advertisement
Forums

 

AAPL stock: Click Here

You are currently viewing the 'Friendly' Political Ranting forum
A message from the troops?
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: January 22, 2006 08:30PM
I found two sites with the same letter - maybe neither actually posted by a serviceman.
(links to graphic photos at these pages)

[groups.msn.com]

[www.deskpro.com]

Them camel jockey graphic artistes spell better than the "troops" that wrote the letter. But then under Saddam Iraqis were the best educated Arabs, so it doesn't surprise me that some of them write English better than a high school grad from West Virginia.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: A message from the troops?
Posted by: hal
Date: January 22, 2006 08:52PM
it's called copy & paste forum posting. Surely you know something about that...
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: A message from the troops?
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: January 22, 2006 08:58PM
hal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> it's called copy & paste forum posting. Surely
> you know something about that...

Oh, I know how to copy & paste. I was just trying to determine the original source. Was it really written by our troops, or by resistance fighters trying to demoralize them, or just somebody jacking around? If you know how to determine the source of the pics that would be useful, too. I haven't seen them before, and I've done a lot of searches for anti-war poster material.

Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: A message from the troops?
Posted by: spearmint
Date: January 22, 2006 09:26PM
I guess the fact the Army has the highest reenlistment rate ever and the Marines exceeded their enlistment quota every month last year can be ignored because of a most likely bogus letter. It is an insult to underestimate the heroism and patriotism of the best. Cindy's son reenlisted with the assurances he would go back. A free society produces the best warriors obviously.

The 1st Air Cav took a big portion of the heavy lifting in Vietnam for the Army and that was real hell on earth and nobody wrote a letter like this fraud. Most of them were drafted too. I attribute most of knee jerk reaction to this war to a lack of a draft. It just does not touch home what the military is all about and for.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: A message from the troops?
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: January 22, 2006 09:39PM
spearmint Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I guess the fact the Army has the highest
> reenlistment rate ever and the Marines exceeded
> their enlistment quota every month last year can
> be ignored....

Well, it would be helpful if you provided a source for that statement, otherwise, yes, I will ignore it.

[www.washingtonpost.com]

I suppose $40,000 enlistment bonuses and raising the age of enlistment limit to 40 helps in an economy where minimum wage doesn't equate to cost of living. Lowering the educational requirements, and recruiting from the third world & promising citizenship helps too, no doubt.

Recruiters are often liars and young people are often gullible.




Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: A message from the troops?
Posted by: spearmint
Date: January 22, 2006 10:05PM
From the Stanford Progressive:
The U.S. Army's recruitment rates have been falling, and the Army is clinging to very high retention and reenlistment rates to make up for it, avoiding a shortage crisis that way. If those numbers begin falling in the near future, however, we are headed for trouble. Assuming that Iraqi Security Forces are being trained as efficiently as possible, the solution may have to come from abroad. With waning support from allies in Iraq (around 12% of coalition troops are from outside the U.S.), we must look for additional help in Afghanistan, where international help is a bit easier to come by, and the Horn of Africa, where help is desperately needed. Fortunately, along with the announcement of troop cuts in Iraq came news of troop cuts in Afghanistan, where NATO has agreed to expand its mission.
[progressive.stanford.edu]

Sufficient? How about seven straight months of the Army meeting or exceeding its recruitment goal? From the UK

[www.guardian.co.uk]

How about exceeding retention goals for the year? This article says you can quit worrying about being drafted thanks to the patriotism of others.

[usgovinfo.about.com]

Of course elitist lefties refuse to believe what does not meet with their view of things dictated by knowing what is best for us. You can take your hands off your ears now and quit yelling "I can't hear you!"
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: A message from the troops?
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: January 22, 2006 10:28PM
Thanks for the links, mint. I apologize for questioning your veracity about the recruiter's success, but not for questioning the cause they promote to gullible and naive youth while promising big bucks to kill innocent people who never threatened us nor had the capability to do so. Some things just aren't worth a shiny new 4x4.

I agree with John Murtha, as referenced in your first link:
"... the presence of U.S troops is the very reason for the constant insurgency, a "catalyst for violence" Murtha called it. Remove the troops, and we'll remove the insurgency."

Your statement "How about seven straight months of the Army meeting or exceeding its recruitment goal?" seems to ignore the fact that they lowered their quotas to meet them. The second linked article also clearly states:

"Army officials have said they expect this to be an extremely difficult year for recruiting, in part because of the Iraq war. Last year, the service fell 6,600 troops short of its goal of 80,000."

The third article is a usgovinfo propaganda piece, as far as I can tell. Lowering goals to meet them is not a good plan. I'm not anti-military. There are bad people in the world, and we need a strong defense. Unfortunately our military has been used since WW2 for offense, and we've overthrown democracies in Guatemala, Iran, and Chile and supported vicious dictatorships in many more countries. Saddam was one of those evil dictators, but some of our MFN trading partners, such as China, have worse human rights records, according to Human Rights Watch.

We differ in what is best for our country to support evidently.


Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: A message from the troops?
Posted by: spearmint
Date: January 22, 2006 11:02PM
Sorry nothing seems to convince you about the facts you do not like. Government Propaganda? Is the census propaganda because it was made by the government? I rarely accuse people of dishonesty so out of courtesy I will not ask for footnotes on your statement of lowering quotas. Reenlistment being high is an indication of disillusionment on the part of the troops? As a veteran (I was drafted though) I resent the idea of people choosing the military as young and naive and then disappointed. What accounts for the high reenlistment then?

I do not concern myself about what is best for the country that is the job of the left. I am a very interested observer with strong personal opinions. It is the job of the electorate to pick and choose not the self appointed master planners with utopia on their mind.

Murtha is enjoying the limelight he has created for himself but is undermining the troops. He will go back to his career long anonymity he has in his Congressional career. 15 minutes and counting for him. I shake my head when heroes (this does not include Kerry)do stuff like this. This is Hanoi Jane's job.

Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: A message from the troops?
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: January 22, 2006 11:56PM
spearmint Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sorry nothing seems to convince you about the
> facts you do not like. Government Propaganda? Is
> the census propaganda because it was made by the
> government?

With cronies being appointed to all sorts of gov't positions rather than actually experienced folks ("You're doing a great job, Brownie!") I've learned to distrust all levels of government.

I rarely accuse people of dishonesty
> so out of courtesy I will not ask for footnotes on
> your statement of lowering quotas.

I misread the article. What I should have said is "they lowered their standards to meet their quotas."

Reenlistment
> being high is an indication of disillusionment on
> the part of the troops?

These kids are being dazzled by reup and signing bonuses of up to $40k. Compared to flipping burgers the army looks very good, and young guys think they're invulnerable.
[www.commondreams.org]

> I do not concern myself about what is best for the
> country that is the job of the left.

There's a name for those concerned about what is best for their country. They're called "patriots."





Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: A message from the troops?
Posted by: spearmint
Date: January 23, 2006 12:18AM

[/i]There's a name for those concerned about what is best for their country. They're called "patriots.[/i]

Sorry that does not make any sense to me. That would make raving Communists who want a different kind of government patriots, as also would militant vegans be defined. Benedict Arnold sincerely believed America would be better off under British rule making him a patriot also under that definition.

Dictionary.com Merriam Webster: One who loves, supports, and defends one's country."

I sincerely doubt the majority of those who say they support the troops and vocally want us out immediately in disgrace have to choose between the two because the latter reinforces the resolve of our enemies who in this case do want victory but all of us unbelievers dead and depresses the brave ones.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: A message from the troops?
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: January 23, 2006 08:10AM
spearmint Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>That
> would make raving Communists who want a different
> kind of government patriots, as also would
> militant vegans be defined.

You are aware that Christ's apostles were communists, aren't you? In the Book of Acts it says "they sold their possessions, held them in common, and gave to each other as they had need." So if W was really a Christian he'd not be cutting social programs. But I digress. One cannot "love, support and defend one's country" when he sees its leaders, (selected by the narrowest of a simple majority by means highly suspect of fraud) destroying it, and remain silent.

Benedict Arnold
> sincerely believed America would be better off
> under British rule making him a patriot also under
> that definition.

Benedict Arnold sold out his country for 2O,OOO sterling (about $1 million today) because he was ambitious and self-promoting. I think you'll find it hard to find any other American to support your contention that he loved his country more than he loved himself.
[earlyamerica.com]

> I sincerely doubt the majority of those who say
> they support the troops and vocally want us out
> immediately in disgrace have to choose between the
> two because the latter reinforces the resolve of
> our enemies who in this case do want victory but
> all of us unbelievers dead and depresses the brave
> ones.

Fighting for lies IS dishonorable. It is those who have fabricated the evidence of a threat against the United States and sent honorable men and women to their deaths needlessly and in pursuit of ulterior motives that have disgraced our nation, making it feared and a pariah amongst the world community, having squandered what respect and honor others at one time afforded us.

There were no WMD - two highly funded teams of inspectors have scoured the country, and despite Rumsfeld's assertion that we "know where they are," NOTHING has been found, barring a few discarded artillery shells with residue. Cheney stated flatly that it was a "FACT" that Iraq had reconstituted nuclear weapons. It was ALL lies, mint. The disgrace comes from continuing to demand our soldiers forfeit their lives and sacred honor supporting these lies. The ONLY honor we can retain is in being big enough to admit our mistake, apologize, withdraw, and make amends and reparations.

Islam is not a monolithic block of Christian haters as you seem to imply, and many disagree with bin Laden's tactics and aims. It is becoming a religious war because decent, peace-loving Muslims are offended by the images and stories of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, and our indiscriminate bombing of civilians, an act of terrorism we claim to utilize to defeat terrorism.

We cannot fight fire with fire unless we intentionally want to set the world ablaze. To some of Bush's fundamentalist followers (imho as crazy and bloodthirsty as any jihad inspired suicide bomber) this conflagration is a GOOD thing, since it may lead to Armageddon, and hence Jesus's return. I do not agree with this vicious vision and I hope you don't either.

My point is there are sick and violent people on both sides, (e.g. Eric Rudolph) but 9/11 was retribution for our support for oppressive regimes in Muslim countries that have killed tens of thousands of innocents opposed to our friends murderous ways. This is why Saudi patriots were willing to give up their lives to strike at us, not because they hate our freedom, as W claims, but because we support tyrants. Can you see the contradiction between our words and actions?

The real disgrace comes from the hypocrisy and lies that are masked by propaganda about "spreading democracy" and "Operation Iraqi Freedom," when the result of our interference in Iraq has been the empowerment of Iran-sympathizing fundamentalists who have set back the cause of freedom (by our standards) by centuries. Ask the women of Iraq if they feel liberated. The real winner of the war were the Iranian mullahs, so if you feel fighting to unite and empower the radical Islamists is an honorable cause for American troops to kill and die for we will just have to agree to disagree.




Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: A message from the troops?
Posted by: incognegro
Date: January 26, 2006 01:01PM
spearmint Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I do not concern myself about what is best for the
> country that is the job of the left.

HUH?!?

so are you saying that the LEFT is running the USA via the WHITE HOUSE? because all i hear from the puppet in there is "what's best for the country."



Options:  Reply • Quote
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 211
Record Number of Users: 186 on February 20, 2020
Record Number of Guests: 5122 on October 03, 2020