- Cattle responsible for global warming
- Abortion should never be acceptable
- Bronco “fans” go too far
- Electoral college comments
- Ft. Collins A.K.A. Grinchville
- Paul Campos & the Constitution
- U.S. now tortures
- Chandler Grafner’s parents want to sue
- Denver Election Commission
- Makes me want to vote Republican
Funding bill for Iraq
First of all, Mr. Bush needs to understand that an efficient Democracy is based upon a well informed public with OPEN debate. In such a system, no one, not even God himself, dictates what is of more importance.
It’s all important, it’s all free speech! Let us do our job; let us (WE THE PEOPLE) decide! Which, by the way, I think we have, just not loudly and persistently enough.
I do agree that we need to listen to the military; but not his hand picked Generals sitting in air conditioning in the fortified green zone. We need to hear from the boots on the ground, the soldiers who are doing the dirty work, many of whom, pay the ultimate price. At ivaw.org is account after account of soldiers who feel betrayed. Not only mislead initially (i.e. WMD, Saddam ties to Al Qaida, etc.) but also little or no care upon their return. Over 100 Iraq vets killed themselves last year, one out of every four homeless people are vets.
Support the troops? Are you listening Mr. Udall!!
We need to support these brave souls at ivaw in whatever way possible! Call Congress and Demand no more funding for the Iraq war!
This letter has not been edited.
robert go tell your buddy udall and all the other bleding liberal progressives you elected to do what you told them to do. I cant wait for the air to be filled with their laughter. they dont care what you think they just wanted to get elected.
Posted by on November 14, 2007 02:34 PMYour letter is nothing less than a declaration of contempt for the troops. If you truly supported the troops, you would also be defending their mission.
Posted by Brian Stuckey on November 14, 2007 02:58 PMNo Brian Stuckey, this is a declaration of contempt for greedy cowards like you and Bush and Cheney who never fought in a war and have no respect for American soldiers nor their lives. You have no respect for the troops and could care less how many die in hopes that Bush never has to admit he made a mistake in invading Iraq.
Posted by htieK on November 14, 2007 03:05 PMStuckey : Supporting the troops does not necessarily mean supporting this mission! All of you Bushies keep insisting that anyone who questions the idiot in charge is not patriotic!........ B.S.!!!! Don't you ever tell me I don't support my young friends and relatives that are stuck with this mission.....keep those idiotic rants to yourself and the rest of the pathetic right-wingers.....!
Posted by abbb on November 14, 2007 03:10 PMBrian,
Contempt for the troops is displayed in attempts to silence opposition to civilian policy by conflating such opposition with "contempt for the troops".
I can't think of anyone who despises the troops and our great country more than Brian "Steno" Stuckey.
Posted by Charles B on November 14, 2007 03:13 PMBrian you just another Rightwing coward who refuses to fight but send our kids to fight for them? You are nothing but a pathetic traitorous coward, a chickenhawk.
If the Right has its way and continues waging war on every country in the world with different politics and different religions (and countries that have things we want..like their oil)..then the US will soon be little different than the countries we despise.
Thank you Mr. Ketterhagen for formally abandoning the "surge isn't working" rationale for surrendering Iraq. Now that things are actually improving in Iraq - something only the most unobservant and willfully blind refuse to recognize - we can dispense with Sen. Ried's treasonous "This war is lost" arguement.
While IVAW.org certainly does have vets who oppose the war, I myself have never personally met one. On the contrary, all of the many that I know who have returned from Iraq recognized the value of what they did and almost all were ready to go back. We should listen to the troops and support them by letting them do what they know must be done: win.
Posted by Neal5x5 on November 14, 2007 04:01 PMAs you can see even the liberal media have to reluctantly admit that things are getting better in Iraq.For you Democrats that means WE are winning.We meaning the US.What you will see now is a big push for the Democrats to help their terrorists friends by cutting off the money for our troops.Their effort will be non-stop because they can't afford to let us win against the terrorists.
Posted by An American on November 14, 2007 04:03 PMI checked out the website the writer refers to. Their mission is to "end the war in Iraq."
I 've also seen "countless" numbers if service persons who are proud of the work they're doing and say although they'd like to return home, they don't want to until the work is thru.
If you expect to here factual, unbiased information regarding what the vets really think I would recommend actually talking to the ones now returning, not simply relying on a website with a mission.
Posted by KW on November 14, 2007 04:04 PMAs you can see even the liberal media have to reluctantly admit that things are getting better in Iraq.For you Democrats that means WE are winning.We meaning the US.What you will see now is a big push for the Democrats to help their terrorists friends by cutting off the money for our troops.Their effort will be non-stop because they can't afford to let us win against the terrorists.
Posted by An American on November 14, 2007 04:06 PMNeal5x5 has been to Iraq recently where he talked to many average Iraqis and knows the following first-hand:
"Now that things are actually improving in Iraq - something only the most unobservant and willfully blind refuse to recognize..."
So tell us about your trip Neal5x5. Did you suffer any losses or take any fire? Did you go to the market like back in Indiana?
You must've gone right? Otherwise how could you know things are getting better?
Let me guess: You're just making sh*t up. It's highly likely that you're the credulous type that believes whatever you're told by the people doing the Enron style cadaver counting in Iraq.
If you had the wherewithal to do the math, you'd know that we have already surpassed last year in the number of troops killed.
How many times do you have to be hoodwinked by the cynical bastards who feed you the utter bullsh*t that you regurgitate before you figure it out?
Until you do you're just a mark, a rube and a sucker, ignorant by choice and stewed in your own vociferous idiocy.
Posted by Charles B on November 14, 2007 04:39 PMCharles B,
Take your meds, take off the blinders, and read the following:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iytJC_yqYYxVZxixaL3GsDlNPJjQD8SSLOQO2
If you can read, I stated that all the vets I've spoken to who have returned from Iraq recognized that they were there for the right reason and that they wanted to win.
Posted by Neal5x5 on November 14, 2007 05:05 PMCharles B.
"If you had the wherewithal to do the math, you'd know that we have already surpassed last year in the number of troops killed."
If you would look at the math, the majority of those deaths occurred in the first part of the year when the Dems were still fighting to stop the surge. The death toll has dropped since the surge was engaged at full force. In addition Iraqis are starting to move back into Baghdad and tribal leaders are turning against Al Qaeda.
I understand that any good news from Iraq is bad news for the Dems, to them getting elected is more important than anything else.
How many times do you have to listen to the bullsh@t being fed to you by the likes of Moveon.org and code pink before you realize they are trying their best to help the terrorist win this war?
Posted by jgd777 on November 14, 2007 05:08 PMDon't forget to tell them to vote "no" on illegal immigrants, welfare recipients, and all the other unconstitutional wastes that the federal government has no constitutional authority.
Posted by on November 14, 2007 05:17 PMrobert,You said it ,you have to be well informed to make an educated responsed.Well,you are too lazy to spend the time or too stupid to comprenhend the facts.That's what makes you another dumb-ass liberal
Posted by Keith on November 14, 2007 06:19 PMIf we brought 20,000 or more additional policemen into any city in the USA, the crime rate would drop dramatically, until they left. Same with Baghdad.
Posted by Truth on November 14, 2007 08:04 PMStuckey out sucking chimp dick again, I see.
Posted by on November 14, 2007 08:06 PMNeal:
I stated that all the vets I've spoken to who have returned from Iraq recognized that they were there for the right reason and that they wanted to win.
Besides being a statement of the obvious (the troops want to win, no sh*t Neal), argument by anecdote is a logical fallacy.
Here's a few questions for you:
1) How long do you propose that we act as a street-level police force in Bagdad?
2) How long can we maintain our current troop levels, which would be necessary to continue our role as street-level police force in Bagdad?
3) How many tax-payer dollars are you willing to spend to police Iraq and to what end?
4) How many Iraqi's would like the USA to leave immediately according to the most reliable polling?
5) Are you willing to reconsider your position on the issue of our invasion and occupation of Iraq?
Posted by Charles B on November 14, 2007 09:24 PMjdg777 tried:
"...the majority of those deaths occurred in the first part of the year when the Dems were still fighting to stop the surge. "
Oh, ok. Let's just throw out those deaths, because they are meaningless since they were pre-surge. Strange for a so-called conservative to be taking such a short term view.
So what happens when we inevitably draw down the troop levels? Or would you have us stay forever, at a cost of hundreds of billions of tax dollars, to act as a street-level police force in Iraq?
Your insinuations that Democrats want us to lose reveals more about your cynicism than theirs and is a non-starter since I am very much not a Democrat.
"How many times do you have to listen to the bullsh@t being fed to you by the likes of Moveon.org and code pink before you realize they are trying their best to help the terrorist win this war."
Your assumptions about where I get my information are incorrect.
Posted by Charles B on November 14, 2007 09:37 PMNeal5X5, you said that the troops you spoke with knew they were there for a reason. What is that reason?
Posted by leftside on November 14, 2007 09:50 PMcharles b.,You get dumber everyday,#1,We are not street level police force,the Iraqis are .Fact.So there is no reason to answer# 2 and # 3 because it is obvious to anybody with an I.Q. over 70,which leaves you out.The Iraqi gov has said on camera that they don't want us to leave.But known liars like reid and pelosi say they do.So according to an idiot like you that is the most reliable poll.And dumb-ass it is not an occupation.
Posted by Keith on November 14, 2007 10:33 PMCharles B
"Oh, ok. Let's just throw out those deaths, because they are meaningless since they were pre-surge. Strange for a so-called conservative to be taking such a short term view."
No death of a US soldier is meaningless, and you know damn well what I was saying. The number of soldiers dying has dropped since the surge. So your statement about this being the deadliest year for our military did not mention the reduction in the death since the surge. Another example of a fact to attempt to distort the truth of what is really taken place.
We have no idea of what might happen after the draw down, however we know the Shite and Sunni seem to being working things out. Not a perfect solution yet, but at least they are trying. Maybe the surge, whose goals was to give them the time to try, is actually working.
When you walk like a duck, talk like a duck, act like a duck, don't get upset when people think you are a duck.
The Dems have done and continue to do everything they possibly can to help the terrorist. Even as we talk they are passing a bill to limit or deprive our troops the necessary funds to continue the "working" surge. They know full well the President will veto that bill, if it gets through the Senate.
Leftside - all of those that I know believe they served to make America and American's safer and that their efforts did just that. Most of them are/were infantry (Marines and Army) and worked with local Iraqi forces, of whom they generally considered to be OK (the army, not necessarily the police). It's been interesting to see the change over the past months because the surge has been a big improvement to morale , and they've liked the fact that they're going out into neighborhoods more and not just holed up and getting shot at.
One of my military friends is very liberal and a Marine. He despises Bush and didn't agree with invading Iraq, but served when called up because he's a professional and honorable. He returned a little while ago and still hates Bush and thinks the occupation of Iraq was badly screwed up, but he's told me that after what he's seen and learned from the Iraqis, he believes that things are better for most (certainly not all) Iraqis than they were before the war.
Posted by Neal5x5 on November 14, 2007 10:40 PMSomeone please hit Keith in the face with a sledgehammer, it would have to make him smarter.
Posted by on November 14, 2007 10:45 PMOur ranter-in-chief Keith must be talking about the Iraqi cabinet (he conveniently left any mention of the Iraqi parliament from his diatribe) that's made of bought-and-paid-for stooges that were installed in power by the Bush administration. I hate to break it to Keith, but the Iraqi prime minister and the cabinet are no more representative of the Iraqi people than Keith himself is of Rhodes scholars. If Keith bothered getting his facts from sources other than Fox News or the Rush "Ass Pimple Deferment" Limbaugh show, he would see that. The U.N. Security Counsel mandate that supposedly puts a "legal" stamp on our presence in Iraq is up for renewal this month and Nouri-al-Maliki, Iraq's prime minister, has such great support from his Parliament (the only Iraqi government body actually elected by the Iraqi people) that he had to take a lesson from our village idiot president and request renewal of this mandate without consulting parliament...which he is bound to do under the Iraqi constitution. Their constitution gives parliament the duty of ratifying any treaties or agreements made by their cabinet/president. Depending on whose poll you look at, 70%-90% of the Iraqi people want us out of their country and if their people, through their democratically elected parliament, decide that it is time for us to leave, then we should, or we then expose ourselves as the occupying force that they claim we are.
Posted by Keith and Hank sittin' in a tree, K-I-S-S-I-N-G on November 14, 2007 11:51 PMNeal5X5,
Thank you for answering my question in a respectful manner. As such you deserve a respectful response.
First of all you should know I am not a liberal. I consider myself a 1970's conservative. The Christian Coalition, Gun Extremist and Pro-life movement have pushed the box so far to the right that I find my Christian values, my ideas about guns and my respect for a womans ability to make her own choices on the "Leftside".
Having said that, I to felt that the decision to go to war with Iraq was a safety measure for America, or at the very least felt that erroring on that side was prudent. However, when no WMD's were discovered then "Mission Accomplished" and deployment of the troops should have begun immediatly.
For that reason I support and will vote for Hillary Clinton. She is the only candidate, Democrat or Republican, that shares my opinion on that score. She support the president using that same logic and once it was determined that no threat existed from WMD's wanted the troops out. Candidates who voted against going to war and candidates wanting to stay in this war in my opinion didnot and do not have Americas or the troops best interest at heart.
Posted by leftside on November 15, 2007 07:32 AMMan I love to see the right wing regulars here prove the old adage that you can fool some of the people all of the time.
2007 has been the bloodiest year in both Iraq and Afghanistan. 2008 won't be any better because unfortunately whack-a-mole STILL isn't sound military policy and the surge isn't sustainable in even a small portion of Iraq, let alone the entire country...WITHOUT A DRAFT.
Posted by jay on November 15, 2007 09:55 AMIt would be irresponsible to leave Iraq now. We're just starting to turn the corner! You'd have to be blind not to see that we're making huge progress, just like Neal 5x5 asserts. I know I've been saying that we're winning for the past 4 years, and things are always one turned-corner away from really turning around, but this time, unlike all the countless other times, it's not a lie! It's true! Why wouldn't you believe me? Is it because you've been lied to so many times before that only an absolute idiot piece of human garbage could possibly be stupid enough to believe yet another claim that things are just about to go swimmingly in Iraq? Well, in that case, I might as well tell those same idiot pieces of human garbage that we're losing because the damn Democrats (who've caved in to every single piece of Iraq war legislation I've ever asked for without so much as a bat of the eye) and MoveOn.org are keeping us from winning.
The beauty of it is, if you're dumb enough to believe the first part, you'll definitely be dumb enough to believe the second part. My new strategy is to isolate the stupidest, most worthless excuses for idiots in the country (Neal, Kieth, KW, that would be you) and just keep lying to them as long as they'll believe it.
Oh, by the way, I hope the average American household of 4 has an extra $20,000 lying around. I'm going to be taking that to go kill brown people.
Posted by George W Bush on November 15, 2007 11:26 AMI see people are still debating ideological positions based on public media releases. It's truly sad that you can't see the progress made in this country.
I'll try to put together a comparative report from a civilian perspective in the next few days. Time is not always available to accomplish all that I would like to do; but, I'll work hard to get this done.
Trinity
al Ramadi
Thanks Trinity. Frontline, unfiltered news on the situation will be refreshing.
Posted by KW on November 15, 2007 03:47 PM