Posted on 02/14/2007 2:57:10 PM PST by eeevil conservative
G'Night, Ernest!
Of course, that is the problem. A defeat in Iraq will help spell the end of the all volunteer military and a draftee military will not be as professional and capable as the one we have today.
During his 1971 lying testimony before Congress, Kerry raised the question, "How do you ask someone to be the last man to die for a mistake?" Obama said that the 3000 lives lost in Iraq were a "waste." It took the military more than 15 years to recover from Vietnam. It will take much longer to recover from what is going on now in Congress on Iraq. It is a disgrace.
Today, Bush made excuses for what the Dems are doing. He said that they were just as patriotic as him even though they didn't support the mission. We need some Reps to call a spade a spade. The Dems are aiding and abetting the enemy by this resolution, non-binding or not. It signals to the enemy that the US objective is not victory but withdrawal. It bolsters the enemy's flagging morale and increases the level of violence including making the American military an even greater target since the enemy knows that we are casualty averse. What is going on is a disgrace and we don't have a CIC who will condemn it. Pitiful.
Thank you so much....
Ping for TOONS above thanks to Gritty.
That's great
That's great
"Recently Murtha stated that he would not serve in today’s military."
Yes, the Marines are looking for a few GOOD MEN. He would fail that requirement on two counts. He might qualify for the cowrds' brigade...their motto is "Swarmy of One Ton."
What I said: "He said that they were just as patriotic as him even though they didn't support the mission."
From the transcript of the President's press conference:
Q: Mr. President, it seems pretty clear where this Iraq vote in the House is headed.
BUSH: Yes.
Q: Your press secretary has said repeatedly that members of Congress ought to watch what they say and be concerned about the message that they're sending to our enemy.
I'm wondering: Do you believe that a vote of disapproval of your policy emboldens the enemy?
Does it undermine your ability to carry out your policies there?
And, also, what are you doing to persuade the Democratic leadership in Congress not to restrict your ability to spend money in Iraq?
BUSH: Yes, thanks.
A couple of points _ one, that I understand the Congress is going to express their opinion, and it's very clear where the Democrats are, and some Republicans. I know that. They didn't like the decision I made.
By the way, that doesn't mean that I think that they're, you know, not good, honorable citizens of the country. They just have a different opinion.
I considered some of their opinions and felt like it would not lead to a country that could govern itself and sustain itself and be an ally in the war on terror, one.
Secondly, my hope, however, is that this nonbinding resolution doesn't try to turn into a binding policy that prevents our troops from doing that which I have asked them to do.
That's why I keep reminding people _ on the one hand, you vote for David Petraeus in a unanimous way; and on the other hand, you say that you're not going to fund the strategy that he thought was necessary to do his job, a strategy he testified to in front of the Senate.
I am going to make it very clear to the members of Congress starting now that, you know, and they need to fund our troops and they need to make sure we have the flexibility necessary to get the job done.
Secondly, I find it interesting that there is a declaration about a plan that they have not given a chance to work. Again, I understand. I understand.
Q: Do you have to support the war to support the warrior? I mean, if you're one of those Americans that thinks you've made a terrible mistake that's destined to end badly, what do you do? If they speak out, are they, by definition, undermining the troops?
BUSH: No, she actually asked the enemy, not the troops.
But I'll be glad to answer your question. No, I don't think so at all. I think you can be against my decision and support the troops, absolutely. But the proof will be whether or not you provide them the money necessary to do the mission.
And I said early in my comment _ my answer to her was that _ somebody who doesn't agree with my policy is just as patriotic a person as I am.
And, you know, your question is, you know, valid. I mean, can somebody say, We disagree with your tactics or strategy, but we support the military ? Absolutely. Sure.
The President had an opportunity, I daresay an obligation, to point out that such a resolution would be aiding and abetting the enemy and undermine the morale of the troops. How can you ask someone to put their life on the line and have the House of Representatives pass a resolution that opposes an increase in troop levels and rebukes the President's [CIC] actions?
I would like to send white flags for the new committee chairs, though.
Patriotic can mean a lot of things
And I stand by mine.
Patriotic can mean a lot of things
Positively Clintonian. It depends on what the meaning of "is" is.
Patriotic can mean a lot of things
Positively Clintonian. It depends on what the meaning of "is" is
Bush But I'll be glad to answer your question. No, I don't think so at all. I think you can be against my decision and support the troops, absolutely. But the proof will be whether or not you provide them the money necessary to do the mission.
My reference, accessible to you, for patriot is Online Etymology Dictionary.
In this country you can speak out against the government
If you don't support the mission, I don't see how you can support the troops by approving a resolution, non-binding or otherwise, that opposes an increase in troop levels and rebukes the President's [CIC] actions calling them a mistake.
I am sure that Daniel Ellsberg felt he was being patriotic by disclosing classified information to stop the war. As Samuel Johnson said, "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel."
There are even limits to free speech, e.g., you can't incite riots or advocate the violent overthrow of the government. Regardless, you can speak out but you should also be aware that there are consequences for what you say, especially if you are a member of Congress. I am not advocating or suggesting that criticism of the government should be abridged.
OR COWARD
WHITE FLAGS, ANYONE?
As Pogo said, "WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY AND HE IS US.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.