraq and Al-Queda for political reasons, that doesn't take away from the fact that we KNOW Iraq has trained and funded terrorists.

Yes, Saudi sucks.  No, I don't like it any more than you do, but at the moment their government is being fairly cooperative.

And finally, my point about the shirts was that is people wear those shirts around to make some sort of political point, and they KNOW that servicemen find that to be insulting and revolting, then those people are, in essense, spitting on the soldiers that died for them.  Does it matter where or why these guys died?  Not in the least.  They died for you, and that is all that mattered to them.  Now, I'm sure you're going to read that and start composing a speach about how it DOES matter where soldiers die, but I ask you this:  What does that have to do with the shirts?  So, soldiers that die fighting against the Canadians trying to invade and take over our country are more worthy of respect than the soldiers who died fighting a war that they may, or may not, believe in?  A soldier who dies in training still died for freedom.  He wouldn't have been there if he didn't feel that it was worth fighting and dying for.

I also find it funny that civilians get all worked up about going to war, and they totally forget to look at the soldier who is telling them that it's neccessary.  I would have thought that Vietnam would teach people to listen more to those who are in the middle of it, but I guess that was too much to hope for.

While these guys are over there fighting and dying, we're over here taking cheap shots at the President in public.  Calling him names and throwing around half-truths because they suit our needs.

"And for example, Tami Silicio, a Pentagon contractor, took photos of coffins being loaded onto plane in Kuwait. She was fired after her pictures appeared in the Seattle Times."

No mention of the fact that those were official photos and taken on official time.  They may have even been classified depending on where they were taken and what was in them behind the coffins.  I'd have fired her ass too.  She tried to make money off of dead soldiers, and if that's not bad enough, what she did was illegal.

If you don't like the President, fine.  Don't vote for him next time.  All you do by swearing and calling him names is run him down in the international community.  You hurt our country everytime you stand up and say petty things for no other reason than you disagree.  Let your vote talk for you.

I know I'm getting a little preachy...  I'll try to stop, but it's Demo's fault.  

Btw, Demo.  You're a good guy, and I do have a ton of respect for you.  You're just WRONG.

[xolik]

I'd just like to chime in for a second and wish you the best, Rico, no matter where you end up going to. You're a good guy and I want you coming home safe. Go back to arguing now, people.  

[Demosthenes]

Guys, are you denying that the Iraqies used WMD on the Kurds?  Do you REALLY think some one just decided to use the last of their stock-pile on what they concidered a bunch of vagrants?

Rico, that was in 1988.

They actually did destroy the bulk of what they had left after that, and none have been found since.

Some went unaccounted for.

But where are those?

And did the Bush administration have hard evidence of them still being there, and usable, and capable of being delivered 6,000 miles to hit US targets prior to invading?

Didn't think so.

I'm sorry.  Say for instance, that I say some one has a towel.  I know that they have popped people in the ass with that towel several times in the past.  I also have heard them talking about how they intend to use that towel in the future.  Then I break in to their house and look and round and for the life of me, I can't find that towel!  They either hid it, used it, or gave it away.  Don't you think it's a good idea to figure out what they did with that towel before they pop us with it?

And you'd be charged with breaking and entering.  And rightly so.  There is a process that one must go through in order to deal with such situations.  Breaking the law and trespassing illegally doesn't fix anything, particularly if you didn't find anything.

Notice that no one ever discussing the war ever mentions that Iraq used WMD on the Kurds and Iranians?

That was in the 80's.

 I guess they must have just run out or something.  Everyone just wants to close their eyes and pretend it doesn't exist, or that it magically disapeared some how.  We tried that with the Russians, remember?  We're still looking for several of those nukes, or had you not noticed?

If credible evidence exists of Iraqi WMDs, Bush should have used it to justify the invasion.

But that credible evidence doesn't exist.  And the Bush administration admitted as much, Rico.  Catch up.  THEY don't even claim that they had "credible evidence" anymore.  All they have is rhetoric and now, backpedalling.

Reagan didn't do anything about it because he was dealing with Lybia and had the Communists on his ass.  Bush Sr. didn't do anything about it because he had just finished up with Kuwait, but had hoped that UN inspectors would do his job for him.  Clinton had his own problems, and I can't say that he really intended to do anything about it.  I DO remember at least one speach in which he condemed the Iraqies for their continued stockpiling of WMD.

People will always look for reasons to blame the President for everything, no matter if it was his fault or not.  There were, and probably still are, WMD in Iraq.

And that one shell that was around 15 years old that was found recently with trace amounts of sarin on it makes the case?

Oh wait, you're talking about huge stockpiles of chemical weapons on rockets that can reach the United States, right?

Sorry, but until I see those, I don't believe that.

 Intel was firm on that.

Actually, it wasn't.  The CIA admitted to feeding the White House bad intel on that subject, and Rumsfeld, Bush and Powell have all gone back and said that they were operating on bad or no intelligence where WMDs are concerned.

Catch up.

 Everyone seems to think that Al-Queda is the only terrorist organization in the world.  Supprise it's not, and while I grant you that the link may have been made between Iraq and Al-Queda for political reasons, that doesn't take away from the fact that we KNOW Iraq has trained and funded terrorists.

No, we don't.  In fact, the White House is backing off on that now too.  They know that Al Qaeda tried contacting Iraq ten years ago, but they have admitted that no support of any kind occurred between them.

As for other terrorists, what ones, SPECIFICALLY do we supposedly "know of" Iraq training and funding?  I haven't heard of any of those.

Yes, Saudi sucks.  No, I don't like it any more than you do, but at the moment their government is being fairly cooperative.

Only because at the moment they're facing a potential militant insurgency that rivals the one occurring right now in Iraq if they don't nip it in the bud.

And finally, my point about the shirts was that is people wear those shirts around to make some sort of political point, and they KNOW that servicemen find that to be insulting and revolting, then those people are, in essense, spitting on the soldiers that died for them.  Does it matter where or why these guys died?  Not in the least.  They died for you, and that is all that mattered to them.

Those soldiers may think that, and you may even think that, but it's not true.  They're dying for George Walker Bush and the incredibly dense tactical, strategic, politically-motivated mistakes he's made since entering office.

 Now, I'm sure you're going to read that and start composing a speach about how it DOES matter where soldiers die, but I ask you this:  What does that have to do with the shirts?  So, soldiers that die fighting against the Canadians trying to invade and take over our country are more worthy of respect than the soldiers who died fighting a war that they may, or may not, believe in?  A soldier who dies in training still died for freedom.  He wouldn't have been there if he didn't feel that it was worth fighting and dying for.

The fact that you're operating under the apparently HUGE illusion that Iraq was somehow in immediate poised position to directly attack the US and that our invasion was THE ONLY THING that saved us from the Iraqi military might , doesn't change the fact that what you're fighting for and putting your life on the line for has nothing to do with "freedom" or defending the US against its enemies.

We are less free now than ever before.

We have more enemies now than ever before.

And it was the decisions from the Commander In Chief that got us here.

And it was the negligence of Congress that allowed it to happen.

I also find it funny that civilians get all worked up about going to war, and they totally forget to look at the soldier who is telling them that it's neccessary.

Hello!  Veteran here speaking!  Wore the uniform, took the oath, had commendations pinned on me!  Honorably discharged!

You seem to forget that.  You conveniently try to portray this as a "military versus civilians" fight, when in fact people can be PRO-MILITARY AND STILL BE AGAINST THIS UNNECESSARY WAR.  

And by "necessary", you still haven't managed to provide us with any reasons why you think that.

Iraq was not a direct threat to us.  Not by a long shot.

Particularly when compared to any of about a dozen other countries that would have made far better subjects for invasion and/or military action than Iraq.

I'm here now, as a veteran, as a voter, and as an American, telling you that this was was NOT necessary, and (since it is being carried out without a declaration of war from Congress) it's unconstitutional, to boot.

And until you can provide me with some pretty damning evidence that Iraq was somehow even capable of carrying out an attack on the United States, I'm standing firm on that.

While these guys are over there fighting and dying, we're over here taking cheap shots at the President in public.  Calling him names and throwing around half-truths because they suit our needs.

As a good American, it is my right, nay, duty to make as many people aware of injustice as I can, and when I see the biggest, shining example of that sending brave men and women to their deaths for NOTHING, I'd be one piss-poor patriot to just sit silent and let him do it without saying something.

And please point out a "half-truth" that I've used here to that end.

I've pointed out plenty of blatant falsehoods in your arguments.  You have yet to point out any in mine.

If you don't like the President, fine.  Don't vote for him next time.

I won't.

 All you do by swearing and calling him names is run him down in the international community.  

I've done no such thing.  He's done that all on his own.

You hurt our country everytime you stand up and say petty things for no other reason than you disagree.

By remaining silent in the face of outrageous injustice, and criminal negligence, I would be doing far more hurt to our country.  I could just as easily say that every time you tell someone to stop speaking their mind you hurt our country even WORSE.

I can and WILL say whatever the hell I want, Rico.  To hell with your authoritarian "love it or shut up" bullshit attitude.

At this point, I couldn't care less what you do for a living.  You have no right to tell anyone to remain silent over what amounts to a difference of opinion.  All this, and you claim to be "defending our freedom".

Bullshit.  You're a phony, Rico.  I know what you stand for, and it isn't freedom.  And it certainly isn't the America that I stand for.

By speaking my mind -- particularly during these dark times -- I am doing far more to defend our freedoms than you.  

Let your vote talk for you.

Oh I will.  And I'm going to do everything in my power to convince as many others to join me in that.  That's kind of how it works.  That's why I have such a big mouth, you see.

I know I'm getting a little preachy...  I'll try to stop, but it's Demo's fault.  

Btw, Demo.  You're a good guy, and I do have a ton of respect for you.  You're just WRONG.

No more wrong than you are.  Good day.