Murtha: ‘There Is No Question’ The U.S. Military Is Turning Against The Iraq War
Murtha: ‘There Is No Question’ The U.S. Military Is Turning Against The Iraq War
Today on CBS’s Face the Nation, host Bob Schieffer said, “We keep hearing from people who say the American military is turning against the war.” Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) responded, “There is no question about it.” Watch it:
Earlier this month, veterans advocacy group VoteVets.org released the first-ever poll of Iraq and Afghanistan vets. Some key findings:
– 63 percent of all Iraq and Afghanistan veterans believe the Army and Marine Corps are overextended at this time. 67 percent of Army and Marine veterans believe their forces are overextended.
– 53 percent of respondents said they “did not always know who the enemy was” when they were engaged in the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan.
– 42 percent of the veterans said their equipment was below the military standard of being 90 percent operational. 35 percent said their Humvees and trucks were not up-armored when they arrived in-country.
Full transcript:
SCHIEFFER: We keep hearing from people who say the American military is turning against the war. Now, you have a lot of contacts in the military community. Do you think there is anything at all to that?
MURTHA: Well, there is no question about it. They’re frustrated. They realize — listen, the plan has changed from weapons of mass destruction to al Qaeda to topple Hussein to stabilize Iraq to democratize Iraq. We need an achievable plan. We don’t have that. The military operates best when it has an achievable plan. These folks are going back in less than a year. There is no question about the hardship on this small proportion of people, and we’re spending $8 billion a month, $11 million an hour.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
256 Responses to “Murtha: ‘There Is No Question’ The U.S. Military Is Turning Against The Iraq War”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
You tell'em Murtha. Keep on message and don't let the turkeys get you down.
October 29th, 2006 at 11:49 amRep. Murtha is a good guy, but the GOP will try to destroy him, unless his friends in the military back him up!
October 29th, 2006 at 11:55 amWhy does everyone hate America except for the people who say "Why do You Hate America"?
October 29th, 2006 at 11:58 amMurtha has been arguing that the military hasn't been meeting it's goals for a long time and that it's a morale killer.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:07 pmI think the soldiers would respond better if the leadership just simply stated the goal is to secure the oil. Period. After all, Rove is saying that now.
Frankly, I am against all military guys. A real civilized world doesnt need security, army, air or marine forces, it needs schools, hospitals, museums, parks, etc.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:11 pmBut I like this guy. He has balls.
What people say isn't a morale killer. What kills morale is the reality of the experience the soldiers face every day. They and Americans have not been told the reasons we must "stay the course" or whatever the rational of the day may be. To believe that telling the truth will damage morale is another way of saying, "Don't question our decisions or what we are doing." Morale is impacted by what the opposition does, not what people outside the reality of a soldier's life are saying.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:12 pmDid you guys hear Chris Wallace expressing genuine concern for Harold Ford today?
October 29th, 2006 at 12:16 pmChris Wallace (Paraphrased): "You're really a conservative even though you claim to be a Democrat. Aren't you concerned that if you win the election you'll wind up aiding the liberals?"
....the Baker Iraq group is saying pretty much the same thing so they can't really attack Murtha for his opinions anymore.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:24 pmjeff - find the clip of friday's bill maher - he interviews ford and points out his conservative ideals... listen to ford explain himself... it's a good one...
October 29th, 2006 at 12:28 pm.
Southwest Bob,
I don't see it that way. BushCo really jumbles the message sometimes and I'm not sure why. Maybe it's guilt for the initial lies. But I have an understanding-and a correct one-that we're in Iraq to lay the groundwork for a long term transformation of the Middle East. That's the mission and always has been.
They haven't been very solid on the strategy, however. They haven't had enough troops in my opinion to have a solid strategy. They should just hole up at the bases and oil fields and shoot anything that moves. That would bump up morale I bet. Pull back, grab the Twinkies, lay prone with the scope and shoot to kill.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:29 pm$8 billion a month, $11 million an hour.
Chris Wallace probably thinks this figure is 'conservative' when it goes into the pockets of his neo-liberal friends.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:30 pm#3
Actually your perspective is a bit skewed...only liberal propagandists are asked the question.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:35 pm#6 Soldiers understand the reality a lot better than you. Murtha is a traitor to the military basically convicting some marines the day reports first came out...on the senate floor. This Murtha just wants to grab the "anti-war hippy love" (like my man #5 Juan)...at the expense of degrading our soldiers every chance he gets.
He yells about redeployment, just so when the bush changed his tactics...he could say I was right, i was right...typical liberals thinking they are clairvoyant for discerning the obvious.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:39 pmJohnG,
October 29th, 2006 at 12:43 pmI support the Iraq war but I object to numerous other Bush programs. Do you think there are enough troops in Iraq? If not do you propose a solution? This is a very long term mission after all.
$11 milion an hour? No wonder why audits are up so much this year.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:50 pmYou dont think the military is turning against this war then you are not in the military. I have a platoon of 30...guess how many say they actually support this war? 0. Only 1 says they supported it at the beginning.
I've said from the beginning I would feel better, not right, but at least like we had a purpose fighting this war if the president would have just been upfront and said that we need to secure the oil for strategic purposes, he lost me when he had his administration cook up lies.
Lack of a coherent mission and purpose hurts morale; Knowing that you survived 12 months just to get extended for 2 more months because the unit replacing you hasnt even been home a year hurts morale; knowing you'll be back in a year or less, no exceptions hurts morale; knowing your coming back to the exact same situation you left because we're not making any measurable headway hurts morale. And that's the short list.
Troops Morale Hurt by President's Undermining of Democracy
October 29th, 2006 at 12:50 pm$11 million an hour? No wonder tax audits are up this year.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:51 pmTomPaine why can't we just park it at the oil fields? Get off the streets? I have a genuine concern for the military. Why in the Hell are they driving around like targets? Are there some who enjoy this patrolling?
October 29th, 2006 at 12:56 pmJuanC, I agree. Here's to the day when our first line of attack against "terrorists" is the Peace Corps, not the Marine Corps.
Finance King, except that audits of the very rich and Corporations are down. hmmmmm.
Everybody, JohnG is not worth responding to. I'd rather debate Karl Rove than this parrot.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:57 pm#14 I think it was covered here:
October 29th, 2006 at 1:01 pmhttp://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/27/mccain-escalation-2
Can't fess up about stealing(protecting) a countries oil fields while those that benefit price gouge.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:01 pmWhy does Murtha hate the military so much?
October 29th, 2006 at 1:02 pmJeff,
anywhere we park it, we are targets. If the oilfields are seen as in American hands, the oil fields themselves will be targeted.
WHY DON'T WE ASK the Iraqi people what they want? AND THEN DO WHAT THEY ASK US TO DO? After all, it is their country, is it not?
October 29th, 2006 at 1:03 pmExactly "Who" and "When" did anyone ask Bush to come to Iraq to establish Democracy, at the end of a gun barrel?
October 29th, 2006 at 1:03 pmoops..country's
October 29th, 2006 at 1:04 pmYou dont think the military is turning against this war then you are not in the military.
Comment by TomPaine
I would ask that you please not assume you speak for everyone in the military, because certainly you do not.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:05 pm#16
Warning: This is your personal opinion...but it sounds like an authoritive headline in big, bold, and red. If people don't click on the link, they'll assume these are un-biased reports and actually believe Murtha's pandering to hippies, by degrading our troops.
Ah, ha.... finally figured it out. That's how liberals can exist and multiply.
Jesting aside, I do value your service, I just disagree with your conclusions.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:08 pmI don't think Americans or the American government actually give a crap about Iraqis. I sure don't. Atleast a defensive posture would help.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:09 pmYour War Slogan Wanted
So it looks like "STAY THE COURSE" is no longer our strategy for Iraq.
see the list of entries at
http://www.ofrankenfactor.com/
my personal favorite:
October 29th, 2006 at 1:09 pm"I Can't Believe It's Not a Crusade!"
#23
I would support this. Not a "poll", but the actual government request.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:10 pm#29
Although I'm sure your liberal propoganda poster sizes can only allow you an over simplified concepts.
But stay the course has always meant "stay until Iraq is pacified". You actually have to listen to the speaches, not just the liberal one line excerpts you cherry pick.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:15 pmJohn G, Jeff,& For truth: Why do you hate America? Why are you not in the army? Could it be that you are chickenhawks? Are you in favor of the Iraq war, only if someone else fights it? It's veterans like Murtha, Kerry, and myself who know firsthand the folly of a bullshit war.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:19 pmMark+Glesne
You're right...did not mean to presume such. And one more thing...
KING OF BATTLE!!!!!!!
But I havent seen a cannon or observed a round in over a year. Go figure.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:23 pmWhy do you hate America? Why are you not in the army? Could it be that you are chickenhawks? Are you in favor of the Iraq war, only if someone else fights it? It’s veterans like Murtha, Kerry, and myself who know firsthand the folly of a bullshit war.
Comment by Uncle_Ho
Seriously? The chickenhawk argument?
Do you really think that in order to agree with military action you have to serve in the military? What an intellectually deflated argument.
Grow up.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:24 pmI would ask that you please not assume you speak for everyone in the military, because certainly you do not.
Comment by Mark+Glesne — October 29, 2006 @ 1:05 pm
Why not? You do.
You speak for others in the military who've served multiple terms when you've only served one. LOL
October 29th, 2006 at 1:26 pmBut I havent seen a cannon or observed a round in over a year. Go figure.
Comment by TomPaine
Ouch! I'm sorry to hear. No better job in the service - but I'm biased!
October 29th, 2006 at 1:26 pmYou speak for others in the military who’ve served multiple terms when you’ve only served one. LOL
Comment by unbelievable
Get over yourself bud, move on. It was clear what I was referring to and I'm sorry you missed it.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:27 pm#19 Your right, ignore the man behind the curtain. Liberal blinders on?
October 29th, 2006 at 1:28 pmBut stay the course has always meant “stay until Iraq is pacifiedâ€. You actually have to listen to the speaches, not just the liberal one line excerpts you cherry pick.
Comment by JohnG — October 29, 2006 @ 1:15 pm
John,
You are clearly at the wrong website. This is a website for people who "think"... If you believe that we have not heard your lame-ass talking points, ad nauseum, then you might be better off at another website where thinking for yourself is rejected. Somewhere like RedState.org would be more your ignorance level...
October 29th, 2006 at 1:29 pmfound this on another thread... don't think neal will mind...
A friend of mine sent me this off of youtube:
October 29th, 2006 at 1:30 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04jcnuftGS8
it’s a short video about waterboarding, but it’s funny. and kinda sad, too.
Comment by neal — October 29, 2006 @ 10:56 am
.
Get over yourself bud, move on. It was clear what I was referring to and I’m sorry you missed it.
Comment by Mark+Glesne — October 29, 2006 @ 1:27 pm
I'm not a bud. In America, despite your Christian Taliban views, women are allowed to learn to read and write. No doubt you'll now make some sexist pig comment about this. It's to be expected from boys like you.
What was actually clear is that I called you on your bullshit and instead of being a man about it, you tried to movethe goal posts and say you meant something else. Nonsense. You were busted. Deal with it, egomaniac.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:32 pmJohnG is that a curtain or a dress?
October 29th, 2006 at 1:32 pm#35
I believe he was correcting Tom Paine's assumption that his opinion was fact. Then, gosh forbid, you get a bunch of short sighted people spouting off their conspiracy and bitterness off as the "educated opinion".
You have to know what you don't know. I understand liberals won't understand this, or dismiss it as a trick question.
Anti-prop prop:
October 29th, 2006 at 1:35 pm"Securing the peace is a lot easier than wishing for it."
#33 Mark; It's the (I'll use the term verrrry loosely here) 'people' who NEVER served are calling veterans in favor of getting out traitors(see #13 & 22), not the other way around. Five-deferment Dickhead Cheney spoke of "some" people losing their backbone and said that those who call for a withdrawal "give and and comfort to the enemy". Where is Cheney's backbone? And Ashcroft(7 deferments), and Bill Kristol, Rush Limpdick, Elliott Abarams, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, et al?
October 29th, 2006 at 1:37 pm#41
Haha!! You crack me up. I love how tough everyone is online, as they hide behind pen names.
But any way. I'll explain it one more time for the intellectually challenged. One of your liberal buddies was saying that the military could not sustain redeployments and I said that's exactly what we're doing.
And we are. Whether troops "love" going back a few times has nothing to do with it. Whether I have experienced multiple combat tours has nothing to do with it.
Our military is indeed sending troops back for multiple tours and we are sustaining. Plain and simple.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:37 pmYou have to know what you don’t know...
Comment by JohnG — October 29, 2006 @ 1:35 pm
hey all!!! it rummy hisself posting on TP!!! wow.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:38 pmComment by Uncle_Ho
Is that all you have? A list of people on the Right who got out of Vietnam?
Please, you and I both know that both sides have their lists of people who didn't serve in Vietnam - it's a moot point. The chickenhawk argument is one of the most unintelligent arguments in existence. You would serve yourself well by not using it as a talking point - not just here - but anywhere.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:40 pm#48 continued
... after all, (by your chickenhawk logic) if someone can't speak in favor of military action because they haven't served, you shouldn't be able to speak in opposition of military action because you haven't served.
Right?
October 29th, 2006 at 1:42 pm#44
Murtha is a traitor whether or not he served. What a horrible rebuttal, you guys duck and cover everytime you are challenged.
I love how you quote 'people', as if we're need sarcastic quotes because we don't quite fit in to your definition of human.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:43 pm#44; SO WHY DO YOU NOT HAVE YOUR SORRY F*CKED-UP ASS IN THE ARMY? WHY ARE YOU DODGING THE QUESTION? BWAAAKK , BWAAAKK
October 29th, 2006 at 1:49 pmSHOULD BE #50 FOR REPLY., DISTRACTED BY TV.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:51 pmI believe he was correcting Tom Paine’s assumption that his opinion was fact.
Yes, you kind always 'believes'. What you're belief system isn't privy to, is the fact that Mark has, in the past, spoken for the entire militay, and I was playing off of that.
You can stop proving your ignorance now. We got it.
You have to know what you don’t know. I understand liberals won’t understand this, or dismiss it as a trick question.
Comment by JohnG — October 29, 2006 @ 1:35 pm
Alright, I don't know a whole lot less than you don't know... For one, I read non-fiction books and news articles.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:52 pmMurtha is a traitor whether or not he served.
Comment by JohnG
For the record, I disagree with this assertion. 'Ttraitor' is a strong label that should be reserved for real application to people like John Walker Lindh.
However, I do believe, as a Marine, that Murtha is a disgrace to our uniform and our military.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:53 pm#44; SO WHY DO YOU NOT HAVE YOUR SORRY F*CKED-UP ASS IN THE ARMY? WHY ARE YOU DODGING THE QUESTION? BWAAAKK , BWAAAKK
Comment by Uncle_Ho
Because I'm in the Marine Corps, genius.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:54 pm#52
?
October 29th, 2006 at 1:56 pm#51 Because I feel I can benefit myself, my family, and my country by working hard in my field by increasing productivity of my customers, and ultimately the economy (my small part).
Now, why do you think you can ask me a question like that? Can I challenge the liberal propoganda without joining the army as you DECREE?
Silly argument, tricks are for liberals
October 29th, 2006 at 1:56 pmHaha!! You crack me up. I love how tough everyone is online, as they hide behind pen names.
Ad hominems already? Wow, that didn't take long. You're really out of ammunition so soon... LOL
But any way. I’ll explain it one more time for the intellectually challenged. One of your liberal buddies was saying that the military could not sustain redeployments and I said that’s exactly what we’re doing.
I'm not intellectually challenged. You are. I don't care what you think you might want it to mean now, I'm calling you on the fact that you once spoke for the entire militray and are now chastizing someone else for doing exactly what you did. Keep trying to dodge it - it doesn't change the fact that you're a hypocrite.
And we are. Whether troops “love†going back a few times has nothing to do with it. Whether I have experienced multiple combat tours has nothing to do with it.
Yes it does. You can't speak about something you haven't experienced as an expert on the subject - which is what you were trying to do. You could have siad it was your opinion, but you didn't. You spoke for the whole military, because you cannot accept that people disagree with your myopic perspective...
Our military is indeed sending troops back for multiple tours and we are sustaining. Plain and simple.
Comment by Mark+Glesne — October 29, 2006 @ 1:37 pm
Spoken like a true arrogant know-it-all prick. Plain and simple? You are truly full of yourself, but little else.
We are watching peope who signed up to protect our country being killed by the dozens each month for what? Nothing, that's what for. Not for a single goddamned thing. And if you are too arrogant to recognize that, it makes you just as dangerous as those who started this illegal and pointless war.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:59 pm#54 Ur right, I'm just getting fired up.
I would say a "traitor" to the uniform, not the country. My family has a history, so it pisses me off occasionally when this guy just agrees with early reports without even a investigation.
He has a right to his beliefs...but he crossed the line when he starts spouting that propaganda on the senate floor.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:00 pmWho did we piss off? Mark G and John G on the same thread? Oy.
More Vogon Poetry, JohnG, you know how I like it.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:01 pmHowever, I do believe, as a Marine, that Murtha is a disgrace to our uniform and our military.
Comment by Mark+Glesne — October 29, 2006 @ 1:53 pm
Your opinion. There are other Marines who consider him a hero.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:03 pmHe has a right to his beliefs…but he crossed the line when he starts spouting that propaganda on the senate floor.
Comment by JohnG
We all know the NeoCons never pull that shit. Not on the Senate floor, not in the House, not on Fox "News," never, never, never.
*ahem*
October 29th, 2006 at 2:04 pm#58
That is hilarious.
BTW, his point is, you can't preface an argument with "the entire military believes x", you need to have the intellectual security to see "my personal opinion is x".
October 29th, 2006 at 2:04 pm#58
That is hilarious.
BTW, his point is, you can't preface an argument with "the entire military believes x", you need to have the intellectual security to see "my personal opinion is x".
October 29th, 2006 at 2:04 pm#58
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:04 pmMore Vogon Poetry, JohnG, you know how I like it.
Comment by Zooey — October 29, 2006 @ 2:01 pm
I saw an article on Buzzflash this morning that said that the governor's race was actually a dead heat... in Idaho!
I used to wonder why anyone bothered running as Dem in that state...
October 29th, 2006 at 2:05 pm#60
The answer is, 42 years.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:05 pm#57; So, in other words, YOU ARE A CHICKENHAWK. BWAAAKK, BWAAAKK.
you're going home in a body bag oh doo da day
you're going home in a body oh doo da day.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:06 pm"Ad hominems already?"
"you’re a hypocrite."
"your myopic perspective..."
"a true arrogant know-it-all prick."
"You are truly full of yourself, but little else."
"you are too arrogant"
"it makes you just as dangerous as those who started this illegal and pointless war."
comment by unbelievable
Haha.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:06 pmHowever, I do believe, as a Marine, that Murtha is a disgrace to our uniform and our military.
Comment by Mark+Glesne
Your opinion.
Comment by unbelievable
Yes, that is my opinion. Very good. That's why I said "I do believe..."
October 29th, 2006 at 2:09 pmJohnG. I guess it's true, they did lower the enlistment standards to let in low I.Q. types, criminals, and neo-nazis. You are athe proof and embodiment of that policy.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:11 pmBTW, his point is, you can’t preface an argument with “the entire military believes xâ€, you need to have the intellectual security to see “my personal opinion is xâ€.
Comment by JohnG — October 29, 2006 @ 2:04 pm
I got that. He's violated that statement himself. Get it? Was that slow enough for you?
October 29th, 2006 at 2:12 pm#68 No, but that doesn't mean you are right.
Crtitcal thinking, lost on liberals.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:13 pmTalk about the pot calling the kettle black.
Comment by JohnG — October 29, 2006 @ 2:04 pm
That's the best you can do? Cliches that have no relevence to anything I've said? LOL... Dumb troll
October 29th, 2006 at 2:14 pm#71 Too bad they don't require remedial reading to read and understand the comments.
Instead, keep forwarding your liberal propaganda.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:15 pmHaha.
Comment by Mark+Glesne — October 29, 2006 @ 2:06 pm
So you got nothing. Typical dumb troll...
October 29th, 2006 at 2:15 pm#57 You sound like a serial killer who gleefully hides behind a gun and uniform to justify murdering children in the name of "humanity".
October 29th, 2006 at 2:16 pmtricks are for liberals and hypocrites are for conservatives
Yes, that is my opinion. Very good. That’s why I said “I do believe…â€
Comment by Mark+Glesne — October 29, 2006 @ 2:09 pm
Just like you believe you're right about everything.... Which was my point. As usual, right over your head.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:17 pmCliches that have no relevence to anything I’ve said? … Dumb troll
Comment by unbelievable
As opposed to debate points that have relevance, like "dumb troll"?
Haha.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:17 pmIn Feb 2006 72% of active duty soldiers wanted out of Iraq, I am sure this number is higher now that they've seen even more of their friends die, and for what? WMD? 9-11? Iraqi Freedom?
http://www.zogby.com/NEWS/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075
So a recap for you idiots on the right..
Most of our soldiers want out.
Americans at home want us out.
Britain wants their soldiers out.
Australia wants their soldiers out.
The Iraqi people want us out.
The terrorists want us to stay, both domestic terrorists like Mark & John G, as well as Al Qadea, they are thanking the idiots in charge*GOP* for bringing them 1000's of new soldiers in the fight against America's imperialist foray into their country to steal their oil.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:17 pm#74 Your opinion must be right, I mean, everybody who has served is an expert and all agrees on the same thing. How could I have been so wrong? Woe is I.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:18 pmSo you got nothing. Typical dumb troll…
Comment by unbelievable
Some people/points just aren't worth debating. =)
October 29th, 2006 at 2:18 pmToo bad they don’t require remedial reading to read and understand the comments.
Yes too bad - otherwise you wouldn't be posting such asinine drivel about things you don't understand.
Instead, keep forwarding your liberal propaganda.
Comment by JohnG — October 29, 2006 @ 2:15 pm
There is no liberal propaganda... Unless you're referencing the truth again. That's the only liberal propaganda we have... since reality does have a liberal bias.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:19 pmAs opposed to debate points that have relevance, like “dumb troll�
You didn't give me any... And you're sure not answering the ones I have given you. I figured stating the obvious was the most profound thing your little mind could grasp. And I see that I am right.
Haha.
Comment by Mark+Glesne — October 29, 2006 @ 2:17 pm
Yes, like that is such an intelligent comment. Proof that you have nothing.
Why are you here?
October 29th, 2006 at 2:22 pmI used to wonder why anyone bothered running as Dem in that state…
Comment by unbelievable
Ah, I long for the days of Cecil Andrus...our last great Dem governor.
Yep, Butch Otter (R) makes the former governor, and now Interior Secretary, Plastic Man Dirk Kempthorne (R) look like the font of all knowledge. Even the reddest Repubs don't trust Otter.
Brady just might win this thing!
But Idaho sends Bill Sali to represent our state in DC, I'll have to move. I couldn't take that much shame. The man cannot speak of gay issues without using the word "faggot."
October 29th, 2006 at 2:23 pmJohnG, sorry about the mixup, #71 intended for Mark Glesne. still distracted by the tv.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:23 pmeverybody who has served is an expert and all agrees on the same thing. How could I have been so wrong? Woe is I.
Comment by JohnG — October 29, 2006 @ 2:18 pm
You still don't get it. Figures. It's why you support the Bush Regime...
October 29th, 2006 at 2:23 pmSome people/points just aren’t worth debating. =)
Comment by Mark+Glesne — October 29, 2006 @ 2:18 pm
But you've posted it twice, so obviously it hits a nerve...
Why are you neocons so much nastier after church?
October 29th, 2006 at 2:24 pm#83 What truth, please make a some point, and back it up with fact, not speculation.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:25 pm#87 What don't i get exactly?
October 29th, 2006 at 2:26 pm#88 What a horrible argument...just keep the hate speech and personal attacks...charachter is something you obviously don't have.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:28 pmThe man cannot speak of gay issues without using the word “faggot.â€
Comment by Zooey — October 29, 2006 @ 2:23 pm
Well now that the boys are grown, what's keeping you there?
When I was in Boise, I had a friend who had a friend that was Latino. She was telling us about some redneck woman who cut her off in traffic, and then followed her to the parking lot of a grocery store where she began calling my friend's friend the 'n' word. I assume that's how people like Sali even get this far...
October 29th, 2006 at 2:28 pmWhat truth, please make a some point, and back it up with fact, not speculation.
Comment by JohnG — October 29, 2006 @ 2:25 pm
You first!
What don’t i get exactly?
Comment by JohnG — October 29, 2006 @ 2:26 pm
The hypocrisy of what Mark said. You just started defending him becsue he's a conservative and didn't bother to understand that in the past, he's done EXACTLY what he was criticizing people for today.
Blind faith might work for you, but I prefer to know what my target is before I start shooting...
October 29th, 2006 at 2:31 pmthe end of the fight is a tombstone white with the name of the late deceased
-Rudyard Kipling
October 29th, 2006 at 2:33 pmWhat a horrible argument…
Translation: I got nothing. I'll just deflect with some vapid comment. -JohnG
just keep the hate speech and personal attacks…
Translation: Projection usually works, so I'll try that. Accuse others of what I'm doing. -JohnG
charachter is something you obviously don’t have.
Comment by JohnG — October 29, 2006 @ 2:28 pm
Translation: Even though I don't this person, I'll wildly grab something out of my rear end, and smear it against the wall to deflect from the fact that I'm doing exactly what I'm now criticizing. -JohnG
October 29th, 2006 at 2:34 pm#93, no I asked you a question this time.
What don't I just get?
October 29th, 2006 at 2:37 pmMurtha rules. Still don't want him to be majority leader.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:39 pmWhat don’t I just get?
Comment by JohnG — October 29, 2006 @ 2:37 pm
I've already answered your question - twice. If you don't understand, then it's because you don't want to.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:42 pmWell now that the boys are grown, what’s keeping you there?
College residency issues. Fragile parents. F*cking job.
I assume that’s how people like Sali even get this far…
Comment by unbelievable
Zoo Jr is working at the PBS station for work study, and after a program with Sali & Grant, the crew shook hands with them. Zoo Jr told Sali he smelled really nice. Sali whipped his hand away from Jr in a heartbeat. Mama Zoo is so proud of Jr.... *sniff*
October 29th, 2006 at 2:56 pm#98 What comment #?
October 29th, 2006 at 3:08 pmHey JohnG -- Do you have anthing better to do today than trolling? Go back to Freeperville, please? You're not having a debate, you're just being a dick.
October 29th, 2006 at 3:09 pmGonna disappear for a spell. Got an antiwar meeting to attend to plan our next civil disobedience and protest. Other members of the Vietnam Veterans against the war will be there too.
October 29th, 2006 at 3:09 pm.
The Secret Letter From Iraq
By: Nicole Belle on Sunday, October 29th, 2006 at 12:10 PM - PST
Time.com:
Written last month, this straightforward account of life in Iraq by a Marine officer was initially sent just to a small group of family and friends. His honest but wry narration and unusually frank dissection of the mission contrasts sharply with the story presented by both sides of the Iraq war debate, the Pentagon spin masters and fierce critics...
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/10/29/the-secret-letter-from-iraq/
October 29th, 2006 at 3:15 pm.
It's good for our soldiers' morale when they realize that we, the American public, understand how bad it is over there for them. Only a Republican idiot in deep denial would think that soldiers who witness the carnage and chaos in Iraq on a daily basis would be filled with a warm, fuzzy feeling when pathological liars like Cheney rant on and on about how great the war effort is going.
October 29th, 2006 at 3:20 pm#104 I never said war isn't hell...your alternative in abandoning iraq would provide a different level of hell you have never imagined.
October 29th, 2006 at 3:46 pmIts called Vision, it's something Wimps, Shrub Sr or Jr don't have.
October 29th, 2006 at 4:29 pmThe US would not abandon Iraq, we would likely return to controlling the Airspace and put sanctions in place like it was before.
October 29th, 2006 at 4:33 pmYou mean the messiah isn't coming?!?
October 29th, 2006 at 4:34 pmJohnG
The current issue is that there is no goal in Iraq: Nothing concrete to work towards, no timetable to achieve anything and nothing even resembling a plan that goes further then keeping the soldiers in there getting shot.
Currently what is killing troop morale is not the enemy; you kind of expect those when you are in a war zone, nor the press, which is on the soldier's side and has always had a take on any war, it is the incompetent leadership those soldiers have got. They do not have a clear purpose other then getting shot at, something which most soldiers probably deduced from "Fighting them there so we don't have to fight them over here." (To which, I can only answer, Republicans, Making Terrorism more convenient then EVAR!)
Currently the best bet is for America to cut its losses. Terms of victory in Iraq are too vague for it to be readily achieved, so it is time for America to withdraw. Saving face has got to be the dumbest reason I have ever heard for killing people - and currently that is all that is keeping America in Iraq.
If the funding for Iraq went into alternate fuel sources we would all be driving hydrogen powered cars by now, and Islamic terrorism would be a lot less of an issue. Kill oil, kill the significance of the Middle East, kill the funding of all of those Islamic terrorist groups. The money being spent on the war can be more usefully spent making the enemy bankrupt.
October 29th, 2006 at 4:35 pm#106 Oh common. Lets look in to the magic vision crystal ball of the obvious. "redeployment" is any change, any time in the future...can't get more general than that.
October 29th, 2006 at 4:39 pm"Its called Vision, it’s something Wimps, Shrub Sr or Jr don’t have."
Exactly. Although I am a big fan of the space program, when I heard about "George W. Bush's /vision/" for same, I had to choke back something between a projectile vomit and a spit take. Hard to say which, but Frosted Flakes were involved.
I had a similar reaction when someone posted (positively) about "Bush's analysis" in another thread here, today.
Don't you have to possess vision to promote one, and have a certain capacity for thought to analyze something?
And, no, "legacy" degrees from Ivy league schools don't necessarily count.
October 29th, 2006 at 4:41 pmYah, must be why James Baker [Iraq Group] is also thinking of a new name for 'redeployment'
The GOP never has any ideas of their own!!..bwahahhahahhahah!!
October 29th, 2006 at 4:43 pmthis is all the more amazing since the vast majority of the military believes Saddam was involved in 9/11
Zogby in February '06:
Nearly nine of every 10 - 85% - said the U.S. mission is "to retaliate for Saddam's role in the 9-11 attacks," while 77% said they believe the main or a major reason for the war was "to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-zogby/on-a-new-poll-of-us-sol_b_16497.html
October 29th, 2006 at 5:02 pm#113 Bush wants us to win, whatever it takes.
(IMHO, Liberals don't want us to win in Iraq, spy on enemies in the US, or protect this country with defense systems...just appease thugs and terrorists...great plan!)
It's you liberals who have stereo typed the bush administrations intentions "of stay the course" which means until we win and pacify the country. You don't comprehend the full speeches the president and the administration gives...which 99% of you never hear or read anyway. You just pick up the liberal one liners, and think it has the full context.
Think.
October 29th, 2006 at 5:05 pm#112
Name one idea (even if it got squashed), besides giving up in iraq, the the democrats have come up with in 6 years?
GOP record:
October 29th, 2006 at 5:12 pmSocial Security Reform
Medicare reform
Reducing taxes, mostly on small business owners
Staving off a recision from the tech bubble, Clinton corporate scandals, and 9/11. Breaking records in growth and job creation.
Two fair judges
JohnG,
Under the Dems we would have gotten:
Real Social Security Reform, after having not looted it in the first place;
October 29th, 2006 at 5:30 pmReal Meidcare Reform, that doesn't make life harder on the elderly;
Fair tax rate for all taxpayers;
Real economic growth, not a house of cards;
No Clinton corporate scandals, since Clinton is no longer President;
Enron would have been headed off at the pass, saving countless retirement accounts and savings accounts;
Actual job growth and creation;
Some effort, any effort would have been made to prevent 9/11 from happening;
If we were unable to prevent 9/11, osama bin Laden would be on trial now, or dead;
650,000 Iraqis would still be alive;
almost 3000 of our troops would still be alive, 25,000 would be whole and uninjured, and the military would be strong; and
Two exceptional Judges.
A recent poll said that 61 percent of Iraqis said they wanted the US out.
October 29th, 2006 at 5:31 pmExactly. Although I am a big fan of the space program, when I heard about “George W. Bush’s /vision/†for same, I had to choke back something between a projectile vomit and a spit take. Hard to say which, but Frosted Flakes were involved.
Comment by Glenn+Becker — October 29, 2006 @ 4:41 pm
ah ha! ... that was great!... thanks for the laught, and the visual...
and the affirmation about the space program...really...
October 29th, 2006 at 5:33 pmmy son is also a fan, but these days (years), i'm reserved and it's because of bushco... and i think it may have to take a backseat to another apollo project - alternative fuels...
.
w00t, zooey!
October 29th, 2006 at 5:37 pmJohn G
How about a budget surplus as was had under Clinton, instead of this ludicrous unsustainable spending spree under Bushco? Do you realise how much stupendous debt the US is clocking up every minute since Bush came to power? With or without his futiel war that has served no purpose except to make $
Democracy in the ME? Yeah right. Not even you believe that...why do youthink we are in Iraq? No seriously why?
Also 'liberals dont want us to win'
'wny do you hate america'
mean nothing...they're just spin...comfort zones meaningless and offensive.
When libs say they want the troops out ITS TO PROTECT THE TROOPS, not to lose the war...
IT'd be better for everyone IF this war was winnable...not for it to drag on while at the same time the US tells the whole world including the UN to fcuk off....
Bottom line - this government is incompetant. You know this John G.
October 29th, 2006 at 5:39 pmIt's a clusterf*ck, sir.
October 29th, 2006 at 5:44 pm#116 Bullshit, that's all specualtion...you live in a fanatasy land. Everything you state is argumentitive.
name one idea, not specualtion, besides the giving up in iraq theat the democrats have givenin the last six years...even if it got squashed in the congress? A real idea they stood behind, just one. It can't have been an opponent of republican agenda, it would have to be on their own.
October 29th, 2006 at 5:44 pmWhy are you neocons so much nastier after church?
Comment by unbelievable
Ha ha ha.
October 29th, 2006 at 5:50 pmThis Murtha just wants to grab the “anti-war hippy love†(like my man #5 Juan)…
Dont get me wrong. I would put your teeth in your stomach if you threaten me or my family. One thing is to be a pacifist, another differently is to not know how to defend oneself.
I've heard a lot of Reich-wing talk claiming the Democrats don't want us to "win in Iraq."
I would like to know, what does it mean to "win in Iraq?"
October 29th, 2006 at 5:52 pm#122
No actually it was from a consevative website, the poll, i mean. So I was suprised by it too. But it's true, Im not shitting you, cant remember where, but it'll come to me.
Also you dodge the question about Iraq why?
Also If and when the Dems win power they have a limited agenda of things that they will say they do...also I dont know if you're aware of this sunshine but George Bush has been the Prez for 6 years...and guess what there's been a repub congress since 1994! news huh? learn somthing everyday. Who the hell are you Rip van winkle?
If this is 'argumentative' your rebuttals are patent nonsense as you wont answer any quesitons, time to waterboard I suppose is it?
Also a question that Brisead asked I was going to to,
I would like to know what it means to win in Iraq too.
Can you answer anything civily John G?
October 29th, 2006 at 6:06 pm#123: Ask Snow?
October 29th, 2006 at 6:07 pmYeah you cant answer a simple series of questions. The Dems will be judeged when/if they getpower, your good'ol boys are being judged now.
AS for Iraq um....it's pretty mush a no brainer that you're in Fantasy Land there little man.....
October 29th, 2006 at 6:11 pmEverything you state is argumentitive.
Comment by JohnG
It's every bit as "facty" as your list, idiot. Quit whining.
October 29th, 2006 at 6:28 pm#115 Zooey; You go girl!!!
October 29th, 2006 at 6:47 pmsorry - Huffington post
October 29th, 2006 at 6:59 pmThanks Uncle Ho, you're making me blush. You know how sweet I am. :P
Long time no see, how goes the anti-war effort?
October 29th, 2006 at 7:02 pmWhen your treated to all the sterilization of ideas and the basic truth of fact and you are unable to offer up anything deemed worthwhile and you continue to remain as a servant to a unjustified cause, ther must come a time to stand up.
October 29th, 2006 at 7:11 pmThe Congressman has and so have apparently many of our noble troops. We all need to support their courage.
When your treated to all the sterilization of ideas and the basic truth of fact and you are unable to offer up anything deemed worthwhile and you continue to remain as a servant to a unjustified cause, ther must come a time to stand up.
October 29th, 2006 at 7:11 pmThe Congressman has and so have apparently many of our noble troops. We all need to support their courage.
#119 Budget surplus? You think recession after 9/11, the tech bubble (under clinton), and corporate scandals (mostly under clinton) it's bush's fault. Obviously tax revenues go down after that...do you think bush has magic powers?
Our deficit was under 300bil this year...with a war, homeland security, border enforcement, etc., etc...all increasing the post 9/11 world. If you have a problem with that...then Clinton should have spent the money on one hellfire missile the 3 times we had bin ladin in our sites on his watch. This is after he slashes the military and intelligence budget, of course while he's at it.
Do you remember anything other than your liberal regurgitated propaganda.
Wussy liberal democrats incompetence caused 9/11.
October 29th, 2006 at 7:43 pm#119 +1 = #120
October 29th, 2006 at 7:44 pm#120
Again, liberal logic doesn't add up...typical. You can't deny the outcome of losing the war and causing chaos in that region for years to come.
October 29th, 2006 at 7:46 pm#122 Juan, after reading comment #5..."i don't like the military".
How would you "put my teeth in my stomach"...if you had no arms (no mitlitary). How would you protect your family. Too late.
October 29th, 2006 at 7:51 pm#123
Well, I don't know if they have a picture version for liberals...but:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/iraq_strategy_nov2005.html
October 29th, 2006 at 7:54 pm#127 well except for the social security reform, which democrats stated there was no problem to screw the country for political purposes...do you not know what laws have been passed in the last 6 years.
I asked for one original idea that democrats have actually fought for, regardless if it got squashed in congress. Something that wasn't in glaring opposition to any GOP idea
Not acceptable, the democrats: giving up in iraq, or not integrating terrorists except by talking to them, and leaking classified programs to the NYT.
It's easy to second guess all day, 20-20 hindsight is swell.
October 29th, 2006 at 8:02 pmOMG, you liberals are deleting my comments!!!! You deleted all my back posts...you fascists bastards.
I have proof, I kept copies of the pages!
October 29th, 2006 at 8:04 pmOMG, you liberals are deleting my comments!!!! You deleted all my back posts...you fascists bastards.
I have proof, I kept copies of the pages!
Thinkprogress deletes posts that don't agree with them!
My vogon poetry!!
October 29th, 2006 at 8:07 pmYou slimy bastards, I guess there is no point debating with facists.
Your site is called think progresss, and you filter out comments that don't agree with your liberal agenda?
Some progress?
October 29th, 2006 at 8:11 pm#138 - JohnG
I was responding your list, with a list of my own. Clearly, I was not responding to your request for any original ideas the Dems may have had.
Try to be gracious, mine is the better list of factiness.
October 29th, 2006 at 8:23 pmThinkprogress deletes posts that don’t agree with them!
Comment by JohnG — October 29, 2006 @ 8:07 pm
No John, they delete posts from people who come here merely to insult and start flame wars. That is what you are guilty of - violating site policy, repeatedly.
Try debating an issue like an adult and no one will have problems with an opposing point of view being posted. Despite your ignorance of liberals, we don't always agree with each other... Or with TP. And they don't delete that, as long as it's civil...
October 29th, 2006 at 8:27 pmNow, unbelievable, the Vogon Poetry is a true loss. JohnG spent minutes and minutes on it.
October 29th, 2006 at 8:31 pmNow, unbelievable, the Vogon Poetry is a true loss. JohnG spent minutes and minutes on it.
Comment by Zooey — October 29, 2006 @ 8:31 pm
What's a Vogon?
He probably plagerized it, which is why it was scrapped...
October 29th, 2006 at 8:33 pmunbelievable,
Google "Vogon Poetry."
JohnG had posted some truly awful poetry on a couple threads, and I had told him it was poetry a Vogon would be proud of. He complimented my wit. I thought it was sweet, so I have only called him an idiot one time today.
October 29th, 2006 at 8:38 pmComment by TomPaine
I would ask that you please not assume you speak for everyone in the military, because certainly you do not.
Comment by Mark+Glesne — October 29, 2006 @ 1:05 pm
Didnt get to finish had to go...
I can speak of what I know. 30 out of 30 feels there is no sense of mission; Artilleryman=Convoy Security???; 29 out of 30 think we should have never gone to war. Marines have 6 month deployments I'm watching Marine battalions leave that arrived in theater 4 months after my brigade. I'll watch their replacements leave and the new ones come in, in ONE ARMY DEPLOYMENT. So excuse my cynincism and sarcasm as my wife and I will do the equivalent of 2 1/3 Marine combat tours all in one fell swoop.
October 29th, 2006 at 8:46 pmso I have only called him an idiot one time today.
Comment by Zooey — October 29, 2006 @ 8:38 pm
You're a saint...
"Ode to a Small Lump of Green Putty I Found in My Armpit One Midsummer Morning" Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, eh? Should I dare to ask you about any Star Trek fetishes? :)
October 29th, 2006 at 8:46 pmSo excuse my cynincism and sarcasm as my wife and I will do the equivalent of 2 1/3 Marine combat tours all in one fell swoop.
Comment by TomPaine — October 29, 2006 @ 8:46 pm
Oh, no, no - you are more than entitled! Mark is an ass. He might be a Marine, but he has served one tour as a desk jockey in the Green Zone no doubt and has no right to degrade you for how our country has taken advantage of your willingness to defend our country.
Thanks for speaking out. Hopefully in another 10 days, Bush will become a lame duck and we can begin to end this debacle.
October 29th, 2006 at 8:53 pm“Ode to a Small Lump of Green Putty I Found in My Armpit One Midsummer Morning†Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, eh?
JohnG's poetry was even worse than that.
Should I dare to ask you about any Star Trek fetishes? :)
Comment by unbelievable
Oh no, don't be silly! My heart belongs only to Zaphod Beeblebrox. Although I'm not sure which of his heads I like best...
October 29th, 2006 at 8:58 pmJohnG’s poetry was even worse than that.
Then, Thanks TP for getting rid of it! :)
Oh no, don’t be silly! My heart belongs only to Zaphod Beeblebrox. Although I’m not sure which of his heads I like best…
Comment by Zooey — October 29, 2006 @ 8:58 pm
I saw the movie. It sorta sucked. So I've forgotten the details. Zaphod... was that the character with teh flippy heads that was played by the actor who sorta looks like Dana Carvey? He was Wild Bill in The Green Mile?
October 29th, 2006 at 9:05 pmAttacking Murtha is just a convenient tool to the trolls to enter the conversation. You have to remember that these mental midgets are part of the bitter 33% who refuse to comprehend what bush and his moron minions have perpetrated on our democracy, and on the peoples of the world. Ignore these trolls, unless of course you like to burn off some frustration arguing with the wall.
October 29th, 2006 at 9:07 pmOMG, that movie sucked hard. The best was the Vogons -- and Ford Prefect, what a cutie. No idea who the actor was who played Beeblebrox.
I much prefer the books, and the cheesy old tv series. I don't think they show it anymore.
October 29th, 2006 at 9:10 pmFrom the link regarding Victory in Iraq:
Three years and HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS later, and Bush hasn't even achieved one of the short term goals. The government is seen as a puppet government, incapable of providing security and fractured along sectarian loyalties. Sectarian violence is increasing. Infrastructure is decreasing. And their Constitution establishes an Islamic theocracy.
If, after 3 years, a government cannot stand on its own without the backing of 140,000 U.S. troops, then I suggest to you that that government is not a legitimate government. It is a regime imposed by an occupying force.
But the real problem: the definition of "victory" is a political one, not a military one. Our young women and men are being misused by their Commander in Chief.
McCain, the annointed successor to Bush, has called for an additional 20,000 women and men to go to Iraq. I wonder what would happen if the troops, en masse, risked court marshal and refused to go? What would happen if tens of thousands of U.S. soldiers went AWOL at the same time? That's the risk of misusing an army. At some point, morale breaks.
October 29th, 2006 at 9:35 pmMark is an ass. He might be a Marine, but he has served one tour as a desk jockey in the Green Zone
Comment by unbelievable
Haha. Desk jockey? Green zone? More military "expertise" from the Left.
Unbelievable indeed.
October 29th, 2006 at 9:37 pm#155 continued...
unbelievable, please go on. I'd love to hear more about my tour in Iraq.
(this ought to be good)
October 29th, 2006 at 9:43 pmThere are two kinds of "warriors", those who lead the attack and those who feed the enemy. Teddy Roosevelt was cursed by his infantry because they were pressed to keep up with him. His cavalry was equally challenged. In contrast, W is incapable of charging a battery.
October 29th, 2006 at 10:24 pmTeddy Roosevelt was cursed by his infantry because they were pressed to keep up with him. His cavalry was equally challenged.
Comment by WaltTheMan
mmmm...Walt. Im not defending anyone here, but Teddy just won ONE battle in the taking of Cuba from Spain. He sucked.
October 29th, 2006 at 10:41 pmLegal expert Briseadh na Faire wrote, "I wonder what would happen if the troops, en masse, risked court marshal and refused to go? "
It's "court martial," Clarence Darrow.
October 29th, 2006 at 10:49 pm#158 - Juan+C,
October 29th, 2006 at 10:49 pmJuan, that is only a matter of perspective. The only prize in the war was Puerto Rico (and yes, the Philippines). Cuba went independent. That begat another problem.
Exley, yes, I'm guilty of writing a homophone.
"marshal" should have read "martial."
October 29th, 2006 at 11:09 pmThe only prize in the war was Puerto Rico (and yes, the Philippines). Cuba went independent. That begat another problem.
Comment by WaltTheMan
Teddy took the Channel of Panama (nobody asked the Panamanians), the countries you named (They had to sunk its own ship "Maine") and dismembered Columbia. Now, his son was a real president.
So, you see countries taken by the force as prizes...Come on, you are far better than that.
October 29th, 2006 at 11:32 pmIt’s “court martial,†Clarence Darrow.
Comment by Exley
You lecture nobody here, Ex. You still have to see whats the outside world. For real, I mean.
October 29th, 2006 at 11:36 pmIt’s “court martial,†Clarence Darrow.
Comment by Exley
Wow. For one so concerned with manners, that was incredibly rude.
October 29th, 2006 at 11:48 pmJuan, FDR was not a son of Teddy. The Panama canal incident was effected well after the Spanish/American war and was never an issue with Spain - it was with France and Columbia. Simon Bolivar had kicked Spain and Portugal out of South and Middle America about 80 or 90 years before Teddy had entred the fracus.
October 29th, 2006 at 11:50 pmFDR was not a son of Teddy
History is not Juan's strong suit.
October 29th, 2006 at 11:53 pmComment by WaltTheMan
I stand corrected. My mistake...a lot of them.
History is not Juan’s strong suit.
Comment by Exley
In fact it is not. I get confused about how many times US has invaded the same country under different governments...its hard to pick up.
October 29th, 2006 at 11:58 pmNo problem, Juan. I am always happy to correct your misstatements of history (of which you make so very many)...By the way, I was offline all weekend and yet tonight reading through some of the posts made over the weekend, I see you referenced me twice. Wow...Even when I am not around, I still fascinate you! I think the only one more obsessed with me is Zooey.
October 30th, 2006 at 12:02 amI see you referenced me twice. Wow…Even when I am not around, I still fascinate you! I think the only one more obsessed with me is Zooey.
Comment by Exley
Are you still looking for my apologies??? Would that make you feel better?? I mention you, as most of the people here, as one of the most clueless posters ever. But youre funny to watch. Thats all.
October 30th, 2006 at 12:11 amObsession??? Im a buddhist...I have no obsessions (or try).
Now...T. Roosevelt was at the front of US forces against Spain. He won just one battle. US took in 1898 Puerto Rico and Cuba. Cuba didnt remain independent. US invented a better way to controlling new conquered territories: military puppet governments. It was cheaper, I guess.
So Franklin D. Roosevelt wasnt T. Roosevelt´s son? I should be using "the Google" more often.
October 30th, 2006 at 12:15 amone of the most clueless posters ever.
Says the man who just asserted that FDR was Theodore Roosevelt's son.
No, Juan. I seek no apologies from you. I find you to be a rather amiable fellow, whose mind has been filled with a lot propaganda and has yet to learn his history, and who, as a result, does not understand current (or past) world affairs. I seek only to educate you, you poor misguided "ThinkProgressive" you.
October 30th, 2006 at 12:19 amTheodore Roosevelt assumed the office with the same vigor with which he charged up Kettle Hill. A long believer in Captain Mahan's theory of sea power, Roosevelt began to revitalize the navy. Now that America's empire stretched from the Caribbean across the Pacific, the old idea of a canal between the two oceans took on new urgency. Mahan had predicted that "the canal will become a strategic center of the most vital importance," and Teddy agreed.
"The canal," Roosevelt said, "was by far the most important action I took in foreign affairs during the time I was President. When nobody could or would exercise efficient authority, I exercised it."
October 30th, 2006 at 12:22 amSays the man who just asserted that FDR was Theodore Roosevelt’s son.
I confused the lastnames and the generation match. I dont have a problem making mistakes. Thats what makes me learn.
whose mind has been filled with a lot propaganda and has yet to learn his history, and who, as a result, does not understand current (or past) world affairs.
Ok. Says the guy who has never left his block.
I seek only to educate you, you poor misguided “ThinkProgressive†you. Comment by Exley
October 30th, 2006 at 12:28 amAny individual is responsible of his own happiness.
I dont have a problem making mistakes. Thats what makes me learn.
Good to know, Juan. And I'll be right here correcting your mistakes and, thus, helping you to learn. No need to thank me. It's my pleasure.
October 30th, 2006 at 12:36 ammmm...I was right about never leaving the block, wasnt I? So...when can you speak spanish so we can communicate better? Oh, you dont know...
October 30th, 2006 at 12:41 amGoodnight, Juan. You're a fantastic person.
October 30th, 2006 at 12:42 amOk, you can talk about the Mets if you want...
October 30th, 2006 at 12:44 amOh, we communicate just fine as we are, Juan. You understood when Walt corrected your latest factual misstatement. You have understood me when I have corrected you on the history of the Nicaraguan freedom fighters' victory over the Marxist Sandinistas. No, our current method of communicating now is working perfectly well. You seem to be learning from me just fine. Why change now? If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
October 30th, 2006 at 12:46 am#177, Nah, Juan...Baseball season is over. Wayne, Jane, and I will not be talking about the Mets until the spring.
October 30th, 2006 at 12:48 amGoodnight, Juan. You’re a fantastic person.
Comment by Zooey
Oh, you were here!!! Thank you very much. Thats a big deal coming from you. Goodnight. :)
October 30th, 2006 at 12:49 amThinkprogress deletes posts that don’t agree with them!
Comment by JohnG — October 29, 2006 @ 8:07 pm
John G
October 30th, 2006 at 12:55 amI don't know which and how many of your posts have been deleted here; but given the vast number that still appear, many with your calling liberals "wuzzy" and"stupid," your complaint doesn't hold much water. I can only imagine that your deleted posts were simply irrelevant and/or outright vulgar.
And it's so typical of neo-CON trolls to blame everything on Clinton. 9/11 occurred on Bush's watch. There is plenty of documented evidence that Condi Rice and others were warned that Osama bin Laden was determined to strike within the US and FBI agents were warning about the suspiciious number of Arabs enrolling in flight schools wanting to learn only how to fly--not to land. Such warnings were ignored, while Bush went on vacation
You have understood me when I have corrected you on the history of the Nicaraguan freedom fighters’ victory over the Marxist Sandinistas.
Ha ha! Marxist Sandinistas...that was a good one. Freedom fighters that raped and killed american nuns...thats new, I guess.
The death toll in Nicaragua from the U.S. terrorist war based in Honduras per capita, relative to population, would be the same as about 2.5 million dead in the United States, which turns out to be higher than the total number of American deaths in all wars in the U.S. History, including the Civil War. So, from the Nicaraguan point of view, this was not a small event. It did lead to establishing democracy. With a gun at their heads after Bush warned them this was going to go on unless they vote for our candidate – this is Bush number one - Nicaraguans voted for the U.S. candidate and were rewarded for that by, uh – there was tremendous applause in the United States and "The New York Times" had big headlines saying ‘Americans united in joy…’, kind of like North Koreans, ‘Americans united in joy at the victory for U.S. fair play’. You know, that's pretty much what happened. Since then -- since the U.S. took it over again, Nicaragua's declined to the second poorest country in the hemisphere after Haiti. Again, by accident, Haiti happens to be the main target of U.S. military intervention in the 20th century. Nicaragua is second. But that's just another coincidence. About 60% of the Nicaraguan children under two are now suffering from severe anemia from
malnutrition, meaning probable permanent brain damage. Half of the active labor force is out of the country because there's no way to survive there. But it is regularly described in the "Wall Street Journal", too, as an economic miracle where you can buy anything that you want. Which is true. There are 24-hour malls open for people that can afford it.
You can buy computers and plenty of great things -- great place for retired Americans to go. They can live a very cheaply in wonderful mansions and so on. But for children under two, their prospects are permanent brain damage. And that's what we call a victory for democracy. That tells you something about the Bushs' messianic vision to bring democracy to Iraq using the same experienced official. And, we don't have to go on about the kind of democracy that he brought to Honduras or that the present incumbents and their Reaganite face brought to the rest of Central America, but that we're supposed to forget about.
Wayne, Jane, and I will not be talking about the Mets until the spring.
October 30th, 2006 at 1:00 amComment by Exley
I know baseball is a big deal for you. I have a friend in the Lab who is from Veracruz, a city in the coast of the Gulf, where baseball is the official sport. A lot of african-latin blood there, so you get the picture. And I remember becoming interested when I was a kid, when John Kirby hit a HR in the world series that were won by the Dodgers. I get bored by baseball but I often watch the World Series.
Wouldn't you love to see Rove, W, Rummy and Darth in a room full of pissed off vets?
October 30th, 2006 at 1:25 amCan you spell gauntlet?
I get bored by JohnG, Exley and Hensler, but often watch the regulars pick them apart like the carcasses they are.
October 30th, 2006 at 1:26 amwho better to believe than a veteran, murtha, or the thugs in the whitehouse who have never experienced war, bush, cheney, rummy.
October 30th, 2006 at 8:05 ami choose murtha.
Juan, Franklin and Teddy Roosevelt were cousins. Franklin greatly admired Teddy, the first Progressive Republican. Unfortunately there was a split in the Republican Party and Progressive Republicans were no longer supported by the Party. Republicans became entrenced as the Party of Big Business from after Teddy Roosevelt to this day.
Those who still held to Progressive ideals found a home in the Democratic Party. Thus Teddy's cousin Franklin was a Democrat.
In the years between Teddy's presidency and FDR's, unregulated capitalism plunged the world into the Great Depression. It is not possible to know whether FDR's economic program would have eventually lifted the US out of the Depression, as WWII was born, fueled from the economic hardships in Germany and elsewhere.
October 30th, 2006 at 8:40 amIn the years between Teddy’s presidency and FDR’s, unregulated capitalism plunged the world into the Great Depression.
Thanks for the history and politics lesson, Briseadh.
I always had the impression that F.D. Roosevelt was one of the most progressive presidents of US history. He allowed leftist or liberal governments in Latin America (Lázaro Cardenas in Mexico, Getulio Vargas in Brazil, Perón in Argentina and González Videla in Chile). It was called the New Deal, I guess. A lot of this "allowance" had to do with the WWII, IMO. Now, when Roosevelt died, came Truman...who for all I know was a real major thug.
About Dems and Reps, from this side of the world (not US) it really doesnt matter who party is in the government. US economy is based on military development...so every 4 years we will have some rich-resources country occupied or invaded, whether there are Dems or Reps. :(
October 30th, 2006 at 9:11 amThank you, Mr. Murtha, both for your service and speaking truth to power.
October 30th, 2006 at 9:25 amJuan,
October 30th, 2006 at 10:18 amPerhaps you should write up a little quiz for Exley on Spanish history (en Español).
#189, Ah, but Walt, the difference is I do not purport to be an expert on Spanish history, nor do I go around lecturing people on the topic....I realize that I do not know enough about Spanish history to lecture others on the topic. That is the difference between me and Juan. Juan lacks an understanding of American history. Thus, he should avoid seeking to lecture about U.S. history. Juan is a fine fellow, but his understanding of American history is little more than a cacophony of left-wing propaganda and discredited revisionism.
October 30th, 2006 at 12:01 pmNor, Exley, are you knowledgeable on US history.
October 30th, 2006 at 12:09 pm#191, Oh, that is quite incorrect, Walt...In fact, I would classify my knowledge of U.S. history as encyclopedic.
October 30th, 2006 at 12:15 pmExley
October 30th, 2006 at 12:49 pmThat you classify your knowledge in such glowing terms, just means you are arrogant. Your knowledge is weak at best.
Bruce, "It ain't bragging if you can do it." (Quote attributed to Nolan Ryan).
October 30th, 2006 at 1:03 pmJuan is a fine fellow, but his understanding of American history is little more than a cacophony of left-wing propaganda and discredited revisionism.
Comment by Exley
I try to be a fine fellow, thanks. I dont know enough US history, thats true. I dont know who were the presidents of US, hell, I dont know the national anthem of Argentina or its presidents, etc. I am a mechanical engineer deeply attracted to social movements. That you describe your knowledge as encyclopedic is, of course, an exaggeration, but somehow its true. You lack the ability to interpret the events of history.
October 30th, 2006 at 1:10 pmJuan, That you describe your knowledge as encyclopedic is, of course, an exaggeration....Heh! Of course, Juan. I was engaging in a little non-serious egotistical hyperbole....
You lack the ability to interpret the events of history.
Of course, I feel the same way about you. I guess that's why we debate.
October 30th, 2006 at 1:15 pmI guess that’s why we debate.
Comment by Exley
No. You debate me because you want me to apologize for totalitarian communists regimes that killed millions of people. I have told you I do not support totalitarian regimes or any other that commits abuse against its own or other population. I have explained you that communism have not appeared in this planet, yet. You cant jump from a zarist or semi-feudal state to a communist one. I debate with you, mainly, because you are fun (no offense, really) and debate like my 20 y/o brother.
October 30th, 2006 at 1:36 pm#197 - Juan+C,
October 30th, 2006 at 1:55 pmSince you are an ME, I would guess that your last name is not Carlos.
Juan, I find your last posting ironic given that it is you who have gone to great lengths to apologize for the most brutal totalitarian regimes, figures, and ideology in world history (Soviet Union, Castro's Cuba, Pol Pot's Cambodia, the Sandinistas, etc). Your failure to understand that communism is inherently totalitarian and antithetical to economic and political freedom is an example of your inability to understand and interpret history.
While you remain a fine fellow, your politics and willingness to countenance the millions of victims of communism simply to prove a discredited political point is despicable. But it's the better angels of your nature, which you occasionally display, that makes me confident that someday you -- like many communists of the 1920s and 30s, such as Whittaker Chambers-- will mature and repudiate that hateful ideology which you embraced based on naivete and an unwillingness to recognize that endorsement of communism is tantamount to endorsing the brutal and oppressive tactics of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc.
October 30th, 2006 at 1:58 pmExley
Telling the truth about a given government is not appologising for it, its pointing out that things aren't 100% black and white. Most people who know the history will point out that Hitler did indeed have a strong economy, and that the Treaty of Versailles was excessive, but that doesn't change the assessment that Hitler was evil.
Meanwhile, whenever we raise issues like the US's support of Apartheid, or the toppling of the duly elected Communist Government of Chile in favour of an unpopular dictator that 90% of the population hadn't even heard of until the takeover, you seem to deny the whole lot or call it liberation.
Lets face it, anybody with a working knowledge of history can find much better presidents then Reagan to worship, yet you seem in love with the guy. The same Reagan who appointed a guy in charge of enviromental protection - who believed that we should destroy the enviroment in order to hasten the second coming.
Reagan wasn't the worst president in US history, but he is definitely the most over-rated (The title having past over the last year or so from JFK in my book.) Reagan's great success was the result of an unworkable system just ending its final collapse while he was in power, in other words, dumb luck. His great failures were mostly domestic and in the realms of poor choices. There have been worse presidents, heck Reagan doesn't even make the bottom ten, but he wasn't great.
October 30th, 2006 at 2:22 pmExley is lack of historical learning expect things he collected from censored books.
Actually, Third world countries was victims of both the Western "Free" World and the Soviet Evil Empire in the Cold war.
Both 2 super powers didn't care about "Democracy", "Freedom" or "Human rights" for countries where they chose as battlefields. They had their puppet fighters or govts commit murder, rape and loot against opposers.
Check the Iraq-Iran war when Saddam was a US's good "friend".
October 30th, 2006 at 2:49 pm
Bruce,
You said a lot there, but rather than focusing on the broad topic of whether Reagan was a great president or not (which has been and will continue argued ad infinitum -- By the way, his position fluctuates with me --- The top five ranking in 1) Lincoln; 2) Washington; and then 3,4, and 5 are -- in order -- James K. Polk, Harry Truman, and Ronald Reagan), let's focus on one thing you said -- Reagan's alleged support of apartheid (which we all agree was an immoral and odious system in South Africa).
Reagan's policy towards South Africa was one of "constructive engagement" -- in other words, diplomacy and negotiations designed to have the South African government dismantle its indefensible racial policies. The Reagan administration argued that economic sanctions would do more harm than good, especially for those the sanctions were intended to benefit. This stance by the Reagan administration was criticized by many liberals here in the U.S. and abroad.
But isn't diplomacy and engagement what so many "progressives" implore in international affairs, be it Iraq, Iran, or North Korea? Why was it acceptable to negotiate with a Saddam Hussein but deplorable to do the same with South Africa? Similarly, with sanctions....Calls for divestment and economic sanctions against South Africa were all the rage among progressives in the 1980s. yet, in the 1990s, these same progressives decried economic sanctions against Saddam Hussein's Iraq, claiming (incorrectly, as we now know) that the U.N. sanctions were responsible for killing millions fo Iraqi children. Many leftists called Clinton a criminal for supporting such economic sanctions.
Now, Bruce, do I remember correctly that you said you were a South African? If so, as a South African and a progressive, you are in an excellent position to explain to me these seeming inconsistencies in progressives' positions on diplomacy and sanctions.
October 30th, 2006 at 2:52 pmHey Exley, some best thing from US "freedom" fighters was My Lai Massacre. And recently, Steven D. Green has been charged with raping a 15-year-old girl, then shooting and killing her -- along with her mother, father and young sister.
October 30th, 2006 at 2:57 pm#203, Those were crimes carried out by individuals. Accordingly, they were (My Lai) and are being (Iraq) investigated and individuals prosecuted and punished. Those criminal actions were not undertaken as sanctioned, official conduct of the U.S. military and government.
That is the difference, Yangho. Whereas Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein used the deliberate murder and torture of innocents as a matter of official policy and tactics and rewards those who carry out such atrocities, such activities when committed by rogue members of the American military are prosecuted and punished by the U.S. armed services.
October 30th, 2006 at 3:10 pm#204 There was some systematic crime supported by US govt.
Remember "Strategic Hamlet Program" in Vietnam war
And My Lai was not individual's crime. It was results of the "body count" policy.
October 30th, 2006 at 3:29 pm
Exley, I will respect you if you stop lying me about good deeds of US policies in Cold War.
October 30th, 2006 at 3:31 pmYangho, if you are waiting for me to apologize for the West's victory over communism, the most murderous and brutal ideology in world history, you will have a long, long wait. America's sacrifices during the fight and ultimate victory over the forces of fascism (World War II) and communism (Cold War) are two great badges of honor for this country. Neither would have been defeated without the United States. And now, we are once again faced with a conflict with a great evil (radical Islamic fundamentalism).
October 30th, 2006 at 3:40 pm#208 - Exley,
October 30th, 2006 at 4:37 pmActually, the Soviet Union did more than all the other allies to disencumber the Axis. The Germans diverted more of their forces to the Eastern Front as the war wound down in Europe. When the Soviets attacked Northern Japan - A-Bombs aside, the Japanese generals caved in.
#209, Walt, You are undoubtedly correct that the USSR played a major, major role in defeating Nazi Germany. But without the U.S.-led second front opened up in Europe Germany's defeat became inevitable and happened faster than it otherwise would have happened. Would Nazi Germany have been defeated without U.S. involvement. Perhaps. But it would been much longer and much bloodier.
I will dispute you on the Soviet's role in the Pacific. The Soviets' late entry into that conflict played little to no role in Japan's defeat. That victory is almost 100% attributable to the United States.
October 30th, 2006 at 4:55 pm#208
I don't expect you apologize anything. But the fact is both Cold War and WWII serve for only US's interests. Yes, US won Cold War but paid by blood and tears of Third World's ppl.
Don't tell me, In WWII Allies was "Freedom" fighters. US rule over Philippine (The Philippines only achieved independence from America on July 4, 1946.). Britain dominated Middle-East and Indian. French colonized Indochina. They are all Colonists.
About the great evil "radical Islamic fundamentalism", I can tell you that US's policies in Cold War is its own father. Clue: Soviet-Afghanistan war and US supported Mujahadeen.
October 30th, 2006 at 4:59 pmHaha. Desk jockey? Green zone? More military “expertise†from the Left.
You didn't deny it... Based on your posts, you've admitted to serving ONE tour. You said that you loved it, so I figured you're a desk jockey in the Green Zone. The people who've seen battle don't love it Mark. Not unless they are demented. Are you saying you're demented? That would make sense too.
Unbelievable indeed.
Comment by Mark+Glesne — October 29, 2006 @ 9:37 pm
Yes, it applies to people like you who spout unbelievable nonsense. That way I don't have to keep typing it over and over when you post, it's just permanently there.
unbelievable, please go on. I’d love to hear more about my tour in Iraq.
(this ought to be good)
Comment by Mark+Glesne — October 29, 2006 @ 9:43 pm
Not really, Mark. You're a cliche. It's just fun to press your buttons and watch you dance...
Wanna discuss your latent homosexuality now? About you wearing pink panties and a bra under your camouflage?
October 30th, 2006 at 5:48 pmI dont have a problem making mistakes. Thats what makes me learn.
Good to know, Juan. And I’ll be right here correcting your mistakes and, thus, helping you to learn. No need to thank me. It’s my pleasure.
Comment by Exley — October 30, 2006 @ 12:36 am
And then perhaps Juan could help you with your English... :D
You can't blame the US 'liberal' media for Juan's political views. He lives in Mexico. Nice try though Exley, you just forget that you're not hanging around your usual Neanderthal crowd...
October 30th, 2006 at 5:53 pmExley,
October 30th, 2006 at 6:30 pmIf you read translations of Japanese messages after August 10th, 1945, you would realize that the Japanese military and rulers were scared shitless that they would be absorbed as a Soviet Republic. My family was in China at the the time - my father was an agent for the OSS on a diplomatic Visa.
#213 Ummmmm, Unbelievable, where do I blame the liberal U.S. media for Juan's lack of knowledge of American history????? Point it out....Oh, that's right! I didn't! Nice try, junior, but I am well aware of Juan's background...I even know the story about how his father came to realize that communism is inherently corrupt....
Please, Unbelievable...Try to do a better job next time. I hate to see you embarass yourself like you just did.
October 30th, 2006 at 9:33 pm#214, Walt...my father was an agent for the OSS on a diplomatic Visa. ...That is so cool!
I am sure the Japanese were indeed afraid of that. But the fact is the Soviets did nothing militarily against the Japanese throughout the war. The reason the Japanese were afraid of the Soviets is because they knew that after suffering defeat after defeat after defeat at the hands of the U.S. from 1942 to 1945, they had no military capability to stave off the Soviets. The war against the Japanese and Japan's ultimate defeat was overwhelmingly the doing of the United States.
October 30th, 2006 at 9:37 pmExley,
October 30th, 2006 at 9:42 pmYour encyclopedia was written on a cafe napkin.
Walt, How many battles did the Soviets fight against the Japanese in World War II between 1941 and 1945? How many Soviet soldiers died fighting Imperial Japan?
October 30th, 2006 at 10:22 pmExley,
October 30th, 2006 at 10:36 pmI'll explain a little about what was happening at the close of the Pacific Theater. On August 07th, 1945, the Soviets began to move naval forces into the vicinity of the northernmost islands of Japan after the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on the 6th. These islands were basically undefended because the Japanese believed the threat was from the south. By the 14th, the Soviets had secured these islands and had a fleet steaming towards the Sea of Japan from their Asian ports. In between, Nagasaki was nuked on the 9th, it had no bearing on the decision by the Japanese to declare surrender. They simply did not want to become a Soviet state.
As everyone should know, V-J day is officially September 2nd, the actual date was August 16th.
I even know the story about how his father came to realize that communism is inherently corrupt….
Thats not the story I told you. My father went to a sawmill in Chile. Allende´s democratic government had won and a lot of social programs were to be undertaken. US was furious. If any country not following IMF´s instructions have success to promote welfare, a lot of them will follow. Thats the main reason why there has been such more military governments in Latin America, get your head out of your ass. If you go to Argentina and say that those military governments were for argentinians benefit, they will rip your head off. Thats the problem of getting info from US mainstream media...you are clueless. You say the same in Nicaragua and they burn you alive.
Now, he went to this big sawmill and saw the misery of workers, a lot of them were maimed, all of them lived in subhuman conditions. That was the result of past capitalist military governments...but the communist party didnt care a lot to be honest. But thats the way of the political class whether it is a "communist" or a neoliberal. They dont give a f*ck. My father spoke there to the workers and told them: You dont have to ask anything from us (Commie Party), you have to demand it! You are leaving your sweat and blood in this place. I dont have to told you that he was kicked out. This happened days before Pinochet´s coup (financed by US...surprise!) and then 30,000 dead bodies will follow. My father lost friends there. He lost a girlfriend who was pregnant by the time...they tortured her, killed the baby and then they killed her. This was done by your Freedom Fighters. So, please, I maybe dont know how was T Roosevelt related with FD Roosevelt, but I have first-hand info about what US did in Latin America. And you are clueless.
October 30th, 2006 at 11:21 pmYour encyclopedia was written on a cafe napkin.
Comment by WaltTheMan
Walt...Im Juan Cristóbal.
October 30th, 2006 at 11:21 pmLONDON -- On Aug. 8, 1945 -- a week before Japan's surrender in World War II -- 1.5 million Soviet troops began a gigantic surprise attack against Japanese occupation forces in northern China and Korea, an area the size of Western Europe.
Within days, Tokyo's million-man army in the region had collapsed in one of the greatest military defeats in history.
"It was a massive campaign and a crushing blow for Japan, which was already in a bad way after fighting for almost four years in the Pacific War," said Nigel Steel, a World War II historian at the Imperial War Museum in London.
Historians say the now largely forgotten Red Army victory -- codenamed August Storm -- not only hastened the end of World War II but also set the stage for the Korean War and for the victory in 1949 of the Chinese communists in the civil war against the Nationalists.
Some Japanese historians believe it had a greater effect on the decision of the Japanese leadership to end the Pacific War than the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which came within days of the Soviet attack
October 30th, 2006 at 11:27 pm#220 Juan...This was the story you told to which I was referring:
Quick story (sorry for taking your time):
My father was in the communist party back in Argentina some decades ago (yeah, you would figure out why I think like I do, but dont judge me yet). He had to travel to Chile for a communist meeting. They were waiting for the president of the communist party in the airport and then the guy arrived IN ITS OWN FREAKING PLANE. At present a private jet costs around $100 million. Imagine how much did planes cost back then. You cant imagine my dad´s dissapointment. Communism is about fair distribution of the wealth (controlled by the state, ok, that part I dont like) and this guy has its own jet. There are crooks and murderers in both sides, so it is hard to attach passionately to an ideal expressed by human action. Of course, he left the party, but kept his principles (correct or wrong, whatever, doesnt matter).
I am sure you will be able to see that the best thing that can happen to you and the people you defend is permanent self-criticism seeking better ways to relate with people. Do you agree at some extent?
Comment by Juan C — August 10, 2006 @ 10:49 pm
October 30th, 2006 at 11:41 pm#219, Walt, That is very interesting and I do not doubt any of it. But it does not change the fact that it was the United States and the American soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines who bore the overwhelming bulk of the fighting against Imperial Japan from 1941 to 1945. Indeed, the Soviets and Japanese signed a neutrality pact in 1941, which remained in force throughout World War II until August 1945, at which time Japan was teetering on the brink of defeat.
Juan, Interesting. I must confess I did not know about August Storm.
Stalin committed the
Soviet Union to attacking Japan at the Yalta Conference in
February 1945. At that time, the United States and Britain
anticipated a long, bloody campaign on the Japanese mainland
in late 1945 and wanted Soviet support. Later, when the
1. Department of the Army. Japanese Monograph No. 155. Record of
Operations Against Soviet Russians on Northern and Western Fronts of
Manchuria, and in North Korea (August 1945). Japan, 1960. p. iii.
United States had produced nuclear weapons, the other allies
would have preferred to finish off the Japanese by themselves,
and keep the Soviets' role in East Asia to a minimum. The
Soviet leadership realized its people were tired of war, but
believed it had to seize the chance to increase their influ-
ence in post-war Asia. Other than wanting a role in the peace
settlement with Japan, Stalin wanted to retake southern
Sakhalin Island - lost in the 1905 war with Japan - and take
Japan's Kurile Islands. Also, the Soviets sought to gain
influence in post-war China by getting some trade concessions
with that country.2
GlobalSecurity.org
October 30th, 2006 at 11:51 pmHey Exley, I see you avoid me. It's fine for me, if you learn more before posting some historical facts, please. Again ,was you read censored books?
October 31st, 2006 at 12:07 amThe best thing was thousand ppl were brutal murdered and you still think murderers were Freedom Fighters.
October 31st, 2006 at 12:42 amYangho, I did not avoid you. We had our back-and-forth above. Your last posting (#211) did not contain any questions, so I did not respond. To what "censored books" do you refer?
October 31st, 2006 at 12:42 am#227 In last posting #211, I gave you my 3 point
1- US won Cold War but paid by blood and tears of Third World’s ppl.
2 - In WWII, Allies was “Freedom†fighters included US.
3 - The “radical Islamic fundamentalism†was born from US’s policies in Cold War.
You avoided to debate my point.
October 31st, 2006 at 12:52 am#228 Sorry 2- In WII, Allies was not "Freedom fighters" included US.
October 31st, 2006 at 12:53 amJuan,
October 31st, 2006 at 2:52 amI only meant to indicate that the current King of Spain is Juan Carlos I (With all of the royal spaghetti at the end.). He visited our fair city (Saint Augustine, Florida) about two or three years back.
I forgot about the Russian Manchurian (August?) campaign - I was only four at the time and the bomb and the islands penetrated my consciousness at the time (Dad was supporting the Navy.).
Exley
South Africa got peaceful elections out of Sanctions. Had Reagan or Thatcher done anything about it; Sanctions would have ended under them and the Apartheid Government would still be in power. Reagan sincerely didn't disapprove of the Nats. They preached the same kind of things the Republicans do now, "Fear the communists. Fear the terrorists. Fairness is communism. Communism is terrorism. Beware the red peril! Embrace the lord and FEAR FEAR FEAR." Frankly his idea of dangling the carrot was mainly intended to keep our government white and our policies anti-black. They were window dressed with talk about investment that if the world had accepted, wouldn't have come to anything.
October 31st, 2006 at 11:26 amPlease, Unbelievable…Try to do a better job next time. I hate to see you embarass yourself like you just did.
Comment by Exley — October 30, 2006 @ 9:33 pm
I didn't embarrass myself... Because I wasn't the one being an ass (hint: you were). I also called you out on your silly commentary and you didn't address it, but bait and switched. You need better smoke and mirrors.
October 31st, 2006 at 5:18 pmYoung Girls Young Girl Models Young Puffy Nipple
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 15th, 2008 at 4:28 pmInfo Puerto Rico Travel
and rest information about travel
March 17th, 2008 at 9:49 amConsolidation Loans
Primary consolidation including consolidation company who grants essential consolidation.
March 19th, 2008 at 12:21 pmRetirement Village Floor Plan
Your blog makes very interesting reading. I'm sure others will think so too I look forward to reading their comments.
March 20th, 2008 at 12:37 pmPee Public Pee Public Pissing
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 20th, 2008 at 8:52 pmGay Incest Gay Male Sex Gay Brothers
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 2:57 amAsian Asian Hotties Asian School Girl
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 10:06 amGay Sex Gay Ass Gay Ass
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 22nd, 2008 at 7:21 pmJack
Nifty.
March 24th, 2008 at 6:22 amPantyhose Fur Fetish Men In Pantyhose
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 27th, 2008 at 2:50 amretirement in panama
) Some individuals or companies have abused the TrackBack feature to insert spam links on some blogs (see sping). This enables authors
March 28th, 2008 at 2:39 amEric
Web traffic can be increased by placement of a site in search engines and purchase of advertising, including bulk e-mail, pop-up ads, and in-page advertisements. Web traffic can also be increased by purchasing non-internet based advertising.
March 29th, 2008 at 12:22 pmAsian Asian Schoolgirl Asian Porn Stars
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 30th, 2008 at 12:38 amSex Free Sex Pictures Office Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 30th, 2008 at 6:22 amPee Female Pee Pee Hole
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 30th, 2008 at 4:47 pmFree Granny Porn Lesbian Milfs Free Mom And Son Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 31st, 2008 at 6:34 amSchool Incest
came across our site doing some research coming from this other domain but as I can see it has nothing to do with "incest", guess its a mistake
April 1st, 2008 at 9:29 amGay Incest Old Gay Men Gay Male Galleries
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 2nd, 2008 at 6:32 amYoung Girls Youngest Boys Gallery Young Girls Naked
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 2nd, 2008 at 4:29 pmGay Incest Gay Cumshots Gay Jock
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 3rd, 2008 at 5:56 amGay Sex Gay Teen Gay Men Having Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:05 amSex Girls Having Sex Rough Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 3rd, 2008 at 2:17 pmGay Sex Gay Twinks Gay Hunks
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:53 pmGay Sex Gay Sex Videos Black Gay Men
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 4th, 2008 at 12:25 amRetirement Community In Pa
This article sounds well, but how everything is related together?
April 4th, 2008 at 12:35 am