Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) Calls Bush’s Iraq Policy a ‘Dereliction’ and ‘Deeply Immoral’
Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) Calls Bush’s Iraq Policy a ‘Dereliction’ and ‘Deeply Immoral’
On the Senate floor Thursday night, Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) said Bush’s Iraq policy “may even be criminal.” This morning on ABC’s This Week, Smith elaborated on his criticism of Bush, calling his Iraq policy a “dereliction” and “deeply immoral.” Smith said the death of ten soldiers on Wednesday made him go from “steamed to boiled” about Bush’s failed policies.
Watch it:
Transcript:
STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator Smith, let me begin with you. That was clearly a deeply personal speech, and it showed a dramatic change of heart. What triggered it?
SMITH: Waking up the other morning and turning on the news, and hearing that yet another ten of our soldiers died the same way that several thousand have —
STEPHANOPOULOS: Wednesday.
SMITH: Wednesday, to roadside bombs. I went from steamed to boiled, and I felt I had to speak out because if we’re going to be there, let’s win. If we’re not, let’s at least fight the war on terror in a way that makes sense.
STEPHANOPOULOS: You said in that speech that current policy may be criminal.
SMITH: I said it. You can use any adjective you want, George. But I have long believed in a military context, when you do the same thing over and over again, without a clear strategy for victory, at the expense of your young people in arms, that is dereliction. That is deeply immoral.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
98 Responses to “Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) Calls Bush’s Iraq Policy a ‘Dereliction’ and ‘Deeply Immoral’”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
Now that there are some actual checks and balances in the Government, seems folks aren’t as afraid to tell us what they are thinking.
December 10th, 2006 at 10:46 amYou know, it would be a hellova twist if the Republicans in Congress began the impeachment proceedings. In fact, it would be a sure-fire way for the Republican Party to regain control of the House and the Senate in 08 if they took the lead on this issue.
December 10th, 2006 at 10:48 amNah, nothing BushCo. has done has been the least bit…criminal. (*sarcasm off, now*)
December 10th, 2006 at 10:53 amGood to hear someone finally use the word “immoral” - I’ve been saying that for years about this disaster. One can only hope Bush and Co. are brought up on terrorism charges for what they has done to the Middle East.
December 10th, 2006 at 10:54 amYou are right, Briseadh na Faire. Um, Speaker Pelosi…..?
Apparently being “steamed” about the death of so many of our troops in Iraq isn’t enough — one must be “boiled.” Although I am glad he is speaking up.
December 10th, 2006 at 10:54 amAlas mr smith, and as he goes to washington. I am sorry, but this is dirty trick from someone that knows his political base is going to crush his chances for any future election. He has backed the killer all this time, wholeheartedly. Now suddenly he is saying the fellow he liked so much is a criminal?
You knew all along that he was a criminal. You participated in that crime and need to be held accountable for truly stupid and fiscally irresponsible behavior.
big noise from a little republican toy. we will remind you of your hypocrisy when we vote. and by mail in our state.
If what you say is true, and I am not going to deny you are moderate in many things, then act now. From now on, do something, do it now. Give those of us in Oregon a reason to vote for you again. We know you take a lot of timber money, and that isn’t good for our people that you are under the thumb of the people trying to rape our state and planet for their profit.
you are on notice. I am 90% likely to vote against you. That 10% is much better than any other republican candidate I have seen, for you are clearly a “slightly” moderate member of “the party of perversion, deceit, theft, war, religion, etc..
but you can choose your fate by showing your true colors, now.
December 10th, 2006 at 10:55 amWho care’s about all the irrelevant body bags?
December 10th, 2006 at 11:04 amBaby Bush is going to get a bigger aircraft carrier than Poppy Bush!
That’s what this is all about.
Smith is another rat bailing from the sinking ship. He doesn’t want to be the next sen maccaca or man on dog. Where was he over the last 3 years?
December 10th, 2006 at 11:11 amPunk
Who care’s about all the irrelevant body bags?
Baby Bush is going to get a bigger aircraft carrier than Poppy Bush!
That’s what this is all about.
Comment by OxyCon
… not to mention a much bigger library.
December 10th, 2006 at 11:13 amActions speak louder than words. Do something Senator and then we’ll believe you mean it…
December 10th, 2006 at 11:20 amThe slightly smarter rats are leaping from the quickly sinking SS BUSH. The ones who are left, still clinging, still in denial, still dreaming like Bush himself of some new magical plan for success, are clearly going insane.
Squeek squeek littl rats, I hope you can swim.
December 10th, 2006 at 11:21 amNow that there are some actual checks and balances in the Government, seems folks aren’t as afraid to tell us what they are thinking.
Comment by ForTruth — December 10, 2006 @ 10:46 am
And it’s people on the left who deserve credit for showing them that the checks and balances work - by refusing to go along to get along, by refusing to be intimidated, and by not being afraid to be labeled as traitors when we were not.
If nothing else, they should respect us for that.
December 10th, 2006 at 11:24 amSeems that all the Bert Lahrs out there in the GOP are getting their c-c-courage. As Zooey noted, better late than never.
(no offense to Dorthy’s friends)
December 10th, 2006 at 11:24 amSpeaking of Impeachment:
Impeachment Rallies Country-Wide
December 10th, 2006 at 11:25 amAnother gutless wonder that put his finger in the air to find out which way the political winds are blowing, me thinks the Senator doth protest too much.
December 10th, 2006 at 11:26 amWhile it’s nice to see him seeing the light, I’m wondering why our media is so enthralled by the foreign policy opinions of people who were so catastrophically wrong about the Iraq War in the first place.
I mean, did Smith like so many of his fellow Republicans accuse the wise people who opposed this war of being anti-patriotic or insane, instead of addressing the substance of their criticism of the war, which turned out to be right while his was wrong?
Seriously, these are the idiots who believed Democracy would spring full-grown in the sands of Iraq, that we would be “greeted as liberators,” and that 15 painted schools were more strategically significant than the widespread looting which indicated we had zero control of the country and not nearly enough troops back when enough troops could have made a difference.
Why are we listening to people like him at all? They were wrong. Catastrophically wrong. And they attacked the people who were RIGHT. Seriously, how does this idiot schmuck have any credibility at all?
December 10th, 2006 at 11:29 amAs Zooey noted, better late than never.
Comment by barrelhse
And now Smith has to toe that line, because he’s on tape on the floor of the Senate and on ABC saying it. No going back, baby…
December 10th, 2006 at 11:32 amyou’re a little late senator… by about 4 years.
December 10th, 2006 at 11:35 amSen Smith should also be charged with a Fish & Game violation for killing the last beaver in Oregon, just so he could wear it on his head.
December 10th, 2006 at 11:35 amTrueblu - regarding impeachment, this about the only impeachment resolution introduced in the House thus far:
Rep. Cynthia McKinney’s Full Remarks On the Bush, Cheney, Rice Impeachment Bill
Mr. Speaker:
I come before this body today as a proud American and as a servant of the American people, sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States.
Throughout my tenure, I’ve always tried to speak the truth. It’s that commitment that brings me here today.
We have a President who has misgoverned and a Congress that has refused to hold him accountable. It is a grave situation and I believe the stakes for our country are high.
No American is above the law, and if we allow a President to violate, at the most basic and fundamental level, the trust of the people and then continue to govern, without a process for holding him accountable, what does that say about our commitment to the truth? To the Constitution? To our democracy?
The trust of the American people has been broken. And a process must be undertaken to repair this trust. This process must begin with honesty and accountability.
Leading up to our invasion of Iraq, the American people supported this Administration’s actions because they believed in our President. They believed he was acting in good faith. They believed that American laws and American values would be respected. That in the weightiness of everything being considered, two values were rock solid: trust and truth.
From mushroom clouds to African yellow cake to aluminum tubes, the American people and this Congress were not presented the facts, but rather were presented a string of untruths, to justify the invasion of Iraq.
President Bush, along with Vice President Cheney and then-National Security Advisor Rice, portrayed to the Congress and to the American people that Iraq represented an imminent threat, culminating with President Bush’s claim that Iraq was six months away from developing a nuclear weapon. Having used false fear to buy consent, the President then took our country to war.
This has grave consequences for the health of our democracy, for our standing with our allies, and most of all, for the lives of our men and women in the military and their families–who have been asked to make sacrifices–including the ultimate sacrifice–to keep us safe.
Just as we expect our leaders to be truthful, we expect them to abide by the law and respect our courts and judges. Here again, the President failed the American people.
When President Bush signed an executive order authorizing unlawful spying on American citizens, he circumvented the courts, the law, and he violated the separation of powers provided by the Constitution. Once the program was revealed, he then tried to hide the scope of his offense from the American people by making contradictory, untrue statements.
President George W. Bush has failed to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States; he has failed to ensure that senior members of his administration do the same; and he has betrayed the trust of the American people.
With a heavy heart and in the deepest spirit of patriotism, I exercise my duty and responsibility to speak truthfully about what is before us. To shy away from this responsibility would be easier. But I have not been one to travel the easy road. I believe in this country, and in the power of our democracy. I feel the steely conviction of one who will not let the country I love descend into shame; for the fabric of our democracy is at stake.
Some will call this a partisan vendetta, others will say this is an unimportant distraction to the plans of the incoming Congress. But this is not about political gamesmanship.
I am not willing to put any political party before my principles.
This, instead, is about beginning the long road back to regaining the high standards of truth and democracy upon which our great country was founded.
Mr. Speaker:
Under the standards set by the United States Constitution, President Bush, along with Vice President Cheney, and Secretary of State Rice, should be subject to the process of impeachment, and I have filed H. Res.1106 in the House of Representatives.
To my fellow Americans, as I leave this Congress, it is in your hands to hold your representatives accountable, and to show those with the courage to stand for what is right, that they do not stand alone.
Thank you.
http://michaelmoore.com/mustread/index.php?id=787
December 10th, 2006 at 11:37 amRep. Cynthia McKinney, didn’t she slap a cop because she forgot to have her credintials with her? Good roll model.
December 10th, 2006 at 11:59 amSen Smith should also be charged with a Fish & Game violation for killing the last beaver in Oregon, just so he could wear it on his head.
Comment by Zooey — December 10, 2006 @ 11:35 am
LOL… That was ‘coke through the nose’ funny…
December 10th, 2006 at 12:00 pmRep. Cynthia McKinney, didn’t she slap a cop because she forgot to have her credintials with her? Good roll model.
Comment by robert — December 10, 2006 @ 11:59 am
Since it’s Sunday, I’ll throw you a bone:
“Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”
Okay, now that that is out of the way, let’s talk about whose sins are bigger robert…
December 10th, 2006 at 12:03 pmOregon Republican Senator Gordon Smith attempts CYA in 08 election
You’ve taken money from Jack Abramoff
You’ve supported the War in Iraq and Bush until now
You support Trent Lott as Republican Minority Whip, a racist that supported Strom Thurmond
“I wanna tell you, ladies and gentlemen, that there’s not enough troops in the army to force the Southern people to break down segregation and admit the nigger [1]] race into our theaters, into our swimming pools, into our homes, and into our churches.” — Presidential Candidate Strom Thurmond 1948 Campaign Speech
Senator Smith you are not fit to represent Oregon. We will vote you out in 08 overwhelmingly.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:09 pm“Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.â€
This does not state that the smaller sin is in a better position than those with a bigger sin.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:10 pmRep. Cynthia McKinney, didn’t she slap a cop because she forgot to have her credintials with her? Good roll model.
Comment by robert
Just because McKinney has a (D) behind her name, doesn’t mean she can do no wrong in the opinion of Democrats or liberals or progressives. That only holds true in the Republican world.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:11 pmunbelieveable,
It is easy for Rep McKinney to make a stand at the 11th hour when she has nothing to lose. Where has she been for the last 3 years? Where were the principles all this time? Suddenly, when there is nothing on the line, she finds them. They must have been stowed away with her House Membership pin.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:15 pmZooey, I have never taken the position that Republicans can do no wrong. EVER. I have taken the stand that I can not make negative comments about a sitting President. I take that stand because it is a LEGAL issue for me. As anyone familiar with the UCMJ can tell you, that is Disrespect towards a Superior Officer (Art 89).
December 10th, 2006 at 12:19 pmIt amazes me to hear the SCLM call Smith a moderate. With one exception (and I can’t remember what it was) he has signed on to every piece of crap this bunch has put forward for the last 6 years. Moderate hell.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:20 pmre: #29 Hang in there Robert
Hang in there Robert, help is on the way. We just elected a new House and Senate and we’re about to elect a much better commander in chief. In 08, you’ll be able to once again be a proud member of the US Armed Forces instead of a pawn for Bush that butchers innocent people.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:24 pmSlightly off topic, but Green Cheese Bush says that the Moon Study Group confirms his view that the Moon is really made of Green Cheese…
In other news, Bang, Zoom, We’re gonna send Mr. Green Cheese to the Moon…Where is NASA when you need ‘em?
Merry Christmas (or Happy Holy Days, if you prefer).
December 10th, 2006 at 12:24 pmAs anyone familiar with the UCMJ can tell you, that is Disrespect towards a Superior Officer (Art 89).
Comment by robert
My comment was in response to your comment, but it was not specifically aimed at you.
Your words may be bound by the UCMJ, but your thoughts are not.
You don’t seem to have a problem disrespecting Rep McKinney.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:29 pm#31, Thanks for the concern, but I am already a Proud Member of the Armed Forces. US Marine to be exact.
I was just as proud under Clinton.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:31 pmRep McKenny is not in my chain of command and I am not bond by the UCMJ with concern to her. I can not talk negativly about the SecDef, SecNav, or the President as they are in my chain of command.
As for my word being bound by the UCMJ but not my thoughts. As soon as I type my thoughts, they become words.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:37 pmBecause Smith has criticized the Iraq occupation should not disguise the fact that when Stephanopoulous directly asked him if he is in favor of withdrawal Smith hemmed and hawed and said basically that it depends upon the conditions on the ground, as if things are going to somehow magically improve. Smith justifiably bemoans the deaths of 10 American soldiers killed last Wednesday but cannot, apparently, ask himself what is the noble cause that these soldiers are dying for. Unfortunately, the vast majority of the Democrats and Republicans are the same way, since there is not one senator who is calling for the immediate withdrawal of the troops from that abattoir in Iraq. One wonders how many deaths it will take- 58,000?- before the politicians in both parties decide to change their minds on this issue.
Also, before the buildup to the war there was literally only one antiwar voice whom the corporate media saw fit to bring on their programs. On today’s Sunday talk shows, again only one antiwar voice is being heard and that is Ed Asner. I believe the expression is: The more things change the more they remain the same. If it was not for programs like Democracy Now! and others which are heard on Free Speech TV and Link TV, those voices in the antiwar movement would remain silent.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:40 pmAs soon as I type my thoughts, they become words.
Comment by robert
I don’t want you to type your thoughts, I just want you to be capable of thinking them — even if you don’t.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:42 pmThis does not state that the smaller sin is in a better position than those with a bigger sin.
Comment by robert — December 10, 2006 @ 12:10 pm
Oh robert…
The point I was making was that if no one ever is willing to stand up to those who are making the biggest sins, because they themselves are not perfect, then there will be even bigger sinners to contend with…
We must not let her minor imperfections get in the way that Bush is destroying the Constitution and the country… Otherwise, people like Bush will escalate their behavior.
Capisce?
December 10th, 2006 at 12:48 pmTO BAD MR. SMITH’S ROPE IS 3000 LIVES LONG.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:50 pmIt is easy for Rep McKinney to make a stand at the 11th hour when she has nothing to lose. Where has she been for the last 3 years?
She’s been anti-Bush all along, robert. You might wanna do some research before you suggest she has been silent on this matter. Just because FOX doesn’t broadcast it doesn’t mean it isn’t happening…
Where were the principles all this time? Suddenly, when there is nothing on the line, she finds them. They must have been stowed away with her House Membership pin.
Comment by robert — December 10, 2006 @ 12:15 pm
Firstly, you’re wrong.
But secondly, that’s NOT the point. The point is that we needed a non-neocon supporting majority in order to begin this process. Now that we have it, someone can move it forward. Get how that works or you want me to explain it to you?
December 10th, 2006 at 12:51 pmAs for my word being bound by the UCMJ but not my thoughts.
Comment by robert — December 10, 2006 @ 12:37 pm
Actually robert, you have an obligation through your oath, in which you swore an allegiance to the Constitution, to We The People over the President. Should a sitting President violate that Consitution, you are obligated to defend us, not him…
December 10th, 2006 at 12:55 pm“Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) Calls Bush’s Iraq Policy a ‘Dereliction’ and ‘Deeply Immoral’.”
Stated on the floor of the Senate while wearing a PINK shirt ! (Commie Bastard !).
December 10th, 2006 at 12:56 pm.
Zooey
Unfortunately, Robert seems to believe that because he is in the military, he must then take on the identity of a robot, not realizing, as Lt. Watada has tried to point out, that those in the military have a rght to think and to question, especially when it comes to an illegal and immoral war. If Robert were to see the documentary Sir! No Sir!, which centered upon the GI resistance movement during the Vietnam war, he would then realize that those soldiers were indeed able to think and question what their government was doing, i.e. engaging in an illegal war by killing the Vietnamese people, a people, like the Iraqis, who had never harmed, or threatened to harm, anyone in this country.
The best way to bring this illegal occupation to a halt is to have it happen from within. Bring the troops home- safely- now.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:56 pmrobert; yours is the point that i tried to bring up to these people yesterday.
December 10th, 2006 at 1:02 pmthat being-c. mckinney was not the best choice to file articles of impeachment.
but like the ‘good’ libs they are,they attacked me like a pack of hyena’s.
the point being,if you want to file articles,let a democrat with credibility,and who is still in office,do it.
some of these people aren’t too smart.
Comment by atlanta angie — December 10, 2006 @ 1:02 pm
Look, Ray, we know it’s you…
And we get that you think McKinney is corrput, even though she was never charged with anything, much less convicted… However, what you are missing, because it is actually her skin color that troubles you, is that she is not corrupt or immoral.
Sheesh…
December 10th, 2006 at 1:08 pmlook # 46,as far as i’m so called Ray,i left a message about that on yesterdays thread.
as far as mckinney,i never,ever,mentioned corruption or skin color-you just did.
it’s about the fact that she’s OUT OF OFFICE.
capisce? i guess not.
December 10th, 2006 at 1:38 pm#42, As the Congress has not activated the Military against the President of the United States I have still required by Law and Regulation to afford him all the courtesies of his office. I did the same for Clinton. Although I disagree with Bill Clinton politically (I still can not see the threat to the US in Kosovo) I never made public statement against him.
Erroll, No I do not believe in the Military following blindly. You have accused me of this MANY times. But members of the Military can not select what orders to follow unless they are ILLEGAL orders. Here is an example for you:
1) Go to Iraq under orders from the President, the US Congress, and sanction of the UN (not illegal)
December 10th, 2006 at 1:39 pm2) Shoot that woman walking across the street that has done nothing wrong (Illegal, violation of the Law of War)
3) Throw a grenade into the window of that building where someone is shooting at you (not Illegal)
[…] TPM and CNN reported it during the week and today Senator Gordon Smith… Republican (!)… from Oregon (!) broke it down for us further with George Stephanopoulos… STEPHANOPOULOS: You said in that speech that current policy may be criminal. […]
December 10th, 2006 at 1:41 pmre: #42 Obligations to the people and the constitution
As for my word being bound by the UCMJ but not my thoughts.
Comment by robert — December 10, 2006 @ 12:37 pm
Actually robert, you have an obligation through your oath, in which you swore an allegiance to the Constitution, to We The People over the President. Should a sitting President violate that Consitution, you are obligated to defend us, not him…
Comment by unbelievable — December 10, 2006 @ 12:55 pm
Great post unbelievable. It seems many soldiers quickly forget this fact. I understand why. The first day of basic training I was told by my Drill Sergeant’s that all civilians are scum and that I’m a maggot but since I am now a soldier, I am one step above civilians on the evolutionary food chain. It takes alot of brainwashing to get a peace loving 18 year old christian boy to go out and kill people so the reputation of civilians often gets smeared in the process of team building…
re:#36 Comment by Erroll — December 10, 2006 @ 12:40 pm
December 10th, 2006 at 1:45 pmEd Asner is a God btw
Republican Senator Gordon Smith, enough Rope to hang himself
re:#40 TO BAD MR. SMITH’S ROPE IS 3000 LIVES LONG.
Comment by JNE4KLPK — December 10, 2006 @ 12:50 pm
Actually Republican Senator Gordon Smith’s rope is much longer if you consider the millions of Iraqi casualties, the entitlement program casualties as tax dollars are diverted to an illegal war, the tax payers, and the physically and mentally maimed soldiers and their families…
Meanwhile Republican Senator Gordon Smith has been collecting tanlines and campaign cash in the Virgin Islands while protecting a millionaires’ tax dodge.
December 10th, 2006 at 1:46 pmRobert at #48
Your example of those example of crimes which, when discovered, is quite specious because in reality atrocities are being committed against the Iraqis on a daily basis because of the belligerent U.S. military presence in Iraq. I strongly suggest that you read the writings of, among others, Dahr Jamail and Nir Rosen and Robert Fisk and Patrick Cockburn of The Independent to discover what the Iraqi people have to endure under the thumb of the United States military. In the words of Burt Lancaster in the antiwar film The Train [1966], it would help to “broaden your horizons.”
December 10th, 2006 at 1:52 pmit’s about the fact that she’s OUT OF OFFICE.
Comment by atlanta angie — December 10, 2006 @ 1:38 pm
No she isn’t. Not until the new Congress is sworn in - in January…
Capisce now?
December 10th, 2006 at 1:54 pmRobert: “Although I disagree with Bill Clinton politically (I still can not see the threat to the US in Kosovo) I never made public statement against him.”
We did not send military power to Kosovo because of any threat to the United States. We sent the military there as part of our treaty obligations to NATO. As a member of the military, I’m very surprised that you don’t get that, Robert.
December 10th, 2006 at 1:57 pmThe first day of basic training I was told by my Drill Sergeant’s that all civilians are scum and that I’m a maggot but since I am now a soldier, I am one step above civilians on the evolutionary food chain. It takes alot of brainwashing to get a peace loving 18 year old christian boy to go out and kill people so the reputation of civilians often gets smeared in the process of team building…
Comment by Erroll — December 10, 2006 @ 12:40 pm
That’s appalling… But, not surprising. My middle brother was a soldier for just over 5 years. He left the Army not being the same person I grew up with…
December 10th, 2006 at 1:57 pm#53~unbeliev[ed]
oh,SNAP; how’d i miss that? ::sigh::
later y’all,
angie.
December 10th, 2006 at 1:59 pmRobert: “1) Go to Iraq under orders from the President, the US Congress, and sanction of the UN (not illegal)”
You keep acting like the War resolution, which was a resolution to allow the administration to wage war on Iraq IF NECESSARY, is cast in stone as a legal document. But, the administration failed in every significant way to live up to its end of the resolution so, as far as I’m concerned, it’s only value is as a piece of evidence in impeachment hearings.
December 10th, 2006 at 2:00 pmAs a member of the military, I’m very surprised that you don’t get that, Robert.
Comment by Bluedog49 — December 10, 2006 @ 1:57 pm
Precisely why his service record is under suspicion…
December 10th, 2006 at 2:03 pm***CUT AND RUN CUT AND RUN CUT AND RUN***
Gordon Smith - you are a traitor to this country. How can we win in Iraq when you’re criticizing the war? Think of the morale of the troops on the ground…
***FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP***
Gordon Smith - You have no conviction in your decisions; one year you’re for the war and the next year you’re against it…I bet 2008 will be one of those years when you’re against the war, but I guess public opinion could change between now and then…
Gordon Smith is nothing more than a political hack positioning himself for re-election in two years…I wish him the best of luck in failing.
December 10th, 2006 at 2:04 pmhow’d i miss that? ::sigh::
Comment by atlanta angie — December 10, 2006 @ 1:59 pm
A question you should ask yourself about all your points of view…
When I did, I could no longer support the Republican Party, Christian religion, or Corporate American mentality.
Reality truly does have a liberal bias…
December 10th, 2006 at 2:08 pmI am well aware that we went to Kosovo under NATO treaties. I am also aware that we went to Iraq with 41 other nations that had access to the same information as the US. But every one wants to point the finger ONLY at the US.
Unbelievable, any time you want to see proof of my service I will be glad to provide it. Are you willing to say the same about claims you have made?
December 10th, 2006 at 2:21 pmYou have just greatly diminished your credibility.
The name I think gave it away.
No further reading is necessary.
Comment by corpus iraqi delecti — December 10, 2006 @ 2:16 pm
Actually it is YOUR credibility that is diminished here.
Michael Moore is a bearer of reality. No wonder your kind fears him so much.
December 10th, 2006 at 2:25 pmUnbelievable, any time you want to see proof of my service I will be glad to provide it.
No one is stopping you…
Are you willing to say the same about claims you have made?
Comment by robert — December 10, 2006 @ 2:21 pm
Claims? I’ve made no claims. I’ve only spoken the truth. So, you’ll have to tell me what you doubt is true.
December 10th, 2006 at 2:28 pmSpudge, no one in my chain of command has classified the President as a Domestic Enemy.
December 10th, 2006 at 2:35 pmSpudge,
You obviously forgot what following orders means. Or did you for get the Oath of Enlistment?
December 10th, 2006 at 2:46 pmYou follow orders just like a good marine. Do do do.
Comment by Spudge_Boy — December 10, 2006 @ 2:41 pm
I see this also works with ‘Christian’, ‘Republican’, ‘employee’, ‘citizen’, and a host of other labels by which Robert chooses to be a follower in blind faith…
December 10th, 2006 at 2:50 pmI am also aware that we went to Iraq with 41 other nations that had access to the same information as the US. But every one wants to point the finger ONLY at the US.
Comment by robert
Wrong, Bob. At the beginning, the Iraqis presented us with a document detailing the weapons Saddam had. The report was 14,000 pages long when it was handed to Bush - and when he turned it over to the UN, there were TEN THOUSAND pages missing.
Another republican spinpoint bites the dust.
December 10th, 2006 at 2:54 pmI see this also works with ‘Christian’, ‘Republican’, ‘employee’, ‘citizen’, and a host of other labels by which Robert chooses to be a follower in blind faith…
Is there something wrong with being a good Christian? (personally I do not feel I am) After all, it is my right to be.
Or anything wrong with being a good employee or a good citizen? Damn, I thought those were responsiblities of mine.
Maybe I should be a lawless, Athiest, unemployed slacker that contributes nothing to society.
December 10th, 2006 at 3:01 pmbarfly,
And whose fault is it that other countries did not do their homework and question the findings?
December 10th, 2006 at 3:04 pmIs there something wrong with being a good Christian? (personally I do not feel I am) After all, it is my right to be.
It’s about being a follower who does not require proof or evidence to support a position. Yes, there is much wrong with that. The Inquisition, Crusades and Salem Witch Trials come to mind for starters…
Or anything wrong with being a good employee or a good citizen? Damn, I thought those were responsiblities of mine.
It’s how you are defining ‘good’ Robert that is the problem. You think good=obedient. We do not.
Maybe I should be a lawless, Athiest, unemployed slacker that contributes nothing to society.
Comment by robert — December 10, 2006 @ 3:01 pm
Considering that 15% of our country is not religious, yet less than one percent of people in prison are not religious, your example is based on fallacy that atheism is synonomous with lawlessness. Or, for that matter that religious equals moral… LOL
As far as contributing to society, I’m not exactly sure how you think you do that. But feel free to compare yourself to me who spends my days educating the youth of America to use critical thinking skills so that perhaps they will do a better job at saving the world than the “me” generation to which you belong. It’ll be interesting to see how you rationalize that killing innocent people in Iraq is more valuable than what I do every day…
December 10th, 2006 at 3:15 pmAnd whose fault is it that other countries did not do their homework and question the findings?
Comment by robert
“Do their homework?” The “homework” was being tightly controlled by Bush. Is this the strongest defense of Bush you can mount? Pretty weak.
Last time I looked we spend more than the other nations combined on defense, and that includes intel. So, the country with the most effective intelligence apparatus (except for the Israelis) puts forth an incomplete, and as such misleading document, and it’s the responsibility of the other nations to use their less capable intel services to pierce the veil?
Bush lied - and it’s the other nations fault for believing him? The reason Bush was believed was that at the time the United States still retained a small portion of credibility - but that’s gone now.
December 10th, 2006 at 3:18 pmUnbelievable at 3:15 pm
Well said.
December 10th, 2006 at 3:19 pmWell said.
Comment by Erroll — December 10, 2006 @ 3:19 pm
Thank you…
I doubt Robert gets it though. He’s been trained not to…
December 10th, 2006 at 3:25 pmunbelieveable,
Did I ever once say that you do not make a VALUABLE contribution to society? I have never said that. I realize the contributions that you make. And you come across as the type that is respectable enough to not teach you personal views in the classroom.
I never equated lawlessness with being an athiest. Notice the comma that seperates the two. Lawless was to counter that something was wrong with being a good citizen.
About being a good Christian. As I have told you in the past, I have given up on the “organized” church because I can see the Hypocracy. But that does not mean that I can not be a good Christian. I think that is the essence of being a good Christian, to turn away from the hypocracy and worship as God intended, in your heart. Following the teachings of the Bible is not a bad thing.
As far as being part of the “me” generation, belated “Happy Birthday” and I will point out that we are really close in age and are part of the same generation.
Once more for the record, I have never taken an innocent life in Iraq or anywhere else.
December 10th, 2006 at 3:33 pmunbelievable,
if you still doubt my service, here you go.
December 10th, 2006 at 3:39 pmrobert,
You are so much more credible and coherent when you speak from your own thoughts and not what you think you should say or others want to hear. I suspect it is why you are really here.
Thanks. I don’t feel 40 :). Seems weird… But I’m hoping that as 30 did at that age for being taken seriously, that the number 40 will lend a level of acceptance of the fact that I am a rogue not for the sake of being difficult, but because I have lived on both sides of the fence and the right (as in left v. right) side needs to hear the brutal truth of their actions without the consideration of others, reality or the future.
I lost a lot of ‘friends’ when I switched sides. But the new friends I gained in return, and those who remained with me made me not only not miss those who were gone, but made me feel relief that they were… Because then I could be myself and not have to fit into anyone else’s pre-defined ideals of who I should be. Try it robert. It’s the most liberating thing you could ever do for yourself… To think for yourself…
December 10th, 2006 at 3:42 pmif you still doubt my service, here you go.
Comment by robert — December 10, 2006 @ 3:39 pm
That doesn’t prove anything… I have a cousin named Robert as well as several friends…
You really can’t prove it without putting yourself out there. I suggest you not worry about what we think that much…
December 10th, 2006 at 3:47 pmI’m actually done with my final power point presentation of the semester (whew!), so I’m off to other things.
Have a good evening….
December 10th, 2006 at 3:50 pmComment by robert — December 10, 2006 @ 11:59 am
And your point is, what? Did I cite her as a role model?
No. I posted her message.
Your response was incredibly shallow.
December 10th, 2006 at 3:55 pm“No further reading is necessary.” Your omniscience is asstounding.
To lose credibility from one as close-minded as you is indeed an honor. Thank you.
December 10th, 2006 at 4:01 pmHappy Birthday, unbelievable!!
You look fabulous!! Not a day over 40! :-D
December 10th, 2006 at 4:19 pmImpeach Bush!
December 10th, 2006 at 4:22 pm#73 Prisons full of so called Christians
Maybe I should be a lawless, Athiest, unemployed slacker that contributes nothing to society.
Comment by robert — December 10, 2006 @ 3:01 pm
Ironically, the prisons are full of self proclaimed “Christians.”
Its easy to claim to be a Christian, but to actually be “Christ-like” which is the point of being Christian, is an entirely different matter. It is for example, unChrist-like or Anti-Christ-like to kill anyone for any reason. Christ specifically addressed this issue.
“Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment.”:
Ex 20:13 Dt 5:17
This doesn’t mean its ok to kill on odd numbered days or weekends. Anyone who kills is Anti-Christ like, period.
December 10th, 2006 at 5:08 pmRead Corinthians and Leviticus where exceptions are outlined
December 10th, 2006 at 6:22 pm#
I have taken the stand that I can not make negative comments about a sitting President. I take that stand because it is a LEGAL issue for me. As anyone familiar with the UCMJ can tell you, that is Disrespect towards a Superior Officer (Art 89).
Comment by robert — December 10, 2006 @ 12:19 pm
Well, it that’s what you believe, Robert, then I guess you must have never made negative comments about President Clinton when he was a sitting president.
December 10th, 2006 at 7:12 pmstrong>re:#89 Exceptions to Jesus’ teachings
“Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment.â€:
Ex 20:13 Dt 5:17
Read Corinthians and Leviticus where exceptions are outlined
Comment by robert — December 10, 2006 @ 6:22 pm
Are those the words of Jesus? Did Jesus make the exception which allows killing? Next time post the exact verse. Anyway, how convenient. According to your logic, Christians might as well go back to strictly following the old testament which advocates killing, rape, & genocide.
Here’s some classic examples of old testament values and the special benefits awarded to the soldiers.
Rape and the Spoils of War (Judges 5:30 NAB)
“They must be dividing the spoils they took: there must be a damsel or two for each man, Spoils of dyed cloth as Sisera’s spoil, an ornate shawl or two for me in the spoil.” (Judges 5:30 NAB)
More Murder Rape and Pillage (Deuteronomy 20:10-14)
“As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.”
What kind of God approves of murder, rape, and slavery?
Laws of Rape (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)
“If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.”
What kind of lunatic would make a rape victim marry her attacker? Answer: God.
Rape of Female Captives (Deuteronomy 21:10-14 NAB)
“When you go out to war against your enemies and the LORD, your God, delivers them into your hand, so that you take captives, if you see a comely woman among the captives and become so enamored of her that you wish to have her as wife, you may take her home to your house. But before she may live there, she must shave her head and pare her nails and lay aside her captive’s garb. After she has mourned her father and mother for a full month, you may have relations with her, and you shall be her husband and she shall be your wife. However, if later on you lose your liking for her, you shall give her her freedom, if she wishes it; but you shall not sell her or enslave her, since she was married to you under compulsion.”
Once again God approves of forcible rape.
December 10th, 2006 at 8:05 pm91- Republican Corporate Oil & War Machine Monopoly -
EXCELLENT post.
December 10th, 2006 at 8:45 pm[…] If you’re like to hear more from Senator Smith, ThinkProgress has video from his appearance with George Stephanopoulos, in which he seems to be genuinely pissed off about what’s going on in Iraq. […]
December 11th, 2006 at 3:04 amWhen is these here formerly Republican lawmakers gonna realize that they’s screwin’ theyselves by speakin’ out against Preznit Bush Jr.? No doubt this Senator Gourd-head thinks he’s just voicin’ the frustration of his cornstitchewunts. But the fact is, he’s just puttin’ his own bacon on the griddle. When Preznit Bush Jr. declares martial law in February — or maybe April — turncoats like Gourdy ain’t gonna have a seat at the table! They’s gonna have a cot at Gitmo!
December 11th, 2006 at 3:57 amAs a soldier Robert is not permitted to make policy decisions and still fulfill his oath. Whether a person feels strongly enough to violate an oath on ethical basis also includes whether they feel strongly enough to spend jail time. Yes, there is such a thing as Illegal Orders, but they have nothing to do with what Congress and BushCo got up to regarding a soldier’s decisions.
Being in disagreement with George II’s war is not a good enough reason for me to advocate the breaking of the bond between soldiers, a bond that is of utmost importance to anyone in combat. I have opposed GWB from the time he brought up his war, but that has never been a good enough reason to increase the risk to our soldiers, particularly by dissent in the ranks.
December 11th, 2006 at 4:19 amLet’s at least fight the war on terror in a way that makes sense… That war started in 2001. If you didn’t know, 2006 is almost behind us. Republicans have had 6 years in office to make sense, nothing sensible has happened. That makes Smith a hell of a lot too late, mkay. Most evil is not done by bad people, most evil is done by good people who do nothing, and Smith did nothing for 5 loooong years. They will seem even longer burning in hell.
December 11th, 2006 at 5:06 amAny thing can be expected off politicians, some one may say Bush should be proscecuted for war crimes, just like Saddam. If decisions are not taken, work doesn’t get done. Decisions may be wrong but being the president of US ander oath should give the president immunity.
December 11th, 2006 at 7:04 amRobert, in #62, wrote:
“I am well aware that we went to Kosovo under NATO treaties. I am also aware that we went to Iraq with 41 other nations that had access to the same information as the US.”
Yes, they all had the same information that Iraq was not a threat, which is why there was no authorization for military force provided in UN Resolution 1441.
December 11th, 2006 at 7:04 am.
Chuck Butcher,
Thanks for your post.
December 11th, 2006 at 8:16 am#95
“Whether a person feels strongly enough to violate an oath on ethical basis also includes whether they feel strongly enough to spend jail time.” What a profund thought. Do you somehow think that those in the military, or those who had been in the military, are somehow not aware of this? Certainly Lt. Watada is, who has refused to deploy to Iraq because he correctly recognizes that the war in Iraq is illegal and unjust. Certainly people like former military personnel Kevin Benderman and Camilo Mejia are, since they have gone to jail for refusing to participate in an occupation that has inflicted atrocities upon the Iraqi people. Certainly those military personnel in the incredibly moving documentary Sir! No Sir! were aware of this, considering that hundreds of them had gone to jail for speaking out and refusing to participate in the war machine in a place called Vietnam.
Though you believe that “the war is not a good enough reason” to speak out, thankfully there are others, whom I had earlier made reference to, who do believe that they have not only a right but a duty and an obligation to search their consciences and speak out against what they consider to be the illegal and imperialistic and unjust policies of the United States government.
December 11th, 2006 at 12:16 pmOregon’s federal politicians are all good at being politicians — they either suck up to the majority or posture dramatically on a lost cause. Now that republicans aren’t in the majority, I’m not worried about Smith sending his votes to sucking up to and with people I don’t like. I expect that Smith will be voting rather better — either joining the hopefully preferable new majority, or voting ineffectively with the minority — in the run up to 2008. And so long as the democrats don’t screw up the agenda, I’ll be hard pressed to vote for a cloutless newbie as opposed to a nicely suppressed career politican.
That’s why we keep voting for the same almost-useless congress-critters every other year. It’s why the republicans voted for Lieberman.
December 11th, 2006 at 3:03 pm[…] Last week, Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) — who originally supported the war in Iraq — delivered a scathing indictment of President Bush’s policy in Iraq, stating it “may even be criminal.” Yesterday on ABC This Week he called it a “dereliction” and “deeply immoral.” […]
December 11th, 2006 at 3:23 pm[…] Smith has called Bush’s Iraq policy “criminal,” a “dereliction,” and “deeply immoral.” […]
January 9th, 2007 at 5:14 pmWe need to quickly and quietly encircle the city of Baghdad with Coalition forces and then send a major force of Iraqi and embedded advisors into the middle of the city to push outward to clean out all possible problems. Have them work their way outward toward the perimeter forcing any insurgence’s to the outside where the they can be captured or eliminated. Once the mixed force reaches the outside then send them back to the center of the city where they started as a second sweep and then let the coalition forces on the outside disperse to the boarders to prevent any further crossings. This should be the last stand and surge before turning it over to the Irag forces and new government. The training wheels need to come off and now the can fish we can stop feeding them and let them fish on their own.
There is a 1000 year conflict in the middle East that will only be resolved when the leaders of each faction preaches unity not hate. People in each faction need to clean out the problem in their own house before they can all come together to make this work. The US military cannot do that., that is not our objective nor should we be used by those not willing to fight for what they want.. Because there is a mix of difference cultures and ideas combined with the insurgence’s undermining to efforts by stirring the pot trying to thwart the cause of democracy the conflict only increases to bring about the demise of a new democracy. It is going to take a real leader and sacrifice but I believe the people who have tasted and seen the benefits of freedom will rise to the occasion.
We can not cut and run we have to win our objective! We can not win a war of ideas and cultural differences that have been inflamed but the cunning and craftiness of the those seeking to overthrow this new government by inciting one faction against the other. But we can win a war of terrorism and stop the opposition to new direction.
January 23rd, 2007 at 6:12 pmWe need to quickly and quietly encircle the city of Baghdad with Coalition forces and then send a major force of Iraqi with embedded advisors into the middle of the city to push outward cleaning out all possible problems. Have them work their way outward toward the perimeter forcing any insurgence’s to the outside where they can be captured or eliminated. Once the mixed force reaches the outside then send them back to the center of the city where they started in a second sweep. Then direct the coalition forces on the outside to disperse to the boarders to prevent any further crossings. This should be the last stand and surge before turning it over to the Iraq forces and new government. The training wheels need to come off and now they can fish and we can stop feeding them and let them fish on their own.
There is a 1000 year conflict in the middle East that will only be resolved when the leaders of each faction get serious about preaching unity not hate. People in each faction need to clean out the problem in their own house before they can all come together to make this work. The US military cannot and should not be required to do this! That is not our objective nor should we be used by those not willing to fight for what they want. Understanding there is a mix of different cultures and ideas combined with the planned insurgence’s undermining any positive efforts by stirring the pot trying to thwart the cause of democracy the conflict only increases to bring about the demise of a new democracy. It is going to take a real leader and sacrifice but I believe the people who have tasted and seen the benefits of freedom will rise to the occasion.
We can not cut and run we have to win our objective! We can not win a war of ideas and cultural differences that have been inflamed but the cunning and craftiness of those seeking to overthrow this new government by inciting one faction against the other. We can win a war of terrorism and stop the opposition to new direction in this part of the world only if they will decide they really want it and are willing to do what it takes to make it happen..
January 23rd, 2007 at 6:22 pm