Sister Of Slain Soldier: Candidates Didn’t Answer Me About When U.S. Will ‘Get Out’ Of Iraq
Sister Of Slain Soldier: Candidates Didn’t Answer Me About When U.S. Will ‘Get Out’ Of Iraq
At Tuesday’s Republican presidential debate, one of the most memorable questions came from Erin Flanagan, whose brother died in Iraq last year. She asked what the candidates would do to end the war in Iraq:
As a member of an American family who has suffered so greatly at the choices made by the current administration, I desperately would like to know what you as commander in chief would do, both in the halls of the American government, to bring the parties together, as well as on the desert sands of the Middle East to bring this conflict to a point in which we can safely bring our troops home.
On NBC News this morning, Flanagan said that none of the candidates actually answered her question. “Obviously, I know it’s a tough one, and I knew when I asked it,” Flanagan said. “But I think — I truly believe that’s what the American public wants to know: how we can work together to get out.” Watch it:
Not only did no one answer her question, many gave glowing reviews of the Bush administration and advocated staying in Iraq longer:
John McCain: I believe we have a fine general. I believe we have a strategy which can succeed.
Rudy Giuliani: [Going to war was] absolutely the right thing to do. … I believe that what we’re doing in Iraq, if we can get it right, is going to help reduce the risk for this country.
Mitt Romney: And at this stage, the right thing for us to do is to see if we could possibly stabilize the central government in Iraq. … Not to do that adds an enormous potential risk that the whole region could be embroiled in a regional conflict.
Duncan Hunter: So what I would do, and what we need to do right now, and we are doing, is standing up the Iraqi army.
Flanagan is right. Sixty-three percent of the American public wants the United States to set a date for withdrawing troops from Iraq by 2008.
Transcript:
ANCHOR: The campaign for President is already in full swing with staged photo-ops and appearances planned to a tee. But every so often there is a spontaneous moment that catches everyone’s attention. There was one of those moments at the Republican debate on Tuesday night, provided by a young woman who talked about her brother, who fought and died in Iraq. NBC’s Lisa Daniels has her story.
DANIELS: It was a moment not easily forgotten. A question not from a candidate but a grieving sister from Bedford, New Hampshire.
[DEBATE CLIP]: Unfortunately, my beloved little brother, 1st Lieutenant Michael Joseph Cleary, was killed in action in Taji, Iraq, eight days before he was to return home on December 20th of 2005. … As a member of an American family who has suffered so greatly at the choices made by the current administration, I desperately would like to know what you as commander in chief would do.
DANIELS: Despite the comforting words from the candidates Tuesday night, Erin Flanagan says she never did get the answer she was looking for.
FLANAGAN: Obviously, I know it’s a tough one, and I knew when I asked it. But I think — I truly believe that’s what the American public wants to know: how we can work together to get out.
DANIELS: She didn’t expect her question to touch so many. She said she simply wanted to honor her baby brother.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Democrats, Are you WITH the American people or against US?
June 7th, 2007 at 2:18 pmThe correct answer was win the war.
Next.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:19 pmOf course she won’t get a straight answer from them. Anyone who supports this Illegel War like these Asshats do is Intellectually and Morally Dead.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:19 pmThere never was an exit strategy for this Occupation. With a $600 MILLION dollar Embassy — the profits are too high for All of the War Profiteers (Blackwater, Bechtel, Haliburton, etc.) — The Military Industrial Complex had no intention of ever leaving there. The Only way to boost morale of the troops :
is to leave.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:19 pmThe makings of another Cindy Sheehan . . .
June 7th, 2007 at 2:20 pmThe problem is in the question. She should have asked:
What will you do to insure that our troops are never coming home? Since it’s obvious to the American people that our elected representatives are not interested in doing our bidding. I guess I just thought you could just lay it out for us.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:23 pmWhy weren’t the entire responses from the candidates posted?
June 7th, 2007 at 2:24 pm63% of the country has the makings of the next Cindy Sheehan….
June 7th, 2007 at 2:24 pmThe correct answer was win the war.
Comment by Patrick1 — June 7, 2007 @ 2:19 pm
We already won the “war” 5 years ago.
We want the occupation to end.
Next moron with a stupid retort.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:24 pmThe next time a Republican answers a question fully and truthfully will be the first time.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:25 pmWhy did NBC cut “at the choices made by the current administration” from the clip? I didn’t see it live, but the transcript includes that wording and it sounds like something was clipped at that point. Why did they remove that portion of Ms. Flanagan’s question? It really changes the whole tenor of her question.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:25 pmDouchebag troll alert!
June 7th, 2007 at 2:26 pmThe correct answer was win the war.
What war?
June 7th, 2007 at 2:26 pmWow–that she actually got coverage of her disappointment in the non-answers is pretty awesome.
GE will be taking someone to task for letting this get on the air!
June 7th, 2007 at 2:27 pmThe makings of another Cindy Sheehan . . . - Comment by Jake
By all means, swift boat those who have truly sacrificed while bending knee to those who have not.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:29 pmThey didn’t answer the question because they couldn’t. None of them, nor anyone in the current Administration has the faintest clue about how to extricate the US from the Iraqi occupation. That’s why the “Korea solution” sounds so great to them: we simply do not extricate the troops. Ever.
The original “plan” was to sweep in, dethrone Saddam and install a puppet government under Chalabi. The neocons love authoritarians, as long as they act as good US stooges. Chalabi would have assured Western access to US oil, and that’s all that ever really mattered. Since neocons are also monumentally brain-dead, it probably didn’t occur to them that Chalabi would be less than helpful in providing a launching pad for the inevitable invasion of Iran but perhaps I under-estimate Chalabi’s venality.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:30 pmTheir answer? Imperial Conquest always requires countries to be conquered and subservient to the mighty. Their oil is ours by right of conquest and manifu(k destiny.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:30 pmAs we get closer to Al Gore’s election in 2008 I hope these neanderthal Repugnicans (is that duplicative?) continue to sound like Rudy and tell people how “right” we were to illegally invade another nation that never threatened the United States. Keep it up Rudy and Mitt and the rest of you jackals. Already 63 percent of we the people see through you. Keep adding to the tally. Right now the rectal reasoning of the Repugnican party is the best thing the Democrats have going for us in creating a super majority in the House and Senate (on top of Al winning the White House for a second time). Keep it up. We love ya.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:32 pm63% of the country has the makings of the next Cindy Sheehan….
Comment by TerrytheTurtle — June 7, 2007 @ 2:24 pm
I got this infuriating email from a co-worker/friend entitled “Jay Leno makes sense!”
It was typical ignorant Conservative propaganda based on egregiously incorrect information and command to ignorance. It said that we shopuld all be happy, oh and, leave ‘under god in the pledge’.
I replied to this person by saying that while I didn’t have children, if I were a parent and I got one of my kids sent home in a body bag over this illegal and pointless war, I’d be unhappy as well, and no amount of twisted and false data about 94.5% of the country being employed would make me feel any better.
Jay Leno wants us to admire the view from teh rear windshield while ignoring the blatant fact that we’re about to drive off a cliff. And these insensitive asses want to make fun of Cindy Sheehan?
I agree let’s all be Cindy Sheehans.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:33 pmNot satisfied by McCain waxing poetic? Pshaw!
Yeah, and great job, Jake. Your humility and intellect are models for humanity.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:34 pmTimmy (7),
They’re called links; they are a way of showing a portion and providing the whole somewhere else. Ask your mommy if you are allowed to click on them.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:34 pmThis woman is grieving the loss of her brother, and wants a solution so no other family members have to endure what she’s endured.
There are worse things than being compared to Cindy Sheehan. Like being a bloodthirsty lying troll.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:35 pmThere are, counting civilian contractors, over 4000 Americans who have died for no justifiable reason whatsoever in Iraq. These Republican candidates, by avoiding answering this woman’s question, do not care how many more Americans return to this country in flag draped coffins. To them, this war/occupation is just an abstract concept, despite the fact that most of them should remember something called the Vietnam War. But to someone like John McCain, remaining in Iraq is a way to make up for the fact that the U.S. did not “win” in Vietnam, as if an occupying force was ever going to defeat an indigineous people by forcing their will upon them. The same thing is happening in Iraq but the Republicans are too blind, if not too stupid, to realize that the Iraqis, like the Vietnamese, will fight until their dying breath in order to ensure that the U.S. is driven from their soil. Bring those troops home-now.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:35 pmThey have been standing up the army for years now. with no results. This same army has stolen their uniforms and killed them, they leave and go home and then set bombs to kill them. It doesn’t take years to train an army.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:36 pmAs we get closer to Al Gore’s election in 2008
Comment by Ben Dover — June 7, 2007 @ 2:32 pm
An interviewer finally asked Gore the question the right way and he said that while he had not yet ruled out a run in 2008, he had no plans to run because he felt that 1) he is more effective in his current capacity and 2) he’s not cut out for the political system as it currently exists.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:36 pmIt doesn’t take years to train an army.
Comment by happy — June 7, 2007 @ 2:36 pm
And when the hell is some journalist actually going to point this out? Blankly look at these people after their canned response and say precisely that…?
June 7th, 2007 at 2:41 pm#25 And each time Al says that he gets more, free, media coverage. Just wait until after he accepts the Nobel Peace prize in October. I’m betting it all on Al adding a sentence or two to his Nobel acceptance speech to include something like “and I am today announcing my plans to win the Presidency again, as i did in 2000.” Just watch.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:42 pmThe correct answer was win the war.
Comment by Patrick1 — June 7, 2007 @ 2:19 pm
The REAL answer would be to define what parameters constitute victory. Odd how NO Republican is doing that. That allows us to stay there forever talking about how this ‘victory’ must be achieved.
Stupid troll. Bush and Co. are laughing their ass of at idiots like you.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:42 pmunbelievable:
check out snopes for that e-mail. Sounds like the typical conserva-forward that is completely made up and makes them all feel better that a famous person agrees with them.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:44 pmSo, NONE of the Republican candidates have a strategy to get our troops out of Iraq. More of the same from these cowards.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:44 pmWhat war?
Comment by gorn by any other name
I guess he means the little squirmish there was once the US troops entered Baghdad, you know the one against a no-army.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:45 pmStupid troll. Bush and Co. are laughing their ass of at idiots like you.
Comment by Vinnie
I agree. Easiest way to make money = Invent terror.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:47 pmGood thing none of them have a snoball’s chance in hell of getting elected.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:47 pmJust watch.
Comment by Ben Dover — June 7, 2007 @ 2:42 pm
When are the Pulitzer winners announced?
I’m as hopefully as you are Ben, I think Gore is the best person for the job in pretty much every way including the fact that he is a moderate for whom conservatives have told me they would vote. I’m just trying notto be disappointed again :D
I had posted some preliminary Pennsylvanian statistics last week that if it were Guiliani (the leading Repug) versus Clinton, Obama, and Gore, respectively, Gore is the only one who would win that state…
June 7th, 2007 at 2:47 pmgiuliani actually believes that we were right to go into iraq?
unbelievable. no, extraordinary. and proof that his poll numbers reflect the incredible stupidity of americans.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:47 pmunbelievable:
Is the the Leno thing?
http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/hitnail.asp
Has to be. Typical made up conserva-forward e-mail that makes everyone who reads it think some famous person actually agrees with them. Hilarious.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:50 pmcheck out snopes for that e-mail. Sounds like the typical conserva-forward that is completely made up and makes them all feel better that a famous person agrees with them.
Comment by b — June 7, 2007 @ 2:44 pm
Thanks, I thought about it, but realized that the same person had already sent around half a dozen similar emails based on fear of terrorists, breast cancer, and so on, and that the fact that I had debunked them all via snopes hadn’t stopped him from blindly forwarding that crap. So I just made reference to losing a kid (he has several), thinking that might get his attention faster than the truth… Or not.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:52 pmThe makings of another Cindy Sheehan . . .
Comment by Jake — June 7, 2007 @ 2:20 pm
And you have the makings of Ann Coulter, you whiny old b!tch.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:52 pmThe correct answer was win the war.
Comment by Patrick1 — June 7, 2007 @ 2:19 pm
Now that we accomplished that, how do you supposed to “win the occupation”? Or, sport, are you telling me you were too st*pid to know those are *different* things? Poor little sh*thead - were you dropped as a baby?
June 7th, 2007 at 2:53 pmThey’re called links; they are a way of showing a portion and providing the whole somewhere else. Ask your mommy if you are allowed to click on them.
Comment by Peter
I did click the link, it shows that they answered more fully than thinkprogress is implying.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:56 pmRepukes don’t care about the will of the people.
Iraq is not a war, it is an occupation. As such, it is unwinnable.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:56 pmStupid question.
It presumes that the most important thing is bringing the troops home. If that is the overriding concern in waging a war then you are by definition going to lose the war — AND more troops as the enemy uses that against you.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:58 pmb,
Yeah that was it.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:59 pmCynicon Implant sez:
You seem confused, CI. If you would replace the misleading word “war” in your statement with the more accurate word “occupation”, you would find that things make a great deal more sense.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:01 pmYour call is important to us. Please remain on the line, and your question will be attended to shortly. Your call may be answered in the order it is received. If you are calling about the end date for the US’ Iraq deployment, that information is not yet available. Please check our website for further information. Or, if you would like to continue to hold, thank you for holding, and someone will be with you shortly.
…Your call is important to us…
June 7th, 2007 at 3:01 pmI did click the link, it shows that they answered more fully than thinkprogress is implying.
Comment by timmy — June 7, 2007 @ 2:56 pm
But timmy we’d already established that you can’t cover the entire story on the front page…
It would only be deceptive if they didn’t provide the links. The fact that they provided them (same as saying “Story continued on page 37″) is showing that you can go to them for more information.
We know you’re not used to it, but around here, we posts some of what was said witha link so that people can read the whole thing in context and determine for themselves.
The rest of the information doesn’t change anything in this case. therefore, TP never implied anything that wasn’t true.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:04 pmall wars should end the minute a family member begins to mourn a loved one. yep - rainbows and pretty flowers all day long
June 7th, 2007 at 3:04 pmANYONE in these comments with a disparaging remark about this woman —who lost her younger brother to this war— needs to take a step back and examine their perspective. Is it honorable and patriotic to insult her and her right to ask a question about a war for which she has sacrificed so greatly?
ANY discussion of this subject needs to start with respect for her and her right to ask this question. ANYTHING short of this is heartless and gutless.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:04 pmAnd these insensitive asses want to make fun of Cindy Sheehan?
I agree let’s all be Cindy Sheehans.
Comment by unbelievable —
And all the keyboard war mongers here treat this woman like a member of al Qaeda. How does that make the troops feel, knowing that if something happened to them and their families spoke out they would be harrassed mercilessly. Sickening.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:05 pmIraq is just like the abortion ‘debate.’ If Roe v. Wade were ever to be overturned, what would the anti-choicers have to get their panties in a wad about?
If we “win” in Iraq, they won’t be able to say that Democrats are causing the death of our troops, that we “must prevail,” that “they’ll follow us home,” that it’s the “central front in the war on terror,” that Al-Qaeda will soon take over, that there is evil over there we must be on the offensive against, that if we all just decided we liked the war it would go smoother, should I go on?
Our current middle east foreign policy has absolutely no room for leaving Iraq. We are not there to “win” and come home, and we never have been. We are there in order to be there.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:07 pmI desperately would like to know what you as commander in chief would do, both in the halls of the American government, to bring the parties together, as well as on the desert sands of the Middle East to bring this conflict to a point in which we can safely bring our troops home.
—And then what? Never go to war again? Peace lovin’ beatniks, God love ‘em, don’t want war for ANY reason, whether it’s justified or not.
And just to remind everyone..Iraq DID attack us! Several times, in fact. They were constantly firing Triple A (Anti-aircraft artillery) at our planes and those of our allies, the UK who were patrolling the UN mandated no-fly zones. Oh yeah, one more thing…”no WMD’s” doesn’t mean “no justification for war”…..I submit Iraq’s multiple violations of UN Resolutions.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:09 pmIf that is the overriding concern in waging a war then you are by definition going to lose the war — AND more troops as the enemy uses that against you.
Comment by Cynicon Implant — June 7, 2007 @ 2:58 pm
Iraq is not a war it is an occupation. Change the wording, and yes, we do want to lose the occupation of another country.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:11 pmamen
June 7th, 2007 at 3:11 pmall wars should end the minute a family member begins to mourn a loved one. yep - rainbows and pretty flowers all day long
Comment by ct
Afraid to use your whole name little troll?
June 7th, 2007 at 3:13 pm#51. Well, getting shot at and violating UN Resolutions (I didn’t know you guys were such strong UN supporters) is certainly more than enough justification for invading a country, sacrificing 3,500 American lives, and killing 600,000+ Iraqis. *sarcasm*
June 7th, 2007 at 3:14 pmHow does that make the troops feel, knowing that if something happened to them and their families spoke out they would be harrassed mercilessly. Sickening.
Comment by shane — June 7, 2007 @ 3:05 pm
Excellent point.
Typical “compASSionate” conservates for you.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:14 pmct sez:
Spoken like a true chickenhawk.
(And BTW, it’s not a war, jackass…it’s an occupation.)
June 7th, 2007 at 3:18 pm—And then what? Never go to war again? Peace lovin’ beatniks, God love ‘em, don’t want war for ANY reason, whether it’s justified or not.
Strawman… We supported WWII and many of us supported going after Osama bin Laden (who is still at large, by the way).
And just to remind everyone..Iraq DID attack us!
Comment by SGT Higgins — June 7, 2007 @ 3:09 pm
So the next time my neighbor’s kid throws a rock in my yard, I’m free to blow up his father’s house? That IS your logic based on those silly incidents you misleadingly called attacks.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:19 pmJohn posted: Is it honorable and patriotic to insult her and her right to ask a question about a war for which she has sacrificed so greatly?
Yes, according to Liberal philosophy, criticism is both honorable AND patriotic…exercise of free speech and all.
You’ve actully proven Ann Coulter right from her book “Godless”. This would be the latest case of parading out a critic who can’t be addressed? She PUT HERSELF out there. I can respect her ‘right’ to ask the question, but you have no ‘right’ to insist that I respect her. I don’t owe her anything.
And as far as her ’sacrificing so much for this war’, I don’t see it. Her brother on the other hand made the ultimate sacrifice…not her. Don’t give the brother’s honor to the sister, she’s not the one who earned it.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:19 pmct
June 7th, 2007 at 3:20 pmthe argument is that the candidates didn’t answer her question. It’s a problem all politicians have.
If they wanted to be honest and not avoid the question, they couldn’t simply stated the troops will come home when X is accomplished, outline a plan to win the war, combining that with maybe an explanation why we should stay there fighting a civil war on top of terrorists.
If you have an unpopular stance, you should have the stones to state it.
Much of the press made McCain’s answer to the women’s question the the highlight of the debate when McCain rose to his feet and responded to thw women’s brother who was killed in Iraq. Neither McCain or any of the others who answered the question. And the press didn’t report this salient fact.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:20 pmDon’t give the brother’s honor to the sister, she’s not the one who earned it.
Comment by SGT Higgins — June 7, 2007 @ 3:19 pm
But, by supporting this occupation, you’ve killed him, so his honor is all you’ve left her with.
Don’t like the consequences? Then reconsider the actions causing them.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:24 pmIt Sounds like the Republicans don’t have a plan either.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:25 pmBy Sgt Higgins’ logic, I will assume he supported our excursion into Yugoslavia and is in favor of military intervention in Darfur. Right on, Sarge!
June 7th, 2007 at 3:25 pm51
SGT Higgins
Becareful… if you dind’t serve in Vietnam you aren’t allowed to wage war in the progressive world.
But I know they will keep that bar raised with their crop of candidates… oh they didn’t serve militarily either…
But they did stay at a Holiday Inn.. oh wait
Four Seasons
We all know there is now bias at the New York Times…. but just remeber you have to read it from the back to the front to get the real news.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:25 pmSGT Higgins sez:
Criticism, sure. Insults, no. I realize you probably don’t know the difference, and for that, I’m sorry.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:26 pmComment by ct
Afraid to use your whole name little troll?
Comment by shane
(CompTROLLER V-1 was just getting to tiresome to retype after typing “President Clinton”, “Harry Truman”, etc,…………)
June 7th, 2007 at 3:26 pmSGT Higgins,
I have not stated a view that is liberal or conservative. I have asked that you respect a family member of a fallen soldier and her right to express her opinion. I have not stated if I agree or disagree with her.
As for your line of argument as to whether she has sacrificed or not, well your point is sophomoric and indefensible.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:27 pmAnd as far as her ’sacrificing so much for this war’, I don’t see it. Her brother on the other hand made the ultimate sacrifice…not her. Don’t give the brother’s honor to the sister, she’s not the one who earned it.
Comment by SGT Higgins
In other words, f* the families, right? During WWII, families were given large gold stars to hang in their windows when one of their sons died in combat. But f* them, right? Just moms and dads, brothers and sisters. No sacrifice there if their boy comes home in a box.
So the “SGT” thing. Is that because you wear a flea collar?
June 7th, 2007 at 3:28 pmComment by Joneser — June 7, 2007 @ 3:25 pm
Nothing in your post but insults. Not even very good ones.
You know, when you start the name calling, you’ve admitted to having lost the argument.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:29 pmalso funny to me the hypocrisy of making this personal by calling me liberal and hence “godless” and then telling me I do not know the difference between a critique and an insult.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:30 pmI don’t know what the other candidates had to say, but those four non-answers disgust me.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:33 pm70… unbelievable…
Name calling?! where was that in my post?
51
SGT Higgins
Becareful… if you dind’t serve in Vietnam you aren’t allowed to wage war in the progressive world.
But I know they will keep that bar raised with their crop of candidates… oh they didn’t serve militarily either…
But they did stay at a Holiday Inn.. oh wait
Four Seasons
We all know there is now bias at the New York Times…. but just remeber you have to read it from the back to the front to get the real news.
I have read plenty of posts and have a few backs and forths with you… and i can recall quite a few insult and name calling…
but hey projection is 9/10’s of the truth in the progressive world
June 7th, 2007 at 3:36 pmBut, by supporting this occupation, you’ve killed him,—- I’ve killed him? My support for this war means I’m to blame? What about the guy that fired the IED/rocket/rifle? Do you by any chance hold him responsible? I mean, you can”t possibly be that much of a kook.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:36 pmso his honor is all you’ve left her with. — yeah, that and the $500,000 in death benefits.
Don’t like the consequences? Then reconsider the actions causing them.— Consequences? You think I don’t know consequences? Sir/Ma’am, my wife managed to hang on while I was downrange…with 2 kids. We now have a 3rd child w/ special needs. If you think we don’t know sacrifice and consequences, you’re delusional.
We won the war in 2003. Now we are in an occupation.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:37 pmYou don’t win those, you end them.
So the correct answer was end the occupation.
There are hundreds of Cindy Sheehans. Sheehan was the only one who knew how to get a lot of attention through publicity stunts.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:38 pm70
arguments aren’t won or laost by Polls see John Kerry (he served in vietnam) and the exiting polls of the 2004 election…
June 7th, 2007 at 3:38 pmYou can’t say the honest answer in public sometimes. Her question is really how you eliminate bi-partisanship to accomplish something. The honest answer would be when Democrats stop calling it Bush’s War and when Republicans show some nads and produce a viable way out.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:40 pmAlejandro sez:
Thousands, actually. Roughly 3500, at last count.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:40 pmall wars should end the minute a family member begins to mourn a loved one. yep - rainbows and pretty flowers all day long
Comment by ct — June 7, 2007 @ 3:04 pm
Hey, what do you know, a willfully ignorant troll gets the last part of its blather correct, as “rainbows and pretty flowers all day long” sums up W’s continuing approach to the meatgrinder called the Iraq Occupation
Such a shame for the trolls their anti-US blather got electorally Bitchslapped so thoroughly last November
I’d suggest the apologists and lackeys for The Glory Of All Things W get their cowardly asses over to Iraq, but since their physical aim is probably as faulty and deficient as their always easily-debunked rhetoric, then it’s obvious the only ones in real danger from such a move would be all those US troops themselves
So whine away trolls, just know that your deliberate obtuseness will NOT rally the US public towards W again
The public rallied around W once-after the Sept 11 attacks, and look what that got us
And since it didn’t result in the crushing of the Tailiban, or the capture/death of Usama bin Laden-remember him trolls, the guy who gave the go ahead for the Sept 11 attacks-look what it didn’t get us
Other say “don’t feed the trolls”, I say mock them mercilessly, treat them like the worthless parasites they all are, and laugh at their absurd attempts at logic and thread-derailing
This sister sacrificed as much as any military family does when a loved one is killed, to suggest otherwise is lunacy beyond belief, and a sure fire sign of an arrogant, incompetent ChickenHawk, no matter how it signs its online ID’s
June 7th, 2007 at 3:40 pmI really wish people would stop saying this. Of the Republicans, Ron Paul is the ONLY one willing to get out immediately. How many Democrats can you say that about? Maybe Kucinich and Gravel, and that’s it. So, of 19 presidential candidates, only 3 want to end the occupation immediately.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:40 pmWell, there are some mothers who are Bush fans.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:42 pmSGT,
Perhaps you should take a look in the mirror and ask why this subject is so personal and makes you so angry.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:42 pm76…
i like you Alejandro… i saw your posts last time on the radio talk show post yesterday…
i don’t know your leanings left or right but you definitly seem sound and respectful in thought and opinion without all the name calling. Props to you.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:42 pmWhat Joneser at #51 is doing is misstating the issue. It is not whether the Republicans and conservatives served in the Vietnam War. The issue becomes whether these superpatriots who are so quick to advocate that this country go to war displayed their alleged patriotism by ending up in a field of combat while wearing a military uniform in Vietnam. There are extremely few of them who can make that claim, which is why they should not be called patriots but either hypocrites or chickenhawks. One can also legitimately ask why is it that neither Bush’s daughters nor Cheney’s daughters are serving in the military in Iraq while all four of FDR’s sons served in the military during World War II.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:44 pmI submit Iraq’s multiple violations of UN Resolutions.
Comment by SGT Higgins — June 7, 2007 @ 3:09 pm
So we’ll be invading Israel next, right?
June 7th, 2007 at 3:48 pm.I submit Iraq’s multiple violations of UN Resolutions.
Comment by SGT Higgins — June 7, 2007 @ 3:09 pm
YooooHoooo, that means we can go after Israel who also has violated multiple UN Resolutions. Great logic Higgins!
June 7th, 2007 at 3:48 pmAlejandro sez:
I’d wager that that number, which is already so small as to be statistically insignificant, is shrinking more and more rapidly, as the incredible malfeasance of this corrupt and criminal administration becomes more and more known to the masses, and the few mothers who still support Chimpy realize that their childrens’ lives were thrown away for the pleasure of a tin-plated despot who does not even acknowledge, let alone appreciate, their sacrifices.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:49 pm“I submit Iraq’s multiple violations of UN Resolutions.
Comment by SGT Higgins — June 7, 2007 @ 3:09 pm
So we’ll be invading Israel next, right?
Comment by toasterhead — June 7, 2007 @ 3:48 pm
.I submit Iraq’s multiple violations of UN Resolutions.
Comment by SGT Higgins — June 7, 2007 @ 3:09 pm
YooooHoooo, that means we can go after Israel who also has violated multiple UN Resolutions. Great logic Higgins!
Comment by Yikes — June 7, 2007 @ 3:48 pm”
Ooh those are bound to bring Mighty Aphrodite-oh-wait-I-was-outed-now-im-Valiant-Venus out of her hole. You’ll be called ‘anti-semite-supporters of Hamas and Hezbollah’ before the day is out. Mark my words.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:54 pmWe all know there is now bias at the New York Times…. but just remeber you have to read it from the back to the front to get the real news.
Comment by Joneser — June 7, 2007 @ 3:36 pm
Well what do you know! Another regurgitation of the lie brought to you by Bill O. Please Joneser, it’s nice for you to acknowledge Alejandro’s thoughtful opinion but it would be nicer if you would refrain from repeating falsehoods. It’s especially telling that you repeat Bill O’s lies and means that people like myself will have a hard time reading anything you post.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:56 pmLOL Toasterhead, as the saying goes, great minds think alike… never mind the rest of it!
June 7th, 2007 at 3:57 pmAnd anyone here should believe this just because YOU say so, with no proof to back up your claims other than your “bash the troops families” blather?
So, if something happened to you, would it be right to use your own logic against your wife regarding sacrifice?
By your own logic, does YOUR wife do any “sacrificing” if you-who allegedly served, we don’t know, not based on just your say-so alone-were killed in combat?
And as for this lil’ trooper who likes to walk unarmed into a contest of wits
Yeah, that’s the typical cry of those on the low end of the polling scale, especially with W, that polls don’t actually mean anything
Of course, these same nattering nabobs of neocon negativism sure didn’t mind sucking up to W right after Sept 11, and those same poll ratings were strong enough to help launch an idiotic invasion of a country that never was, and never would be, a physical threat to the US
But hey, you W assclowns go right on worshiping Dear Leader W, it’s not like reality, logic or common sense have entered into any of your political calculations so far, so why start using those qualities now, eh?
June 7th, 2007 at 3:58 pmso his honor is all you’ve left her with. — yeah, that and the $500,000 in death benefits.
As his sister, I would think her chances of seeing any of the $500,000 or pretty slim, usually wife and children, or Mom and Dad get he money. Besides money doesn’t replace her brother, no matter how much she may recieve. If you are arguing this, you may want to look at the vacant spot in your chest, where your heart should be.
June 7th, 2007 at 4:01 pmErrol - #85 You just compared daughters to sons…at any rate, they didn’t serve because they didn’t VOLUNTEER to serve. it’s just that easy. You can question their patriotism all you want, but I betcha dollars to doughnuts, they wouldn’t have ended up in Iraq any more than Prince Harry did.
gummitch - #69 F the families? Did I say that? As for the Gold Stars of which you speak, are you certain they were ‘given’? Just curious, not pickin’ a fight. bc we had to buy ours…..they are blue for a Soldier who is away/deployed, and yes, gold for a deceased Soldier.
John - #83 I’m not angry, neither am I taking any of this personally.
June 7th, 2007 at 4:01 pmRoger Ailes says if Dems can’t face Fox, they can’t face al-Qaeda… well, if these Republicant candidates can’t face tough questions, they can’t handle a tough job like the presidency… it’s insulting for them to have given Bush-like answers such as they did… “it’s important we win…” the question was, how do we get out of there?
PS: nice Irish name, Erin Flanagan!
June 7th, 2007 at 4:03 pmSGT,
Thank you for you and your family’s sacrifice.
I hope we all can find a way to find common ground rather than tear each other apart during this difficult time for our nation, our soldiers, and their families.
Best,
June 7th, 2007 at 4:06 pmJohn
85…
FDR’s son’s vs Cheany and Bush’s kids? WWII… i can answer that with a equal comparison…. Why didn’t we go at Iraq with the same maneuvers as we did on D-day?
They both have something in common… technology and information… we don’t have to throw the same man power at the situation…
however when it comes to this War sometimes i wish we did take of the kid gloves… nevermind the amount of consideration we give our enemies today than we ever did in WW2.. mainly cause of the PC “gotcha” media we have today
June 7th, 2007 at 4:06 pmKing - #91 You’re not getting it right, although I applaud your effort. My WIFE sacrifices daily. She supports the war-fighter. She is a stay at home Mom, home-schools our 2 girls, and managed the household when I was downrange (but don’t take my word for it)…however, were you to ask me…I would tell you that, should anything have happened to me, my SISTER didn’t sacrifice. Suffer, grieve, mourn…yes, sacrifice, no.
June 7th, 2007 at 4:12 pmI was deployed from 3/03 to 2/04 and didn’t deploy again in 1/05 due to my wife’s difficult pregnancy and our subsequent move to be near WReed. But being a truck-driver, I saw plenty of IED’s and what they can do. But hey, don’t take my word for it.
I have to disagree Jones, we wen’t after Iraq with even more then we had during DDay. bombing runs were made into normandy to isolate the area from the rest of france. Bridges and rail lines bombed. Hell the US army had even better weapons, and a foothold on the ground instead of having to storm a beachhead. I am not sure what you mean about the PC gotcha media, but it sounds like a whiny “liberal” media rant. This despite all the cheerleading they did up and into Iraq. Or would you prefer we had just nuked Iraq?
June 7th, 2007 at 4:15 pmJohn,
June 7th, 2007 at 4:17 pmThanks…it’s a privilege to serve in YOUR Army.
I’m ok with not being able to find common ground, as long as the tearing apart isn’t the goal of a discussion. Believe me, my own Mother and I don’t see eye to eye on this one. If anything happened to me, you’d see my wife and mom in the news….only they’d be going at each other. I wouldn’t wish that on ANYONE.
SGT. Higgins at #93
You seem to be missing the forest for the trees. Bush and Cheney have continually stated that the people in this country must be prepared to sacrifice because the United States is at war [though Congress has never invoked Article I Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution which of course states that only Congress has the right to declare war]. Is the Bush administration then saying that only the poor and working classes of this country should be the ones shedding their blood and having their spines severed and having their limbs torn asunder and their brains damaged? You may wish to tell us, when have the children of the elite been exempt from fighting along with the rest of the poor bastards who are risking their lives for a less than noble cause in Iraq? How have the Bush twins and Cheney’s daughters sacrificed? Whatever minimal sacrifice, if any, that they have done, it certainly has not been on a field of combat while wearing a military uniform, now has it? Otherwise, the sacrifices that end up in Iraq becomes dedidedly less than egalitarian.
June 7th, 2007 at 4:23 pmkrazny - #92 That WAS insensitive, and out of line. I was wrong.
June 7th, 2007 at 4:24 pmFair enough SGT Higgins, I wish you godspeed and good luck on your next deployment. I have a friend who is flying blackhawks around Iraq right now, on his second tour. I pray that he returns to his wife and children safetly, just as I hope you do on your next deployment.
June 7th, 2007 at 4:29 pm98… but no means am i a liberal, Krazny LOL
June 7th, 2007 at 4:31 pmand no way advocating nuking iraq either… I was speaking of the lives lost etc… to take that beach… and also the fact that the “if it bleeds, it leads” lib media today would have had a field day reporting on the beach and subsequently after. And the things FDR did in WW2 wouldn’t fly for the TP crowd on this blog.
Sir/Ma’am, my wife managed to hang on while I was downrange…with 2 kids. We now have a 3rd child w/ special needs. If you think we don’t know sacrifice and consequences, you’re delusional.
Comment by SGT Higgins
So in one post you disrespect the family of other troops and then you tell us about the sacrifice of you and your wife. Better go get some compassion from Ms. Coulter, a woman you’ve actually showed some respect for. You hold contempt for sisters and mothers of fallen soldiers and assume somebody put them up to speaking up. Because as a neocon you walk lockstep with the administration and only speak their talking points.
June 7th, 2007 at 4:34 pmWorld has changed alot since FDR Joneser. WWII saw the Japanese-Americans stuck in camps, Use of nuclear weapons, and a fragile alliance with the soviets. Maybe you are right, maybe not. Even still you have to admit, Iraq was pretty well bombed before the first tank crossed the border. I realize there was no headlong charge like D-Day, but it is still the same tactics, strike with overwhelming force, cut supply lines, and move quickly.
June 7th, 2007 at 4:39 pmit’s a really tough subject. in the follow up news interview, the sister admitted as much.
I feel a little funny sharing my feelings with a Vet, because I value your service and wish to in no way demean someone who has given more than myself to this country in a time of war.
Nonetheless, my personal feelings are that Iraq is a mess. That people went there to do an important job, but have been poorly served by their leader’s lack of vision and abundance of confidence. I hope that our country can focus on putting first the needs of our troops and the 27 million people of a nation that has been ripped apart. I think that focus would honor the sacrifice of those who have served. I do not think there are any great options or easy answers left. I do however believe GWB does not offer the leader that our troops and our nation deserve. I do not think a new president will offer some magic potion either.
My feeling is that that NH sister speaks out of her belief that President Bush is off course and that the best thing he could do for the troops. Also, her question is about what a future president will do 1.5 years from now. God help us all if the numbers of deployed are not shrinking by then, as it will mean we have paid a lot larger price than the 3500 lives and half trillion that we have paid today.
June 7th, 2007 at 4:39 pm100 errol… i think you should stop considering the poor and lower class as victims of the war or possibly even ignorant as to what it means to join the military… inactuality the most over represented statistically from last i read are the middle and upper middle class… sacrifice is truely done voluntarily… those soldiers volunteered to serve and thank God for them (sorry secularlists if you are offended)… And nevermind the fact that McCain has a son serving and as well as a couple of others… So if McCain didn’t giver her an answer she wanted to hear… he had 5 years in a POW camp and a son in Iraq to think about what sacrifice means.
June 7th, 2007 at 4:39 pmthen again John Kerry (he served in Vietnam) did say you would get stuck in Iraq if you don’t get a good education. But I am sure he has visited Iraq enough time to know what he was talking about and John Edwards too cause their are Two America’s…
June 7th, 2007 at 4:44 pmOf course you won’t get an answer from the “republican’ts” because they CAN’T tell the truth
June 7th, 2007 at 4:45 pmFair enough SGT Higgins, I wish you godspeed and good luck on your next deployment. I have a friend who is flying blackhawks around Iraq right now, on his second tour. I pray that he returns to his wife and children safetly, just as I hope you do on your next deployment.
Comment by Krazny — June 7, 2007 @ 4:29 pm
What seems to be forgotten in all this bickering about supporting the troops AND criticizing the occupation is that NO ONE, from right or left or up or down, wants any more deaths that would be deemed ‘unnecessary’. And there is the rub. Bush et al seem to feel that some deaths ARE necessary where as myself and others here feel that the whole damn occupation is unnecessary and thus ALL the deaths to date and in the future are unnecessary.
At this point, with all the money Bush has spent in Iraq building bases and keeping oil flowing, it seems that Bush et al are unwilling to call it a day and reduce the US casualties to zero. It seems also, as Alejandro indicated, not many of the candidates for the next presidency are jumping up and down to reduce the casualties to zero. As always and moreso in this faster than light information age, politicians are not willing to step up and take responsibility. From either side. One day I would like to see more than just two sides waxing poetically about such important issues.
I sure as hell hope that SGT Higgins and everyone else gets back in one piece.
June 7th, 2007 at 4:46 pmThank you for your service SGT. Higgins. With all due respect the woman asked a pertinent question and all candidates side stepped her. It’s symantics on whether it achieves your version of sacrifice or not. It’s also wrong to assume there is no sacrifice. There are families who now have to find other incomes because of a 2nd or 3rd tour of duty for a NG member. Chores and duties that were once performed by the soldier are now shuffled amongst family members.
The rationale for this conflict is thin and the execution by it’s leaders has been piss poor.
Once again I thank you for your service. I will continue to question this conflict and all who follow.
June 7th, 2007 at 4:51 pm106 John…
I definitly hear what you are saying and i definitly can concede to alot of what you are saying. Bush obsesses too much with delegating his powers and finally tosses his appointees when the ship is really sinking… He stays the course but drags them along leaving a trail of confusion behind him sometimes… The managment and road has been rough to say midly but for me the goal is still right… and I would think and from what i have seen the troops do as well despite some squeaky wheels the media likes to point the camera to.
June 7th, 2007 at 4:55 pmHe he, now don’t go sell it on Ebay!
Not sure what post you are talking about, but I just call’em like I see’em. I don’t lean right or left. That’s a false dichotomy, IMO. If something works it works, if it makes sense, it makes sense. There is no perfect ideology or system.
June 7th, 2007 at 4:58 pmkrazny - #102 Thank You! =)
shane - #104 - I haven’t disrespected any family of troops. Just because I’m not gushing with emotion at this woman’s loss of her brother doesn’t automatically imply that I don’t respect her. I don’t think that anyone ‘put her up to it’ but I absolutely do believe that she was sought out to be given a microphone. Finding family members of Soldiers who have died can’t be that difficult a task.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:00 pmI also don’t walk ‘lockstep’ with the administration. I disagree on a number of points…..abortion for one. I’m pro-life, but I think a woman should be allowed to not be pregnant if she chooses not to be, I just don’t agree that the US Gov’t should be paying for it. I don’t think it should be banned, though.
And I don’t think I ‘hold contempt’ for anyone, least of all families of fallen Soldiers.
And yes, I did happen to enjoy reading Coulter’s ‘Godless’. It was a lot less dry of a read than O’Reilly’s Culture Warrior. I almost couldn’t finish that one. I kept thinking, “Ok, this is gonna have to get good at some point.” I was mistaken, something that happens very infrequently.
Like good little Nazis, the GOP would- be successors, goose step behind their Fuhrer…..right over the cliff.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:00 pm113
It was the posts you had about Why Obama was considered black if he was mixed race.. and some other stuff.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:01 pmUnb & happy; we spent 20 years training the South Vietnamese Army(ARVN). They fell apart like a house of cards in 1975.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:05 pm117
thanx uncle Ho
for a minute i forgot where i was…
June 7th, 2007 at 5:14 pmhere are some of my prescriptions for change in Iraq:
1. We start at home, by figuring our how to be much, much more efficient about our energy consumption now and in the future.
2. We begin a slow process of disentangling our financial markets from Saudi money.
3. We start a hard but fair dialog with Iran.
4. as for Military Strategy, ideally I think the commanders are best equipped to answer that issue, however with the crucial caveat that every commander who has disagreed with Bush has had to leave by choice or not. I think he has shown himself to be not competent. I think Congress needs to force his hand. They only have blunt instruments at their disposal. I think that is tragic, but I think his continued assertion of power would be even more tragic in the long run.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:18 pmhellinabucket - #111
Thank You for your support.
I can agree that this conflict has been poorly managed…but I don’t think I’ll ever believe that it wasn’t absolutely the right thing to do.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:19 pmIt was unfortunate that the candidates side-stepped her question, but c’mon…they’re POLITICIANS! Please don’t be shocked by it. That’s just what they do! And unfortunately, that trait isn’t party-specific.
But timmy we’d already established that you can’t cover the entire story on the front page…
It would only be deceptive if they didn’t provide the links. The fact that they provided them (same as saying “Story continued on page 37″) is showing that you can go to them for more information.
We know you’re not used to it, but around here, we posts some of what was said witha link so that people can read the whole thing in context and determine for themselves.
The rest of the information doesn’t change anything in this case. therefore, TP never implied anything that wasn’t true.
Comment by unbelievable
Or maybe thinkprogress wanted to pick and choose parts of the quotes to prove their point. Otherwise they would have listed more of the quotes. When reading the actual transcript, all answered the questions nicely, which is the opposite of the image thinkprogress in painting. I also don’t see in the transcript anyplace where the candidates gave glowing reviews of Bush in answers to Flanagan as thinkprogress says.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:26 pmBAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) — A new approach by American-led forces in Iraq is producing “breathtaking” improvements in security in some areas, says Lt. Gen. David Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in the country, but al Qaeda in Iraq remains well-entrenched in some Baghdad neighborhoods.
Posted in CNN today.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:27 pmJoneser at #107
Whether intentionally or not, you seemed to have missed the point of my post, which centered upon hypocrisy. Again, our less than fearless leaders, [who,in case you may not be aware, did everything they could to make sure that they would not end up on a field of combat while wearing a military uniform] have reminded this country that we are supposed to be at war [again, even though Congress, by the power given to them in something called the U.S. Constitution, is the only branch of govt. that can declare war] and they expect its citizens to sacrifice. Why have Bush and Cheney’s daughters not sacrificed by fighting in Iraq? Have Bush and Cheney urged their daughters to sacrifice by joining the military? Of course, their daughters can always ask them “Where were you during the war, daddy”? A great example of do as I say, not as I do. Again, [now pay attention] this administration is great at advocating war but when it came time for them to display their alleged patriotism, one of them sought the safe haven of the National Guard [even though he barely qualified by obtaining the lowest score possible to fly jets] while the other obtained an amazing five deferments to make sure that he did not end up in the jungles of Vietnam while their daughters have made sure that their names do not end up on the bottom of the Army’s enlistment papers. George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, perhaps two of the biggest hypocrites ever to set foot in the halls of the White House.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:37 pmShe did honor her baby brother and continued while speaking with NBC news today !! Hooray HOoooooo HA
June 7th, 2007 at 5:38 pmSGT Higgins, I’m not suprised by the politicians response. As for if the conflict was the right thing to do? I’ll leave that to historians. But if you believe it was the right thing to do and believe it’s been missmanaged then why would you want to support the ones who bungled it?
June 7th, 2007 at 5:38 pm119…
1) we haven’t built a refinery in 30 years… who knows what kind of technology could have been developed out of that… cell phones, plasma tv’s, hepa filters, brita filters, the internet, e-mail,
other option for efficency in economics is raise prices unfortunately…
2) i agree to apoint with that one except the enemy of my enemy is my friend sometimes… Al Quaeda hates the saudi government
3) You can’t talk with a mad man especially when you openly advocate the destruction of your neighbors and fund those who do… ask Neville Chamberlain what talks to a nut did.
It did get out of hand in Iraq and Bush conceded a new course… and it is working and I hope it continues through his presidency before people become more rabid than they already are.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:43 pmUpdate:
I told my firsn thatthe Jay Leno email was a hoax and his response was that he didn’t give a rat’s ass who wrote it, it made sense to him.
I said but if someone will lie about who wrote it, then why wouldn’t they lie about what’s in it?
Ignorance, the motto of the Republican Party.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:45 pmBut, by supporting this occupation, you’ve killed him,—- I’ve killed him? My support for this war means I’m to blame?
As an accomplice, yep.
Reality sucks doesn’t it?
What about the guy that fired the IED/rocket/rifle? Do you by any chance hold him responsible?
Yes, of course, but he was inhis own country. The woman’s brother wouldn’t have been there without someone sending him there and supporting his being there.
I mean, you canâ€t possibly be that much of a kook.
Wow, that’s such a solid argument point. I’m impressed… Jesus, what’s with the insults? Can’t you guys ever argue an issue without resorting to insults?
so his honor is all you’ve left her with. — yeah, that and the $500,000 in death benefits.
Now I get your lack of compassion. You think she’s rather have money than her brother.
You think I don’t know consequences?
Correct, I do not.
Sir/Ma’am, my wife managed to hang on while I was downrange…with 2 kids. We now have a 3rd child w/ special needs.
Your wife will have an equal platform to this woman when you’ve been blown up. Until then, your sob story isn’t the same as hers.
If you think we don’t know sacrifice and consequences, you’re delusional.
Comment by SGT Higgins — June 7, 2007 @ 3:36 pm
Hardly. That’s why I infuriate you so much - i saw through your bullshit and called you on it. That’s as rational as it gets.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:54 pm123
Congress did authorize Bush to go to war…
and to keep arguing about the past is tiresome… were are there now and it is about what we should do about it today. Get over the Bush Cheney hate mantra… they aren’t being elected again… And if there was a push to truely discredit Bush’s service in the military, it went out the window with Dan Rather.
125…
Its about the goal… and and even if it was bungled.. things have been conceded and things are changing TODAY…. its time tom move on from back THEN.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:54 pmThe correct answer was win the war.
Next.
Comment by Patrick1 — June 7, 2007 @ 2:19 pm
like a typical republiscum, poor peppermint patty thinks this is going to happen without a freaking PLAN
June 7th, 2007 at 5:55 pmNo shit, ya dumb bitch!
How the fuk are they supposed ta know, moron???
Jesus this bitch is dumb!!!!
June 7th, 2007 at 5:55 pmJonser,
Thanks for your response. Following is my rebuttal:
1. Refining capacity affects prices in America, not the huge amount of cast we are sending by the tanker load to the most volatile region in the world.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:57 pm2. Al Queda hates the Saudi government, but they are financed and supported by members of the royal family who are members of that government. Not to set off red flags galore among the more conservative posters here, but that Michael Moore tidbit in Faranheit 911 about the Saudi investment in America representing 7% of our total economy is fairly accurate. Anyone with 7% interest in our country has a significant say in how we conduct our affairs.
3. The President of Iran is a nut. But the funny thing about their government is that he is not the one running their country. I think we do need the threat of force behind our negotiations, but if Bush and Cheney thought they could attack neighboring countries to the East and West of Iran, and not have expect interference and the need for direct talks, they are either high, or have their own adgenda, or both.
4. I do not believe that the surge represents a new course. I think it is a shift of emphasis, and that he has not seen the light after James Baker did everything he could to tell him the Emperor has no clothes. Perhaps, as GWB is so fond of saying, I guess that is one for the historians. Unfortunately, I believe he will be proved wrong sooner than later.
I can agree that this conflict has been poorly managed…but I don’t think I’ll ever believe that it wasn’t absolutely the right thing to do.
It was unfortunate that the candidates side-stepped her question, but c’mon…they’re POLITICIANS! Please don’t be shocked by it. That’s just what they do! And unfortunately, that trait isn’t party-specific.
Comment by SGT Higgins — June 7, 2007 @ 5:19 pm
This dude knows what he is talking about. All you emotional outta control hippies should listen to him.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:57 pmunbelievable,
June 7th, 2007 at 5:59 pmyou are out of line.
Or maybe
Comment by timmy — June 7, 2007 @ 5:26 pm
Or maybe the tooth fairy left a quarter under your pillow…
Stop spinning timmy, you’ll get dizzy.
June 7th, 2007 at 6:02 pmWar was never declared Joneser.
Things haven’t been conceded about being bungled. There have been criminal acts both militarily and thru profiteering. A forceful hand has to be used here and Bush is weaker than Gonzo’s memory.
June 7th, 2007 at 6:03 pmUnbelievable: Your “intellectual superiority” to poor SGT Higgins is baffling. How do you get to be on such a high plane so as to “see through the bullshit” and judge others so harshly?
June 7th, 2007 at 6:04 pmTeach me, oh great one!!! s/c
Jesus this bitch is dumb!!!!
Comment by Mr. President — June 7, 2007 @ 5:55 pm
Your compassion is overwhelming.
June 7th, 2007 at 6:06 pmhttp://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001238.php
Pay attention SGT; You talk about Saddam Hussein shooting at US aeroplanes; quite apart from the fact that not one was lost pre-war, individual people who are constantly being provoked are going to fire back out of anger or exasperation with or without central orders… if bombs are falling on your heads, you naturally want to protect yourself. And as revealed above, President Bush had been trying to get a causus belli by putting his own troops deliberately into possible lines of fire for months… And the above information was known, due to leaks from people who were alarmed by this, BEFORE the war began… If you really care about danger to US service people, there is only one side to blame for the situation they found themselves in then, and they find themselves in now. The side that were prepared to shed your blood to start a war of choice. The side that even now cuts service benefits, extends tours of duty, and would rather leave you to bleed to death in Baghdad for another 19 months simply to avoid having to make the hard choices their disasterous mismanagement have led too.
June 7th, 2007 at 6:07 pmOr maybe the tooth fairy left a quarter under your pillow…
Stop spinning timmy, you’ll get dizzy.
Comment by unbelievable
Nothing to spin, thinkprogress did what everybody here complains about Fox News doing. Skewing statements and changing facts.
June 7th, 2007 at 6:08 pmunbelievable, you are out of line.
Comment by john — June 7, 2007 @ 5:59 pm
No mommy, I am not.
Mind your own business.
June 7th, 2007 at 6:08 pmunbelievable,
June 7th, 2007 at 6:11 pmi ain’t your mommy.
I’m your daddy.
and by the way, your momma was great last night.
Your “intellectual superiority†to poor SGT Higgins is baffling. How do you get to be on such a high plane so as to “see through the bullshit†and judge others so harshly? Teach me, oh great one!!! s/c
Comment by Craig Mack — June 7, 2007 @ 6:04 pm
Did you miss your afternoon does of Lithium?
I know you sheep don’t possess critical thinking skills so you insult those of us who do, but really, you trolls sure are crankier and more ignorant than usual. I guess the remain 28% is hopeless.
June 7th, 2007 at 6:13 pm