[cowboyway]

Street fighting......I like it!

[MNJohnnie]

Ask the Leftist if they have ever been elected to a national office. When they say "Of Course Not" say since you have never been elected to national office , you have no right to comment on Federal politics. Have they ever been a Pastor? No, they have no right to comment of Religion. Ever been etc etc etc. It is a stupid nonsensical argument that you should feed right back to them. It is your duty as a citizen to be informed and speak out. When they accuse you of "Being a chickenhawk" Fire back "I see you are another rabid Leftist confused on how Government BY THE PEOPLE works."

BTW, I have served so I am entitled to speak on this topic EVEN if any Freepers thinks the "chickenhawk" argument has merit. ;->

[SIDENET]

Only the freaking libs would come up with some stupid argument to tell fellow Americans why they shouldn't even have the right to hold and voice an opinion.

[gondramB]

Some of the articles I've read seem to be also making a double entendre with the sexual meaning of "chickenhawk."

[Viet Vet in Augusta GA]

Or you could simply say, "So by your standard Cindy Sheehan has no credibiliity?"

[Berlin_Freeper]

This is how I respond to their "chickenhawk" BS:

I slap them across the head with the greatest of all weapons, common sense.

By their flawed logic, the only way I could ever expect my money to be safe in the bank is if I join the police force.

Then I take them out with a piercing strike through their wretched hearts with the bare truth:

The only reason they rely on such flawed logic is because they are cowards whose biggest fear in life is that they MIGHT be called on to defend their country on a field of battle and they hide behind the ridiculous argument of "chickenhawk" to try to justify their own cowardice.

They stumble away as that sinks in, and they never want to talk to me again.

[wayoverontheright]

Great post.

My brother and sister are both extremely anti-Iraq war, and in the past have seemed to live to bombard me with their predictions of doom.

This past Thanksgiving, I waited patiently for the onslaught I knew would come. This time I had prepared. The inevitable attack came with the snide opener ..."Well, what do you think of the Iraq war NOOOWWWW"?...Huh?...Huh...?

I replied that I thought the war was already won...by our side.

Mockingly grinning from ear to ear, in unison, they pounced. "Oh really?"

"Yes, the outcome is now inevitable, you have chosen the wrong side to root for. The insurgency has now been reduced to having to send 10 year olds, the retarded, and recently in the Amman bombings we see the use of valued lieutenants sent to die for the cause. This indicates to me their recruiting is headed in the wrong direction."

"Is that all you've got?"

"No. The withdrawal you are calling for will soon happen, and it will leave the insurgency with the now-proven losing tactic of having to kill fellow Muslims and Arabs in order to succeed. Incidentally, can you name one strategic victory the jihad can claim in Iraq?"

They could not name one. I proceeded to itemize the failures of the jihad....failure to seed civil war, failure to stop the election of an interim government, failure to stop the vote on the constitution, failure to derail Bush's timetable for each election, failure to expel the infidel..."they have succeeded however, in achieving ONE of their goals....can either of you tell me what that is?

Silence.

"They have succeeded in HARDENING THE HEARTS of people like you...they have succeeded in getting you to embrace their cause of preventing the liberation of 27 million from unspeakable tyranny."

I'm not so smart. What had occurred here is I had been passive on previous occasions with their sniping at the war, and I had boned up on this forum prior to going home for Thanksgiving. I got most of the above from astute Freepers on this forum. The key to the whole thing is to position yourself for the coup-de-grace, calling a lefty hard-hearted really hits them at their core.

Anyway, this is the first time I feel I have won the argument, as they could not refute anything I said.

[garbanzo]

This argument while good misses the key philosophical point - is the left suggesting that public officials should make national policy decisions based on their own family's self-interest? Are they suggesting that Bush's decision to go to war would (or should) be different depending on whether or not his daughters would see combat? If Bush made economic policy decisions based primarily on whether or not it would enrich his children, that would rightfully be called corruption. Same thing applies here - it should be irrelevant whether or not Bush's daughters are in the military.

[G.Mason]

I understand your point, however it is our elected officials [?] whom need to be responding to the Democrat traitors in this country.

I don't hear many "Republicans" telling it like it is. For crying out loud Lieberman, a socialist Democrat, has caused more of a media stir than most, if not all, the weak kneed "Republicans".

The fact is that the leadership is just not leading on this, and one, or two citizens railing for his bretheren to stand up and be counted isn't going to cut it.

That is not to say I do not applaud your efforts and good intentions.

[TalBlack]

There is one other response to to the charge of "chickenhawk" but you have to MEAN it: Just say 'Are YOU calling me a COWARD?" If the answer involves any words other than 'yes' or 'no'interrupt and ask again and KEEP asking untill you get an answer or he backs down--but as I said you HAVE to MEAN it.

I have no trouble in this respect because I AM offended when I am pointed to and called a coward, both by the filthy sneaking cowardice in the tactic as well as the slur.

[Non-Sequitur]

In making the chickenhawk argument (which generally goes something like 'if you like the war so much, why aren't you in the military'), the speaker crosses a big, bright, thick line: he has moved from civil discourse on substantive issues to personal attack.

So the response is not to defend avoiding military service but to launch into personal attacks of your own? Good plan.

[sure_fine]

"Have You Slapped Down A Liberal Today?"

[sure_fine]

For Americans, largely ignorant of world history, Islamic radicalism mysteriously appeared on their television screens for the first time on Sept. 11, 2001, and has dominated our national security concerns ever since. But for those more familiar with the major forces shaping world events, the violent spread of Islam is recognized as one of the most important geopolitical forces in the last 14 centuries, one that has touched billions of lives.

For instance, I personally lost dozens of family members – perhaps over 100 – in the genocide of the Christian Armenians by the Muslim Turks. I'll mention just one of those family members – my great grandfather, Steelianos Leondiades. A Protestant minister, in 1908 he was attending a conference of Armenian and Greek ministers in the major Turkish city of Adana. Here's how his daughter, my maternal grandmother Anna Paulson, recalled the terrible events that unfolded: "Some of the Turkish officers came to the conference room and told all these ministers – there were 70 of them, ministers and laymen and a few wives: 'If you embrace the Islamic religion you will all be saved. If you don't, you will all be killed.'"

Steelianos, my great grandfather, acting as a spokesman for the ministers group asked the Turks for 15 minutes so they could make their decision. During that time the ministers and their companions talked, read the Bible to each other and prayed. In the end, none of them would renounce their Christian faith and convert to Islam.

"And then," Anna recalled, "they were all killed.

"They were not even buried. They were all thrown down the ravine."


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47469

[dakine]

I call them "keyboard commandos"....

[armymarinemom]

I'm often asked why George Bush hasn't sent the twins to Iraq yet. The twins question seems to be their favorite line to come back with after they have thrown out they orginal Chickenhawk question and find out that I have three sons serving. I answer by telling them that he is a conservative and only liberals seem to advocate conscription. So far it has always caused a look of dejection on the part of the moonbat.

[StatenIsland]

ping

[Mr. Bird]

A couple of responses: if all the supporters of the war joined the service, we'd have a 50 million man army. Good for crushing a foe, but bad for the economy....

The chickenhawk argument supposes that if one does fight for the cause, one's support is legitimate. If this is the case, there is no consistent reply to any service man or woman who supports the effort.

[manwiththehands]

Great read! The entire political climate regarding the war in Iraq needs to become a no-holds-barred war at home in the arena of ideas and public discourse.

I'm not worried about the "chickenhawk" argument. Most leftists are not worth our time and arguing with them only makes us look and smell like pigs.

But if we must ... I can't remember who said it recently, but I like the "hit them until they stop twitching, then hit them again" approach.

[Semper Paratus]

The Chickenhawk arguement can be destroyed by making it absurd:

Do you support abortion? Then why haven't you voluntered to work at an abortion clinic?

Are you against Bush's tax cuts? Why haven't you been paying your taxes at the old rate?

Against Global Warming? Why are you driving a car?

It's fun, works with any arguement.

[Malsua]

While I agree with your position, I think the more likely course by the lefty is to simply dodge it and advance on a different front.

When pushed, the lefty will trot out the next canard.

For example, when you charge on the "Why aren't you in Iraq" he'll respond by saying "What about the Tortue at Abu Graib and Gitmo"?

This places you in the position of either defending torture or going into a 10 minute discussion about the facts that Koran's weren't flushed, Saddam actually shredded and gassed people, on and on.

If you begin to win points on torture, the next canard pops out. Bush lied and misled us into war, on and on.

The left's arsenal is in it's brevity. The talking points reference a litany of stories the MSM has been dredging up for years now.

For example, they'll say "Iraq is worse now than before the war". Eight words. To respond, you'd have to start quoting statistics.

Since May 2003, unemployment in Iraq has fallen by nearly 50%
170 independent newspapers are now open across Iraq.
80 independent television stations are broadcasting in Iraq.
Iraq has 168,000 Internet subscribers-- there were just 4,000 before the war.
27,000 new businesses have opened in Iraq.
Over 3,000 schools have been rehabilitated and reopened.
8.7 million Iraqi children are enrolled in primary school.
5 million Iraqi children between the ages of 6 and 12 have received vaccinations.
There is an average of one new hospital under construction every six months in Iraq.
The death rate in Iraq is half of what it was under Saddam, and is among the lowest in the middle east.
76 water treatment projects have now been completed.
33 fire stations have now been built.
In July of this year, Iraqi oil production hit the highest level in Iraqi history.
A poll this year found that 80% of Iraqis believe their lives will be better one year from now.
Voter turn out was over 60% for October's vote on the Iraqi constitution.
The Iraqi economy is expected to grow 17% next year.
Iraqi per capita income has doubled since 2003-- it is now 30% higher than it was before the war.
Inflation in Iraq is one quarter of what it was before the war

See the problem? They spout in 8, It took me 225+ words to refute it. We need to be able to distill success down to talking points. If I could reference "The Monica Memo", the "Iraq is worse now than before the war" argument is effectively countered.

Even if you could deflect every argument they throw at you in short quips, you'll find that in the end, nothing has changed. The next meeting with the leftist will have him tossing the same turds on the table as if you never refuted them at all. Basically they're just mindless little children who are doing the "I know you are, but what am I" routine upgraded to support a marxist agenda.