RE: http://shock.military.com/Shock/videos.do?displayContent=129786

I'VE BEEN WAITING FOR SOLDIERS TO SAY THOSE WORDS...

I thing all these anti war people should forfit all thier rights and freedoms, sence they are againsed all the sacrafice our men and woman have given for them. The U.S. needs to restructure who it calls citizens. If you served your country your a citizen and have rights to all services and benifits, if not you are a resident and have little to no rights and get taxed out the ass for everything. Eliminate welefair, and send them to the nearest recruiting office. Oh how I would love to be dictator of this country for 4 years, I would change so much....

i know those guys, that is my company... LOL

way to go NBC, that was hard to say

quote:

Originally posted by dreed3521:
I thing all these anti war people should forfit all thier rights and freedoms, sence they are againsed all the sacrafice our men and woman have given for them. The U.S. needs to restructure who it calls citizens. If you served your country your a citizen and have rights to all services and benifits, if not you are a resident and have little to no rights and get taxed out the ass for everything. Eliminate welefair, and send them to the nearest recruiting office. Oh how I would love to be dictator of this country for 4 years, I would change so much....

Big fan of the first amendment, are you? The type of stuff you advocate is the stuff of authoritarian regimes and mindless jingoism. Just because someone opposes a policy or a war by this country doesn't make them unpatriotic or even wrong. This story had three guys saying they wanted their sacrifices to count for something. It wasn't very political, and I don't think a single one of them would advocate the fascist solution you propose. They want their sacrifices to be worth it, and that's understandable. But there are plenty of people who believe that they've sacrificed enough - and some of those people are themselves veterans of these conflicts and family members of those we've lost - and there are others who are saying we cannot solve the problems of the world militarily, at least one of those people being Petraeus himself.

Why don't you go find yourself a little island nation to go exercise your authoritarian fantasy? No real American thinks as you do. You don't even value the things that make this country great.

I think dreed 3521 should learn to spell first before he becomes a dictator. He should also stop watching "starship-trooper" so much and grow up a little.
Sad but true, we really need to support our soldiers more than we currently do, but there are plently of people who should never, never ever put a uniform on. Dreed 3521 might have slipped through the cracks. Enough detraction.

Well done NBC - well done to the real soldiers giving real answers. It's hard to answer with your real thoughts when a PR liaison officer is hovering behind the camera crew...

It is not just "those 3 soilders" that say that they want the sacrifice people have made to be invain. Were I am at in Kansas there are hundreds that say the same thing, my wife being one of them. If we go by the logic of auntie, if we see a few flag burning, American hateing,protesting hippies, the whole country is against the war and hates the people involved in it. JMHO Also finally get to say these words. Good job NBC!!!! Glad you are catching up to what is really going on.

quote:

Originally posted by MarineAuntie:
But there are plenty of people who believe that they've sacrificed enough - and some of those people are themselves veterans of these conflicts and family members of those we've lost - and there are others who are saying we cannot solve the problems of the world militarily, at least one of those people being Petraeus himself.

What you've described is responsible discourse. Unfortunately, we do not have that in this country.

Instead we have a very vocal and damaging movement who is invested in FAILURE IN IRAQ, while "claiming" they support the troops.

Not protesting the troops is by no means "supporting them."

I believe the points the Soldiers were trying to make is that it is ignorant and hypocritical to say "I support the troops but not the war aka the mission."

One can disagree with the war and the reasons how or why we got there, however, one MUST NOT invest in the failure of our war fighting like in Vietnam.

At every turn, the anti-war movement has tried to undermine the war effort. They started by trying to impede the movement of troops but soon abandoned those efforts when they found out law enforcement was going to kick their collective a$$es if they tried.

However, I believe the subversive nature in which the current anti-war movement is operating is just as damaging to the troops as impeding their movement.

The phrase "Support the Troops" was used very disingenuously as a way to cut off the debate regarding the war. i.e. If one was against the war then one was against the troops. So instead of a debate (like a normal functioning democracy) we instead got a litmus test. With any type of alternative thought so effectively weeded out of the debate is it any wonder the war has been prosecuted as badly as it has?

Yes, I can support the troops and be against the war. It is this FUNDAMENTAL right that we have all signed up to defend. To say other wise is to completely betray our democracy and to those who have defended it.

And as for the charges that there is an active subversive element in the anti-war movement I have not seen it. And no, a bunch of idiots in Berkley protesting a Marine recruiting depot is not a threat to our military. However, casting war doubters as some type of anti-military liberal 5th column is down right scary.

In an all volunteer military you cannot, in late 2008, long after almost any military memeber who wanted out could have gotten out, say you don't support the war but support the troops.
I rejoined the military as a reservist in 2007 knowing damn well my unit was headed to Iraq this January. Why? Winning this war on radical Islam is worth it to me. I was tired of standing on the sidlines as 35 year old who they would still let in - watch 18 year marines come home in flag draped coffins w/o putting my money where my mouth was. Do you anti war types "support" people like me?
If you oppose the war have the guts to stand up and tell the soldiers fighting it that you oppose them for volunteering to fight in it. It is a free country but you should not be allowed to make an illogical statement like the one we are talking about in 2008 to cover your ass.

I oppose the war that you volunteered for. If you want help line Bush and Cheney's pockets by volunteering to fight in Iraq then go ahead. Its a free country. Just do not think for a second that fighting in Iraq is protecting the civilian population here. that is just pure BS. And to tell me that to disagree with the Iraq war that I am hoping that you come to harm is not just streching it, its pretty damn insulting.

quote:

Originally posted by EvolDeth:
I oppose the war that you volunteered for. If you want help line Bush and Cheney's pockets by volunteering to fight in Iraq then go ahead. Its a free country. Just do not think for a second that fighting in Iraq is protecting the civilian population here. that is just pure BS. And to tell me that to disagree with the Iraq war that I am hoping that you come to harm is not just streching it, its pretty damn insulting.

Sir, with all due respect to your right to state your opinion, you are ignorant.

Bush and Cheney have in no way benefited from the war in Iraq and you in no way have ANY proof they did, other than what you read on equally ignorant blogs and hear on the Daily Show.

You can also be for driving SUV's and against drilling oil, but that doesn't make the position any more credible or logical.

If you wish to be intellectually dishonest and "claim" you support the troops while attempting to undermine them by perpetuating LIES about the CinC, that is your choice, it is America after all.

However, we don't have to accept your ignorant position as anything but ignorance and ideological hyberbole now do we?

This is not the thread to show how badly Bush/Cheney lied about the Iraq war. Besides, if you want proof just ask Scott McClellan. This thread is to point out the creeping intellectual dishonesty in equating support troops=supporting war. To equate me, a veteran, as being anti-troop because I opposed invading AND occupying a country that posed NO threat to ours is the height of intellectual dishonesty. You create a strawman of arguments that myself or the left never used (The left hates the troops personally) and then you tear this strawman done with Ad Hominum attacks. It provides a convenient cover to those (such as yourself) who cannot justify this war on any moral basis. Why argue the facts when you can just say the opposition "hates the troops". Not America's best moment.

The film with the "troops" talking politics in violation of Code of Conduct is filmed and written by the Pentagon. Interviews are staged, using cuts, retakes and multiple camera angles.

Any idiot who is not offended by this violation of the oath to "protect and defend the Constitution of the United States"....

How do we expect to build a democracy there while giving up our own?

Yes..I have been to Iraq.

Reading above about Bush and Cheney benefitting from the war...

Let's look at Blackwater. It is really owned, as some may know, by Richard DeVos of East Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Richard is also the most powerful Republican in the U.S.

Blackwater now operates, not only inside the U.S. using their intelligence capabilities to support political candidates but has also worked extensively for countries unfriendly to the U.S.

Money paid to Blackwater pours into the Republican party.

Last time I was in Iraq, I was reviewing pipeline capacity from Kirkuk to Ceyhan.

Why is the capacity and flow 2X what is being paid for?

Is half the oil in Iraq being stolen with the money being split between.....you can guess.

I could also describe driving past many "projects" which were paid for but never built.

Why do we have no comprehensive record of the thousands of projects we have built but "may not" (read "do not") exist.

We put a few decent Marines on trial and cover up for billions in fraud.

Saying Bush and Cheney don't profit is insane.

quote:

Originally posted by gpduf:
Saying Bush and Cheney don't profit is insane.

No, making asinine comments on illogical assumptions is insane.

No, doubt this is America, you have the right to your opinion even though completely illogical and unsubstantiated... it is an opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by EvolDeth:
This is not the thread to show how badly Bush/Cheney lied about the Iraq war. Besides, if you want proof just ask Scott McClellan. This thread is to point out the creeping intellectual dishonesty in equating support troops=supporting war. To equate me, a veteran, as being anti-troop because I opposed invading AND occupying a country that posed NO threat to ours is the height of intellectual dishonesty. You create a strawman of arguments that myself or the left never used (The left hates the troops personally) and then you tear this strawman done with Ad Hominum attacks. It provides a convenient cover to those (such as yourself) who cannot justify this war on any moral basis. Why argue the facts when you can just say the opposition "hates the troops". Not America's best moment.

Let me explain it to you in simple terms.

An intelligent person who is not ideologically driven makes this assessment.

1. I do not agree with the war and I think we made a mistake entering the war.

2. I will state that opinion in public to include legal protest and to my elected representatives in the hopes that our elected representatives make better decisions in the future and do not enter wars without fully investigating the reasons for doing so.

3. I will hope that our soldiers prevail so they can come home and I will support them in anyway I can to that end.

An illogical person and intellectually dishonest person makes this assessment.

1. I do not agree with the war and I think we made a mistake entering the war.

2. I will make up lies and exaggerate partial truths about the motives behind the war and how we got into the war in an attempt to undermine public support for the war so that the war will be stopped.

3. I will support elected officials who call our soldiers murderers and claim the war is lost to further undermine public support for the war so the war will be stopped.

4. I will protest and impede the war effort anyway I can so the war will be stopped.

5. I will not protest the troops like my ideological peers did in Vietnam so that I can claim that I support the troops.

See the difference.

Nice Strawman! Does it come with a yellow ribbon?

quote:

Originally posted by EvolDeth:
Nice Strawman! Does it come with a yellow ribbon?

Yea, yea, the typical liberal response when you are getting schooled. Nice try, but a strawman argument must be untrue.

Please illustrate how my example is untrue. It illustrates clearly the illogical and hypocritical postion of the so called "against the war - for the troops" out there.

That said, one can be against the war and support the troops if they are indeed hoping that we win the war. Outside of that one CANNOT support the troops and be hopeful that we lose the war.

Unless of course you would like to illustrate how losing a war is beneficial to the troops.