Check out this discussion I took part in dealing with Rumsfeld, Fake Fascism, and a "Hail Mary" thrown by an Administration that Doesn't have a playbook (except Rove's) and has no clue what's going on on the field. We are ready for a new game in town!
UPDATE 9/13: (Via Huffpost)
I have always been a fan of Russ Feingold's - right on the war, right on campaign finance reform, right on lowering the defecit and many more. I saw him a week or so ago out in California and he came and spoke to young folks who weren't giving him money - not bad, right? Anyway, it appears he is reading Citizen Hunter as well, we love it! I was complaining about the use of this word last week. President Bush and the English language have never been close friends though.
If it is "The Conflict" then why was it planned so badly? Why didn't they send enough troops to fight it? Why didn't they plan to win? Why do they not adjust? Why is it taking longer than WWII? Why Why Why? I'll tell you why. They don't believe what they are telling us. They changed it's import to try and change the political landscape at home. In short, they are using our men and women a political pawns in a game the admin is not good at playing.
Coaches don't win Superbowls bringing half the squad and no playbook. This was never the Superbowl to them and we are paying the price. No amount of election season spin is going to change the last few years. It is time to fire the coach and get someone interested in winning - not spinning.
Posted by: Joe at September 6, 2006 10:57 AMHow can anyone compare WWII and the Iraq war? If you would research WWII, we did not tie our soldiers hands behind their backs. we did not give them rules of engagements that were more restrictive then our very own local police in any city here in the USA. We did not require troops to fight a war with kid gloves on. We certainly did not arrest and drag soldiers and marines through court for doing their jobs! Sure, the ones who violated US laws, yes. Yet, the troops who were in a fire fight?
Face it, it sounds like just another "I HATE BUSH" type of spewings. Well, that is just MHO.
Posted by: Onefrozen Migra at September 6, 2006 06:41 PMRight on, Flavia. You tell it like it is, girl. "Stick to policy, not politics." We won in Iraq when our troops got to Baghdad in 2003, "Mission Accomplished!" he said. We won again when we put Saddam in prison and once again when we witnessed a democratic election. What we are doing now is occupying the country. If we leave, we are not "cutting and running." We have finished what we started and we are leaving. The Shias, Sunnies and Kurds need an arbitrator, not an army.
What is even more scary than our Iraq policy, is the "regional conflict" and humanitarian disconnect being shown by the current administration regarding the people of the United States. Muster the forces for November. Take over Congress and serve the subpoenas.
Posted by: Arthur at September 6, 2006 08:04 PMGreat job as usual, Flavia. Hopefully the American public won't be scared again by Bush and company.
Posted by: Steve at September 6, 2006 09:47 PMGood Job Flavia
They can't stick to politics and go with policy due to they don't have one ... They have so invested in the "politics" of Karl Rove that it will be most amusing to watch them scrambling over the next two-months to actually have to establish a position and explain themselves ...
Following the "fear-o-grams" of the past week, we came up with a soundtrack for them
Garlic Exclusive! New RNC/GOP Theme Song For Midterms
http://puregarlic.blogspot.com/2006/08/garlic-exclusive-new-rncgop-theme-song.html
Peace
JTD
Come on, where is the solutions from the DEMs? Flavia is on her way up. I support a lot of what she says. Yet, she comes at people with facts, not the same old line of "It's Bush's fault!" When will any DEM stand up and say something other then attack a REP? America needs leaders. Leaders with their own ideas, problem solving abilities and the willingness to earn the job. The DEMs could have won the last election, yet, not one of them has taken any stance on any subject. So, please, do your home work, don't just stay the course of bashing. We are all in this together, right? We all have a lot of things on the table, Immigration, removing all the illegal aliens, stopping the flow of illegal aliens, get out of Iraq and finish what we started in Afghanistan. These are just a few. We need answers. I am so tired of the party lines. Aren't you? Why not try and work with all parties and let's make each person who "applies" for the job pass an interview where we demand they answer questions. ANSWER! Not spin. I would like to see Bill O'reilly, Hanity, Flavia, Comes and maybe a news anchor or two on a panel and have a real debate. No prescreening of questions, no time limits and a buzzer that can be sounded if the person is trying to dodge the question. Make them earn the positions. Why do we just give it to them cause they are in "our" party?
Posted by: Onefrozen Migra at September 7, 2006 03:07 AMOnfrozenMigra
If you don't think any Dems are com-ing up with a solution, a. then you either haven't been paying attention, b. or just repeating the R party line.
This is the deal. The R's are in power, and the D's still come up with solutions. Read your congressional record, do some homework, and see exactly who is stifling debate. It's not the DEM's.
Out.
Reality, i think you need the check. You haven't cited any examples in your comments because there aren't any. The only ideas i've heard are either surrender, or exactly what we're already doing. Face it, we're in a war that we HAVE to win. That is the only acceptable idea.
Flavia is smart and pretty but she's wrong, and so are you.
Posted by: Rhino-itall at September 7, 2006 12:15 PMRhino-itall,
Examples, why don't you enlist and see for yourself. Citations. This war is a crock. WMD was a crock. Vietnam was a war we HAD to win. BS my friend. BS, and you know it. You are so far up W's behind that you wouldn't believe the sky was blue. Open your freaking eyes.
Posted by: RCheck at September 7, 2006 01:32 PMBush' war is a failure. Sorry Rhino. F-A-I-L-U-R-E. Failure. And you know what else. We are in more danger now. Shoot, not only will history prove you wrong, the present is proving you wrong as well. The NEO-CONS themselves have abandoned the effort. The WH own intellectual base is leaving them. Its a failed policy and the WH is backstroking as fast as they can.
Posted by: bestandbrightest at September 7, 2006 01:40 PMRealityCheck,
Um...have you ever seen or heard a DEM come up with a public statement of solution for N. Korea? If so, can you post a link? How about getting out of Iraq? How about Immigration? All I have seen is attack, rip on Bush and more attacks. Let's look at immigration for an example. Upstate New York, I-87 (the North Way) had a US Border Patrol Checkpoint. With pressure from the DEMs, it has been shut down. The USBP had proposed a full time 24/7 chkpnt there, yet, Clinton and Shumer shot it down. They (USBP) catch a lot of illegal aliens, smugglers and drugs at this checkpoint. The left says the checkpoint is too dangerous. Huh? Then why not close all the toll booths in the country?
All of the top DEMs came out since mid to late 90's demanding we take action on and on how dangerous Saddam was. Do you need me to post a link?
Leave the left/right stuff behind, can you? Let's get to our own solutions. Then, demand that those who want the job, give us answers, their answers. Will you at least listen to what the DEMs are saying? I mean, listen to what they are actually are saying? They are mostly telling US that the war in Iraq is bad, wrong, etc...They are not telling us how they plan on solving the problem! The same holds true with immigration.
I do not vote party lines! I try and do some homework, ask questions and demand that the person has answers, not just hate! How bout you?
Posted by: Onefrozen Migra at September 7, 2006 02:15 PMIt's not Bush's war, it's America's war. It is not the same as vietnam in any way and the comparisons are ridiculous.
Of course i expect the up the butt comments from the left, but again i notice that you don't have ANY examples of the dems ideas or solutions. I knew you wouldn't have any because there aren't any but i thought you would be smart enough to just disappear and show up on some other subject like most on your side. I guess i overestimated your intelligence.
We are in a war against animals who brought the war to us. Iraq is the central front of that war. The left feels that we created that front, the right feels the front presented itself, either way most agree that this is the front line.
How do you measure progress in a war unlike any we have ever fought? what country are we fighting? what land mass are we trying to take? what rebellion are we attempting to put down? These traditional questions don't apply here, and it is that kind of "inside the box" thinking that has stumped the dems.
How do you figure the war in Iraq is a failure? what battle have we lost? didn't we have multiple free elections? didn't we rid the world of one evil dictator by force (saddam) and one just through intimidation (qadaffi)?
How many people have we freed?
Tell me the ideas of the left? besides surrender, what do they offer? I'm interested in hearing what they have to say. I read the letter that they sent to the president, and i read the response from the whitehouse. Did you? If you did you must have noticed that of the four recommentdations from the dems, 3 were already in the works, and the fourth was surrender.
So again i ask you, or flavia, or anyone else to cite me some examples of unique ideas that the left has had besides surrender.......
Posted by: Rhino-itall at September 7, 2006 02:49 PMDUCK HUNTING
I went hunting ducks last season -used a duck blind. My neophyte buddy asked me why we used duck blinds and I asked him if he ever tried running into the water yelling and shooting. You aint gonna shoot nothing but get yourself duckpooped on. Same concept. Pull back from the water, set in your blind with the decoys pulling them in, and then fire away. Now how in the hell is that surrendering to the ducks??? Answer that.
My plan and Dems Plan:
Duck Hunting.
W's and your plan and maybe 227 people left in the US' plan: Getting pooped on.
No retreat baby , no surrender.
Simple 'nuff?
Posted by: Duck Hunter at September 7, 2006 03:39 PMWELL SAID DUCK HUNTER (IF I DO SAY SO MYSELF)
Posted by: RealityCheck at September 7, 2006 03:46 PMEquating ducks with terrorists?
Actually that would almost make sense if ducks were flying planes into your blinds, planting IED's near your tree stand, and strapping TNT to their beaks and walking into your local Cabellas.
EE-Aw
Posted by: Muammar al-Qaddafi Duck at September 7, 2006 03:50 PMSo i'm still waiting for some examples of unique ideas from the dems..... reality? brightest? flavia? ......
Posted by: Rhino-itall at September 7, 2006 04:03 PMRhino- you asked for a plan. I simplified it for you, but you won't be satisfied until it comes from the WH. Mark my words, this will be the plan of the day and you will disappear like the rest back into the woodwork like you already are. You have lost your dirty, ill-planned little "war" because it was not planned correctly. No exit strategy, and no strategy right now. This is the cold hard truth. And there is no one else to blame for it than yourself and those who support this joke of a decider.This is the plan and will be the plan. Get used to it.
Posted by: RealityCheck at September 7, 2006 04:36 PM"It's not Bush's war, it's America's war."
I don't think so. What facts do you have to back that little winner up? 70% want us out, think it was a mistake. And thats just a poll - but who cares about polls anyway? This is not America's war.
Posted by: Qtip at September 7, 2006 04:48 PM"It is not the same as vietnam in any way and the comparisons are ridiculous."
Militarily not. But politically speaking, the facts that is a corrupt and inept Iraqi govt feeding off of us, as Gen McCaffery says himself that unfortunately and sadly it is looking more and more like Vietnam everyday politically. And Vietnam looked like any other military venture we took to prop up an inept little government.
Of course i expect the up the comments from the left,
How do you know I am from the left. I could very well be a conservative who is fed up with the BS. Folks like Pat Buchanan, the WSJ, and many others are saying the same things. I just like my language a little salty. Get over it.
Posted by: From the halls of at September 7, 2006 04:52 PMbut again i notice that you don't have ANY examples of the dems ideas or solutions. I knew you wouldn't have any because there aren't any but i thought you would be smart enough to just disappear and show up on some other subject like most on your side. I guess i overestimated your intelligence.
It looks like we will be redeploying and fighting this war smarter. Whether GWB wants to claim it as his own...it's just a matter of time.
Posted by: To the shores at September 7, 2006 04:54 PMDuck Hunting Redux
what is meant is...
Pull out the troops to the periphery, away from the population centers. Pinpoint targets using intelligence and blast them like we took out Al Zarquawi. Using special forces, like SEALs, we hunt them. See we are the targets, the hunted. By enacting this different plan, we have turned the tables and make them the hunted. Thats how a counterinsurgency war is fought. Even Machiavelli said that you cannot take over a country without overwhelming force, securing the borders, and making the local police forces the best paid group in the land. We have done none of these things. But I digress. No, we redeploy, let the insurgents raise their heads out, and blast them. Instead, we are patrolling checkpoints with insufficient number: 2 PFC's, (remember the soldiers that were overwhelemed and murdered) meanwhile, the Iraqi's want to give amnesty to those that kill the soldiers.
either way most agree that this is the front line.
Back it up. This is a lie, and maybe you feel if you repeat it enough people will believe it. This is a distraction. Al Qaeda did not exist in Iraq until we invaded. We have done nothing but strengthen IRAN.
How do you measure progress in a war unlike any we have ever fought? what country are we fighting? what land mass are we trying to take? what rebellion are we attempting to put down? These traditional questions don't apply here, and it is that kind of "inside the box" thinking that has stumped the dems.
It seems it has stumped the R's. Where are the flowers and candy that was to greet us? BS my friend. "Wrapping the intelligence around the policy" as they said.
But I just gave you a plan. We should use it.
How do you figure the war in Iraq is a failure? what battle have we lost? didn't we have multiple free elections? didn't we rid the world of one evil dictator by force (saddam) and one just through intimidation (qadaffi)?
The Generals themselves have said we have provided the best recruiting tool ever. They are growing stronger, not weaker. You have encapsulated every R talking point and I applaud you for your recall. The latest Pentagon report shows that attacks are GROWING. Our military, my military, is being stretched so thin that we are running out of parts just to train! Man, get your head out and read DefenseNews, or even the marinecorps times. As soon as you people get your head out and smell the coffee, quit being afraid that any agreement with dems on reality will lose you an election, maybe you can swallow your pride and adopt a dem plan that will work better than whatever it is you are doing.
Posted by: RealityCheck at September 7, 2006 05:00 PMHow do you figure the war in Iraq is a failure? what battle have we lost? didn't we have multiple free elections? didn't we rid the world of one evil dictator by force (saddam) and one just through intimidation (qadaffi)?
Lets see, We have created a govt that is getting close to enacting Sharia as their basis, and will do that sooner than we think. We have just emboldened and strenghtened shia all over the region from iraq to Iran and it will spread to Saudi. We have destabilized a region with absolutely no plan on what to do next, at least the r's wont admit it and fix it. and you my friend are a perfect example.
So if we free millions just to kill thousands and them subjucate them to a shia imam, then what was the point. Absolute lunacy my misguided and ostrich -parrot- like friend.
Lets look at the dems plan and redeploying. 9 out of 10 generals agree...and of course the flip flopper in chief will say it was his idea all along. but we know he's going to do that, maybe repackage it, but do it. we know the r's opposed the homeland security dept when the dems proposed it and then reintroduced it. Flip flop. Politics my friend, and when we redeploy and use pinpoint attacks to take out the enemy, making them the hunted once again, good ole W ... and you will say it was your idea all along. Just like an R..no original ideas. just obstinance and theft when no one is looking. Well we are looking. So keep spouting and talking. Redeployment and Hunt. Its that simple.
you know what my favorite thing to hear is?
someone who has never been shot at, or fired a gun in anger, talking about how you fight insurgents.
Posted by: evolo at September 7, 2006 07:29 PMOKAY. If this war is not America's war, why did Congress give the President their thumbs up?
If we follow the "DUCK" plan, the bad guys will simply hide even deeper with the "innocent" civilians. They will hide in the Mosques, schools and hospitals. What, you think we should bomb those? These are not your average ducks. We already killed the dumb ducks. Those dumb ducks that are left, well, they kill themselves as Murder Bombers.
The war went south the MINUTE Turkey did not allow us to enter from their border with the 4th ID. That allowed the great Republican Guard change clothes and mix in with the locals. We then started to listen to a bunch of lefties and sofites who never picked up a weapon, and tied our troops' hands behind their backs and told them to be nice and gentle.
If we would simply have Hollywood make a film of United States soldiers taking "terrorists in orange jumpsuits outside and toss them into a wild pig pen, and have the pigs eat the bodies. I think there was a movie that had this in it. Then, we tell the terrorist they are next. We take a pair out from one cell, drag them crying outside. Then, film them being thrown in with pigs that are gentle. Then, switch their bodies with fake bodies and have the magic begin. Make it appear that the hogs ate the terrorists. let the ones in the remianing cells watch it "LIVE!" Then, ask them some questions. The first pair, ship them to Gitmo, so nobody will know they aren't dead.
The reason I would compare this to Vietnam, the cowards who protest publicly and give aid and comfort to our enemies in the name of our troops. Much like kerry did and Jane Fonda. I know, how dare I say you don't have the right to free speech, right. nah! Speak all you want. Just don't do it for the TV cameras. Don't let the enemy see it. Write letters, emails, make phone calls, and or go visit your elected officials. Speak out all you want. Just don't let the media get a hold of it so they can pass it on to the terrorists.
evolo, i have been observing this ridiculous back and forth. both dudes are spouting off party lines. but you mentioned something worth repeating :
you know what my favorite thing to hear is?
someone who has never been shot at, or fired a gun in anger, talking about how you fight insurgents.
i think you just described "migra" and "reality check" and thats okay.
i guess.
but you also described some other guys that are paid alot of money to think about these things.
books and booksmarts don't replace the sound of gunfire or the smell of cordite from a shell.
words don't win battles - or do they?
maybe inadvertanlty, (sp. not so good, i don't write for a living or even a hobby -- my job is let just say...a little more "practical")
you mentioned a truth. wars are fought by our best, and planned by our brightest - right.
but politics has them stuck in "the cycle - the loop"
you know it -- the boyd cycle, the ooda loop, whatever you want to call it:
Observe
Orient
Decide
Act
either way it works for me, follow the path of least resistance, like water, conforming to the battlefield as it develops.
i dont know, maybe i shouldnt be making my opnion known, but i see what i see.
maybe someone will listen, doubt it, not with partyline dudes
time for me to get off stage and back into the shadows.
something to think about, maybe
Posted by: dude at September 8, 2006 08:44 AMdude, nice SA.
i guess my point was really pretty simple.
there are many folks in our great country who run off about things they have absolutely no knowledge of. take health care, i'm in the military and it isn't much of a worry to me, but i still spout off on how unfair it is that the only health care some citizens have is in the emergency room.
this of course is their right and i for one am proud that we live in a place where you can speak freely and not get your head sawed off on video.
the flip side is, like you pointed out, the people who make many of the decisions regarding how battles are fought and won/lost are generally smart folks who may or may not have had the combat experience.
not a problem if the thing works out.
when it doesn't and more energy is spent on the spewing diatribe between parties, while good Americans get killed and hurt, we are witnessing criminal negligence.
so...
i'm with you.
It does seem like a hail mary desperado attempt. Just waiting for the next Osama tape to come out, not suprised when it does come out.
oh, it came out. Like clockwork...
Posted by: Hmmm at September 8, 2006 10:48 AMAh, the back seat driver who ads nothing to a trip other than their mouth. So, you dare to tell people what I have done in my life? You dare to comment on what I have done for my country? You Sir (based on your handle of "DUDE") have really shown your ignorance! I bet you were one of the people who screamed about the injustice of the "attack" on the service record of Jonh Fitzgerald Kerry, right? Just a guess.
You go ahead and believe that I have not seen, heard and fired shots while being engaged by the enemy. heck, I have seen enough of that in my everyday job. I might not have shot back (based on our laws, but, we are attacked almost everyday, shot at more often then I can remember. Had face offs to include attacks by soldiers wielding Ak-47's or FNFAL's, and even M-16's who invaded the United States from our "FRIENDS" to the south. You do not get to read much about those things though, eh? KMA dude. You nothing of me and my service for this great country. Try looking up 18 bravo, 18 charlie. You might be able to figure out what I did in the Army.
Posted by: Onefrozen Migra at September 8, 2006 12:55 PMMan you guys rock! Seriously you are so much smarter than I am, not even funny, I learn so much. Thank you for all your interesting comments.
So sorry I have been MIA I have been travelling, I have missed you guys. (Luckily, I have an admin who puts stuff up even when I'm on airplanes.)
Don't know where to start with all these comments will come back in a bit to write more have to go write more blogs for you guys.
Don't you worry Rhino I will be coming at ya with tons of facts ideas and plans I hope you have plenty of time to read!
I totally agree with you. The dems until recently were driving me insane! The American people are an optimistic hopeful bunch who don't like to see America surrender and so it is not enough to be against something we must offer a plan for how we can get back to the amazing nation we are and we need specifics. After going to Divininty school I learned you have to cite scripture in that case in this case facts.
Clearly, I am no military expert nor do I claim to be in case youngperson is reading, but I do care deeply about us getting this right or as good as it can be. It is the most imp. issue facing our nation and deserves far more than partisan rhetoric. In fact, I think there is no place for it. We need to get together and work on solutions. If you have noticed even R's have reversed their position on the war as late. I am giving them the benefit of the doubt that they realize situation has changed and that we went in under false pretences and have to change course not just go on a PR trip selling a failed policy. It might be possible that we are getting close to November and they are running away from an unpopular President and unpopular policy. Huge understatement by the way. More later. Thanks you guys. I seriously missed you it's like my little family here.
Evolo, for a change, I might disagree slightly with you. I think throughout history some who have not been on the front lines in combat have had a lot to contribute strategically. There is a reason thhere is civilian control of Armed Forces. More on that later. What I do know is that you are a bad dude I mean bad in a good way! and I think you are awesome and glad you are doing the hard work I have neither the courage or ability to do. God bless you and all the other great men and women around the world, but in particular are CH readers you know who you are!
Posted by: Flavia at September 8, 2006 01:12 PMFlavia,i completely agree with you on the fact that in our own history many great decisions have been made by civilians that effected the military and therefore our country. Maybe Harry Truman comes to my mind first.
i will try to define my point better:
i think that with a few exceptions, most political folks, be they elected or bystanders, use the war in Iraq/Afghanistan as a SEGUE to their POLITICAL AGENDA and it has less to do with substance and solving than it has to do with posturing and getting elected.
whaddaya think?
and Migra, NOUS DEFIONS.
Posted by: evolo at September 8, 2006 01:25 PMhttp://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14728447/
Senate report: No Saddam, al-Qaida link
Long-awaited analysis also finds that anti-Saddam group misled U.S.
Here's your war Migra. Based on lies and they are still lying.
GWB sez then:
"The use of armed forces against Iraq is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001." [Bush’s Letter to Congress, 3/21/03]
...and now:
BUSH: The terrorists attacked us and killed 3,000 of our citizens before we started the freedom agenda in the Middle East.
QUESTION: What did Iraq have to do with it?
BUSH: What did Iraq have to do with what?
QUESTION: The attack on the World Trade Center.
BUSH: Nothing. Except it’s part of — and nobody has suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack. Iraq was a — Iraq — the lesson of September 11th is take threats before they fully materialize, Ken.
Nobody’s ever suggested
that the attacks of September the 11th were ordered by Iraq.
...and heres Dick:
RUSSERT: Do you still believe there is no evidence that Iraq was involved in September 11?
CHENEY: “Well, what we now have that’s developed since you and I last talked, Tim, of course, was that report that—it’s been pretty well confirmed that [9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta] did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service in Czechoslovakia last April, several months before the attack.” [NBC, Meet The Press, 12/9/01]
So, lets go over this:
Iraq had nothing to do with 911.
Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction.
We know the truth now.
So why are we there? Because if we are just going to liberate every people in every country that has a contract with, a tie with, from missile to technology, lets get the tanks started, because that is everyone. We are all linked in a global economy. Money flows everywhere. WHAT ABOUT SAUDI ARABIA??? There are connections everywhere. And now, with just one leg of the axis of evil, we are stretched beyond belief. Meanwhile Iran just sits back. We are doing their dirtywork.
btw I graduated from PI. I love my country, and want to see it strong and right. I happen to believe that we are heroes, but our leadrship is letting us down. On the borders, in our ports, in the halls of power, and in the Pentagon. Afghanistan is the war, the central war. We have moral authority on that one. and if we are to liberate millions in Iraq and overthrow a dictator, well we did that. That is good. But now, we have overstayed our welcome and purpose. The present course is disastrous and needs to be modified. I have laid out the plan of redeployment, maybe in sophomoric fashion, but don't say we don't have a plan. The Generals have it mapped better than I do. We have alternates. The Dems and Murtha didn't just hatch this on their own. It is in no way surrender. I beleive in credibility, ie , you do what you say you are going to do, but the present plan is a mess.
Motivating:
Somewhere a True Believer is training to kill you. He is training with minimal food or water, in austere conditions, training day and night. The only thing clean on him is his weapon and he made his web gear. He doesn't worry about what workout to do - his ruck weighs what it weighs, his runs end when the enemy stops chasing him. This True Believer is not concerned about 'how hard it is;' he knows either he wins or dies. He doesn't go home at 17:00, he is home.
He knows only The Cause.
Still want to quit?
this motivates me at times. I just wish we focused on the right ones, i mean we can stir up war wherever we choose, just want it to be in the right places. Out. and thanks I'm done with my rant of the decade.
Posted by: RC at September 8, 2006 02:47 PMnoticed a question posed by one of the commenters that if the dumb ducks hide in the mosques then what should we do. I think that if they are hiding, then they arent doing much fighting. Right? So when they rear their little duck heads to do more mischeif we can get them. Didn't the UK just arrest 20 or so terrorist? That seems more effective and I think we will be headed back to police enforcement and intel reliance now that the services have been retooled. The military is better suited for wars, not counterinsurgency and police work and training. That should be left to other orgs like BlackWater Inc. and whatever. we have iran and korea and Venezuela/Cuba on the horizon and need to be ready for those.
"we have iran and korea and Venezuela/Cuba on the horizon and need to be ready for those." Wesley, please explain the Venezuela/Cuba reference.
Going back farther, to the Vietnam reference. You can compare Vietnam to Iraq, in that the war will never end with a conventional surrender. We tried to negotiate our withdrawal from Vietnam, but in the end, North Vietnam overran the south, and we walked away. How different would a unilateral withdrawal have been? We are not used to losing, no one wants to lose face, but if you're not in it to win, then you got to face the inevitable. We don't control the borders in Iraq, so we can't stop the flow of reinforcements and supplies to the insurgents. Add to that the problem with the local militias, and the suspected infiltration of Iraqi security forces by militias, and you have one never-ending mess.
I don't want us to simply leave Iraq because we're weary or public support has waned. It's absurd that we ever invaded. But now that we are there, we literally have a tiger by the tail. At the very least, we need new direction. Most leaders would realize the need to clean house and bring in new management when things go badly and the incumbents' strategy is to "stay the course." I don't think Bush will ever do that. He seems to take pride in his ability never to re-think anything, or to even consider he may have made a mistake.
I don't think the Bush administration will ever be nimble or clever enough to pull the rabbit out of the hat on this one. I think a more reflective, thoughtful president might. If we are not willing to commit more troops to Iraq, then we have no chance of prevailing militarily. So the only other option I see is a radical change in our foreign policy towards the region.
Posted by: Eric at September 8, 2006 07:41 PMEric,
what gives you this impression?
who might be a more "reflective,thoughtful President?"
Posted by: evolo at September 8, 2006 08:05 PMhow bout flav for prez?
Posted by: nick at September 9, 2006 03:35 PMCan't we just let the sunni's and shite's kill each other and sell them both the weapons. Helps our economy and rids the world of islamic facists. A real win-win situation.
Posted by: Steve at September 9, 2006 09:07 PMhttp://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/16/122915.shtml
RC, (you sure you were not a "Hollywood" Marine?;)the above link shows that there were some reports uncovered that spell out some of the Al Queda links with saddam. The report you are refering to with your link is based on "PRE WAR" intel. The report focused on PRE war information and was trying to prove the President "LIED." Although, as your link pointed out, they could not come out and state for a fact that the Preisdent lied, they had to stop at the word "misleading" the public. Funny, huh? So, we should all let the dust settle. Then, pop off.
I did not call for this war. I do know that when our soldiers placed "feet on the ground" my thoughts and spirit is and was for their safe return. I do not like to see a divided country on this war. I want people to speak their minds, just, don't do it where the media will play it up and give aid and comfort to our enemies! Just like Jane and John Kerry did during the Veitnam war. You can use your freedoms in such a manner as to get your point across and yet, still keep the enemy from getting wind of it. Use the mail, email, fax and phone calls. You can also walk into your elected officials office for a face to face. Then, you win, those opposed to the war who say they are doing it for our troops win and our soldiers win!
Evolo;
Hmm.. I worked with some 7th group dudes in OEF in the helmand area.
Evolo,
yeah, I got a nice balck sweat shirt "hoodie" from SOT at Mott lake back in April,1986.
Posted by: Onefrozen Migra at September 10, 2006 02:20 AMHollywood Marine, heh, you're funny. Don't tell me how to use my freedoms dude. This war isn't going to be lost by our boys over there. Place responsiblity where it belongs. The leaders and planners.
So we can talk about where we were stationed, what we did, the cool gear we have, the challenge coins, the PUC's NUC's, NAM's and CAR's etc. and everything else we have earned. But we have also earned the right to speak our minds however we choose. Yes however.
I don't care much for John Kerry but he spoke out on a war that was wrong. History has already decided that. Does might make right?
You said so yourself, if "everyone is thinking alike - someone's not thinking." I agree. We brought 75,000 when there should have been 300,000. Where do I get my numbers? The Naval War College teaches the basics of holding what you fight for, counterinsurgency tactics. Tactics as old as the hills, and yet, we followed none. But we are there now.
To pull back now would be folly I believe.
Redeployment to Camp Lejuene is surrender, but to pull back to the border towns and armed super bases in Iraq is not. That's what I mean by the periphery.
But we have to call a spade a spade and the planning errors and omissions have unecessarily costs us our blood and treasure. Something aint right my friend when the planners do not listen to the warriors. Even every good junior leader knows when to speak up when thier officers are wrong. Be bold and proficient enough to gain their confidence, but for God's sake, speak up to help redirect the war effort. That's what I am doing and what others are and should be doing.
The administration had proven that it will change course when enough political pressure is exerted. Sadly, they are political first and foremost. In this one case at least, the political pressure to redeploy would be the right strategy. I wouldn't be calling for it if it wasn't. It will refocus our efforts from the diffusion it is now, to laser-like focus. From there we can map out a way to kill with better precision, and if necessary, reinsert with strategic, operational,and tactical cohesion, which is missing right now. This is the MAGTF way.
People will be writing about what went wrong with this war for generations to come if we do not fix this situation before it gets out of hand even more. Every rule has been broken. Just to say that this is not like any war we have ever fought does not make it so. It is like the insurgencies we have fought in every decade, every generation from the Cacos to the Russians fighting the mujahedeen in Afghanistan. We are fighting true believers in an assymetrical battlefield. The population is ambivalent, or in most cases, antagonistic to us. A majority thinks it okay to kill us. Why: we did not preserve order after the invasion because of inadequate troop numbers - something the admin planners were warned about by the Generals. One General was dismissed after speaking up. I agree with you, the stakes are too high to be messing around. But we will not lose because a citizen practices the very freedom that we provide. It is because of the planning and the stubborn attitudes that keep our leaders from following and acting on our after action reports.
Not every cowboy thinks alike my friend. I want the Philly readers and whoever else looks at this to know that to speak out, especially in times of war, is the best of freedom. The solution is not to shut up those that see something wrong and want to fix it, it is to fix the policy and the leaders who make it.
And in that effort I will proudly enlist. American is the best country for a reason. We fight the good fights and fight them well. To win, with honor. Gitmo, secret CIA torture camps, suspension of habeus corpus, and all the little peices that eat at the heart of us: the righteous warriors, do more damage to our souls than any letter to the editors, veterans speeches before Congress, and any discussion and criticism to the SOT's of Bush's War. As long as he does not change the course to win, it will always be his war. My hope is that he starts to listen to all of us, think with a militarily strategic mind instead of a politically strategic mind. And it looks like it will take political pressure to do this. Then, my friend, it will be Our war. Until then it is W's War I, not World War III.
Posted by: RC aka dude aka backseat driver at September 10, 2006 09:40 AMHow can we have a fruitful debate about Iraq if one side is going to claim that any kind of public criticism is tantamount to giving aid and comfort to our enemies? It is a specious argument at best. We are not a unilateral country. We are a vigorous democracy, and democracy is served best by an involved electorate, a free press, and informed debate. If the day ever comes when we no longer debate, when our democracy has become an imperial presidency, THAT is when our enemies will take comfort.
From the posts on just this one topic, it is clear that even members of our own military are questioning our present military "strategy" in Iraq.
Many people use the word "war" when they describe our military campaign in Iraq. I think we won the "war" in Iraq when we overthrew the government of Saddam Hussein. Since then it has been a military occupation. Bush has stated that we'll leave as soon as Iraq is ready to govern itself and maintain its own security. Are we making significant progress towards that end?
Then there is the larger question. Have we accomplished anything significant in Iraq, other than ousting Hussein? Have we increased or diminished our influence in the region? Will democracy survive in Iraq? Will it spread throughout the region?
We have seen widespread participation in elections in Iraq, despite threats and efforts by dissenters to discourage turnout. As encouraging as this is, democracy will not survive if the government cannot maintain law and order.
I have opposed this military adventure since Bush first threatened it. I continue to oppose it. But I cannot in good conscience ask that our troops be brought home simply because things aren't going well. We owe it to the people of Iraq, and to our military, to fix the mess we have made. I wish I had the answer on how to do that. RC's ideas sound interesting. Bringing in new leadership is definitely needed. We're never going to be able to leave Iraq by "staying the course."
Posted by: Eric at September 10, 2006 07:11 PMHey OFM-
"I would like to see Bill O'reilly, Hanity, Flavia, Comes and maybe a news anchor or two on a panel and have a real debate. No prescreening of questions, no time limits and a buzzer that can be sounded if the person is trying to dodge the question. Make them earn the positions. Why do we just give it to them cause they are in "our" party?"
What if it involves the War? Can they still speak their minds? Who can speak and who cannot? What topics should be off limits or illegal in your view?
Also, are you in favor of the government regulating the press if it feels threatened?
Posted by: Some Questions OFM at September 10, 2006 10:38 PMhttp://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,213239,00.html
Would you like to see this happen in our country
(see above link)
if you thought, or your leaders thought it would be the best thing to do to help fight terrorism?
What will you say when it finally happens.
No one thought we'd ever torture.
No one thought we'd run secret prisons.
No one thought we would allow searches without warrants, or warrantless wiretaps.
But we do.
Where will we draw the line?
You've drawn the line with immigrations and the threat to our rights as citizens. A true patriot.
Where would you draw the line?
What will you say when it finally happens?
Some Questions OFM:
Why would the topic matter? If those people want the job, then, all topics (except those that are secret or deal with current mission of our troops) on or should be on the table. Every debate I have seen the questions were handed out in advance. Other debates allowed the people involved to wonder off course to a pre canned response on some other topic. Also, attacking the other person, is not an answer to a question. You can attack someone's actions or lack there of, just not the person themselves.
What if it involves the War?>>>>so what if it does?
Can they still speak their minds?>>>> Yes, why wouldn't they want to?
Who can speak and who cannot? Those who are debating can speak when it is their turn. Those asking the questions can ask them, then, each of the panel can ask questions in order.
What topics should be off limits or illegal in your view?>>>>> Like I said above, secret stuff, anything that deals with troop movements, locations and actions, etc...
Also, are you in favor of the government regulating the press if it feels threatened?>>>>>Like Clinton and this new movie? Well, if the media has pictures, film of troops at certain locations, then, YOU BET! If the media has information that is helpful to the Taliban, Al Qaeda, or any other enemy, and the story will allow the bad guys to obtain that information, then yes. They (the media) should delay the story until the info is no longer relevant. There was a story like this not too long ago where the current admin asked the press not to run the story. The press told them to kiss off, I believe. I will have to check on that. So, the answer is yes if it means saving the lives of our troops on the ground, in the air or on the seas. Yes, if the story will enable the enemy some vital information they would not be able to get otherwise.
Think of a Police situation where some bad guys are hold up in a bank. They need to know what is going on, where the police are (or aren't) and to see what is going on outside. So, they turn on the tv (if they had one). The media is outside with cameras choppers and reporters every where. So, should the police be allowed to ask or order the media not to film any movement, location or details of what is or isn't going on outside?
Posted by: Onefrozen Migra at September 11, 2006 03:11 AMWould you like to see this happen in our country "China Tightens Controls on Foreign Media"? Well, I would not mind Al Jazera being told to take a hike. But, I don't consider them a real media source. they are reporting nothing but what fits their agenda (much like the right says about the MSM and the left says about Fox :)
"if you thought, or your leaders thought it would be the best thing to do to help fight terrorism?"
The foreign media should have the same access that our media does. They should also have the same restrictions, though. Oh, I would not allow them to be emmbedded with our troops.
What will you say when it finally happens.>>>>I would have to say if the shoe fits. If they were reporting things that could cause even one of our troops to lose their lives, or any of the other security issues I stated earlier. I would say good. If they did it just to hide something, then, it would be wrong!
No one thought we'd ever torture.>>>Nobody thought that the MSM would run thousands of pictures and stories calling what happened at Abu Ghraib was "TORTURE!" So, who said we tortured anyone?
No one thought we'd run secret prisons.>>>> Huh? Who cares that we have seret prisons? So long as those prisons were known to our government and it was monitored and inspected by the host country and an inspector general type outfit. I am glad we got those 14 to talk. How many lives were saved? Maybe yours or a family member of yours?
No one thought we would allow searches without warrants, or warrantless wiretaps.>>>would those be the ones where people from known terroist states called or received calls from from the United States? If the people involved were calling or received calls from places that support, have or are knwon for being friendly with terrorists, then, yeah, they should be monitored. It makes sense. Now, if they just tapped everyone's phone, and then, tried to prosecute people for what they discovered (when that stuff had NOTHING to do with terrorism) then, I think it should and would be thrown out.
Where will we draw the line?>>>Where it makes sense to do so. Stacking prisoners into a pile, naked, is not torture, so draw the line. Keeping them from sleeping isn't torture either, so draw the line. Tapping a phone call to Pakistan, well, I would not draw the line there. If a person called South America or Mexico or some places in Europe, Russia, etc...I would draw the line. If the media had footage of how our troops defeat an enemy, then, it should not be shown. If they have footage of a troop beating a driver of a car who was just going to work, show it. Yet, show all footage, not just the beating (if there is any, remember Rodney king's.)
You've drawn the line with immigrations and the threat to our rights as citizens. A true patriot.>>>>Yeah, it isn't rocket science when it comes to illegal Aliens. You see, the minute they step over the border, they are criminals. the minute they overstay their visas, they are criminals. The minute they lie when entering, they are criminals. When those illegal aliens fail to register with the Selective services (knowingly) they are criminals. Yep.. real hard one.
What would I do? I would VOTE! That is why i do not go with just one party. I go with the best answer for AMERICA. I like to think of my party as "The America First party!" I vote. I write letters, I email, I use CONGRESS.ORG and have letters hand delivered. I make calls. Fax, and even visit. I make it known what I think. I make them state what they think! If they don't, I will not vote for them. If pro illegal aliens love criminals so much, change the laws. Don't support criminals. Vote.
Posted by: Onefrozen Migra at September 11, 2006 03:35 AMSo, who said we tortured anyone?
You sir, are a nut job.
It will be my pleasure to see your face when the truth finally sinks in to your brain.
Posted by: My pleasure to cancel out your vote at September 11, 2006 03:00 PMYeah, you seem to mask your aggressions and prejudices behind the veil of patriotism and fake sobriety. IMHO. Just seems fake to me.
Posted by: Rick at September 11, 2006 03:03 PMNice personal attacks. I am surprised the moderators allow such acts here on this site. Your mothers must be proud, eh?
>>>>>>>>Yeah, you seem to mask your aggressions and prejudices behind the veil of patriotism and fake sobriety. IMHO. Just seems fake to me.
Posted by: Rick at September 11, 2006 03:03 PM<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
How could you call me "prejudice" Cause I do not agree with open borders? cause I think illegal aliens are criminals?
If I were in control of this board, I would block your IP from ever posting here. Look in a mirror before you throw a stone, will ya?
Yeah, who says we tortured anyone? What do you call torture? Forcing someone to listen to the RED HOTs? Making them a bit chilly? Keeping them awake? Or, amybe you were upset that a female interviewed some wearing a thong and rubbing "red" liquid on a shirt? I wonder what you thought about the body of an American soldier being dragged through the streets of Somalia? Well, Sir, a good friend of mine from group did not even have enough body parts left to drag through the streets after the mob finished with him. Read Mike Durant's book "NIGHT STALKERS" and see how the pilot from BLACK HAWK DOWN fame was treated and the fate (the real true fate) of the two Delta soldiers who came down to help protect that crash site. How the mob treated them and their bodies.
Look, GORE lost. Sorry to have to be the one to tell you. Oh, so did Kerry. get over it and pick up the pieces and DEMAND your next candidate
has some answers and stands up and announces some of them. Do not just fall for the best Bush basher.
I guess I will have to start wearing my bullet proof vest while visting here.
http://www.phrusa.org/research/torture/abu_ghraib.html
PHYSICIANS for HUMAN RIGHTS, that is what that link above is to. Now, go and read all the links on that page concerning TORTURE. Then, please, let me know where the HUMAN RIGHT's DOCTORS even mention what is done to US Service men and women when and if captured or if their bodies are found on the battlefield? Where do they address the crimes of torture on civilians who are beheaded, burnt, chopped up and dragged? The rape? Where is the link that shows the ACLU's outrage against those who troture (real torture) of our troops?
Posted by: Onefrozen Migra at September 12, 2006 01:35 AMImmigration Policy and the War
There are three things that aren't discussed at the dinner table: Sex, Religion, and Politics.
What a boring meal that would be!
I just wanted to add my two cents to the discussion and then get back to work.
Growing up in Texas, I had always looked at the border as an imaginary line on a map across which people would go back and forth as they pleased. Much of Texas was built by immigrants, legal and illegal. But now we live in a post-NAFTA, post-9/11 world. Yes, there are other issues related to our neighbors to the north and south of us: labor and pay issues, assimilation issues, environmental concerns. But to focus on them now while basic laws of access created to protect us are not being enforced would be a mistake.
Like a house on fire - put out the fire first. At this point in our history, security should be our number one priority.
Yesterday, as I watched the 9/11 memorials, I remembered the concern I felt for my sister who worked across from the WTC on Church Street, and my other sister that would sometimes take the train that stopped under the WTC, grabbing a coffee and muffin. My concern now includes my newborn niece, Julia.
We can discuss and debate whether Iraq is the central war on terror along with the academics within ivy walls, pundits on their stage, and the vets and civilians among us. Maintaining respect for one another is key in this debate. To this national "dinner table", which is CH, we bring our lives and experiences, our fears and inspirations. We discuss and listen, sometimes vent, and hopefully learn in our own ways. It's a credit to CH for bringing these "tabasco sauce" issues to "the table" and to the commenters for taking the time out to speak out. Whatever we may say, I beleive that the security of our family is the most important issue for all of us, though we may disagree on the language, or the path to obtain it.
I hope that we do our research as time allows, follow our conscience and intellect, and remember that these issues may change with time, but we will always be part of the American Family.
Before I get back to work I just wanted to include a quote I saw that struck me because of its simplicity and it's mirror-like qualities. I try to think about this before I speak here or anywhere. I hope others might too.
"if we attempt to do things for others or for the world without deepening our own self-understanding, our own freedom, integrity, and capacity to love, we will not have anything to give to others. We will communicate nothing but our own obsessions, our aggressiveness, our ego-centered ambitions." Merton
Hopefully we be able to communicate more than our "obsessions, aggressiveness, and ego-centered ambitions" at our CH dinner table here and elsewhere.
I think we are on our way. For your sake, my sake, and for little baby Julia.
Posted by: Joe at September 12, 2006 10:44 AMI would just like to say that Joe makes a good point about respectful discourse and the safety of our families being our first priority.
Posted by: MADMEG at September 12, 2006 04:43 PMWow!!!! The guys here that have seen your recent picture of you in our stuff want you to know that we may just have a spot for you in our unit. You may even be getting a few invitations to our Marine Corps Ball!
I remember you once wrote:
"If the Marines ever have a division that talks its way out of jams then I might be worthy."
Can you say Public Affairs Officer? Yes, I know you can't find your way around in your own city, and some Marines I know happen to be directionally challenged, but that's why we invented GPS. Think about it.
Anyway, we love your military look and it is great to have a fan as outspoken as you are on issues that mean so much to us. You put your money where you mouth is and live your values, which is what we try to do everyday when we lace up our boots and go to work. You and people who care about this great country have more in common with us than you think. It takes a country to defend a country and you are certainly doing your part by speaking, writing, and doing as much as you can to support the troops. And you can run like a champ.
Semper Fidelis,
Sgt D
4th MAW