Posted on 11/17/2005 4:20:47 PM PST by churchillbuff
Don't know how many of you caught Rep. John Murtha's very angry, very moving speech just now in which he called on the White House to institute an immediate withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. CNN didn't air the entire thing, but as I listened to it, I could feel the ground shift. Murtha, as you know, is not a Pelosi-style Chardonnay Democrat; he's a crusty retired career Marine who reminds me of the kinds of beer-slugging Democrats we used to have before the cultural left took over the party. Murtha, a conservative Dem who voted for the war, talked in detail about the sacrifices being borne by our soldiers and their families, and about his visits out to Walter Reed to look after the maimed, and how we've had enough, it's time to come home. He was hell on the president too.
If tough, non-effete guys like Murtha are willing to go this far, and can make the case in ways that Red America can relate to -- and listening to him talk was like listening to my dad, who's about the same age, and his hunting buddies -- then the president is in big trouble. I'm sure there's going to be an anti-Murtha pile-on in the conservative blogosphere, but from where I sit, conservatives would be fools not to take this man seriously.
(Excerpt) Read more at corner.nationalreview.com ...
"The ultimate end of war, at least as America fights it, is to restore peace." - U.S. Army Leadership Manual
"We make war, that we may live in peace." - Aristotle
God Bless all the men and women of our Armed Forces.
But he did serve, unlike some others. And he served in two wars, unlike some others. He's earned the right to give his opinion.
So you're blaming him for not politicizing his service in Korea?
You can say whatever you damn well please, that's one of the rights that Murtha fought in two wars to protect. But I'll give more credibility to people who have actually been there than those who's experience comes from Hollywood movies.
Of course you can. But Murtha, having been in a couple of wars, has a little more credibility over those who never served or who avoided service altogether.
Nothing like snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Dems are terrified of the President's strategy working miracles for the ME. Yesterday on NPR, they said Dem's ideas were 'realistic'...(running away with our tails between our legs)...and the need to abandon 'neocon' idealistic grand schemes for the ME.
The other day, they discussed the President's trip to South Korea and the NPR reporter kept saying 'Bush' did this or that, and 'Bush's rhetoric', and when he mentioned the South Korean President, he said, 'President So and So.' Normal operating procedure for this crowd. No respect for the President of the United States and slamming whatever he has to say as 'rhetoric'.
As for Murtha's remarks, you'd have to be made of iron to remain unmoved by a trip to Walter Reed. But Murtha's a fool if he thinks waving a white flag at bin Laden and company will win us a lasting friendship. After the war, Vietcong leaders admitted that we'd beaten them and they'd been about to surrender, but along came Jane Fonda, the MSM, Liberals, Democrats, and John Kerry. The Vietcong knew they had a strong fifth column in this country and kept on fighting, knowing when the dems won an election, we'd run away. Murtha is a fool.
This is the same kind of "but he served, he knows" refrain that rung from the housetops about John Kerry.
Bawling, saying we've had enough, sounds like "we give up" to me.
The terrorists are absolutely right, about some of us.
I emailed him a copy of GunnySgt Bob's column.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1524349/posts
If you go to his 'contact' page, there is a webform, but the only way I got it to work was to enter in the zip code from his Johnstown office. It seems he tries to filter his email so that it's only constituents. I entered his Johnstown office fax number in the phone number field for good measure...
http://www.house.gov/murtha/write.shtml
There is a lot of potential if Republicans stick true to their roots that they could turn 2006 into a bloodbath for Democrats which in my opinion they deserve if for nothing else than for putting themselves and their politics against our soldiers.
Get a life! You are young,naive and rude and should learn to read how others are using something in context. If you read the conversation carefully, I was using the example of Japanese "kamikaze" (suicide attacks)which they began to use when they were losing the war badly in late 1944 as an act of desperation to stop the rapidly advancing American forces as an analogy to the Democrats desperate attacks on the Republicans and Bush. Take your PC tripe elsewhere and never chime in on any of my conversations on here again.
".....they could turn 2006 into a bloodbath for Democrats."
I think that is part of the plan and then there will be a day of reckoning for some of the real traitors. :-)
"One further reason for sticking in Korea was,..." "They have an ingained dislike of any use of military power." "...not understanding how this"video-game" stuff corrodes..."
Good morning. Excellent points, all.
"Even if it is vital to our national security,..."
The sticking point there is convincing the people that when we do go to war it is in fact vital to national security, and then maintaining that conviction in everyone's mind (heart, gut) throughout the conflict. When that conviction exists, we always win. Unfortunately, as it concerns the war in Iraq, not everyone is convinced. It's inevidable that our representatives will waffle as they see more of their constituents waffle on support for this war, or any war.
It stands to reason, those that live by the polls will die by the polls. It is no accident that this is happening, in lieu of the recent polls showing unfavorable support for the war. They better hope the numbers supplied by their own liberal cronies are correct. Then there is always the W factor, could he have a surprise for them all?
==========================================
And one I did not make.
I see that you are one of those who put words in other's postings that are not there (and then insult the poster for those words that were never written)so that your position can be made to appear stronger. This forum is full of that sort of dishonest posting style. It is useful though in that it makes it easier to identify the bullshitters.
This is the first time I ever posted to you. It will also be the last.
"To: billbears
Who in their right mind would 'like' a war, any war? Some wars are necessary, some are optional. Some we have been told in the past were necessary, only to find out at a later date they were not necessary and in the end made conditions on a worldwide basis worse than before."
I suppose this is a bad optional war ? See my response in 228"
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.