***Operation Iraqi Freedom - Situation Room - Day 14 - LIVE THREAD***

[Solson]

Using your kaboom in a positive fashion? me?

[justshe]

As in Congressional hearings, the "question" becomes the news and is reported as fact.

[An.American.Expatriate]

[exiting lurk mode]

Good Night Free Republic!

Special Prayers tonight for the Coalition Forces, the fallen and thier families and for PFC Jessica Lynch - may she recover quickly from her injuries. Last but not least, keep the Iraqi people in your prayers that they may be liberated quickly with little civilian casualties.

I'll start the new thread around midnight EST.

God Speed.

[Consort]

Which is your key-in and which is the cat's?

[Catspaw]

The way the competition has been for the 1000,2000,3000, 4,000 etc post numbers, you could probably auction off your "2000". I'll be your agent, for a small %. (G)

I'm game, but I'll have my lawyer look over the contract :-))

[Trust but Verify]

She's a he.

[Quilla]

The ol' clock on the wall says it's quittin' time for me, so I'm heading to the ponderosa. Thank you all for the updates and the lifting of spirits. Have a safe evening.

[justshe]

Baghdad TV is off the air as a result of bombings within the last hour.

[bornintexas]

ditto

[Lauratealeaf]

Which is your key-in and which is the cat's?

LOL! He is still hanging around trying to grab my fingers as I type. Making it hard. Sometimes he does that. Need new cat treats.

[US_Pride]

(had to forward this, brought to my attn via Dan Peirce, Talk 610 AM WGIR):

Can You Back the Troops and Oppose War?
From the April 1, 2002 Dallas Morning News: In a word, no.
by Terry Eastland
04/02/2003 6:20:00 AM

BOUNCING AROUND the Internet is a photo of a huge banner that was carried in the recent "peace" demonstration in San Francisco. The banner says, "We support our troops when they shoot their officers."

Now, the calm response to that banner is that "our troops," were they to shoot "their officers," would be violating the oath they take upon enlisting, which obligates them to obey "the orders of [superior] officers," which don't include shooting or otherwise committing acts of violence against those officers. And such acts, it probably doesn't have to be pointed out, aren't merely violations of the oath of enlistment but duly punishable crimes.

Among the terrible early stories of the war is that of the Army captain who was killed after a serviceman rolled a grenade under his tent. The blast also injured 15 soldiers, one of whom later died. An Army sergeant, in custody, is suspected of the crime. Presumably, he or whoever pulled the pin on the grenade is exactly the kind of soldier some war protesters "support."

To be sure, there are protesters who define their "support" for "our troops" in more appealing terms. Indeed, as The New York Times has reported, "demonstrators [save, it appears, for some in San Francisco] have been careful to express their admiration for those serving in the armed forces." But only for them. The anti-war movement has settled on a formulation that simultaneously expresses its support for "our troops" and its opposition to the president who commands them, George W. Bush.

Rep. Charles Rangel of New York has stated it succinctly: "We support the troops, but we don't support the president."

That is morally better than supporting our troops "when they shoot their officers." Yet what does it mean, what can it mean, to support the troops but not the president?

Not very much. The protesters "support" the troops in the sense that they hope our men and women in uniform will be okay, notwithstanding their dangerous environment. To spell out the obvious, they hope our troops won't suffer death or injury or capture, nor hunger, nor (too much) sleep deprivation, nor (another) blinding sandstorm.

But note that the protesters' "support" doesn't extend to the troops' actual mission. Consider that the oath of enlistment obligates each soldier to obey "the orders of the president of the United States." President Bush's orders to disarm Iraq and effect regime change, given to the Pentagon and our armed forces, are precisely what the protesters oppose. Thus, they are unable to support our armed forces in Iraq in the discharge of the very responsibility they have accepted and that matters most to the country--the execution of their mission.

Those who oppose the war but meanwhile declare their "support for the troops" may feel better for having made that declaration. And they may think that, by voicing such "support," they and their cause will look better to a country overwhelmingly behind the president and that supports our armed forces as they seek to accomplish their mission. But the support the protesters offer our troops is beside the point.

What isn't trivial is the act of a U.S. soldier who actually disagreed with the president's decision to go to war but who nonetheless has accepted his duty and now is carrying it out. The decision to go to war, whether one agrees with it or not, belongs to civilian authority, not the military. It is the responsibility of the soldier to live up to the oath of enlistment and thus to obey the orders that come ultimately from the commander in chief, the president. To refuse those orders would be wrong. The protesters may be astonished to learn that American soldiers may have thought more--and more clearly--about the morality of using force in Iraq than they have.

We may be in for a longer war than many armchair generals once advised. If so, we can expect more demonstrations. And no doubt more statements of "support" that fail to recognize the duties of a soldier.


Terry Eastland is publisher of The Weekly Standard. This article originally appeared in the April 1, 2003 Dallas Morning News.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/474xssjr.asp

[Catspaw]

Hmmm, this is the second presser Ari had in which he didn't call on Les Kinsolvig. I heard Les call out Ari's name, but Ari ignored him again. He's definitely in the dog house.

[Ragtime Cowgirl]

belly girl -> it's why they fight.

we're still looking for a poster boy...men in uniform, poster boys all (except for grenade boy). (^;

[AppyPappy]

And he does call on that nutbag Helen Thomas. There is no justice

[Consort]

She's a he.

Oops, it's too late to change it. He's going to have to have a sex change operation.

[Dog]

You mean Les Nessman was ignored??

:-)

[Vol2727]

Ya know, they keep showing these "meetings" of Saddam with his inner circle. You see him laughing and stuff. This is shown all over Arabic TV. Now, here's something I don't get. They have civilians dying all over the place and here's their leader laughing on TV. What gives?? Something's f$cked up here.

[retrokitten]

Using your kaboom in a positive fashion? me?

As SandyinSeattle pointed out yesterday, Kaboom is highly effective when the cat makes a hackworth on the carpet! LOL!

BTW, I think I have got to take a break from FR. A little bit ago I went to answer a call from a customer and instead of my normal greeting (good afternoon,company name, my name, how can I help you?), I started to answer, "Good afternoon, Free Re-"

[Dog]

Its memorex...

He's dead,Jim