The Bush cultists and thier leaders will attack these generals in the same way, by ignoring them, and instructing all thier bought and paid for puppets in the media to do the same. They persist with the lie that they support the military, so they cannot be seen as attacking members of the military. Those who dont say what they want are just ignored.

Jonathan Swift, you are not. But thanks for indicating with your post #39 that your post #38 was sarcastic. It would not have been evident otherwise.

Yeah, I think that is what I said….anyway, hows about we have NO military plots to overthrow the Government whether they come from the Left OR the Right? That is my point.

Googled it – sounds interesting.

You guys do realize that any military coup is far more likely to come from reactionary forces in this country and not Progressive ones, right? (I hearby premptively strike at the almost certain chance somone will say it has already happened – ha, ha). It seems like 7 Days in May posits such a scenario, I just can’t see a forcible liberal revolution coming from the US Army.

It is different because there is a process detailed in our Constitution for removing the Executive if they commit crimes. Congress has not seen grounds for impeachment in Bush’s signing statements. I think your rhetoric is a little overheated. The signing statements don’t say “I am above the law”, anymore than Bush is ordering the Officer Corps to “kill our troops.” CIVILIANS make policy; the military carries it out. Inviting the military to over rule civilian policy decisions is asking for military dictatorship.

Again, I CAN’T believe anyone really wants the military running this country – I am beginning to feel like the liberal on this particular thread.

Please explain the difference me between Bush’s “Signing Statements” declaring he is above the law and a letter from a Military Officer telling Bush that he will not obey the order to kill our troops. If that is beyond radical there should be a hell of a lot more of us.

Illegal orders? How do you figure? If they are illegal, specifically what law has been broken? It seems that advocating a military coup is far and away more outside the Constitution than anything Bush has done.

Suppose Hillary wins, orders the troops to leave, and they refuse to recognize her authority. Would that kind of coup be okay with you, too?

We may be far apart on the political spectrum, but ANY talk of a military coup is just chilling stuff.

Bush will be gone in 15 months. I can’t believe you seriously think a coup would serve America’s interests. That strikes me as beyond radical.

I am totally serious. We have a motto for our kids and drugs: “Just say no.” If that approach is good enough for our kids to keep them from getting killed by drugs why is it not good enough to protect our kids from getting killed in an illegal and immoral invasion of a foreign Country. The Generals, i.e. military, have a very firm legal grounds for refusing to remain in Iraq. These grounds were established following World War II when the “Nazi” defense of “I was only following orders” was denied. Bush has issued illegal orders to the military, if the military chooses to follow those orders they are equally guilty. Congress has the same authority and responsibility in their appropriations acts. In a post above it is stated that Bush will ask for 200+ BILLION DOLLARS to kill our troops. Congress can and should adopt the old Navy term I cited earlier.

The twenty generals validate the rest of us, but unless and until we get congress to listen to them and to us, we can only comisserate with one another, because nothing will change.

Bush is recalcitrant, beligerent and stubborn. The closer he comes to the end of his term and his ability to affect history, the more dangerous he becomes.

Are you being sarcastic or serious?

points to the first troll who says the obvious: this must mean that these generals hate the military, and, in fact, themselves.

i wonder if any of these generals has ever written an op-ed in favor of a presidential candidate during an election like petraeus did for bush in 2004?

if the brave, strong, honorable general wanted to avoid politics, he should’ve stayed out. but the brave, strong, honorable general is fine for all the chickenhawks to shriek in horror at how BADLY he’s been treated. one wonders if the brave, strong, honorable general couldn’t just step forward and say, “no big deal — i’ve taken a bullet, i can certainly take AN AD!”

i guess the brave, strong, honorable general is just a political tool. wonder if he’s going to make that run for president in 2012 or 2016?

Instead of running another puerile college-newspaper level “oh, look, we can rhyme” ad, why not write a statement that all 20 of these retired anti-Iraq Generals can sign…and create a full-page ad of this?

I know, I know..I’m gonna hear from ALL those folks who thought the “Betray-us” ad was brilliant.

Well, there’s an old saying: if you want to know if what you did was right, look at what’s left. Move On handed the Republicans an issue: “Dems/progressives/liberals hate the military.”

Yeah. Fookin’ geniuses!

Now HERE’s an opportunity to leverage our military to genuine effect.

We need a new President now.