“They’re brainwashing the next generation of troop-haters:”

56 Responses to ““They’re brainwashing the next generation of troop-haters:””

1. PCD
   March 21, 2007 - 09:28 AM on March 21st, 2007

   Bush should order that the law be followed and order Federal funds withheld from San Francisco, Berkeley, Portland, and Seattle until they drop the institutional acts against the military.

2. snowy egret
   March 21, 2007 - 12:58 PM on March 21st, 2007

   We should make a effegee of a antiwar protester complete with 70s chicken footprint antiwar slogans and wearing the sissy pink flower with its stupid antwar adage and burn it:idea::cool:

3. Robert
   March 21, 2007 - 01:02 PM on March 21st, 2007

   Oh, Yes, the biggest problem in the world is not terrorism, not Islamofascists, why it’s the U.S. military!

   These vile filthy vermin. They DO NOT deserve the freedom they are abusing. The freedom paid for with the blood of those they “loathe”.

4. Toasted Tofu
   March 21, 2007 - 02:43 PM on March 21st, 2007

   “see Michelle for the story behind it”

   I looked but did not find the “story” behind it. Just some personal outrage commentary, which isn’t a story.

   I don’t know why they chose to burn a mock soldier but since one of the photos I found shows a US flag being burned with this dummy burning in the same frame, maybe they were trying to symbolically state that not only America is being harmed by this war but also our troops?

   I don’t know for sure because I can’t find a story that is actually “news” that says what message these protesters were trying to send. Whatever their message is/was has been lost for certain. Parading with mock coffins I can understand as a visual, but burning a mock serviceman leaves me confused.

5. Robert
   March 21, 2007 - 04:28 PM on March 21st, 2007

   …but burning a mock serviceman leaves me confused.

   No confusion here. These protesters are disgraceful, disgusting, vile vermin. They should be sent to Al Qaeda for use in beheading videos.

6. Toasted Tofu
   March 21, 2007 - 04:53 PM on March 21st, 2007

   5- Death by beheading is your plan? Sounds like you want to live under Saddam’s extremist rule?

   Okay, just wanted to make sure where you stand on the First Amendment.

   As with burning the flag, which I don’t condone but agree we have the right to do, I don’t think these protesting Americans deserve beheading. Obviously you and I have differing interpretations of our Constitution.

7. Robert
   March 21, 2007 - 05:13 PM on March 21st, 2007

   I am advocating only sending them over to be with their good friends, since they apparently do not value the Freedom they abuse here. The Freedom paid for by the sacrifice of others.

   Whether they are beheaded is up to the practitioners of the religion of peace! Perhaps they would actually appreciate and honor the presence of their unofficial operatives from America! The protesters might be treated as honored guests! At least this is probably what the antiwar crowd believes.

   Does someone have the Constitutional right to parade around with an effigy of a black man hanging from a rope? Would you support their right to do that? It is am extreme example but it is an example of free expression nonetheless. Would you support it?

8. San Francisco Liberal
   March 21, 2007 - 07:51 PM on March 21st, 2007

   SF Lib NOT supporting this.

   At all.

   (!)

9. Rocky Lore
   March 21, 2007 - 08:57 PM on March 21st, 2007

   I’d like to confront one of these morons and ask them when they plan to protest against jihadists.

10. FrmrArtyOffcr
    March 21, 2007 - 10:44 PM on March 21st, 2007

    We had anti military protesters on campus when I was in ROTC. One of my fellow cadets did a survey of the cadet corps on their reactions to the protesters for a sociology class. When the instructors heard my response, they loved it. I simply told the truth that since they didn’t have the courage to say anything to my face unless there were 15 of them or behind my back within earshot unless there were at least 5 of them, I felt no reason to even respond to such cowards. These are a pathetic example of how far down the path to destruction this country has gone. These morons fail to realize a few simple facts:

    The reporter doesn’t insure freedom of the press, the soldier does.
    The orator doesn’t insure freedom of speech, the soldier does,
    The organizer doesn’t insure freedom of assembly, the soldier does.
    The religious leader doesn’t insure freedom of religion, the soldier does.

    Without the soldiers who have fought and died to preserve these freedoms since this country was founded, these freedoms would not exist. Had the soldiers decided to quash these freedoms, they would not exist. Our military protects rights that in many cases they themselves do not enjoy.

    In the civilian world, you can be fired for an office romance. In the military you can be court martialed and sent to prison.

    For these protesters to act in this manner, while Constitutionally protected, is inexcusable. This is a direct result of the attitude that as long as you have a right to do something, you have no responsibility for the results of doing it. Why else do the liberals want to disarm law abiding citizens, but allow violent criminals to run our streets after repeated convictions?

11. Rocky Lore
    March 22, 2007 - 05:46 AM on March 22nd, 2007

    As I have said before, FrmrArtyOffcr, these people will protest the military and kick the ROTC off campus, but they’ll welcome spokescowards from the Taliban or Hezbollah to campus.

12. snowy egret
    March 22, 2007 - 07:17 AM on March 22nd, 2007

    Hey Look San Francisco Liberal has crawled out of their wacky weed smokehouse to be a blabbering lunkhead:razz:

13. Matthias Roggenbuck
    March 22, 2007 - 08:53 AM on March 22nd, 2007

    That’s really a shame!!! Compared to the 3000 US-uniforms that GW, Condi, Dick and Rummie burned in Iraq (with its living content) for a really good reason…

    Let’s declare war on that islamo-fasco-commie-lib-pacifist-scum!!!

14. TedintheShed
    March 22, 2007 - 08:59 AM on March 22nd, 2007

    13 (Matthias)
    How does what you are saying relate to this at all?

    I’ll answer for you: It doesn’t.

    So, I take it you not only condone this action, but the spitting upon soldiers returning from home during Viet Nam.

15. PCD
    March 22, 2007 - 09:29 AM on March 22nd, 2007

    Mattias, you are a twisted sot. You come here with your condemnations, but if we had not gone into Iraq, you had never condemned Saddam with out prompting. You never condemn Al Qaeda without prompting for killing civilians. YOU never have condemned Hammas and Fatah for killing civilians.

    Finally, you wonder why you are treated rudely? Are you insane?

16. Eben
    March 22, 2007 - 02:13 PM on March 22nd, 2007

    I don’t know any troop haters.

    I only know people who want them home from this pointless war and the unnecessary carnage it’s caused.

    ‘Troop haters’? God that’s a stretch.:roll:

    There must a camp for them somewhere in the Adirondacks :roll::roll:

17. Eben
    March 22, 2007 - 02:15 PM on March 22nd, 2007

    Here are the real “troop haters”

    They are too.

    Eben,

    You didn’t do the link properly, and I’ll not be giving that site any links…We all are aware of them, and we have discussed them along with The Patriot Guard Riders…

    Please don’t link to them again

    Peejz

18. PCD
    March 22, 2007 - 02:31 PM on March 22nd, 2007

    Eben, You do not know Sen. Dick “Dirtbag” Durbin? The Clinton White House that regularly “dressed down” generals who came in uniform to the WH? The University of Washington Student Senator that spoke out against a memorial to Medal of Honor Winner, Col. Greg “Pappy” Boyington? The San Francisco School Board? You really don’t know of any troop haters from your side of the asile? You have your liberal blinders on that tightly?????

19. TedintheShed
    March 22, 2007 - 03:02 PM on March 22nd, 2007

    Re 16:

    So, saying that the folks spitting on the troops returning from Viet Nam were troop hater “is a stretch”?

    

    My friend, you need a reality check. To say that there are no folks that hate soldiers is absurd, particularly on the left and libertarian left. A brief combing of lewrockwell, Democrat Undergound, The Huffington Post and KOS is all you need to affirm this.

    There are just certian truths that are undeniable. Most of the extreme religious zealots reside on the right. Most of the extreme anti-establishment troop haters reside on the left.

20. TedintheShed
    March 22, 2007 - 03:12 PM on March 22nd, 2007

    Eben,

    I tracked the original story to Little Green Footballs.

    Please link here, and read the story and look at the pictures.

    When you are done, please acknowledge the big white banner that says “Fuck The Troops” and explain to me how these folks are not “troop haters”.

    “I don’t know any troop haters.”

    Well, you do now.

21. Peejz
    March 22, 2007 - 03:16 PM on March 22nd, 2007

    20- How pathetic those people are..and they are the first in line screaming about their “rights”:mad:

22. Robert
    March 22, 2007 - 03:33 PM on March 22nd, 2007

    Yup. Their rights, paid for by the blood of others (those the hate). How incredibly upside down, how disgusting, pathetic, and disgraceful. They don’t really deserve those rights.

23. TedintheShed
    March 22, 2007 - 05:10 PM on March 22nd, 2007

    21, 22

    You’ve not even begun to approach the vicinity of the vileness of this sub human pond scum.

    I have noticed though that on this issue, the left is very much like Islam. No condemnation of radical behaviour. No internal preasure to solidify this to cease this becasue it may wreck their good name.

    I’ve only seen one outspoken person speak out against it, and that was Alan Colmes. It was an interesting conversation though, because in the same breath he said it doesn’t represent the left. The point was maade about Durbin calling them Nazi’s, Kerry calling them uneducated and baby killers (paraphrasing) and Murtha’s outrageous behavior. These these are the leaders of the Democrat party saying these things. I just shrugged it off, thinking those “leaders” can’t accurately represent the common folks on the left.

    Then along comes matthias and Eben. Denial, and then deflection and NO CONDEMNATION. I pointed out precise examples, and still NO CONDEMNATION.

    AKD? Nothing. No comment.

    Credit where credit is due though. SFL, thank you for a dose of sobriety.

    Eben, perhaps the likes of Robert and Egret are right. I always take what they say with a grain of salt, but perhaps I shouldn’t anymore. Perhaps they are right regarding the absolute evil of the left. Perhaps these folks are the rule, and folks like Alan Colmes and SFl are the exception.

    Please, I beseach you- restore my faith.

24. Fred Dawes
    March 22, 2007 - 06:20 PM on March 22nd, 2007

    The old Army of free guys ( See 1775-1975 ) who loved the USA Is now in the history books of the one world dogs of evil, you can’t win a war with money you can only win it with the ideals of the American way of life over death.

    long live the ideals of 1776, ask why? ask who? and see it for what it is, and you may not like what you see, both the right and left hate our freedoms and want mexico/third world and its ideals of mass-enslavement here and now, why fight for the pigs of mexico and the third world moneys? one reason is ONE WORLD.

    But so what? its not really the USA Is it?

25. Robert
    March 22, 2007 - 10:46 PM on March 22nd, 2007

    Credit where credit is due though. SFL, thank you for a dose of sobriety.

    I’ll second that!!!

    Ted, I know that I often come across as extreme, and I am fond of using characterizations. Part of it (the characterizations) is for entertainment. But often I portray things in extreme terms because it seems called for in order to shock people back to reality. The surreal, Alice in Wonderland politicized society and nation we find ourselves in is itself an extremity. No longer are there seemingly any absolutes, including self-preservation.

26. Matthias Roggenbuck
    March 23, 2007 - 06:01 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    14- “13 (Matthias)
    How does what you are saying relate to this at all?
    I’ll answer for you: It doesn’t.
    So, I take it you not only condone this action, but the spitting upon soldiers returning from home during Viet Nam.”

    Ted, I will tell you a story why I think that soldiers can’t excuse themselves by simply saying that they followed commands:
    When I was a private with the temporary duty of belonging to the sentry team I also had guard another private who was taken into custody because he didn’t show up when his period of service began. I/we treated him well and he was okay with the situation as far as one can be. A couple of weeks later I heard from my father (who was an officer in the same barracks) that the unit leader of that poor fella had already announce months ago before the service period of the guy began towards the other officers, that “he would lock up one of those longhaired punks the next time he gets one”.
    So there you are- an asshole who thinks he can play god because of some silly stars on his shoulders and me the stupid and obedient tool to this arbitrariness. I am not innocent in this story!

    I guess the US military law has a similar code of conduct as the German, which says that no soldier has to execute orders that are immoral or criminal. With such a loss of civilian lifes in Iraq (or Vietnam), I wonder if all participating soldiers were aware of this principle!

    Besides it is typical for the conservatives to twist the interpretation of pacifist demonstrations as “actions against the soldiers” instead being “actions against the responsibale politicians that ordered the war”… There are 3,000 US citizens (and 50,000 Iraqi civilians) that could still be alive if that uniform-burners had been the ones to make decisions…

27. PCD
    March 23, 2007 - 06:09 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    26, Mattias, thank you for describing your basic disrespect to authority. Authority you don’t recognize, but is legitimate. Ifiots like you don’t get “Rank has its privileges.” That is why you ware a private GIVEN ORDERS, not an flag level officer determining policy and giving orders.

    Mattias, you are a complete idiot and your father must be totally ashamed of you.

28. Matthias Roggenbuck
    March 23, 2007 - 06:12 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    23- “the vicinity of the vileness of this sub human pond scum.”

    I am not sure, but I only know the term “sub human” as the term that the Nazis used to define their enemies…

29. PCD
    March 23, 2007 - 06:18 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    28, Mattias, you understand nothing. Everything is twisted in your sick mind. If not for the invasion, Saddam would be putting 100s of thousands in mass graves YEARLY. Dumbasses like you pontificate from a distance and don’t know squat. When given the truth, you deflect and deny it. If not for the soldiers obeying orders, there would be still the Third Reich, and you’d be in a camp for disobeying orders.

30. BonBon
    March 23, 2007 - 06:33 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    23 & 25.. Ted, I agree with Robert. Where I live there are loads of liberals and I hear them talk over and over again. Some of the things they say, or in alot of cases, don’t say speaks volumes on their feelings. It gets frustrating and prompts some of us to say extreme things.

    My impressions are based on these things.

31. Matthias Roggenbuck
    March 23, 2007 - 07:09 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    29- “If not for the soldiers obeying orders, there would be still the Third Reich, and you’d be in a camp for disobeying orders.”

    So just to state this once and forever:
    Let’s create a law which enables the president to start a war wherever he wants (without that useless parliaments permission), because the local asshole is probably the next Hitler and everyone who objects is most likely an unpatriotic islamocommieterrorfascistlib who has to be locked up in Gitmo?

    A simple solution for a simple world that also very very simple people understand!

32. Robert
    March 23, 2007 - 07:22 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    31: You just set up a classic straw man argument, which only serves to prove that you yourself are an example of what you are arguing against. Classic!

33. PCD
    March 23, 2007 - 07:27 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    31, again, Mattias, you show yourself to be a stupid, stubborn fool who is uninformed and stubbornly remains so.

    1. we did have the authority under UN Security Council resolutions. Saddam violated 17 of those to disarm and be a peaceful neighbor, but fools like you overlook those facts.

    2. the US spent a year and a half trying ALL other options to get Saddam to comply, but fools like you ignore that fact.

    Mattias, sitting on your cupa (Polish for ass) and saying no war, no war, does nothing except lets tyrants like Saddam kill more and more. You have been sanction Saddams killings of many more innocents than have died you your suspect statistics. So, what kind of meshugganh piece of work are you?

34. TedintheShed
    March 23, 2007 - 07:52 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    Re 26 (Matthias):

    An intersting story, but I am still not sure how this relates to what was said in earlier posts.

    Regarding this statement of yours: “With such a loss of civilian lifes in Iraq (or Vietnam), I wonder if all participating soldiers were aware of this principle!”

    Here is the crux of the issue: If the troops in Iraq were ordered as policy to purposefully target non-combatant civilians and they followed those orders, then what you say just might have some merit. In that instance, thopse troops wopuld bge terrorist by definition. However, that simply isn’t the case.

    Most civilian loss of life is due to terrorist (by definition) activity of various groups in Iraq, including Al Queda, sects of Sunni and Shia and other external based forces at work.

    FOA can attest to the soldiers being aware of the Coc, and the prosecution of those who do not follow it.

    Regaridng this statement:

    “Besides it is typical for the conservatives to twist the interpretation of pacifist demonstrations as “actions against the soldiers” instead being “actions against the responsibale politicians that ordered the war”… There are 3,000 US citizens (and 50,000 Iraqi civilians) that could still be alive if that uniform-burners had been the ones to make decisions…”

    I don’t think this is the case at all. Look at the link I gave before, where the “Fuck the Soldiers” banner is. This isn’t about the self defeating and hopeless cause of pacifists, but about a hate of our soldiers.

    As far as the deaths go- I don’t agree with that at all. Although I am not sure where you source your numbers from it may be true the Soldiers my be alive, but at the clip that Sadaam and his sons were killing people even more would be dead.

35. TedintheShed
    March 23, 2007 - 07:56 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    Re 28:

    “I am not sure, but I only know the term “sub human” as the term that the Nazis used to define their enemies… “

    Yes they did.

    So? These people aren’t my enemies so how does the comment relate? Nazis lived in houses and so do I, but that isn’t a relative comparison, at least no more relevant than yours.

    If a man gives his life to protect yours, would you then shit on his grave in front of his family in a display of disrespect?

    That is exactly what is happening here.

36. Matthias Roggenbuck
    March 23, 2007 - 08:09 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    34- “I don’t think this is the case at all. Look at the link I gave before, where the “Fuck the Soldiers” banner is. This isn’t about the self defeating and hopeless cause of pacifists, but about a hate of our soldiers.”

    I am sure that there is a minority of far-left extremists who abuse the good intention of the pacifists to sell their own sick ideas as the message of the whole mass. I actually experienced something similar myself, when I went in a demonstration against violence vs. foreign citizens in Germany. At the head of the demonstration there were some assholes carrying Lenin and Marx flags which must have given to observers the impression that we all were a happy bunch of communists- as a result I never participated in such an event.
    So I think you can’t put those burn-anything-folks together in the same pot as the ones who simply want to get your boys back home. Besides, I am not sure if I share this liberal view: I mean, you created the mess- now it is your responsibility to remove it! How long it ever may take!

    33- You don’t expect me to accept the “asshole-nature” of the Saddam regime as a valid reason for so many innocent people that died (and in this civil war still die)…
    Why don’t you understand that as long as Saddam had his pupa in place (thanks for the new word) everyone dying in Iraq was on his account, but from the moment that your goverment did the first action they started going on your account. That is the difference: if you take responsibility on something you take responsibility for everything- not only for the good things but also for everything goes wrong!!!

37. PCD
    March 23, 2007 - 08:09 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    34, Ted, I know you usually ignore my comments, but with Mattias, have you ever given thought to what motivates people like Mattias to only castigate the US for killing, but never killers like Al Qaeda, Saddam, Hammas, or Iran?

    I’ve challenged him publically to prove a point. Mattias has proven that point over and over again. These people of peace won’t face down the killers of the world, just the people who do face down the killers of the world. How sick and perverted is that?

38. Matthias Roggenbuck
    March 23, 2007 - 08:14 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    35- It was just a question…

    As a foreigner I always try to understand where I have to sort you in the political range between (US) far left and far right. Using radical terms gives the impression of radical thinking…

39. Matthias Roggenbuck
    March 23, 2007 - 08:22 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    37- I know that terrorists, Al Quaeda, Saddam, etc. are killer/radicals. That is a common fact to me and I don’t have to state it as I don’t state each day that the sky is blue either…

    But both for my christian education and simply my will to do the right thing, I don’t subscribe to this “an eye for an eye”-philosophy. If terrorists behave like scum, that is no justification for me to do the same!
    Besides, apart from my personal morale reason to think how I think, every day’s news prove that fighting terror with terror only creates more hate towards your country and as a consequence more terror(ists)!

40. TedintheShed
    March 23, 2007 - 08:41 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    Re 36 (Matthias):

    “I am sure that there is a minority of far-left extremists who abuse the good intention of the pacifists to sell their own sick ideas as the message of the whole mass.”

    I’m not sure that is the vase here matthias. One can provide quote upon quote of the Democrat leadership themselves (Durbin, Murtha, Kerry, etc) flaying the soldiers. They;ve been called uneducated, equated with Nazis, etc, so forth and so on. If the Dems and the left rose up and quashed these statements then I would believe thay don’t represent them. But the silence is deafening in this case.

    “At the head of the demonstration there were some assholes carrying Lenin and Marx flags which must have given to observers the impression that we all were a happy bunch of communists- as a result I never participated in such an event.”

    Good for you- so why haven’t you come out against it now? Condone the behaviour as SFL did, and you will gain a bit of repect I am sure.

    So I think you can’t put those burn-anything-folks together in the same pot as the ones who simply want to get your boys back home.

    I never did.

    “Besides, I am not sure if I share this liberal view: I mean, you created the mess- now it is your responsibility to remove it! How long it ever may take!”

    You are going to have to clarify this. But yes, I supported for the war, I still support the war and I still believe it was the right thing to do. I also agree with you- we should clean up the “mess” created by it. Where we differ in view is how to go about doing so,

41. TedintheShed
    March 23, 2007 - 08:43 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    “As a foreigner I always try to understand where I have to sort you in the political range between (US) far left and far right. Using radical terms gives the impression of radical thinking…”

    Let me help you- I am a firmly entrenched moderate. I swing left to right on specific issues, depending on said issue.

42. TedintheShed
    March 23, 2007 - 08:44 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    PCD, Bon Bon and Robert,

    I’ll address your comments in a bit.

43. PCD
    March 23, 2007 - 09:54 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    36, Mattias, I ascribe ALL the deaths to your account. You and the other idiots who say do nothing everywhere. You people are dysfunctional. A Saddam, an Idi Amin, a Robert Mugabe, etc. does not stop killing by saying nice words to them. They don’t stop killing if you pay them bakshesh (bribes). They have to be killed. You keep them alive, their followers kill to free them to kill again.

    People like you just don’t get it and in not getting it, you proceed to screw up the world further by trying to restrain the good people of the world with your harangues.

44. Matthias Roggenbuck
    March 23, 2007 - 10:01 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    43- The big flaw with this noble “we free the universe of all bad guys”-spirit is that the definition of who is a bad guy always depended on the guy’s relation towards the US government.
    As long as Saddam was only murdering islamist folks from Iran, none of you complained about all the murders he committed on his own people… not to mention all those other fiends supported by the US… scum like Pinochet, etc. …

45. BonBon
    March 23, 2007 - 10:18 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    Matthias…..definition of bad guy. Bad guys want to kill everyone who does not believe as they do so they can rule the world. No respect or tolerance for others way of life, religion, politics, etc.

    Good guys want everyone to live free with regards to speech, how they conduct their lives, their religion and their politics as long as they follow the rulee of law society has set forth.

    What is so difficult with that?

46. PCD
    March 23, 2007 - 11:25 AM on March 23rd, 2007

    44,45, BonBon, people like Mattias can not allow anyone to make such decisions. Mattias has said as long as Saddam killed his own, no one should stop him. Throw in a few hundred thousand Iranians and Kuwaitis, and Mattias is more angry at the US. Mattias, just hates ANY authority, but him giving the orders.

47. BonBon
    March 23, 2007 - 01:05 PM on March 23rd, 2007

    I know PCD and sometimes I fear that people of this mentality are going to win out and then what happens? We lose our lives, our freedoms, and our very basic rights.

    I often ask myself (and liberals) how they intend to fight terrorists after we leave Iraq and turn over the worlds oil to terrorists. They don’t have any answer. They look at me like I’m nuts but I don’t think I’m nuts when 2,973 people died in ONE day here on our shores. That doesn’t even begin to count the people who have died in other countries.

    And the bumper sticker I see alot around here that says “When Clinton lied no one died” just about makes me puke.

    But I ramble….today I’m really pissed over an issue so I’m venting. Thanks G _ d there are people in this country who seem to have some modicum of common sense. Hope you have a great weekend.:cool:

48. PCD
    March 23, 2007 - 01:11 PM on March 23rd, 2007

    BonBon,

    If you want my email address, Peejz will give it to you if you need to talk, vent, or sound out ideas.

    I live in an area where the unions almost destroyed the town with their extreme socialist ideas. A few of those goofballs still think profits are stolen from the workers and that after 20 years the workers should own a piece of the company. Those are the tamer ideas.

    The UAW local was demanding that John Deere pay for union member’s hearing loss no matter what the cause, and they were getting the backing of the local Democrat hacks.

49. BonBon
    March 23, 2007 - 01:19 PM on March 23rd, 2007

    Thank you PCD. I will contact Peejz and make sure you have mine as well. There are times when I could use some points for my side of the argument and I don’t like to use this forum.

    I’m off for the weekend but I’ll be in touch.

50. PCD
    March 23, 2007 - 01:28 PM on March 23rd, 2007

    49, BonBon have a great weekend. Just remember that there are people out here who genuinely care for you.

51. FrmrArtyOffcr
    March 23, 2007 - 10:15 PM on March 23rd, 2007

    The next time you hear a Clinton Kool aid drinker say that noone died because Clinton lied, tell them to tell that to the Branch Davidian survivors or the Weaver family. Also bring up the fact that both Bill and Hillary claimed the exact same thing about Saddam having WMDs. So that would make them liars too.

    US Soldiers do not intentionally target civilians. That is a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

    As for Iraq having a civil war, I just can’t see it. Sectarian violence? Yes. A civil war? No. Here is my logic. Iraq has a population in excess of 25 million. Wouldn’t it be reasonable to expect at least 10 percent of that population to be actively involved in hostilities were it a true civil war? That would mean that at least 2.5 million Iraqis would have to be fighting against each other and that is simply not happening. The numbers of active combatants other than the Iraqi police and Army are estimated at under 10,000 among both the Sunnis and the Shia militias. Al Quada in Iraq being under 500. That means that with over 200,000 members in the Iraqi police and army, the total number of Iraqi combatants total less than 1% of the total population. That hardly sounds like a civil war does it? A small rebellion perhaps but hardly a civil war. Hell we had more illegal Mexicans than that walking down the streets of LA or Phoenix last spring. Does that mean we’re having a civil war with the Mexicans in this country illegally? They kill and wound more American citizens annually than the Iraqi terrorists do.

52. BonBon
    March 24, 2007 - 06:11 AM on March 24th, 2007

    FAO…thank you for your talking points. I hadn’t thought about Ruby Ridge or the Branch Davidian although I had thought of Ok city. You always make really good arguments and I love the way you write. Thanks for being on RV.
    

53. FrmrArtyOffcr
    March 24, 2007 - 08:38 AM on March 24th, 2007

    Thanks Bon Bon. I try.

54. FrmrArtyOffcr
    March 24, 2007 - 09:37 AM on March 24th, 2007

    I have a way to silence the anarchist crowd. I just tell them that they should be glad that there is a government. It’s the only thing keeping some of us from culling the herd of morons like them. Some people are only alive because it’s illegal to kill them. Thankfully most of the modern anarchy crowd are unarmed anti gun pacifists. That will make culling the herd much easier should they get their way. LOL

    Here’s a thought to ponder. Why is it that anti government anarchists tend to become big government should control everything liberals ? How does that change occur? Wouldn’t it be more logical for the Anarchists to become limited government Conservatives or Libertarians? Of course, seeing the kind of people who tend to be anarchists in college, common sense really isn’t their strong suit. These are the same people who get multiple body piercings, brandings, and outrageous vulgar tattoos and then wonder why businesses won’t hire them. Here’s a hint to anyone out there that this describes, first impressions matter. If you’re trying to put forth an image of being a trouble making nonconformist, you’re probably going to succeed. However, most companies aren’t looking for trouble making nonconformists.

    A little bit of advice for those thinking about getting a tattoo, before you get it think about whether you’d want your small grandchildren to see it and choose its design and location accordingly. Tattoos are reasonably permanent. While they are removable, it isn’t cheap, painfree or guaranteed successful. The last price I heard for tattoo removal was around $10,000 per square inch. I’m certain that has gone down, but insurance doesn’t cover tat removal. Even at $1000 per square inch, that 3 inch by 4 inch tattoo that might look good now, will cost as much as a small new car to remove later.

55. FrmrArtyOffcr
    March 25, 2007 - 03:19 PM on March 25th, 2007

    I heard a great comment on the pacifist movement from Fred Thompson on the Paul Harvey show. Mahatma Ghandi castigated the Jews for fighting back in Warsaw and trying to escape from Treblinka. He claimed that had they committed mass suicide their actions would’ve been heroic. For some reason, Fred Thompson doesn’t think that attitude will fly with most Americans.

    I for one am perfectly willing to allow any pacifist who desire to follow Ghandi’s advise to do so. As long as they don’t hurt anyone else in the process (that would be very unpacifistic anyway), I am perfectly willing to allow them all to kill themselves in protest. Might I suggest Cyanide. Mixed with Koolaid it worked wonders for the followers of Jim Jones.

    Mattias, your commander had every right to incarcerate a soldier who was AWOL. You would’ve been guilty of disobeying a direct order had you refused to guard the prisoner. There is a substantial difference between guarding a prisoner who has violated military regulations and committing war crimes. Ask your father to explain the difference to you. As an officer, he should know, seeing as you do not.

56. Robert
    March 25, 2007 - 07:26 PM on March 25th, 2007

    I do not believe in suicide; personal or national. I think it is far better to kill the enemy, or die trying.

    I agree with you FAO that the anti-war pacifists are very welcome to display their leadership by removing themselves from the equation. I would like to add to that the Global Warming hysterics who are so ready to strip away our rights, destroy our economy, and micromanage out lives in their absurd quest to affect something that is not even understood.

    They should show leadership and commitment by ceasing their personal emission of CO2. It is time for them to take action, step up to the plate, demonstrate their commitment. Any who are unwilling to do this are not worth listening to. And those who do, well, we’ll listen to them after they prove they are worthy…

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Right Voices uses Gravatar to display your individual icon next to your name. Visit Gravatar.com to get your own!