'nuff said, you cajun scum.
Posted on 05/31/2004 1:43:51 PM PDT by GreatOne
Edited on 05/31/2004 1:48:29 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
The handful of valiant American warriors fighting the ''other'' war in Afghanistan is not a happy band of brothers. They are undermanned and feel neglected, lack confidence in their generals and are disgusted by Afghan political leadership. Most important, they are appalled by the immense but fruitless effort to find Osama bin Laden for purposes of U.S. politics.
This bleak picture goes unreported because journalists are rarely seen there. It was painted to me by hard U.S. fighters who are committed to the war against terrorism but have a heavy heart. They talked to me not to undermine policy but to reveal problems that should and can be corrected.
Afghanistan constitutes George W. Bush's clearest victory since the terrorist attacks of 9/11. The Taliban regime has been overthrown, eliminating al-Qaida's most important base. But the overlooked war continues with no end in sight. Narcotics trafficking is at an all-time high. If U.S. forces were to leave, the Taliban -- or something like it -- would regain power. The United States is lost in Afghanistan, bound to this wild country and unable to leave.
The situation in Afghanistan, as laid out to me, looks nothing like a country alleged to be progressing toward representative democracy under American tutelage. Hamid Karzai, the U.S.-sponsored Afghan president, is regarded by the U.S. troops as hopelessly corrupt and kept in power by U.S. force of arms.
Those arms are not what they seem. The basic U.S. strength in Afghanistan is 17,000 troops of ''straight-legged'' infantry -- conventional forces ill-prepared to handle irregulars. The new unit assigned to Afghanistan is the 25th Infantry Division, which has been stationed at Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, and has not seen combat since the Vietnam War...."
'nuff said, you cajun scum.
???? What do your sources say?
Troy Harworth of Williamsburg, Va. holds up his son Johan Harworth to the
Vietnam Memorial during Memorial Day remembrances in Washington Monday,
May 31, 2004. Troy's father, Air Force Sr. Master Sgt. Elroy Harworth, was
shot down over Vietnam in May of 1966, two months before he was born.
Hm--I really wanted RCT to answer that and now he's banned...
I do have the sense that we were never really told the whole story on why we were going into Iraq. I've always thought that in order for us to be able to gather real, live, good intelligence with regards to possible terrorist attacks we need a presence in the ME. We also probably wanted to have a presence there in case we need to prosecute a war vs. some of the countries there. Iraq was the perfect staging point for this because we could kill two birds with one stone: elimiate a vicious dictator for the Iraqis, and help ourselves in the bargain. And in the meantime do our best to try and erect a quasi-secular democracy in a sea of theocratic totalitarianism. A lot of that, if true doesn't bother me that much because sometimes a leader has to act like a leader, and at times that may involve deceit and/or omission.
You say that you think Novak's on point because of impressions of the war related to you by your brother. Why does your brother think that we've lost our way there, and when you say that the troops can see the politics, what do you mean?
I'd be interested in what you have to say because I've been wondering these last few weeks how the troops view this. They bear the biggest burden and have the least say.
Last week on the Hannity show, he had a troop on, and Sean asked him if he liked President Bush, and he refused to say. Now I know that Soldiers aren't entitled to a publicly held opinion regarding the CIC, but the manner in which the Soldier dodged the question left me with the impression he wasn't at all pleased with the President's leadership. And he took Sean off-guard with his answer too, so I don't think it was just me who viewed his answer that way.
I know that the troops are like the rest of America, with probably myriad opinions about the efficacy, value and merit of the war, but I would really like to know if there is a consensus among the troops that the path we're on is the right one.
I guess some people must have been against WWII also. I remember there was one woman Representative and may be others in the House that voted against the declaration of war.
But at this point in time it is amazing what a poor attention span people like Novak and many other here have. If they had the ability to remember what the President said right after the attacks of 9-11 they might understand:
1. The War on Terror would be fought on many fronts, some public some not, some military some diplomatic. This is very important. The press has adopted the strategy of calling these battles wars to try to separate the parts of the War on Terror in the minds of the American people. Among the fronts so far:
A. Afghanistan, a public battle won easily only mopping up going on now.
B. Iraq, a public battle won easily only mopping up going on now.
C. Yemen, a less public battle with success against terrorists.
D. Libya, a behinds the scenes diplomatic battle which seemingly the US has won.
E. Spain, a set back in a diplomatic battle when terrorist succeeded in changing the government with an election eve attack.
These are only the ones, I know about. Mostly these have been successes but as the president said this has not been a cakewalk. The KIAs and other casualty levels have been low but not zero.
You're becoming more transparent. You seem less the sincere, sweet innocent and more the obvious "bad-mouther". Remember that all good actors must stay in character.
Her name was Rankin I believe.
No he is dead.
"They talked to me not to undermine policy"
FOX has been traveling with these guys and they have not said anything even close to this. How did Novak find these "disgruntled" people in Afghanistan .. since he's not there.
Ever since this "Wilson" thing, I've seen a change in Novak. A change I DON'T LIKE .. AND I don't support what he says.
Novak and that homo Tucker Carlson are paid to be conservative...
Draw your own conclusions.
Looks as if he/she "got it".
There were some absolute disasters in the early part of the Second World War. If Novak and his brothers at CNN had been in control of coverage we wouldn't be celebrating VE and the world would be a very different place.
They were allowed to do their dirty work in Viet Nam and we lost heart and abandoned the field. The result was the slaughter of millions, and generations doomed to communist rule, still under communist rule after it collapsed everywhere else in the world.
They are hard at work trying to sap our will again, and if we listen to these jaybirds we will lose again. These guys are beneath contempt. There is room for critical coverage and we depend on it. But these guys are trying to undermine the work we are doing and if they get their way the result will be a disaster.
There were some absolute disasters in the early part of the Second World War. If Novak and his brothers at CNN had been in control of coverage we wouldn't be celebrating VE and the world would be a very different place.
They were allowed to do their dirty work in Viet Nam and we lost heart and abandoned the field. The result was the slaughter of millions, and generations doomed to communist rule, still under communist rule after it collapsed everywhere else in the world.
They are hard at work trying to sap our will again, and if we listen to these jaybirds we will lose again. These guys are beneath contempt. There is room for critical coverage and we depend on it. But these guys are trying to undermine the work we are doing and if they get their way the result will be a disaster.
Correction, I asked if it was baseless slander. To date you've provided no basis for me to assume the slander has merit.
Now you are saying that we provide too much aid to Israel.
No, I simply showed that being against sending American taxpayer dollars to another nation is Washingtonian, unless you now contend that George Washington is also an 'arabist', because he didn't want us to get America wrapped around the axle of other nation's intrigues.
Whether or not that is the case, I take it you now agree that it is not a slander to call Novak an Arabist?
A failure on your part to provide any evidence that Novak is an 'arabist' has not compelled me to agree with you. The smear is still baseless, as "I say so!" isn't very convincing evidence on your part.
Tell us more; what else are you against, in this country? Better yet, tell us what you think about Islam, communism, religion, capitalism, marriage, homosexuality, the right to bear arms, our founding fathers. I bet I know how dark your 'mind' is.
You know there is another stupid sob named ragincajun. That would not be you would it james?
Don't ever forget that Robert Novak is a registered Democrat.
ROFLMAO.........this shows just how little you know; Bob Novak is the last person in the world, next to Billy Kristol, this adminstration would call with a tip.
Michael Peroutka (their candidate) wrote a position paper where he called the Iraqi war "immoral" and "unconstitutional."
I voted CP the last two presidential elections, but after reading that, was moved none too subtly to pull the lever for W. in November.
Maybe their platform doesn't say it (I didn't bother to read it this year), but his position paper sure does.
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.