The Road Home

[Downthestretch55]

This is a rather lengthy editorial from the NY Times. I think it's worth the little time it takes to read.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/08/op...nted=1&_r=3&hp

[timmgirvan]

This a better,more truthful piece than the Times blather! (no offense DTS)
http://frontpagemag.com/blog/printable.asp?ID=834

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

I'm confused. Which is more truthful? They both seem pretty biased.

The Generals post is from one who lived it......the Times is the usual drivel they put out!

[GPK]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

I respect his service and appreciate it. But come on, it's pretty biased. The sooner we get away from a Dems vs. Republicans type of thinking, the better off we will be.

Jay....honestly, we both know that will never happen.

[timmgirvan]

You can get away from the pundits to check for yourself, but the facts are clearly laid out. The Times is the same group that has leaked Govt. stuff and filmed a soldiers' execution by a terrorist! Maybe that's just me....but those actions don't speak to their character.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

You are right, but it doesn't mean it's not right. Both sides are so focused on blaming the other side for something that nothing ever gets accomplished.

IMO....the days of the "career politician" need to come to an end. The sooner the better.

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

I am not defending the Times at all. But you are a pretty staunch republican right? So don't you think you are biased as well?

I am a conservative actually! If the Repubs had any backbone/character then we wouldn't be in the current calamity we face now! They suck too! But the ideas(and ways to achieve goals)brought forth from Dems are ludicrous and shortsighted,imho!

[GPK]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Yep. Part of the problem IMO is it is almost impossible to be an honest person of power anymore. It's financially stupid. I know it would be great to think that money didn't matter, but really who doesn't love money?

It may seem a bit silly to some, but it almost seems to me that the whole idea of "accountablity" has been taken out of politics.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

I agree Kev accountability has been taken out of all aspects of life. No one wants to own their s hit anymore. I don't need to tell you this, as I know you work with people.

Its a sad state of affairs...and at the risk of sounding like an old man, its not getting any better with the younger generation. The example that has been set forth in front of them, leads them to believe they don't need to be concerned or take responsibilty for their actions.

Im the furthest thing from perfect, but one thing about me stands true. When I screw up, im the first one to stand up and admit it.

[timmgirvan]

Me??...liberal issues???? I'm not a neo-con, but damn..A liberal??? Talk to me!

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Yeah, I'm a ******. I'm guilty of PWI tonight and I seem to have confused myself. I got thrown off when you called yourself a conservative instead of a republican, which you sort of are. I'll make the necessary adjustments. Still though, as a conservative you are pretty biased, no?

DaHoss: biased doesn't mean brainwashed! I know what right/wrong is and what compromise is and does in Society! But..don't tell GR...she thinks I'm a "dittohead"

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

The Generals post is from one who lived it......the Times is the usual drivel they put out!

Timm,
If you go back and scroll down to the bottom of the link you posted, you might be surprised to find that Pendry wasn't a general, he's a retired sargent.
And, if you take the time to analyse his "arguements", you'll see a tactic that is repeatedly used by those that refuse to address facts, such as "name calling" and fabrications. Labeling those that object to the occupation of a country that was invaded by choice as "axis of idiots" only shows the level of thinking of this 28 percenter.
Reminds me of a dog I once had. He was a very nice dog, dumb as a box of rocks, but boy oh boy, was he loyal.
Woof, woof.

[Downthestretch55]

Timm,
Here is what a real general has to say.
http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index....groundid=00192

I wonder what Sgt Pendry would have to say to Gen Odom.

[Antitrust32]

Tim, that was a good blog from the military guy, It was sad though.


I've said time and time again (not on DT, i rarely post politics) that the US media is just giving the terrorists more reason to fight by exposing and then totally focusing on whatever error our military creates.

Instead they should be focusing on supporting the troops and keeping things confidential when it comes to military secrets.

I wrote CNN emails telling them they are supporting the beheadings of captured US workers in Iraq by broadcasting nonstop on the Abu Ghraib Prison scandal.

The media doesnt care who dies, they just want their headlines.


I also totally agree with Hossy and Kev regarding career politicians and the corruption of the government / the dem vs repub thing.

Politicians today are the most disgusting people out there, all they care about is getting re-elected and campaign funding. Its gross, they should all be ashamed.

This country was founded by men who were career Farmers, or Military, or another occupation. Politics was not their career, it was their way of giving the people a voice and doing what is right for a nation.

Today, Politics is just a money driven career. I dont think they really care about the people.

I am conservative with my politics, but I cannot stand this current (and past 6 years) adminstration. They have caused me to become 'independent', because Bush is not a real republican, he is more about 'big government' than anyone and I am very disappointed in the republicans when they controlled washington.

I wish Republicans and Democrats did not argue about EVERYTHING. Dont you think most issues should be agreed upon through common sense?? Why must it always be about two sides fighting, instead of doing what is right for our country.

It is all pathetic.

[sham]

Wisdom requires that one consider both sides of a debate.

http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/2920101.html

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/...d_vietnam.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1308349,00.html

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by sham

Wisdom requires that one consider both sides of a debate.

http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/2920101.html

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/...d_vietnam.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1308349,00.html

Ok Sham,
I read the links you put up.
The first one, dated Sept 4, 2005, is no longer current. Circumstances have changed during the interim.
The second one, May 2006, spells out a rationale for the invasion and occupation, "a resource rich region". Why not just say oil? Oh, and it also trots out the "domino theory"...'nuf said.
The third one, Sept 20, 2004...ummm, can we stick to "current events"?
Blair has been replaced by Brown.
Old PR and justifications don't seem to be effective given the circumstances of July 8, 2007.

Question...how can the US military gain "victory" in a civil war, and what will be necessary to sustain that "victory"?

[Storm Cadet]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Ok Sham,


Question...how can the US military gain "victory" in a civil war, and what will be necessary to sustain that "victory"?

This is now a RELIGIOUS WAR, not a civil war...and NOBODY wins in a religious war...it's been going on since the Crusades (or longer). Our US Army can not stop this Muslim religious war. IMO

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Storm Cadet

This is now a RELIGIOUS WAR, not a civil war...and NOBODY wins in a religious war...it's been going on since the Crusades (or longer). Our US Army can not stop this Muslim religious war. IMO

That's an interesting point.
Actually, some no longer call it a "war" as it's an occupation involved in "peace keeping".
Back to the question of "victory"...how many more military lives will be taken to gain "it", and what will it look like?

[sham]

Here is a more recent article that does a nice job of pointing out the reasons to remain engaged in Iraq by those that consider such as the proper course of action. I personally have no predominant opinion and concede insufficient wisdom to know the best path for our nation. To me, it looks like "damned if you don't...damned if you do". I think it's inevitable that the US will be forced to take a major stand against radical Islam in some place at some point in time.

http://bcsia.ksg.harvard.edu/publica...e&item_id=1711

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by sham

Here is a more recent article that does a nice job of pointing out the reasons to remain engaged in Iraq by those that consider such as the proper course of action. I personally have no predominant opinion and concede insufficient wisdom to know the best path for our nation. To me, it looks like "damned if you don't...damned if you do". I think it's inevitable that the US will be forced to take a major stand against radical Islam in some place at some point in time.

http://bcsia.ksg.harvard.edu/publica...e&item_id=1711

Sham,
Of the three options presented, the one that makes the most sense is tainted with hypotheticals. 3 "may"s and one possibly.
Perhaps the author needs a consult with Madame Zelda and her magical cards.

"If the U.S. withdraws without achieving even this minimalist definition of "success", Iraq will deteriorate into ever worsening violence and may splinter into its component parts. Turkey may then invade Kurdistan, whose possible independence it views as a threat to its own territorial integrity. Iran will become not only a primary player in Iraq, but the primary one, possibly even annexing Shiite areas outright. The Saudis, already threatened by rising Shiite influence in the region, petrified by a possible Iranian presence right on their border, may similarly choose to preempt this by grabbing parts of Iraq. Jordan, with an Iranian controlled Iraq on its border, might collapse. For Israel, the consequences will be severe."

Oh, I wonder why the author is looking out for the interests of Israel?
hmmm.....