A U.S. Army Soldier gets a lift from an Iraqi boy and his mule on Route Douglas in the Jamilla Market in the Sadr City district of Baghdad, June 9, 2008. (U.S. Army photo by Tech. Sgt. Cohen A. Young, MNF-Iraq)
Really-- What more can you say?
US Soldiers- Smiling children- Safe Streets- Sadr City
Sensational.
Thanks Joshua!
Meanwhile in Basra... Medical Engagement Team brings care, supplies
And, don't miss Matt Sanchez writing about-- "The Iraq War Is Winding Down"
That's what our boys and girls do -- bring peace and stability when there was none, only lies.
ReplyDeleteGod bless our troops and the Iraqi people.
Steve B.
++
ReplyDeletethat's one picture truly worth a thousand words!! (thumbsup)
God Bless Soldiers everywhere for putting THEIR
lives on the line to protect us ALL from terrorism!
==
Thank you GP for keeping the left honest! And thanks to Tech Sgt. Cohen A. Young! And to the troops on route Douglas for their mercy and patience with Iraqis. A street named after a fallen buddy I imagine. They've made unbelievable sacrifices to set others free.
ReplyDeleteMay God protect and keep them safe. And may the Lord keep Obama from wrecking all the progress in the future.
Look at the one Iraqi teenager sitting, turned around on the right side. He has a big ole grin! :) hope, change, a new Iraq.
Ha! Great picture by Sgt Cohen. It really captures a wonderful moment of change taking place.
Why? Why are he and his buddies all happy? Why is the man in front of the donkey smiling? Why are all the Iraqis gathered around our troops? Because they see change and hope! Not the empty, false rhetoric of another appeaser to tyrants. Why are our soldiers quite comfortable with them?
Can it be that real change is taking place? That real hope is on the horizon for all Iraqis?
Maybe these children know what Obama blind messiah does not know. They are experiencing freedom for the first time and Americans are responsible for this new found liberty. They are now protected from the radical Iranian backed Sadr thugs. Protected from the madman in Iran. The same man that Obama would kiss his thug hand.
This battle front in Sadr City is one of the most strategic in Iraq and the larger war of terrorism. This is the final wrap up for final security of Baghdad. And the Iraqis are fully involved in solving problems now. Along with Iraqi Army, ISOF, INP, IP and Iraqi government moving into Sadr City, we will gain even more new allies in the war against terrorist. These kids will come to love America, just like so many others that longed to move here.
For the first time Western people are being seen by Iraqi people up front and close. They now see that Americans are not evil. That in fact Americans are funny, friendly, caring people that are there to help them rebuild their lives after 35 years of Hell on earth.
Hell under a man who supported Russians being in his nation, who loved Stalin and who hated America. This is what happens when a nation of hope moves into a nation of despair where the former Communist Soviet Union had special priveledges.
That huge wide grin by a young Iraqi boy is an emotional ticker tape parade. One that has been repeated all over Iraq. It is the result of the Red, White and Blue shining light into the darkness.
It is the result of Americans that John "Lurch" Kerry insulted as not intelligent. These young adults are winning wars, winning peace, winning lives saved, winning against propaganda abroad and at home from the left.
These kids get it. They know who their friends are and with it smiles of freedom. The Purple Fingers of true Hope in Iraq continue to march forward as Iraqis voted for true Change.
Obama, who does not care about Iraqis will send them back to death and destruction all to satisfy his and the Democrat's greedy power grab.
If these kids only knew that Obama would roll them back into hell under tyrants, they'd be protesting against Obama's candidacy and cheering for McCain to win.
BG,
ReplyDeleteSo true. That big smile reminds me of kids in America.
We know our enemies are not the Iraqi people, but the tyrants who control them, control their media, brainwash them. This is why Obama the blind messiah cannot do any good in talking to enemy leaders. He will have no impact at all except for empty platitudes and false promises.
Meanwhile the people suffer thru hell in Gaza, Sudan, Iran, Yemen, Zimbabwe, Libya, and so many other places where tyrants rule. Eliminate the tyrannical leaders that brainwash their people with hatred of Jews and Israel, and you free the people from darkness.
But Obama blames America. How can any sane person support him?
Dave in NYC? Do you have a reasonable answer for supporting Obama anymore?
@BG
ReplyDeleteNot really. At least not without context and eviorment.
In this instance it's powerful photo after series of articles and photos claiming the same thing. So it's good ilustration of real situation. However it's not a big problem to make different kind of photos...
++
ReplyDeleteJoshua..
i get a real kick out the kid marching next to the soldier going the other way.. what is it they say, imitation is the best form of flattery.. oh yeah!!
btw.. i don't believe too many people have taken note of how different life for the Iraqis were outside of Baghdad proper (not their fault if the "out of sight out of mind" MSM didn't/ doesn't report it)..
Hussein had no limits as to how far he'd go to portray Iraq as being one huge thriving metropolis for public consumption.. reality is: the living (and i say that loosely) conditions for approx 95% of those outside of Baghdad proper was quite to the contrary.. they lived in squalor.. little to no electricity, many with no running water, sewage strewn streets, dirt roads, no hospitals or schools, etc.. more or less impoverished to the max on all fronts other than their brainwashed population.. :(
Godspeed to them, free at last!!
==
++
ReplyDeletePeterus @ 9:31 AM..
picture this: get over yourself!!
==
If we really wanted to win their hearts, we'd help the locals open a concrete and asphalt plant, employing all the locals and pave the roads...
ReplyDeleteThen build a sewer system....
++
ReplyDeletebryan @ 10:06 AM..
concrete plant.. check!!
asphalt plant: check!!
employing all the locals and pave the roads: check!!
Then build a sewer system: check!!
all that & lots more has been & is
being done all throughout Iraq..
problem was/ is..
you have to get into & secure the area
in order to build up the area: check!!
==
++
ReplyDeleteHT : Anonymous via Talisman Gate
==
The happy kid riding on the cart looks kind of like Dr. Sanjay Gupta from CNN. Any idea if he was/is in the area?
ReplyDelete"problem was/ is.."...
ReplyDeleteGetting Bryan to pay for it?
++
ReplyDeletejuandos..
many of the projects are being financed by the GOI now.. people really need to stop reading the MSM headlines & cancel their cable!!
==
Another significant breakthru for peace in Iraq. A major ceasefire with over 500 Iraqis putting down their weapons, turning over caches, and returning to society. This is essentially a rejection of al Qaeda and Iranian funded terrorist. American soldiers and Iraqi Army have the enemy on the run all over Iraq.
ReplyDelete"The mass reconciliation here marks a turning point for the Balad area, in terms of these men's realization that it is impossible to further their cause by means of violence,” he said. “Instead, as we approach possible elections in the fall, they are choosing, as one reconciliation leader called, 'the war of the purple fingers' by embracing the power of the vote to advance their part in democracy."
The War of the Purple Fingers!
Smiles... Iraqis putting down AK47's and giving Al Qaeda and Iranian funded militias the purple finger.
Ha!
As more fully VETTED Iraqi units deploy across Iraq, logistics pick up, operating independently and eliminating enemy fighters own their own, the Iraqi economy is heating up. It will be a powerhouse in a few short years as they open their country up to free market opportunities.
By the time November rolls around Iraq will be established as a success on the way to a new and bright future. Even though it appears fragile, most Iraqis realise the great opportunity now ahead of them. It will not be perfect. Neither was America after 1776. It took 10 years before our nation fully got its house in order.
Our forces will need to maintain sufficient force of airpower, training, logistics and civilian PRTs, plus ethics, government training. I suspect more draw downs beginning in August after Petraeus completes his review. A trickle effect downward as over 500 thousand Iraqis protect and rebuild their nation.
The darkness of Saddam's hell in baghdad is over. Thanks to our soldiers and other coalition forces from around the world. The Awakening continues.
Now, if we can get the Americans to awaken and take their government back from a bunch of socialist, marxist corruptocrats.
++
ReplyDeleteJoshua @ 1:04 PM..
thank you!! (thumbsup)
and hope you don't mind that i posted this link & an excerpt (with MNF link) from your post @ ITM.. :)
WAY TO GO IRAQ!!
==
bryan said...
ReplyDeleteIf we really wanted to win their hearts, we'd help the locals open a concrete and asphalt plant, employing all the locals and pave the roads...
Then build a sewer system...
From Iraq by the Numbers.
TELEPHONES:
_Prewar land lines: 833,000.
_April 4, 2008: 1,360,000.
_Prewar cell phones: 80,000.
_April 30, 2008: More than 12 million.
WATER:
_Prewar: 12.9 million people had potable water.
_April 30, 2008: 20.9 million people have potable water.
SEWERAGE:
_Prewar: 6.2 million people served.
_April 30, 2008: 11.3 million people served.
(Note: The number for sewerage has not changed in the newest SIGIR report.)
Before putting finger to keyboard, please know what you are writing about. It would really help how others perceive you.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete++
ReplyDeletere: bg @ 1:45 PM..
Gringo @ 1:27 PM..
thanks!! :)
(also posted @ ITM)
==
Oh my god. If that photo is an example of the state of the country then the United States is going to be there for a hundred years repairing all the damage. Good luck with that. What happened to the surplus Clinton left behind?
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile the people suffer thru hell in Gaza, Sudan, Iran, Yemen, Zimbabwe, Libya, and so many other places where tyrants rule. Eliminate the tyrannical leaders that brainwash their people with hatred of Jews and Israel, and you free the people from darkness.
ReplyDeleteBut Obama blames America. How can any sane person support him?
Dave in NYC? Do you have a reasonable answer for supporting Obama anymore?
This picture is great, and if we are really as close to bringing security to Iraq and ending the war there as all of you claim, that is great news.
However, I would like to understand how much longer you think it will take before the current number of U.S. troops is no longer needed in order to maintain security in Iraq. I have been reading this blog for about 2.5 years, and have been hearing about security transfers and the imminent end of the war for about as long. Gatewaypundit has been touting the low number of US troop fatalities relative to other wars since there had only been 2,400. Since then, an additional 1,700 have been killed.
If the situation on the ground is so fragile that we need to maintain these troop levels in Iraq for another 2.5 years in order to continue making progress, I would be hesitant to claim that the war is close to ending. I don't think any of us really knows at this point.
I don't think I 100% support either candidate's position the Iraq war or foreign policy in general. Iraq is obviously important, but as you said there's also "Gaza, Sudan, Iran, Yemen, Zimbabwe, Libya, and so many other places where tyrants rule." What do you think should be done in all of those countries? What do you think a McCain would do and what do you think Obama would do if each became President? Obviously invading them all isn't an option.
Peterus,
ReplyDeleteSorry you lost or are losing your faith? Might I say that your anime pic says a thousand words about you? Without any context? The interpretation of the Sadr city pic, or your pic depends upon the audience member of course and context, but that is nothing new. But I say it can stand alone as well as an important point worth a thousand words.
At your age did you ever have real faith? I never did. Though I thought of myself as some minimal form of Christian fading away as I left for college. College was fun with the philosophical discussions by largely pretentious professors who very few had done little in life but lecture young minds. Not to bash all professors. Certainly many have done much. But many direct students steps away from faith as one of their great thrills in life.
Many people leave college and never grow up. These people today are known as democrats. Many still do not know that Darwin is Dead. But the greatest minds now have debunked the major parts of his theory, namely RM & NS.
They would critique BG much like you. But your critique is made to fast without thinking clearly of the clashes in time and culture. The picture itself stands alone. Go review Europe before and after Allied forces freed France for example. Look before and after pictures. Tell us if the preponderance of smiles were for the Nazis or Americans in the thousands of pictures taken. What does the smile indicate?
While it is true you can find a picture of an Iraqi smiling with some terrorist dressed up in Jihad clothing. The picture shows an American. This is the first big clue that it is an outstanding moment in history of Sadr City and for Baghdad.
Every picture has some context to know a bigger picture. A soldier kissing a young lady in France has context. But, just like your anime pic, without the context to describe the emotions some interpretations may be wrong. The viewer may say more about your anime than the street scene in Iraq. But then again, they may just say, "What a repressed personality"
If you cannot glean a thousand words from the Iraqi pic, maybe it is due to your loss of faith? It is always good to question all sides. But hope is not based on appeasement. The American soldier is in a city that has long been hostile to them and supposedly supportive ONLY of Iranian trained puppet master Sadr and his thugs.
Look again at the picture. What does it tell you about the factual context? Does it not contain its own context? At least more than your anime? Are they angry at our troops? Are they throwing rocks? Are they carrying signs for Sadr? For Iran? For Khomeini? Why not?
Or, is the gloom and despair seen in your anime pic an outward glimpse of how you project your feelings onto the world, or America in Iraq? That is my partial intrepretation of your anime. A sad, rather angry, yet determined and intelligent young man.
Whereas the boy is about to chuckle with laughter with a wide open mouth. The yolk of the world is at this moment in time lifted off his shoulders for a great big laugh. And the soldier is having fun to catching a ride. The streets are filthy from the Iranian backed Sadr thugs, yet in these children they are not afraid of the so-called "cold-blooded killers" that the far left tries to paint our soldiers as. Now do you understand how deep the understanding of this one single picture can mean to anyone that is allowed to see it?
But will our MSM show it? Do you think anyone will print or put this picture up in a major leftist media outlet? Why not? Because it is ordinary?
Think again. This picture does speak a thousand words. It speaks against the leftist mantra of demonizing our troops and it speaks of the filth that Iranian puppets left Sadr City in, with sewage and disease everywhere, and it speaks directly to the hope for real change now that the Sadr thugs are being replaced with American forces helping Iraqis.
The truth is everywhere in that picture screaming at you. You just refuse to recognize it on grounds of a superficial split second look.
Even without context you can ascertain these facts of war and liberty. The soldiers are not Arabs or Persians. They are caucasions mainly and are foreigners in a foreign land on a donkey cart with sophisticated technology about 4000 years in advance of that ride. It is like if Star Trek were to land in NYC today. And kids would run up to Spock and Kirk.
That picture summed up my writing easily and as you can see, I can bring up many other great angles from the future to the past and civilizations coming together. You may disagree. But the truth is you can see this with or without articles or other pictures. You know there has been a fight and the victor is now accepted not as an enemy, but a friend. And laughter is a good indication of their reaction and the future for both sides. They're not staring madly, or with eyes down in fear.
I see it as a great change coming into Sadr City. And Guess what? Sgt. Cohen did too, or he would not have caught the moment. Like you, he would've considered it bland like any other pic of a brick wall. Something tells me by your anime pic, you might find a brick wall pic more interesting than the life bursting forth in these young childrens eyes and smiles accepting foreign soldiers so safely in their midst.
Maybe, maybe not?
I hope you get your faith back. Faith is patience for hope in things yet unseen. Faith is being restored in Iraq today for things yet unseen. Faith is established again by defeating the darkness fed into the mind that oppresses and stifles the creativity that hope unleashes from the chains of despair. The truth is you have Faith and Hope even if you do not want it. Faith can be directed in negative outcomes and Hope tied up due to trauma or years of listening to only one sided views. You haven't lost your faith. You just misplaced it. Look around in one of those 3 billion nano structures inside of you, that pumps your heart, gives you abtract thinking and says, you are fearfully and wonderfully made.
We are not a happy accident. No matter what blind followers may think in acceptance of atheist or some elite scientist. We have reason and purpose for being. We are on the precipice of a new paradigm only just beginning at a most exciting time in our lives.
Where scientist using a new paradigm for progress is thowing away the shackles of Darwin that have misled them for 150 years.
Inside us, the plants surrounding us, the sun, the seawater sits the answers we've only begun to unravel that will eliminate the need for oil and will rapidly advance our healing thru the unlocking of the genetic CODE for RNA and DNA. It is more complex, more redundant, more designed than anything our best can do. This is why people like Richard Dawkins must admit aliens may have seeded earth with the information inside of us. He cannot account for it and thus looks more the fool than those of us he mocks.
All the best Peterus, don't lose faith, seek still the way, the truth and the light.
Dave in NYC,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the response. Quick answer is I do not have all the answers :)
I have to respond to you later tonight or tomorrow morning.
And a question to you for the meantime until I get back.
Was the lives of 400,000 Americans worth it for WWII? How about 300,000 lives for freeing the slaves during the civil war? None of these are easy, are they?
Dave in NYC,
ReplyDeleteOhhhh, shoot. Forgot. Were the lives lost in the wars of Israel worth it when David defeated Saul? Or Gideon defeated the Midians? Or Moses.... well, you get the picture.
By that kind of logic, we can almost say no to every situation. Problem is status quo has been to leave the tyrants alone. They then build up irrational hatred and fear against outsiders. They oppress, torture, imprison any who dare stand against them.
I'm not advocating a rampaging crusade. But I am advocating for very tough stances from here on out. The reason being is if Iran were to ever develop the bomb you can only imagine what will happen. Truth is Pakistan is a danger.
This war has lasted 1400 years and it will not stop simply because we hope for peace or because one man comes along. Obama cannot solve these problems. He has no military experience. We do not need a dove at this point in history. Not while our troops are fighting around the globe in more places than we're told. Iraq and Afghanistan are the well known war zones. There are more.
It sounds like we can have a reasonable discussion. I'll get back later!
++
ReplyDeleteAnonymous @ 4:05 PM..
get a grip.. we are there to fight the terrorists, secure territories, train & advise Iraqis.. the IRAQIS can & are rebuilding their own country, not to mention dying for it!!
==
++
ReplyDeletebtw Anonymous @ 4:05 PM..
we did not cause all the damage, those are the majority of Iraqis 'normal' living conditions..
Iraq was an utter cesspool outside of
Baghdad proper & the Kurdish North..
==
++
ReplyDeletenews/stories & pix from Iraq
news/stories in pix from Iraq
Enjoy!! :)
==
Dave in NYC said...
ReplyDeleteHowever, I would like to understand how much longer you think it will take before the current number of U.S. troops is no longer needed in order to maintain security in Iraq.
Here's your answer: In July, the last of the surge brigades will come home. After that, General Petraeus is going to take a 45-day pause to see if security holds. If it does, he will start bringing more brigades home, taking a similar pause between groups to make sure it's the right thing to do. When he gets to the level agreed upon in the SOFA, that's where it will stay. Good enough?
Was the lives of 400,000 Americans worth it for WWII? How about 300,000 lives for freeing the slaves during the civil war? None of these are easy, are they?
ReplyDeleteActually, I think they are easy. Yes and yes.
But those answers are in retrospect, knowing that we won the wars. Were the 58,000 American lives lost in Vietnam worth it? Iraq isn't Vietnam, but it isn't World War II or the Civil War either.
Problem is status quo has been to leave the tyrants alone. They then build up irrational hatred and fear against outsiders. They oppress, torture, imprison any who dare stand against them.
Actually, the status quo has been to support some tyrants and oppose others through various means. I would like to see that change, although I know that the reality is sometimes complicated. Talking to a foreign ruler is nto the same thing as supporting him, of course.
But I am advocating for very tough stances from here on out.
What does a "tough stance" mean in this context? A tough stance towards whom?
The reason being is if Iran were to ever develop the bomb you can only imagine what will happen.
Would you take a tough stance against other countries that aren't allegedly seeking nuclear weapons (like Saudi Arabia, for example)?
This war has lasted 1400 years
What war are you talking about?
Obama cannot solve these problems.
Not all of them, agreed. Neither can McCain. Part of the question is who will do the best job of addressing these problems without compromising what America is and stands for at home.
Not while our troops are fighting around the globe in more places than we're told. Iraq and Afghanistan are the well known war zones. There are more.
Perhaps. If true, just another reason that the Republicans need to be removed from power. Unless you don't have a problem with a President who violates the Constitution?
After that, General Petraeus is going to take a 45-day pause to see if security holds.
ReplyDeleteDo you think it will?
++
ReplyDeletejust ONCE Dave in NYC.. i'd like to see some PROOF of the accusations you consistently state as if they were FACTS..
ie: a President who violates the Constitution?
you obviously haven't a clue about war time presidents, if Bush violated anything Constitutional, so has every president before him, and yes, including Clinton.. a "peace-time" president (whom soldiers also dies under), go freakin' figure..
==
++
ReplyDeleteOT.. via Laura Ingraham
ANTHONY "THE FLIPPER" KENNEDY STRIKES AGAIN!
In a major defeat to America and the War on Terror, the Supreme Court this morning ruled that enemies captured on the battlefield have habeas corpus rights under the U.S. Constitution. It is almost impossible to explain just how damaging this decision is, though we get an idea when Justice Scalia notes in his dissent that the ruling "will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed." That outcome, he says, might be tolerable if the Court were upholding longstanding legal precedent. Instead it's a stark reversal of precedent that opens this country up to new security threats.
For example: There currently are no rules for trying enemy combatants in American courtrooms -- that will be left up to the courts themselves. (The Court did insist on defendants having access to witnesses; does that mean U.S. soldiers serving in the field?) Assuming defendants receive legal protections on par with U.S. citizens, terrorists will be able to easily manipulate our court system for access to classified government intel. Scalia notes that when the terrorists behind the first World Trade Center attack were tried, federal prosecutors produced the names of 200 unindicted co-conspirators, and "that information was in the hands of Osama bin Laden within two weeks."
Insanely, the military tribunals that were today declared unconstitutional were set up by Congress and the White House at the direction of an earlier SCOTUS ruling. "Turns out they were just kidding," Scalia notes wryly.
It also turns out the Constitution's a suicide pact after all.
==
(_o_)'s, gah!!
get ready for the anarchy the Dems have been stroking coupled with the revolution Obama's been praying for..
==
Dave in NYC said...
ReplyDeleteAfter that, General Petraeus is going to take a 45-day pause to see if security holds.
Do you think it will?
I think it has a better chance of holding then a with premature, politically motivated withdrawal.
Don't you?
However, I would like to understand how much longer you think it will take before the current number of U.S. troops is no longer needed in order to maintain security in Iraq.
ReplyDeletePerhaps you should ask those fighting us, Dave ... because history would make me hesitate about asking our own leadership about such timing ...
... for fear that they would actually be the ones to determine it.
You see, it is the LOSER that determines WHEN the war ends ... either by an exhaustion of will, or by physical inability to continue the fight.
It is the WINNER that determines HOW the war will end ... and that is what I want to see our leadership focus upon.
******************************
Actually, the status quo has been to support some tyrants and oppose others through various means.
That status quo was established in large part because critics like yourself insisted that America must NEVER use her might ... made from what she does right, not from greed or power-lust ... to DIRECTLY AND DECISIVELY defend life and liberty, through credible confrontation of those who threaten it, short of an actual invasion of American soil.
That "tripwire" is simply set too far back in this time in history ... for we are too highly interconnected to the rest of the world to (1) not be injured when the thugs attack somewhere else in our civilization, and (2) control movement in and out to the degree needed to guarantee that we don't see another 9/11 (without heavily disrupting commerce and freedom-of-movement, doing some of the terrorists' work for them).
That status quo has been a drip-drip-drip of death and misery over my 49 years ...
... and you can thank your fellow-travelers of the anti-war Left for establishing it, by persuading so many of this Big Lie regarding the need for a "restraint", the results of which smack of what happened to the late Kitty Genovese ... only on an international scale.
I would like to see that change, although I know that the reality is sometimes complicated. Talking to a foreign ruler is nto the same thing as supporting him, of course.
It isn't ... but neither is talking to him productive if it is not backed by a credible threat of enforcing your legitimate interests in the event he seeks to infringe upon them.
In fact, merely granting dictators the same deference we do democratic nations -- including respect for their sovereignty -- is counterproductive ... for it opens the door for the dictator to turn your good-faith efforts at dialogue, against you ... as we saw with the corruption surrounding Crude-For-Food.
At the very least, dialogue in the absence of credible confrontation gives the dictator no incentive to change. Name one totalitarian in history who became rights-respecting on his own, in the absence of a credible threat of force from outside or inside his domain.
What history shows me, is that in terms of liberating people from oppression, reducing arms stockpiles in REAL terms, and producing conditions for sustainable peace, the mere diplomacy that the Left has hung their hats upon has not delivered upon its promises.
In fact, it is the much-maligned "cowboy diplomacy" that has done far more in my lifetime to further those noble aims ... by ACTING to credibly confront those who threaten life and liberty, to compel them to either turn towards rights-respecting governance themselves ... or be removed from power forcibly.
Bottom line: if you want peace, the real peace song is not Kumbiyah.
It is Yippie-Ky-Ay-A.
ie: a President who violates the Constitution?
ReplyDeleteyou obviously haven't a clue about war time presidents, if Bush violated anything Constitutional, so has every president before him, and yes, including Clinton.. a "peace-time" president (whom soldiers also dies under), go freakin' figure..
The Constitution does not allow secret wars that the government does not tell us about. Is this a controversial statement?
The Constitution does not allow secret wars that the government does not tell us about. Is this a controversial statement?
ReplyDeleteDepends on the degree you think they should "tell us about".
We all know we are at war with various totalitarian elements of the Islamic world. No secret there.
However, if you think that "full and detailed disclosure" is the order of the day, you need to rethink your position. Such disclosure could easily compromise our effectiveness in getting inside their OODA loop and defeating them.
Don't prioritize the prevention of American misconduct, over the interdiction of thug intent ... we have other means of preventing the former ...
... but if we obsess about the former, we may not live long enough to deal with the latter.
I think it has a better chance of holding then a with premature, politically motivated withdrawal.
ReplyDeleteDon't you?
Nice try. Obama is not advocating a "politically motivated withdrawal".
My response is: Probably. But if the odds of success with both strategies is very low, then I might support the one with the much lower cost in terms of American lives. In other words, you still need to assess things like the potential costs of both victory and defeat, and the likelihood of each one.
I'm not sure that Democrats are correctly assessing these questions. But I'm even less sure that Republicans are even asking them.
More to the point, when will your rationale *not* be applicable? By your logic, will Iraq ever be more secure without a massive US military presence than with one?
You see, it is the LOSER that determines WHEN the war ends ... either by an exhaustion of will, or by physical inability to continue the fight.
It is the WINNER that determines HOW the war will end ... and that is what I want to see our leadership focus upon.
Again, this assumes the conclusion - that we've already won.
But fine, let me ask you the question then - HOW will this war end?
I think it has a better chance of holding then a with premature, politically motivated withdrawal.
ReplyDeleteDon't you?
Nice try. Obama is not advocating a "politically motivated withdrawal".
My response is: Probably. But if the odds of success with both strategies is very low, then I might support the one with the much lower cost in terms of American lives. In other words, you still need to assess things like the potential costs of both victory and defeat, and the likelihood of each one.
I'm not sure that Democrats are correctly assessing these questions. But I'm even less sure that Republicans are even asking them.
More to the point, when will your rationale *not* be applicable? By your logic, will Iraq ever be more secure without a massive US military presence than with one?
You see, it is the LOSER that determines WHEN the war ends ... either by an exhaustion of will, or by physical inability to continue the fight.
It is the WINNER that determines HOW the war will end ... and that is what I want to see our leadership focus upon.
Again, this assumes the conclusion - that we've already won.
But fine, let me ask you the question then - HOW will this war end?
Dave ... it will end with the Iraqi nation having a form of rights-respecting governance, with limits/checks/balances upon its government -- along with sufficient military and law-enforcement strength -- that will immunize Iraq from being hijacked again and exploited to support totalitarian expansion.
ReplyDeleteThat is, if our leaders don't listen to the anti-war Left, and take the loser's choice of WHEN to end it.
I did not assume that we have won. My assertion is that you are using the wrong metric -- time, instead of stability and strength -- to determine when to leave.
When you are counting the cost of war ... don't forget to count the cost of sending the sons and daughters of these Men and Women back for a third time ... to try and complete an UNFINISHED task in the face of an even stronger and bolder enemy ...
... as opposed to the cost of finishing this now.
The former is what you are looking at ... realistically, mind you ... if we don't end this decisively and sustainably on this go-round.
++
ReplyDeleteDave in NYC..
[HOW will this war end?]
don't tell me, let me guess, you're one of those who complain about line moving too slow at a McD's drive through aren't you (either that or you must work for the soup nazi lol)??
seriously though, it's like this.. seeing as how we've been fighting a dual war in Iraq..
1) when Iraq is able to stand on her own & fight the terrorists off by herself (she's doing fab so far, as we're more or less overseeing the ops) the majority of our troops can come home (which they are in the process of doing as i type.. re-read Kafir @ 5:47 PM post)..
Q: why are we still in ie: Japan, South Korea, or Germany??
2) the GWOT will continue until the Muslims rise up & conquer their evil spawn.. until then, we will help them, aka: take the initiative/ assist/ prod along/ etc.. as inaction is worse then no action, not to mention making US easier targets..
other than that..
we will move on from the Iraq battlefront to wherever AQ et al decides will be the next battlefront.. that's if we & our allies don't beat them to wherever it will take place first, which could very possibly be that we're already there (the US)..
but since Bush is leaving soon, and according to all the expert predictions.. the war is expected to last for at least another decade or two (seems fair, they started two decades or so while we slept before we found a Prez with the balls to BRING IT ON!!)..
but to answer your question directly..
[HOW will this war end?]
in VICTORY!! (thumbsup)
==
++
ReplyDeleteRich Casebolt @ 9:43 PM..
exelent!! (thumbsup)
i mean, isn't that why we're back in Iraq.. we didn't finish the job the first time.. not that it was our fault.. times were different back then.. we had a UN (or so we thought anyways), now it's a despots haven.. our tax dollars at work (won't even mention the cost of diplomatic perks) gah!!
==
++
ReplyDeleteEarth to Dave in NYC..
[this assumes the conclusion - that we've already won]
let me put that another way for you..
WE ARE NOT LOSING!! (thumbsup)
==
++
ReplyDeletere: bg @ 10:09 PM..
WE HAVE NOT LOST!! (thumbsup)
i repeat..
WE HAVE NOT LOST!! (thumbsup)
AQ LOST!!
i repeat..
AQ LOST!!
and guess what?? the MILITIA'S are tossing in the towel as well.. sure, there will be a couple of die hard groups.. but hey, if they think they can do better than AQ.. let them BRING IT ON!!
we're at war, not McD's drive through or the soup nazi's!!
==
Nice try. Obama is not advocating a "politically motivated withdrawal".
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely he is.
He is advocating a position which is politically more appetizing to the American people NOT one determined by the situation on the ground or the consequences of what he is proposing.
In other words, he's trying to win an election by pandering to the populace.
Save the BS.
How will the war end? Just as it's ending right now. Silently, with little or no fan-fare from the media and continued complete denial by the democrats.
And, who in the hell is going to protect us from SCOTUS?
ReplyDeleteI am SO glad my son has returned from Iraq and is safely home in Texas.
@bg
ReplyDeleteAre you even reading these comments, or just identyfing friend or foe and general topic to mount fitting counterattack?
Or maybe there's some phrasal connection in english I don't know and somehow sense of my post was changed (I'm Pole, this is my second laguage)?
Pictures say a lot, but they lie a lot too.
Like famous photo from Vietnam, with sabetuer being shot dead on the street. Most ppl though it was sign of corruption on anti-communists side, shooting of civilians in the daylight. Only few know what this guy did to deserve this.
Yes! Iraq is getting better. Yes! AQ is going down, hard. Yes! It's right to promote photos like this one, or Micheal Yon's one with cross being installed by christians and muslims together.
But single photograph is no proof of any significant trend.
Heh... if it was - then Iraq should be hellish quagmire considering amount of powerful photos circulating in mainstream media.
@Joshua
Anime picture proves I'm lazy. That's from another board. I thought it won't be fitting here, but was too lazy to go get the camera... but now you've mentioned it I'll prolly get my real photo.
BTW what does lack of visible profile mean? Being scared? :P (joke, man, joke - don't attack it with 10.000 signs again, plz)
I'm reading Dawkins Selfish Gene right now and beggining of life as some interstellar "seeding" is mentioned as unlikly possibility.
DNA and mitochondrial DNA too - fit with archeological findings. And for some time DNA is faster to do the job, that is only later checked with other methods.
So as far as I'd really LOVE to be created by BEING OF GOOD (who wouldn't like eternal life?!), the other possibility is much more cosistant. And it's not Darwin - it's theory of evolution, that is USED as a basis of many latter findings. It'd have to be that God wanted to trick ppl and made everything himself, and than disguises it with "seemingly consistent" DNA strings.
Also there's hardly any way anyone could convince me, as "witnesses" for what by definition can't be seen are in my book worthless. There're witneses for Realism, for Hinduism and for Scientologists too. They all "felt" or "saw" something that had to be true ... but they contradict. So only way I'd belive in God is either his intervention, or gunning down the alternative. I do really hope for the first one. I'd be awesome to be "so much more" than biological creature, but there're other awesome possibilites that just aren't true.
@Democrats
I'm Pole this division doesn't really concern us. As far as I see - it looks like a total war of "progressive" and "conservative" on the other side of the pond, so you might get confused and think as this division to be a fundamental one.
But it isn't. It's a few different division actually. Real liberal's in Europe aren't name-stealing commies from US. Secularism in religion is more frequenlty tied to economical freedom than collective here.
And I agree with 90% of Gateway Pundit posts... so trying to make "democrat" of me is bad shot.
BTW I'm actually working on Jihad board game right now. One that's painting AQ in really bad light, while Iraq as a war won by the coalition...
Really bad shot.
Gah! Looks I've spewed some 10k signs too.
Dave ... it will end with the Iraqi nation having a form of rights-respecting governance, with limits/checks/balances upon its government -- along with sufficient military and law-enforcement strength -- that will immunize Iraq from being hijacked again and exploited to support totalitarian expansion.
ReplyDeleteOK, fine. So, how long do you think that will take? How many more American and Iraqi lives will be lost in the process?
That is, if our leaders don't listen to the anti-war Left, and take the loser's choice of WHEN to end it.
But they might! And even if they don't this time around, they might in two years, or four years. That's democracy! And that's just one reason it's important to have some idea of how long this war will take. I supported the war initially, but if I had known it might still be going on when Bush left office and there would be no way to insure its continued prosecution after the election, I might not have.
More to the point, there's a chance that we'll never get to the point you're talking about. Like I said, you're assuming that we're going to win - but what if we don't? The pro-staying in Iraq crowd acts as if they are willing to stay there forever (or 100 years) if we're not successful, and as if there's no cost that's too high for success. I don't necessarily disagree with that position, but if that's what they think they should come out and say it, instead of acting like the end of the war is just around the corner.
++
ReplyDeletethat's one picture truly worth a thousand words!! (thumbsup)
news/updates
Sadr City, June 11, 2008
Iraq's Anbar Hero, June 12, 2008
more here..
God Bless Soldiers everywhere for putting THEIR
lives on the line to protect us ALL from terrorism!
==
Dave ... the instant you post any sort of time frame, you give the enemy a clue as to the limits of your resolve. That is one piece of intel we don't need to give them.
ReplyDeleteAnd you are not considering the total cost of leaving ... and seeing Iraq turned into an industrial-strength, cash-rich Afghanistan 2.0, complete with its own set of thugs itching to one-up the Taliban with respect to taking on the Great Satan.
All we will be doing by leaving, short of victory as defined above, is allowing the enemy to fight this war on THEIR terms ... and possibly end up on OUR soil.
EVERY war in history has been won the same way ... by exercising the RESOLVE to outlast your enemy.
Your problem is, you think this war is optional.
It is not ... regardless of opinion -polling data.
Let me remind you, that it is the LOSER that decides WHEN the war ends.
It is the victor who decides HOW.
Amazing picure! The Manhattanites are going crazy--they hate the thought of non-white people gaining their freedom. Well, I have news for the New Yorkers--we non-white people will be free just like you!
ReplyDeleteTake that, liberal whitey!
Dave ... the instant you post any sort of time frame, you give the enemy a clue as to the limits of your resolve. That is one piece of intel we don't need to give them.
ReplyDeleteRich, you're not the President and the enemy isn't reading these posts. Just give me your personal opinion on how long it will take, and how long you think we should be willing to stay if things stay at this level of violence.
And you are not considering the total cost of leaving ... and seeing Iraq turned into an industrial-strength, cash-rich Afghanistan 2.0, complete with its own set of thugs itching to one-up the Taliban with respect to taking on the Great Satan.
And you are not considering the costs of staying if we are unsuccessful and that *still* ends up happening. I know that the administration doesn't think that can happen, but they are the ones who got us into this problem in the first place.
Your problem is, you think this war is optional.
It is not ... regardless of opinion -polling data.
The problem is, you equate "war" with "victory". But you have not shown that we are going to win, you've just assumed it. If we're not going to win, then of course it's optional.
I supported this war from the beginning - but it was always an optional war.
Dave in NYC,
ReplyDeleteIt appears there have been good answers to your responses, but I see you unwittingly carrying the usual Code Pink Commie message. This is so sad. I am an Independent btw who leans Conservative. I once walked and quacked like a duck on the left too. Eventually, you see the lunacy and the irresponsible ways of the left in destoying our nation step by step. I'll make several post to you, regarding history of war, the lefts refusal to learn from past mistakes and the attempt to gloss over the truth of what actuall hapneed in Vietnam and here at home. You are right in one area. It is all complex and sending up a neophyte from the left to be Commander in Chief is like running Daffy Duck cartoon to run Disney. Makes for a funny cartoon and laughs, but then we do not live in a fictional world. Though Obama attempts to in his book about his father.
To your repsonses...
"Actually, I think they are easy. Yes and yes."
You didn't think thru the question. FDR delayed to long our entry to help Europe. This is the problem with typical liberal view glossing over historical lessons. Had our country responded faster to helping Britain and Europe, a large genocide might have been reduced.
Also, had Britain not followed Chamberlain and appeased Hitler, then what? By looking the other way from Hitler's takeover of land to appease him and to save Britain from yet another war after WWI, they allowed him to build his war machine and gain valuable resources and territory.
This is no different than giving Gaza to PLO, ala Fatah and Hamas.
Millions of Jews, gypsies, and others some still that would still be living today would tell of a different outcome of WWII had Britain, France, Europe and America reacted differently to Hitler. Instead, how many millions died due to all of these indecisions and the blatant appeasement of Hitler?
Have you not learned one lesson from WWII?
Second, Abraham Lincoln, during the war was assaulted time and again to end the civil war. He was hounded to stop the war at all cost, to Give Up and be a Loser, giving Victory to the Confederates. The opposition to him in the Union was just like Obama and the Democrats today. That attack a sitting President during a time of war when we should all be united. This man turns truth on its head and divides us!
Supported by Code Pink Commies, Islmaic Radicals, Communist like William Ayers, CPUSA, the so-called "New Party" but still Commies, the DailyKos Komrades, HuffPo, and so many other liberal institutions many supported by Soros. Not to forget the Democrat leaders, like Harry "We have lost" Reid, Nancy "Kiss Assads ass" Pelosi, Durbin-Nazi, Dennis-Impeach, and Murtha-Cold Blooded Killers. These and more today all bark like the hounds of hell theyy are against our President who has the great responsibility to keep our nation safe after 3000 died on 9/11. During a time of war the Democrats, the leftist, funded by anti-American billionaires like Soros act like traitors to our nation. They call him a liar, and threaten to impeach him. They along with the ACLU again started by a Communist, and today funded by enemies abroad use our legal systems against us.
And you Dave, have no problem with it. In fact you toss out many of their lies.
The turmoil during both WWII and the Civil War was great. Both Presidents made crucial decisions and mistakes, one almost to late for Britain that had to endure constant bombings on their cities, the other to Stay The Course despite all of the pressure to end the Civil War and threats against his own life. In the end, despite their mistakes, despite the wrong Generals often, they corrected their mistakes during the war. And this Dave is what led our nation to victory! By taking the valid criticism and replacing men that "performed" their "work" inadequately to defeat the enemy they both won the war and defeated the idiots at home.
This is once again the solution at home and abroad. Win in Iraq and defeat the idiots at home led by the nose thru radicals that support our enemies abroad.
If Abraham Lincoln listened to the naysayers and doomsayers the South would survive with slaves. You toss out a simple answer without bringing the facts to light of history that each President in these wars faced their devils abroad and here on the domestic front.
I'm asking you to look at actual history. None of it was easy. D-Day, how many man died on the beaches of Normandy? Ove 3,000 Dave. By your logic, FDR should have halted the war the very first day on the beaches of Normandy. This is why leftist logic results in defeat and not victory. It is utter lunacy. The lefts incessant call to repeat how many of our troops died during wars is the tactic of propaganda by the enemy. Yet you fail to realize it. You fall into the word viruses our enemies use against us.
Communist like Code Pinker Medea Benjamin, a Fidel groupie from Cuba do not care about our troops. Just like she didn't care about the thousands dying in Cuba under Fidel. She is an enemy of liberty and freedom. She is an enemy of America. And yet you side with her. Wake up Dave.
Truth is this war will eventually be seen as one of the better campaigns in military history. The mistakes will be good lessons, just like those learned in WWII, Vietnam and Korea for our War Colleges and future leaders. But, this will be seen especially successful against an insurgency once they put the COIN doctrine into place advocated by Petraeus and others.
With fewest troops lost of any major war fought on two large fronts and multiple other fronts in Somalia and Phillipines. We liberated 50 million and have decimated the enemy.
Also, unlike you leftist that live in hollwood lalaland where fake actors like Matt Damon pretend to change the world, the military and Bush will in the end receive some of the highest ratings in military history for saving the lives of our troops thru record breaking turnarounds on military testing and introduction to the battlefield of protective armour and weaponry.
Under his Presidency, our Armed Forces have improved rapidly in speed of use, from prototype to production, to field. Clinton did nothing at all and weakend our military as much as possible. He handed over trade secrets to the Chinese. And then he sought to weaken our military with his and Hillary's priority for homosexuals.
This is the lefts strategy. Make our Army like Folsum Street in San Fran? This may work for you, but not me.
And your man Obama is on record, on video stating he would reduce our countries defenses across the board, weakening our military. He is utterly clueless. He will cut back on our missile defense systems that will now protect Europe from the madmen in Iran, and tell the whole world what we will not do in space. He is a clueless idiot created out of the post-modern day Marxist, Zbigniew Brzezinski faux babble that man has arrived to save the day. He actuallay believes himself to be savior not only to America but to the world.
Even an athiest like Hitchens gets it right when he recognizes Obama is a megalomaniac. You might as well let the Commies have our best kept military secrets while he is busy nationalizing our nation and turning it into a cesspoll of mediocracy.
The one large mistake our President made is sticking to long with Rumsfeld has been corrected as he brought in Petraeus and Gates. This points out the strength of McCain, as he recognized the need to increase troops size. This is the true strength of having a military man in office during a time of war who has actually fought battles and been with men that have been on the fronts.
The transition since the removal of Rumsfeld and to Gates and Petraues to unleash our soldiers has been remarkable in the COIN ops. The building of the Iraqi Army long underway before this transition has finally come to fruition, as well as the Awakening started while Rumsfeld was in office. This Awakening from Anbar has now spread across Iraq and secured the Iraqi Streets. They have corrected their mistakes and rolled onto victory in every single part of the country with the Iraqi Army now taking the lead. This is war. The Allied forces made much larger mistakes than Bush or Rumsfeld in costing the lives of Americans at much larger count numbers.
You want to now go back and say we should never have stopped fighting WWII on the basis of counting deaths? Do you? Because this is the outrageous logic your throwing on the table for debate. It stops anyone from fighting any war at all. We cannot allow a soldier to die on the battlefield. This is insane logic from leftist that follow our enemies propaganda.
"But those answers are in retrospect, knowing that we won the wars."
Exactly and we would never had won those wars if people like Obama were in control of our nation. Chamberlain proved appeasement does not work. Defunding South Vietamese and appeasement to Communist China did not work either. It led to millions dead! Yet you don't give a damn about the Vietamese do you? This is what makes me sick about many men on the left. They feign feelings about the deaths in war. That logic may have worked in the 60s, but it fails completely now. In reality, they all went about getting high, having free sex, getting women pregnant and running away from responsibilities in life. They then turn around and teach our children to be irresponsible. They actually stand for nothing but anarchy in society.
And you avoided the dirty truth didn't you? That war is ugly, our leaders in the past were not perfect, that millions died in WWII that may be living today including the potential of millions of Jews. But don't let an honest review of history stop your liberal meme or from teaching the public the truth, right Dave? Lets just all follow our liberal professors in college that got high in the 60s and dropped LSD and never chaged their ways or matured enough to understand there are enemies we must fight or we in fact lose our own freedoms.
"Were the 58,000 American lives lost in Vietnam worth it?"
I've answered this question above. The Left made it not worth it because they chose to lose the war. By the way, we didn't lose. We signed a peace treaty. This is why our military is I think the only one in the world that salutes differently from all others. Someone want to verify?
Dave, are you willing to look at history with a straight face, instead of a liberal juandiced eye? Were the lives of millions of dead Vietamese worth it to you and other liberals when the Democrats defunded the support of South Vietnam? Were accepting the lies of Walter Conkrite worth it to allow millions of South Vietamese die? The only people who dishonored our troops were the left. From John "Genghis Kahn" Kerry to the Communist Activist who were spurring and funding many of the protest. We won the Tet offensive. Did you not know this truth? How many know this truth? That we won? Do you?
I'd really like to have your answer on that. It is key to any understanding. If you believe we lost and will not accept the truth, then anymore discussion with you is like talking to a brick wall. Our nation was lied to by Conkrite. This is why we simply cannot trust the liberal media today.
As a result of Tet, North Vietnam was reeling and ready to quit. Our soldiers did heroic efforts to win a victory just like in Norht Korea. Yet they were stabbed in the back by a traitor to our nation. Yet again another leftist sheister! Schmuck!
This is admitted now by the very General of North Korea in charge at the time. But the liberals shut down funding, and our media with Walter Conkrites help demonized our military on almost every single show. Jane Fonda embrased the Commies. So many others did to. And they did so out of fear, loathing, drunkeness, debauchery, sex and lies. Boy, that is a great past to look back on for the liberals. To stab your fellow Americans in the back and spit on them when they return home.
The words, the protest. This was and is is the Commie modus operandi by the way. And many on the left very clueless about life in this world, follow them blindly. Why doesn't it bother you at all that much of what you support falls in line with the Commies and enemies propaganda against our nation? Do you have no self respect? I'm losing respect for you in terms of your ability to see the truth when it is laid out bare for all to see.
It is the Left and the Democrats who dishonored our troops and snatched victory away at all cost. Why don't you be honest? Vietnam and Korea were similar wars fought by China, Russia and America.
Liberty and Freedom against Tyranny and Communism. Recognize this truth Dave? It is the same war being fought today on different fronts and thru different proxies. Sometimes we fight other times we supply our allies as proxies to fight them. Russia and China are in Iran today. As proxies they fight us. Can I get a vowel to spell it out for you on this big board of Risk?
The Koreaan War ended in peace for South Korea because we stayed! We stayed and protected South Korea Dave. We didn't retreat and allow millions to be slaughtered! Today proteced by our troops one of the 10 largest GDP per capita in the world now prospers and is an ally in the war on terror. Yet the leftist refuse to even do a trade deal with them. The same outcome of a draw and victory for South Vietnam would exist today if not for the Democrats stopping protection and funding of our military to keep training and providing air support for the free Vietamese. We were training the South Vietamese and had we stayed, yes, the South would be free and prosperous nation. And yes, the lives of our soldiers would be as honored as WWII Vets and Korean Vets! The Right still honors them!
The Left still uses them as political propaganda!
But because of people very much like you during the time, that supported leftist causes, our nation was weakened in the world at that time. And the nutjobs spat upon our troops while idiots like Kerry abused them on the media and in the halls of Congress.
How dare you continue to perpetuate these myths about our soldiers in Vietnam being a lost cause. It was a valient cause to keep people free in this world.
I love everyone of them who fought and died, their families. We were fighting against the Communist invasion all across Asia at the time. John F. Kennedy sent the first troops into South Vietnam.
This is why an appeaser and a buddy of Communist, supported by Commie money from the likes of Ayers and the faux "New Party" can never ever be compared to JFK. IT is a huge lie. JFK stood up to Commies. He didn't run with them and set on their phoney boards of social justice, or seek their nomination. Only Ted Kennedy has ever sought Commie support like your man Obama. He dis so in a letter to the Soviet Union to undermine our elections process while he ran as a Democrat. Little wonder that now he supports him and Obama speaks for him at a graduation spewing forth Marxist commentary on "collective" salvation.
All of the above what I said is true. Yes, wars are a complex. So what? We're fightin other men who actuall think about how to defeat us. Wake up. The BS sappiness from the left for our troops is just one big fat lie with a bunch of clueless stragglers and people that may actually care doing the work of our enemies.
Having been raised around it, I smell the fear a mile away and am sick of it. I'm sick of people telling me to fear fighting against an enemy that would wipe us all out, or wipe Israel out given the opportunity. I'm sick of people that make excuses for terrorist in attacking us on 9/11. And I'm sick of people that want to put forth an appeaser that receives more support from our enemy abroad than every before in history. A man that actively compaigned for Commie support at home.
I'm sick of people being clueless to the real story that unraveled in Vietnam as the Democrats cut money from our allies.
Have you ever bothered to talk to survivors and boat people that had to flee the Chinese and North Vietamese? I have! Set down and listen to their stories Dave. Listen to the stories of rape, forced labor, boat trips in hell not knowing if they will survive. Millions dead, millions displaced refugees, thousands dying in the oceasn all because the Democrats cut funding to support a free nation. A new nation that our troops were building up and were supporting.
Obama would do this again!
Frankly, to hell with him and the Democrat Party. The only sane member left the appeaser party after being attacked relentlessly by DailyKos nutters.
Joseph Lieberman, a New Indepedent. God Bless him.
The only reason the lives of our Vietnam Vets are deemed "not worth it" today is in the eyes of losers like the Dems and those who in fear, supported by Communist groups, many largely unaware of the Communist influence shut down Victory in keeping South Vietnam free. The treaty for Vietnam negotiated was a fairly good treaty. It originally kept South Vietnam free.
But then the leftist made sure we never enforced it defunding the government of South Vietnam. Therefore is is the left that is guilty of losing the peace and in symbolic fashion spitting in our soldiers faces like so many idiots actually did in real life. It is the left that is scarred for life in dishonoring our troops sacrifice in Vietnam for liberty and justice. It is the left that continues the lies about South Vietnam and refuses to admit their blood stained hands for millions dead. It is the left that walked away from responsibility to an ally. It is the left that will walk away and allow possibly millions to die again. This is the ever repeating cycle of irresponsibility of the left. To close their eyes while others die.
This is the reason GatheringOfEagles.org was started to never again allow what happened to our soldiers from leftist moonbats, funded by Communist or other radicals and enemies of our country, and to fight for victory this time against the Media and leftist elite who would fight more to shame our troops and lose than than to lift them up in victory!
Your true colors have now come home to roost Dave. This is the left that you support.
"Iraq isn't Vietnam, but it isn't World War II or the Civil War either."
War is war. This is another trite statement with no meaning. It is won or lost by the will to win or lose. Appeasers desire to quit and run away. Victors stand firm despite the stink of defeatist swirling all around them.
The left, the communist, the pacifist, the utopian dreamers that follow Obama are natural born losers. The only way they can win in life is to live in a free society where their hypocrisy is allowed to flourish or they become informers in totalitarian societies, stabbing people in the back under tyrants. They're like the Frency Vichy, tumbling over like French whores to the Nazis. Very few believe in fighting when it is all on the line. They appease tyrants constantly from Europe to Canada, Australia and America. The left is constantly giving away our real freedoms to call enemies what they are and to stand up against them. Witness the Fake HRC in Canada, the 5 idiot judges that gave American citizen rights to terrorist scum that murdered 3000 Americans.
This is the left. They'd defend a terrorist more than the life of 40 million dead babies. This is the legacy of left Dave. Never forget that Hitler started out from the Socialist Party, he embraced Marx, embraced Darwin, embraced Scienitst with Eugenics. All of them rejecting a transcendent truth, believing that man alone would solve the worlds problems. That man would become their own gods. This is the call of Soros, of Brzezinski, of Obama. Like megelomaniacs before him Obama rants much like the nuts who wanted to rule the world and "heal the planet"
Even the techie people on G4 got it Dave. That is why they made a video Mocking him for his Hitlarian speeches. Everyone Heil, heil Obama!
"Actually, the status quo has been to support some tyrants and oppose others through various means. I would like to see that change, although I know that the reality is sometimes complicated."
In this there is some agreement. Of course it is complicated when tyrants rule and democracies fail to recognize the long term evil brewing by tyrannical regimes against them. That is why wars break out that are much bloodier than need be. Our past has been a mixed bag of Presidents. Our hands are tied due to our reliance on oil from these tyrants.
Bill Clinton btw made a one hour speech for $450,000 in Saudi Arabia accusing our President and America in front of Tyrants that they were unjust in holding Gitmo detainees. He said this to a bunch of tyrants that hang homosexuals, women, brutally torture and imprison people for no good reason, including the sick practice of removing women's genitailia. He said this to a bunch of barbarians.
This is the hypocrisy of the left. They will demonize Bush all they can for shaking hands with these thugs due to oil contracts and obligations currently between our nation that both Democrats and Republicans have made, but never look in the mirror.
Again, the left panders hard to the Tyrants for usual liberal causes but the left stream media does not report it. The only way we know what Clinton did is conservative voices picked up on it. The reason the left is becoming so "unhinged" today is finally the liberal media is being countered with from the right with a more visiable Fox News. I think Fox is inadequate and not always truly conservative enough. They allow idiots like Geraldo on to sput tabloid nonsense.
The leftist biased media today report Bush as being evil and pandering to the Saudis, yet make no mention of Clinton. This is the double-standard propaganda Americans live with in the liberal media building up since the 60s. It got out of control, to the point where one single man, Walter Conkrite misled an entire nation with a big fat lie. The man should be castigated by historians for what he did. His hands are soaked with the blood of millions dead as are every leftist that defeated America from within and allowed the Communist break the Paris Treaty, thereby overrunning a Free South Vietamese.
This is the legacy of the left so far. More will follow. As I have time to respond. Sorry for not getting this out earlier in the morning.
++
ReplyDeleteJoshua @ 11:58 AM.. Amen!!
the left are adept at re-writing history, starting with slavery.. but i will not digress back that far at the moment..
Timeline of Defeat
excerpts:
[Here's a pop quiz about Vietnam. When the 94th United States Congress finally pulled the plug on American support, how many of our GIs were still fighting in Vietnam? The question was posed to us the other evening by Secretary of State Kissinger, full of sagacity and wisdom 30 years after the events in question. We guessed somewhere on the order of 100,000, down from the more than half a million American military personnel who had been in Vietnam at the height of the fighting. But Mr. Kissinger had us.
It turns out that when the Congress pulled the plug on Vietnam, the number of our U.S. troops in Vietnam was zero. When, in the 1974 elections, the Democrats widened their majority in the Congress and then, in the spring of 1975, finally defied President Ford and ended support for the free Vietnamese government in the South, the number of GIs was something on the order of two or three dozen, mostly embassy guards.
This is something to think about as the Democrats maneuver against a war-time president over funding for our GIs and our ally in a free Iraq. It turns out that when one looks at the time-line of the betrayal of South Vietnam, one of the lessons is that, in the end, it was not about our GIs and the loss of American lives, great though that treasure was. Our GIs had long since been drawn down, as President Nixon fulfilled his campaign promise of Vietnamization of the war.]
[The Congress, however, wasn't prepared to stake them, despite the fact that South Vietnam was our ally in the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization. In October 1974, the 93rd Congress voted to end foreign aid to Vietnam. President Ford vetoed the measure. Congress, after an election that expanded the Democratic majority by 48 seats in the House and five in the Senate, overrode the veto. In the Spring, the 94th Congress blocked military appropriations for the South Vietnamese. It was not about our GIs. They had long since gone. A country of 50 million individuals who had sided with America and yearned for freedom was cast into the dark night of communist tyranny.
***
So what are the Democrats thinking today? Is this the direction in which they want to go? President Bush's threat of a veto appears to have forced them to abandon a timeline for defeat in Iraq. But Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi have made it clear they are going to keep trying. What was it about the Communists that the Democrats wanted to give them Indochina, a region with as many persons as Eastern Europe? And what is it about our Islamist enemies that makes the Democrats so determined to abandon a free Iraq? The tragedy of Vietnam taught that this is the question that needs to be asked and answered and that a default will haunt the politicians now in power for generations, as their own children and the children of our GIs demand to know their motives.]
How North Vietnam Won The War
excerpt:
[Q: Was the American antiwar movement important to Hanoi's victory?
A: It was essential to our strategy. Support of the war from our rear was completely secure while the American rear was vulnerable. Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the American antiwar movement. Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda, and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and that she would struggle along with us.]
to be continued..
==
++
ReplyDeleteWhat's A Few Hundred Thousand Lives To A Democrat?
excerpt (from Wikipedia):
[Hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese officials, particularly ARVN officers, were imprisoned in reeducation camps after the Communist takeover. Tens of thousands died and many fled the country after being released. Up to two million civilians left the country, and as many as half of these boat people perished at sea.
(snip)
After repeated border clashes in 1978, Vietnam invaded Democratic Kampuchea (Cambodia) and ousted the Khmer Rouge. As many as two million died during the Khmer Rouge genocide.]
excerpt (from Iowa Voice):
[The reason why Kerry wants you to believe that when we left Vietnam, it "wasn't that bad" is so they can force the notion on the American people that we can leave Iraq and it, like Vietnam, won't be "that bad." Nice try at rewriting history, Senator but, like your pal Webb the other day, you fail.]
to be continued..
==
You didn't think thru the question. FDR delayed to long our entry to help Europe. This is the problem with typical liberal view glossing over historical lessons. Had our country responded faster to helping Britain and Europe, a large genocide might have been reduced.
ReplyDeleteWhat the heck are you talking about, I didn't think through the question? You asked me whether it was worth the cost in American lives to bring an end to World War II. You didn't ask me if the U.S. should have gotten involved earlier, or whether I thought Britain should have responded differently to Hitler. So spare me the history lesson, please.
Nobody seems able to answer my simple questions. See you later.
++
ReplyDeletePart 10 of a 10-part series
excerpts:
[Coverage of these stories could have gone on and should have gone side-by-side with negative reporting on corruption, civilian casualties, drug use, and other presumed universal evils of American involvement in Southeast Asia. It is neither suggested nor desired that blemishes or morally repugnant aspects be ignored or covered up. It is asserted, however, that it would have been far more honest to have contrasted examples of deplorable behavior with other aspects, not in the least rare, of which many Vietnam veterans are familiar with and participated in. Fairness and objectivity also demand that equal coverage be applied to the VC/NVA shortcomings and ruthless excesses shown in proportion to their existence and occurrence. Had all this been done, the American public would have been able to understand something, and certainly much more than the psuedo- understanding derived from the “shoot- em- up- bang- bang” reporting they were continually exposed to. For any number of reasons, “positive” news did little for a reporter’s career or ego, a career based on finding or inventing “stories” accentuating the negative while heightening public discontent.
Ignorance of military and Southeast Asia matters, of communist revolutionary warfare, fueled by potential for lucrative career advancement, unwilling or unable to report on South Vietnamese or Laotian troops except in cases of failure, apparently enthused by the visual impact of war and the destruction it causes, sometimes disdainful of South Vietnamese if not American troops while ignoring Australian, Korean, Thai, and New Zeland forces, the news media proved incapable of depicting Vietnam, and Hanoi’s War, in its entirety. The American public saw the same “bang-bang” every year, and were misled into assuming nothing had changed, nothing was accomplished. Allied temporary defeats were portrayed as permanent setbacks, while victories and accomplishments went unreported, or were, with smug theatrics, cast aside as government propaganda.
News media misrepresentation not only misled and uninformed the American public, but also prohibited its ability to think and make logical inferences on its own.]
["Illusionary events reported by the press as well as real events within the press corps were more decisive than the clash of arms or the contention of ideologies. For the first time in modern history, the outcome of a war was determined not on the battlefield but on the printed page, and above all, on the television screen. "]
["Never before Vietnam had the collective policy of the media sought by graphic and unremitting distortion, the victory of the enemies of the correspondents own side."]
[Senator Margaret Chase Smith, "The press has become more sympathetic to the enemy than to our own national interest." (Congressional Record, June 16, 1971)]
if one wants to better understand what really
went down vs parroting revisionists, RTWT..
God Bless Soldiers everywhere for putting THEIR
lives on the line to protect us ALL from terrorism!
==
++
ReplyDeleteDave in NYC @ 12:45 PM..
simple being the operative word..
not to mention trollishly repetitious..
==
Rich, you're not the President and the enemy isn't reading these posts.
ReplyDeleteThey don't? Maybe ... maybe not.
But they do read the papers and watch CNN ... and your fellow-travelers in Congress were WRONG for asking the same question you are now.
Just give me your personal opinion on how long it will take, and how long you think we should be willing to stay if things stay at this level of violence.
You're assuming that no matter what we do, the level of violence will not be pushed down any farther ... I wonder if you thought the same way two years ago?
Were you calling for setting a timetable back then, because you didn't see the violence decreasing?
I don't buy into your assumption, that we will hit some floor level beyond which terrorism cannot be reduced in Iraq ... and neither do the Iraqi people.
This smacks of the old "brown people can't live under democracy" canard.
And you are not considering the costs of staying if we are unsuccessful and that *still* ends up happening.
Read my lips ... as long as we are there, the conversion of Iraq into Afghanistan 2.0 WILL NOT HAPPEN. The thugs and fanatics who want that have shown that they cannot directly engage us ... and we have shown that the clear-hold-build strategy keeps them from re-attaining power.
Until we leave, I don't see that changing at all ... and now that the Iraqis are standing beside us, no longer kowtowing to the thugs, but with a determination to defeat them instead ... I don't see it happening, as long as we don't leave before Iraq can stand on its own feet.
And they are moving, faster and faster, towards that day.
The real question is ... how much is a free Iraq worth to your life, liberty, and ability to pursue happiness?
I know that the administration doesn't think that can happen, but they are the ones who got us into this problem in the first place.
No ... Saddam did, aided and abetted by True Believers in 20th-century conventional wisdom like yourself.
The problem is, you equate "war" with "victory".
WRONG ... I equate victory with peace. That is why I support doing what it takes to attain it.
And you severely underestimate the history-changing ability of American RESOLVE, when it is based upon the fundamental principles of her founding ...
... that life and liberty are the legitimate possession of ALL MEN, and our government's primary function is to protect We the People from those who have shown they would deny us those rights if we cross their path, or the path of others who seek to peacefully interact with us, and they want to control.
What those of you who are mired in 20th-century conventional wisdom don't seem to get, is that the cost/benefit equations of war and peace have changed ... technology and economics have changed the world to the point that a small number of determined men can -- without warning -- severely disrupt our civilization ... and they don't even have to hit our own soil to do so.
And al Quada isn't the only entity capable of doing this.
But you have not shown that we are going to win, you've just assumed it.
It is not an assumption, for we ARE winning the battles now ... and see how we can keep winning, until the enemy makes the LOSERS choice, and decides to end this.
If we're not going to win, then of course it's optional.
Oh ... does that mean if we withdraw, we get the option of NOT having planes flown into our skyscrapers without warning ...
... and the option of not having Sharia forced upon large swaths of free societies ...
... even if this enemy, who would now have the ability to exploit all the wealth of the Persian Gulf to further its agenda, insists upon it and acts to enforce that insistence?
That is where you are DEAD WRONG, dave ... this war has NEVER been optional. It was INEVITIBLE ... and already ONGOING even though people like you tried to wish it away.
We just refused to Cowboy Up! and deal with the problem decisively until now ... and as a result, the cost in blood and treasure has been far, far higher than it had to be.
That delay was the result of hubris ... the hubris of amoral, and sometimes corrupt, people who believed they were too
"sophisticated" to get down-and-dirty to defeat these enemies ... and as a result, this war was fought on the enemy's terms for years and years.
We instead kept looking for WHEN we could end the conflict, shaping our responses to ending our involvement as soon as possible ... and ignored the HOW of decisive victory.
In other words, we kept looking to make the LOSER's choice in the conflict ... instead of embracing the VICTOR'S perogative.
Regardless of your views on the war, this is a remarkable photograph.
ReplyDelete