Advertisement

Letters to the Editor

Protests justified

March 23, 2008

Advertisement

To the editor:

About protesters marking the fifth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, U.S. Army Staff Sgt. Anthony Ferrari said, "By law, it's their right (to protest) : There's a fine line between their rights and disrespecting the troops." What he and others with disdain for Iraq war protesters unceasingly fail to grasp is that the welfare, utilization and treatment of the troops has always been of utmost concern to those opposed to this war.

If an honest and competent president had sent well-equipped troops into a carefully planned action for legitimate reasons, opinion here and abroad would be entirely behind it. Instead, Bush and Cheney sent young men and women into harm's way, ignoring one dire prediction after another from their own military advisers.

With nearly 4,000 U.S. fatalities, 40,000 injured, and massive civilian casualties, the tragic toll on bodies, minds and extended families will last for generations. Bush says it's been "well worth the cost." Cheney calls it "a successful endeavor." By what measure? Spin and delusions don't change reality.

The protester's outrage is aimed at the architects, not the guys on the ground. The Bush administration could have focused on finding Bin Laden; made sure troops in Afghanistan (oh yeah) and Iraq had everything they needed; provided the best care and support for injured troops and their families; not stressed and weakened the military, possibly jeopardizing swift responses required at home or abroad. But they didn't. And it matters. So yes, we protest.

Christy Kennedy,
Lawrence

Comments

posessionannex 6 years ago

And just like that, ckennedy is gone.

0

posessionannex 6 years ago

You're the one who demonstrates homicidal desires with every post.

I must have done something to really make you upset recently. I wonder what it was? Whatever it was, I apologize. Please stop being this way.

0

Mariann 6 years ago

Right thinker, conservotard and kevin the groany all are mentaly inenpt and need to put into isolation in a remote institution.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years ago

"Ok, Mr. Insane Internet Stalker Person."

You're the one who demonstrates homicidal desires with every post.

0

posessionannex 6 years ago

Ok, Mr. Insane Internet Stalker Person.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years ago

"So if I write: "The principles of Islam cannot be altered and and there is no democracy in Islam or nonsense like 'democratic Islam'." I'm a racist, even though I'm quoting Abu Bakar Bashir."

No, you're throwing sh*t at the wall. Again.

0

posessionannex 6 years ago

Anti-war protesters do support the troops. That's the point Christy was making.

about al-Qaeda, I wrote that they have:

a willingness to blow up little girls in their elementary schools.

A noted Anti-war contributor to this site wrote:

Are you referring to the US military?

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/mar/27/costs_war/#comment_556216

0

posessionannex 6 years ago

Sayet's basis of understanding the leftist is grounded in understanding the one thing that leftists do not tolerate:

Leftists do not tolerate discrimination.

Sounds terrific. Who doesn't hate discrimination?

We all react with revulsion to these statements:

"Whites are better than Blacks."
"Christians are better than Jews."
"Muslims are murderers."
"Gays are immoral."

On those we will all agree. Now try these:

"Sayyid Qutb was sane." "...in Europe, ... the number of Muslims is expanding like mosquitoes." "There is no democracy in Islam or nonsense like 'democratic Islam'." "Hamas will not cease to exist until the land between the Jordan and the Med is governed by Sharia." "Al Qaeda will not cease to exist until the entire world is governed by sharia."

My gosh but those are icky statements! If the first one is true, the others require us to discriminate: To see if there is right and wrong in the world. Since those last four require us to look at a religious motivation for them, it's really uncomfortable. After all, nobody wants to discriminate where religion is involved. It's much "nicer" to reject the statements out of hand.

Furthermore, If someone asserts one of those statements, or something similar, the leftist accuses that person of being a racist. Obviously, the Right winger is discriminating, and that's bad, so he must be a discriminatory racist. That's why you have folks filing a human rights grievance against Mark Steyn, who, they assert among other things, wrote "Just look at the development within Europe, where the number of Muslims is expanding like mosquitoes." What they didn't care about was the fact that Steyn was quoting the Norwegian imam Mullah Krekar.

So if I write: "The principles of Islam cannot be altered and and there is no democracy in Islam or nonsense like 'democratic Islam'." I'm a racist, even though I'm quoting Abu Bakar Bashir.

Thus:

"Thinkers: remember them?"

"Sadly, barely."

0

Red_Peters 6 years ago

Right Thinkers are a rare find on this (I'm told award-winning) forum, PA. We can only dream sigh.

0

jumpin_catfish 6 years ago

bah bah bah bahbah bah bah

0

posessionannex 6 years ago

Evan Sayet loves to point out that to the liberal mind, all people are good, and if they do evil things it is because they are provoked. Excerpt:

"Gaza erupted in celebration last week to the news that a Palestinian had murdered Jewish religious students in Jerusalem. And almost daily terrorists send rockets from Gaza into nearby Israeli cities, hoping to kill civilians and provoke Israeli counter-responses -- and perhaps start another Middle East war." -- Victor Davis Hanson

The Right Thinker reads this and says "my, god, the mass murder of innocent students, what a horrible crime."

The leftist sees the same story and, having been taught in kindergarten that "everybody's nice" (therefore every child must be invited to the kindergartener's party) says the Jews MUST have done something to make this nice people do it.

Then we see the terrorists brethren nothing less than dancing in the streets over cold blooded mass murder of innocent students and the Right Thinker recognizes there's a sickness in the Arab world. The Modern Liberal looks, knows how sick it is and has no choice but to say those JEWS must be really horrible for such a nice community to be dancing over their deaths. Any other conclusion would be bigotry.

And the leftist is not a bigot. So, he has no choice but to hate the Jews for making nice terrorists kill them.

http://sayetright.blogspot.com/2008/03/gaza-erupted-in-celebration-last-week.html

continued...

0

posessionannex 6 years ago

Those of us accused of "disrespecting the troops" held a candle light vigil Tuesday night. Names of the fallen from KS were read. A pastor and others spoke. Among us were young and old, veterans, parents of those currently serving, and others who deeply care about our fellow human beings.

How unimpeachably honorable. However, in my opinion, your comments on this story reveal that:

Rather than honoring the fallen troops, you are using dead people to further your agenda, which, if it is not the withdrawal of troops from Iraq, it is at the very least to tarnish the name of the work they are doing, by calling it, among other things, illegal. Apologies for the run-on.

Now let's look at "why we are so hated?"

0

posessionannex 6 years ago

ckennedy, he was saying:

"Thinkers! Remember them?"

"Yes, sadly."

Meaning, it's too bad all the thinkers are gone.

0

posessionannex 6 years ago

Calling those who oppose Bush's disastrous foreign policy "AQ sympathizers" is a lazy and stupid thing to say in place of a rational argument to support your views. This nation was founded by dissenters, patriots-thinkers- remember them?

I do, and they generally killed or exiled the Tories, who wanted to cave and surrender to the British.

0

posessionannex 6 years ago

me>>>>"So no, it was a mistake. We should have waited until more people were killed here at home, and the outrage at Bush's inaction reached a fever pitch."

Christy Kennedy>>What people here at home were killed by Saddam Hussein or any other Iraqis?

See the tense there? Until is the clue. It's the conditional past perfect, or something. I didn't say Iraqis killed Americans. In fact I didn't even say they would have.

And why argue the distinction that our "current presence in Iraq" is legal?

Because you said "[I] believe that any deaths in an illegal and counterproductive war make for a bad day." I only wanted to point out to you, since you are putting your name on this, that troops dying in Iraq right now are dying in a legal, not illegal, war. The protest was aimed at our current presence in Iraq, was it not? Our current presence, sanctioned by the UN, and in accordance with the wishes of our allies, among them being the government of Iraq.

if I go to a restaurant and say I'm an inspector and then kill half of the waitresses and turn the place into rubble : and then I order a meal, is that ok?

If you go into a disgusting restaurant, claim you're an inspector, close it, hire new staff, open it, and ignore the rat problem on your way out the door, does that make you a good inspector?

0

christy kennedy 6 years ago

"If we are acting in ways that create enemies, I'd like to look into that, wouldn't you?"

Bingo. This is one the biggest stumbling block when it comes to understanding what approach to take regarding fundamentalists, extremists, AND innocent civilians affected by bloodshed. An act of aggression against is usually seen by the recipient as unprovoked, while for the aggressor, it is usually retaliation. None of it is justified, and it will go on forever, unless we not only capture those responsible for violent acts AND stop enraging others, who will follow in their footsteps .

Red Peters, Sorry about the Tory question, but when I asked if you remember the original American Patriots and you say "yes, sadly," I don't know exactly what you mean.

Sadly because of what our country is doing and what Bush has done to our standing in the world? I apologize if that's what you meant-I'm just angry and frustrated that the general public is so apathetic and that Congress has been so ineffective at stopping the Bush/Cheney Cowboy Foreign Policy fiasco. And when I write a letter explaining that those of us who are against this war have always cared deeply about what happens to the troops (because we're still accused of "disrespecting them") and then the kind of stupid back and forth commenting happens anyway, well, it's really discouraging.

Those of us accused of "disrespecting the troops" held a candle light vigil Tuesday night. Names of the fallen from KS were read. A pastor and others spoke. Among us were young and old, veterans, parents of those currently serving, and others who deeply care about our fellow human beings.

I guess for those who insist on not understanding us and prefer to call us names and make stupid generalizations, I should give up.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years ago

"I'm afraid I'm skimming your comments so I don't get your point."

PA has not point-- never does. The "black knight" merely throws sh*t against the wall to see if it sticks.

0

jafs 6 years ago

Amen, JOHK.

Let's work on preventing these occurrences.

To that end, we should immediately implement all of the recommendations of the 9/11 bi-partisan commission on securing our borders, etc.

Also, can we not finally discuss why we are so hated?

If we are acting in ways that create enemies, I'd like to look into that, wouldn't you?

0

christy kennedy 6 years ago

ckennedy says... This nation was founded by dissenters, patriots-thinkers- remember them?

Red_Peters (Anonymous) says: ":.thinkers- remember them?" -Ckennedy With great sadness.

So Red Peters, Red is for Redcoat? You're actually a Tory?

0

Red_Peters 6 years ago

"....thinkers- remember them?" -Ckennedy

With great sadness.

0

JHOK32 6 years ago

How about preventing the 911 attacks in the first place......People have been hi-jacking planes for decades. We spend how many billions of dollars a year on the CIA, the FBI, the "National Security Agency?" We have satellites & spies all over the globe, we can see a dime on the ground from outerspace......but nobody in the world's most sophisticated government with all their thousands of computers could figure out a couple of dumb arabs could use a a plane as a guided missile by using a 99 cent box-cutter? This is the REAL scary part!

0

christy kennedy 6 years ago

red peter,

Calling those who oppose Bush's disastrous foreign policy "AQ sympathizers" is a lazy and stupid thing to say in place of a rational argument to support your views. This nation was founded by dissenters, patriots-thinkers- remember them? Disagreeing with one's government's policies does not make you a commie, an AQ sympathizer . . . I mean, come on! It's not as black and white as you'd like to believe. Venture into the gray area of complex thinking once and a while. People against the death penalty are not in favor of violent criminals. Oh for crying out loud.

0

christy kennedy 6 years ago

"So no, it was a mistake. We should have waited until more people were killed here at home, and the outrage at Bush's inaction reached a fever pitch."

What people here at home were killed by Saddam Hussein or any other Iraqis?

And why argue the distinction that our "current presence in Iraq" is legal? Does that mean you agree that the run up to war and the initial invasion were not? I'm afraid I'm skimming your comments so I don't get your point. But if I go to a restaurant and say I'm an inspector and then kill half of the waitresses and turn the place into rubble . . . and then I order a meal, is that ok?

0

Red_Peters 6 years ago

I'm exhausted by anti-war AQ sympathizers who can not see this war's never going to end. Get a clue.

0

posessionannex 6 years ago

The US occupation of Iraq was only sanctioned by the UN after the fact...

Correct. The occupation of Iraq is sanctioned by the UN. Man, you're quick!

0

posessionannex 6 years ago

I'm exhausted by you people who think this was the right thing to do.

I did at one time. Now I do not. In hindsight, we should have known that the left would undermine every effort at success, accuse our troops of war crimes, fail to recognize success, and metaphorically spit upon the troops.

So no, it was a mistake. We should have waited until more people were killed here at home, and the outrage at Bush's inaction reached a fever pitch. You know, like immediately after 9/11 when the leftists were running around accusing Bush of being too lazy, or stupid, or whatever to protect us from the terrorists.

People like me should have known that sort of behavior for what it was: Hate Bush First. We assumed people really wanted to fight and win this war against Islamism, and its terrorists, and the nations that supported them. Since a year of the surge, and the left acknowledging none of the success, I'm ready to throw in the towel. Let 'em all fry over there, if that's what they want, and I get to sit back and remind you all that you're getting what you want, and at least Bush tried to win.

0

posessionannex 6 years ago

From your first link:

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/lawindex.htm

We find this:

"Iraq Tells UN it Wants Multinational Force to Stay"

excerpt:

"A resolution adopted by the 15-nation Security Council in November extended the [Multi-National Force - Iraq] mandate through the end of 2006 but called for a review by June 15."

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/unrole/2006/0613mnfstay.htm

I said "Bonus points if you don't ignore the word 'current' in my question." This link:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/16/iraq.iraq

discusses the original invasion. As does every single link on your second site:

http://www.robincmiller.com/ir-legal.htm

As does your fourth site.

Sorry, no bonus points. Would you like for me to link to sites and UN resolutions that offer legal support for our current presence in Iraq? Or would you like to just quit now?

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years ago

The US occupation of Iraq was only sanctioned by the UN after the fact, and not because member states "approve." It's merely a recognition that the a**holes of BushCo are there with no intention of leaving, and the UN is merely trying to get some sort of accountability from them, as silly a notion as that might be.

0

posessionannex 6 years ago

I believe Merrill was simply stating facts and citing headlines that need no commentary for those of us who believe that any deaths in an illegal and counterproductive war make for a bad day.

Oh good, the LTE writer is here. Let me ask you a quick question: By what standard or law is our current presence in Iraq, which is approved by the U.N., Congress, the President, and the government of Iraq, illegal. You should know this, because you wrote the letter, and the above comment.

Bonus points if you don't ignore the word 'current' in my question.

0

christy kennedy 6 years ago

I believe Merrill was simply stating facts and citing headlines that need no commentary for those of us who believe that any deaths in an illegal and counterproductive war make for a bad day.

0

posessionannex 6 years ago

Civilian Deaths in Iraq May Have Topped a Million

...

Tuesday: 1 US Soldier, 54 Iraqis Killed; 129 Iraqis Wounded

So the averages were 2 soldiers and 547 civilians per day, and on Tuesday it's one soldier and 54 iraqis killed. That sounds like it's a well below average day in Iraq. I wonder if that's the new average, though. What are you saying, Merrill, that Tuesday was an exceptionally good day, or that the security situation in Iraq is improving? I can't tell from your post.

/not that I'm expecting a reply

0

Richard Heckler 6 years ago

Bush Given Iraq Plan With No Troop Cut

    Iraqi Defector 'Curveball' Denies Blame for War
    97 Percent of US Death Toll Came After 'Mission Accomplished'
    Bush Says Iraq War Deaths Not in Vain

Civilian Deaths in Iraq May Have Topped a Million

Sadr Army Battles Troops in Four Iraqi Cities Gen. Petraeus: Iran Behind Green Zone Attack Green Zone Shelling Mirrors Militia Ire

Tuesday: 1 US Soldier, 54 Iraqis Killed; 129 Iraqis Wounded

Cheney Hits Out at Iran, Syria, Hamas

    Survey: Israel Strengthens Hamas Yet Again
    Fatah Accidentally Signed Reconciliation Draft With Hamas

All Judges Jailed by Musharraf Freed

    Spokesman: Musharraf Never Approved of US Strikes in Tribal Areas

Tibet Exiles Say 135 Killed, 500 Hurt in Protests

    Chinese Policeman Killed in Tibetan Region
    Tibet Protests Disrupt Olympic Flame Lighting

US Ship Opens Fire on Suez Barges, One Killed

http://antiwar.com/

0

Richard Heckler 6 years ago

Ho Chi Min is in the White House.... the chief terrorist. Yes the man has earned the title as " father of terrorism". The military did not want to invade Iraq. GHW Bush and several of his cabinet people tried to persuade terrorist GW and his terrorist brother Cheney to stop. Cheney and GW are fools who should be in San Quentin. These two do not respect the consitution, the flag,the troops or the american people.

Meet the Bush/Cheney facist government. Cheney could have enlisted to serve in Viet Nam yet he passed on the opportunity. Sending others off to be killed is OK. Put Bush and Cheney in San Quentin and we'll see how far their tough talk takes them. They are slobs.

0

gogoplata 6 years ago

I wouldn't say reading Ron Paul was a religious experience. But it was a refreshing change from what I was had been hearing from other politicians. A clear line of thinking that is consistent and makes sense. Who would have ever thought that would come from a politician.

0

Vet4Freedom 6 years ago

JHOK:

" JFK was against escalation of the Vietnam war, we all know what happened to him."

In addition to engaging in a conspiracy theory, you have revised history. JFK's role in the escalation of the Vietnam war cannot be discounted. He was behind the formation of the Green Berets (against the Army brass' wishes) specifically to increase of involvement in Vietnam.

0

Arana 6 years ago

The only thing I can say is that I support the troops, but I have never, ever supported the war.

0

Mariann 6 years ago

If given the chance, I would spit on redstaters!!!

0

JHOK32 6 years ago

I have a son in Iraq. He joined, he was not drafted. He is very brave. I believe in him, however, I do not believe in this war. Oilmen Bush & Cheney said they invaded Iraq because Saddam was a tyrant & he had "WMD's." We now know there never were any WMD's & we killed Saddam, so why are we still there? I also lost an uncle in Vietnam, we were told then that we had to defend our country against communism. We lost 58,000 good men (mostly kids). We lost the war. Did America cease to exist? No. Were the Russians ever a threat? Yes, but they knew we would have blasted them off the face of the earth, just as they would have blasted us off the face of the earth. So was America ever really threatened? Who really benefited from these wars? Obviously the massive defense industry has made billions. The big oil companies are now making billions. We now know that LBJ started the Vietnam war when he lied to the American people about the now famous Gulf of Tonkin incident. JFK was against escalation of the Vietnam war, we all know what happened to him. My only point is that kid's are dying & being maimed for life......I pray to God that we are not there just to profit big American companies, and I pray that history is not repeating itself again.

0

Jcjayhawk1 6 years ago

We possess no rights. They are at best privileges. Disagree? Ask any of the Japanese that were rounded up in internment camps during WWII. Look at the displacement of Native Americans. (paraphrased from Carlin)

Rights are temporary privileges. The government holds all the cards.

Imeniant domain, Gun control & Patriot Act are coming for you!

0

Red_Peters 6 years ago

""They forget the soldiers who were spit on returning from southeast Asia:.."

Never happened."


And this "theory" then ranks somewhere around the theory the left-wing fascist of the US being anti-Semite.

Propaganda.

0

kansas778 6 years ago

jafs (Anonymous) says:

  1. Freedom of speech means the freedom to say things which may offend someone - this idea that we must "respect" the troops, or the president, or anything else, for that matter, is an infringement of our right to freedom of speech.

Your right to freedom of speech is a freedom from government censorship, not a right to say what you want and not have anyone disagree with you. My posts

0

posessionannex 6 years ago

"U.S. military bases are 'terrorist training camps.'"

http://www.zombietime.com/sf_anti-war_rally_oct_27_2007/my_country_piss_on_thee/

Some people really don't disguise their aversion to the troops. It's not about actual spit 35 years ago, it's about metaphorical spit now.

0

posessionannex 6 years ago

Christy Kennedy wrote:

"The protester's outrage is aimed at the architects, not the guys on the ground."

Really? Some people's outrage really is directed at those on the ground.

excerpt:

"We need to expose that those in the U.S. military are trained to be part of a "killing machine." While not every member of the military is an individual murderer, they are all part of a system that commits war crimes, including aggressive wars, massacres, rape, and other crimes against humanity, all in the service of U.S. imperialism. The bottom line is that even if these people are relatives or friends, you can not support the troops without also supporting the objective role that these troops play in the imperialist system."

http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2008-03-11/article/29447

0

scenebooster 6 years ago

"They forget the soldiers who were spit on returning from southeast Asia:.."

Never happened.

0

northtown 6 years ago

bozo on the bus happens to be correct.When i returned from Nam nobody spit on me,they all welcomed me back,glad to see i made !! And i returned to Lawrence KS.,no problems here,first in California,no problems there,then in Arkansas,and no problems there.Nobody once made like i had done any wrong.They all where protesting the Govenment. So put the blame where it belongs,i was a soldier for life ,but do have to agree this war is wrong. And the U.S.A. is wasting money and lives for what?? I have been there and seeen it,and then even wondered what for??? So just please direct your protest where they need to go!!!

0

jafs 6 years ago

Obviously a very emotional issue.

My two cents:

  1. The military is recruiting folks by promising certain things and then reneging on those promises.

  2. Freedom of speech means the freedom to say things which may offend someone - this idea that we must "respect" the troops, or the president, or anything else, for that matter, is an infringement of our right to freedom of speech.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years ago

"They forget the soldiers who were spit on returning from southeast Asia:.."

No one is forgetting, because it didn't happen. But like all true "conservatives," repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the gospel truth to you.

0

Red_Peters 6 years ago

Fear and Loathing in Lawrence: For the military.

That's what you're dealing with KS778.....the liberals have mastered spin and propaganda. They forget the soldiers who were spit on returning from southeast Asia.....or do they really feel it was somehow merely 'protesting'?

They hate and yet, tremble at the thought of the military....scares the heck out of them.

0

overplayedhistory 6 years ago

Classclown wrote: "Are you insinuating that only illiterate/stupid people join the military?"


Really, I say read a book to a kid and now I am John Kerry. Oh yeah that is right I forgot, this is the country where if you point out the 5000lb elephant in the room you are a liberal traitor like John Kerry, just brush over the fact that he has killed in the service of his country. I was referring to a public that might not be so easily duped into a war if they were a little more literate. I cant wait till the day, as a country, we get over ourselves and other people actually like being around us.
I like what northtown said, stop driving if you want to protest the war. Ride a bike and do your part for a clean environment and reducing health care costs. Could it be simple laziness, as to the reason we are so effed up?

Support our Troops Send them your SUV Ride a Bike

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years ago

While what you say is true, oldvet, the fact remains that the National Guard and the Reserves make up a much higher percentage of troops on active duty than ever before. And while k778 wants to pretend that the lack of a draft somehow justifies this war, if not for the massive call up of National Guard units, this war could not be fought. Even with that call up, the top brass of the military has consistently said that it is seriously overextended, and National Guard units here in the states are understaffed and under-equipped, leaving the states ill-equipped to handle emergency situations such as the tornados in Kansas and hurricanes in Louisiana and elsewhere on the Gulf Coast. This war-mongering administration has left us clearly less secure by their murderous adventures.

0

oldvet 6 years ago

"It used to be that the National Guard remained in this country, to provide protection against any possible attacks:National Guard troops were not sent overseas in the past:."

You know, crazy, you might want to do a little research before you let your fingers fly... The men of the 69th Infantry, Kansas Army National Guard spent a 13-month combat tour in Vietnam... and in WWII nearly all National Guard units were activated, many were deployed intact as units overseas...

0

jonas 6 years ago

kansas778 (Anonymous) says:

"Agnostick, we don't have a draft:in a time of war. I think it's really funny that you folks can't come to terms with what that means."

No no, I think we all do realize that it means that you've found your one-line justification and that you will cling to it in the face of any further argument. It also means that I'm satisfied, and apparently Agno is too, so have fun gnawing that bone.

0

kansas778 6 years ago

Volunteers are lining up. You keep trying to say it's not that many, they're of less intelligence, but you just can't quite get the fact they they are still volunteering can you? You obviously didn't bother to read your links, because in one of them it says that 300,000 people are volunteering each year. Does it really bother you that much that you have to run them down? We don't have a draft thanks to these people. Again you strangely act surprised that it's harder to recruit right now, what's surprising is that it hasn't been so hard that's we've gone to a draft.

And you didn't have much of a problem deciphering "what that means" as you responded directly to it with your third paragraph.

0

Agnostick 6 years ago

I think it's even funnier that you are incapable of explaining "what that means" in clear, concise terms.

But hey... I can't decipher all the spooky language and innuendoes of extremists. You guys keep all your little codes and things running amongst yourselves, that's cool.

We don't have a draft--but it's not because volunteers are lining up around the block. I've linked to several news articles that back that up.

And... Osama Bin Laden is still running loose...

Me? I'm moving on to more-stimulating conversations... ;)

--Ag

0

kansas778 6 years ago

Agnostick, we don't have a draft...in a time of war. I think it's really funny that you folks can't come to terms with what that means.

0

jonas 6 years ago

"That is when I stumbled upon the writings of Ron Paul."

Goodness. Sounds like a religious experience.

0

mulitdisciplinary 6 years ago

good thought toplikar

send the recruiters over first and put some newbies in the at home positions.

0

Matt Toplikar 6 years ago

I really can't believe we're still having the argument that protesting the war somehow disrespects the troops. It's really beyond stupid. First off I have a few good friends in Iraq right now-- my support is with them, and if you think they'd rather be there than with their families you're crazy.
Secondly, any of these chickenhawks who pretend to be defending our troops' honor need to cut out the bull, find some serious perspective, and get their priorities in order. Those of us who actually care about these people are much more concerned that they return home safely. If you can't put their lives and health in the forefront of your mind while forming your opinions, you don't even know what respect is and have no business talking about it. The fact that the protest was held in front of a recruiting office shows no sign of disrespect to the troops in Iraq. The army recruiters aren't in Iraq-- end of story. If you want to say that it's showing disrespect to those who are responsible for sending troops to Iraq, you may have a point. Still what's worse-- possibly offending someone who's life isn't in danger, or saying nothing while your friends are shipped off to possibly die for no good reason?

0

max1 6 years ago

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-army23mar23,0,7045663.story Republican John McCain, judging the risk to U.S. national security of Iraq unraveling to be far greater than that of the Army unraveling, has said he would keep troops in Iraq for 100 years if necessary.

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/77744/ "They see a force stretched dangerously thin and a country ill-prepared for the next fight," said the report, 'The U.S. Military Index,' which polled 3,400 current and former high-level military officers.

"I'm sorry to tell you, there's going to be other wars," said McCain at a campaign stop last month. "We will never surrender but there will be other wars."

"Asked whether it was reasonable or unreasonable to expect the U.S. military to successfully wage another war at this time," said the report, "80 percent of the officers say that it is unreasonable." When asked to grade the preparedness of the military to deal with the threat of Iran -- on which McCain's rhetoric has been especially hawkish -- respondents gave an average score of 4.5 on a scale of 1 to 10 with 10 representing fully prepared.

"Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran" -McCain

0

Agnostick 6 years ago

Try again, kansas778. I'll try to use smaller words this time. Maybe you could read a little slower?

We don't have a draft in a time of war. I understand what this means, perhaps on several levels:

1) Warfare tactics/methodology has changed. We've moved on from the "cannon fodder" use of soldiers that was common through World War II, and perhaps as recent as Vietnam... to a type of warfare that is "smarter." More technology, more surgically-precise, more sophisticated planes, equipment, targeting devices etc.

2) As somebody else pointed out a few posts back, we're employing more reservists. When you do that, you don't need a draft.

Before you accuse me of "looking for the most negative way to spin this," maybe you should read your own words, study your own feelings, study your own intellect and beliefs... and ask yourself if maybe you are the one who's not looking at this realistically?

I never said anything negative; I merely pointed out a side to the story that you had omitted, either through negligence, ignorance, or choice.

If you have any questions about my beliefs, attitudes etc. towards the WOT, I suggest you peruse my archives here.

Good luck & best wishes...

Agnostick agnostick@excite.com http://www.uscentrist.org http://www.americanplan.org

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years ago

"Agnostick, we don't have a draft:in a time of war! Not just that, but one that's been going for several years. Do you not understand what that means?"

It means that economic opportunities in this country are limited, and enough of those confronted with such limited opportunity are desperate enough to join the military and become cannon fodder for murderous, sycophantic a**holes like yourself.

0

kansas778 6 years ago

Agnostick, we don't have a draft...in a time of war! Not just that, but one that's been going for several years. Do you not understand what that means? You keep trying to point out that recruitment is down, as if that's a surprise in a time of war. The surprise is how little recruitment is down, and that a draft is unnecessary. I get the feeling that you're just looking for the most negative way to spin this.

0

gogoplata 6 years ago

I really enjoyed reading all the posts on this one. Up until the 2006 election I was part of the "love it or leave it" "kill'em all, let God sort them out", "troops are fighting for our freedom" crowd. After that election I started to question my devotion to the republican party. I knew I could not become a democrat so I started looking at becoming an independent. That is when I stumbled upon the writings of Ron Paul. That was in January 2007 when there were some speculations about him making a run for president in 2008. What I found was a consistent political philosophy that made sense. We should have never invaded Iraq. Bush would have had the support of the majority of the American people if he would have simply gone after those behind the 911 attacks. Ron Paul was one of the very few who voted against the Iraq invasion before it happened. I know that Paul is not going to be president but his philosophy of limited government alongside a humble foreign policy have caught on with people like me who have done a complete 180 on the Iraq war. The more people who take the time to learn about the value of liberty the better chance we have of not making another mistake like the Iraq war.

0

Agnostick 6 years ago

crazyks, those are excellent points, as well. The cold, hard truth is that you draft men into the army as you lose them, one way or another. As long as we have the required number of people, we don't need more, period.

--Ag

0

Agnostick 6 years ago

kansas778 (Anonymous) says:

Agnostick, do we have a draft?


No, we do not--and I was not challenging you on that point.

At 6:06pm, you wrote this:

"We've been at war for this long and haven't had to implement a draft. That speaks volumes to the support this country is giving to the war in terms of volunteering to serve."

You tied the lack of a draft directly to those that are "volunteering to serve."

If you bothered to look at the links I offered, you'll note that they all refer to a fairly well-known fact that in the past few years, the branches of our military have all lowered their standards, to some degree. Volunteers that wouldn't have been given a second glance in 1999 or 2000, are now being accepted into the military.

Some have behavioral issues; some have light or moderate criminal records; still others might not have the required level of education or aptitude. "Massaging the numbers" is the easiest way to meet goals, here; if there aren't enough folks making the minimum score on the aptitude test, lower the minimum required score.

Is this truly a bad thing? I don't know. I like to think that in at least 50% of the cases, these "volunteers" with troubled pasts of one type or another are really pumping 110% into their new lease on life, and making themselves, their families, and their nation proud.

Still, numbers are numbers. As long as recruiters can recruit the required number of volunteers, we won't need a draft. Standards can only go so low, though--if they go to low, the volunteers become a danger to themselves, and to those they march into battle with.

Agnostick agnostick@excite.com http://www.uscentrist.org http://www.americanplan.org

0

Linda Endicott 6 years ago

What do you need a draft for, when you won't let those who enlisted come home when they thought they would?

Far too many soldiers have enlisted for what they thought was a prescribed length of time, like two years, or three years...only to discover at the end of that time that they weren't free to go home...

And one of the reasons that we have no "official" draft as yet is because we're sending National Guard troops over...and over...and over...

It used to be that the National Guard remained in this country, to provide protection against any possible attacks...National Guard troops were not sent overseas in the past....

Which is why George W. Bush enlisted in the National Guard, and not the regular military...

0

Pilgrim 6 years ago

RedwoodCoast (Anonymous) says:

Anyway, I keep scratching my head at the folks on here that are trying to link protesting to disrespecting the troops. Protesting is just as American as joining the military. I really don't get the sense that protestors are trying to belittle or demean the troops. I'm definitely not following the logic in those arguments.


Asked and answered:

TheYetiSpeaks (Anonymous) says:

Then do not have your protest in front of the recruiting offices. There are several government buildings here in town and in nearby towns that would have been more appropriate. When you protest in front of a recruiting office, the perception is you are protesting soldiers, regardless of true intent.

0

Pilgrim 6 years ago

ignorant_people_abound (Anonymous) says:

oh, and Bush is a lier and a criminal,


Apt choice of screen name.

0

logrithmic 6 years ago

What's hilarious about the "patriots" amongst us is that they seem oblivious to the fact that taxpayers are funding a military to the tune of $1 trillion a year, and even after all the money is spent, the military claims it is unprepared and stretched thin. Seems almost criminal to me.... Oh I forgot. Many of the military industrial complex and their politicians, the ones the "patriots" vote for, are in prison for robbing the taxpayer. Imagine....

0

kansas778 6 years ago

Agnostick, do we have a draft?

0

Red_Peters 6 years ago

No, I was wrong jonas. It really only takes a small--very small portion of a brain to unravel the lunatic mind of the fringe left that chews away at the important issues on LJW.

0

jonas 6 years ago

Red_Peters (Anonymous) says:

"please spare those of us with half a brain."

So you admit, then, that you only have half a brain?

0

max1 6 years ago

July 25, 2007 http://www.dailytidings.com/2007/0725/stories/0725_recruiting.php Recruiting pressures have resulted in a court martial and fine for an Oregon National Guard Iraq veteran. Hellman, 34, of Salem, was an infantry scout shot by an Iraqi sniper in 2004 and decorated for valor. He was accused of criticizing efforts to tone down recruiting sessions. . . Strategies include doubling payments to new recruits and accepting more recruits scoring below certain aptitude levels or with criminal records. Hellman testified that some recruits appeared wearing earrings and nose rings. Others were seen hugging staff. A supervisor accused Hellman of using his hands to make quote marks around the words "new leadership"

Aug. 11, 2007 http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1652179,00.html (Washington) - Frequent tours for U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan have stressed the all-volunteer force and made it worth considering a return to a military draft, President Bush's new war adviser said Friday. "I think it makes sense to certainly consider it," Army Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute said in an interview with National Public Radio's All Things Considered. "And I can tell you, this has always been an option on the table."

Aug. 14, 2007 http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2007/08/14/gen_casey_says_draft_not_being_considered/9475/ U.S. Gen. George Casey said U.S. forces are "out of balance" and any increased demand on U.S. troops will sorely stretch resources. "But right now there is absolutely no consideration, at least within the Army, being given to reinstituting the draft," Casey said in response to a question. "We're not to that point."

Jan. 23, 2008 http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1706118,00.html Army Recruiting More Dropouts A new analysis of Pentagon data shows that only 71% of Army recruits in 2007 earned high-school diplomas, extending a downward trend that began in 2004, the first full year of the Iraq war, and well below the Army's goal of 90%.

January 23, 2008 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012203326.html?hpid=moreheadlines the Army has met its high recruitment goals for the past two years by lowering acceptance standards, offering signing bonuses and loosening age restrictions.

February 6, 2008 http://www.mcclatchydc.com/iraq/story/26903.html Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the military was exhausted by the repeated deployments to Iraq. . . "We must get Army deployments down to 12 months as soon as possible. People are tired."

0

Red_Peters 6 years ago

You know what I like? Seeing the usual suspects try to squirm and weasle their way out of their hatred for Bush and the military and America and freedom and winning and Cheney and Rice and success for America by writing some strange and convoluted diatribe about 'respecting the troops'.......please spare those of us with half a brain.

0

jonas 6 years ago

Well, as long as we know your preconditions for concession of a problem.

0

kansas778 6 years ago

We've been at war for this long and haven't had to implement a draft. That speaks volumes to the support this country is giving to the war in terms of volunteering to serve.

0

RedwoodCoast 6 years ago

Look out Mormons; don't try knocking on Ignorant's door. He'll probably first tell you why you aren't an Elder at age 22 and then escort you to the sidewalk with his AK while wearing an ammunition belt and Rambo style headband.

Anyway, I keep scratching my head at the folks on here that are trying to link protesting to disrespecting the troops. Protesting is just as American as joining the military. I really don't get the sense that protestors are trying to belittle or demean the troops. I'm definitely not following the logic in those arguments.

0

jonas 6 years ago

But my comment was more directed at the "aid and comfort to our enemies" and "do whatever you want as long as it's not something that I disagree with!" arguments that sprouted up around yours.

0

jonas 6 years ago

Kansas778: Sorry, had to drive back from Hermann, Mo and grade a bunch of midterms. Wouldn't want you to think you scared me off.

Anyway, underneath that snobbish sarcasm that seems to be what passes for humor among conservative commentators (shudder) you do have at least a somewhat valid point, that people should be mindful of presuming the correct action for the soldiers even over the soldier's own choices and viewpoints.

On the other hand, there would be some justification in saying that the situation many of these soldier's might have signed up for has been changed, or at least their perspective of it, based on events in the past few years. On a purely anecdotal basis, the soldiers I know who have gone have a tendency to no longer feel the war is no longer as justified or beneficial for either US interests or the world stage as they did when their tours started or when they enlisted in the first place. I scanned a bit, briefly, earlier trying to find total enlistment rates annually for the last decade but without success, though I stumbled across some articles that suggest that the armed forces are having to change (ie: lower) their requirements in order to meet the quotas that they had previously set. While far from provable conclusions, it suggests that there has been some shift in soldiers' attitudes towards the war, that the argument of "it's their choice" do not fully address.

0

ignorant_people_abound 6 years ago

oh P.s.s.

I DON'T NEED ANY OF YOUR FREAKIN PROTECTION FROM ENEMIES ABROAD, I CAN PROTECT MYSELF JUST FINE RIGHT HERE, NO? JUST TRY TO COME IN MY YARD OR TRY TO GET AT ANY OF MY FAMILY. I WILL SHOW YOU WHAT A REAL SOLDIER IS.........

0

ignorant_people_abound 6 years ago

oh, and Bush is a lier and a criminal, Cheney should be tried and imprisoned and Hilary Clinton is a pagan lesbian piece of scum...... have a lousy day to all who are still, in denial...

0

ignorant_people_abound 6 years ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

0

northtown 6 years ago

I served my country and am proud of it !!!!! This war may be wrong,yes bring the troops home,but show them some respect!!! That all i ask,and that is what i did not get !! I made the army my life,have no regrets!!!!!Somebody has to stand up for you folks who would run at the first threat that was brought upon your shore!!! I went to the Nam and many others until the Rottenn Gulf war,then retired.Shot down three times,wounded four,but who cares,it shows nobody in Lawrence would not!!!!!!!! I am a proud american and am one of the few who can say that!! Stand up and show the people you are a man and then protest the war.Stop driving ,using oil maybe that would ,who knows.George Bush is probably wrong,but do not condemn those that go to fight,some come from your national gaurd,signed up to protect you and ended up in a worthless war!! So put the blame where it belongs!!!!maybe look at yourself?? Happy Easter!!!!

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years ago

People join the military for lots of reasons, and most have combinations of reasons. But among the major reasons is economic opportunity in a society and economy which for millions has very limited opportunities. And given that recruiters are known to lie to potential recruits about what they'll get for putting their lives and their bodies on the line for leaders such as Bush and Cheney who lie to the American people in order to go to war primarily for the profit of energy corporations and defense contractors, protesting at recruiting stations is quite appropriate.

0

Red_Peters 6 years ago

I get the distinct feeling liberals are saying (or thinking if they're wimpier than usual):

"Let's hurry up and lose this war, please, we have an election to win."

0

logrithmic 6 years ago

Protesting in front of a "recruiting" station makes perfect sense.

I hate being in a movie theater and seeing the latest Army or National Guard recruiting ad thown up in my face on my nickel bigger than life. The gist of these ads? The Army cares and will provide you a career after you get out. All you gotta do is come on in and spend your time rescuing babies, kittens, and planting flowers. It is this kind of propaganda that appeals to simple minds, and I'm not referring to potential enlistees who more or less are signing up not for patriotic zeal, but simply cuz they need the money.

No, the simple minds I'm referring to are those that believe that this nation stands for some simplistic notion of greatness and define this as love of country.

Many Americans have grown to cynical to believe in Norman Rockwell goodness. They've seen the American dream disappear like some desert mirage. The problem is they haven't connected the dots.

Excessive military spending beyond all rationale need (we spend more on our military than all other nations combined!), designed to protect the assets of the oil companies so that they can sell their oil to us at substantial profit after we've paid to protect their butts.... Well you can see what it all means.

When or if Americans get tired of impoverishing themselves to benefit the shareholders of Dubai's Exxon Mobile, then perhaps, perhaps, the need to protest will end.

0

Mariann 6 years ago

Protesters are speaking thier minds. Right on!

0

classclown 6 years ago

And another thing. TheYetiSpeaks hit the nail on the head with this...

"Then do not have your protest in front of the recruiting offices. There are several government buildings here in town and in nearby towns that would have been more appropriate. When you protest in front of a recruiting office, the perception is you are protesting soldiers, regardless of true intent."

It also cracks me up whenever I see a group protesting war and calling for peace, there is usually at least one person wearing a Che Guevara t shirt.

"Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes". -- Buck Murdock (Airplane II)

0

classclown 6 years ago

overplayedhistory (Anonymous) says:

Protesting is nothing but therapy for those trying to come to terms with their powerlessness, much like blogging on these threads. Yes I am guilty. You want to affect things, follow the recruiters around with a lawyer and a video camera, quit paying taxes, or teach a kid how to read.

========================================

Are you insinuating that only illiterate/stupid people join the military?

Is John Kerry gracing this site with his presence?

"You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq." --John Kerry

http://www.nypost.com/seven/11022006/photos/news004.jpg

0

Pilgrim 6 years ago

TheYetiSpeaks (Anonymous) says:

"The protester's outrage is aimed at the architects, not the guys on the ground."

Then do not have your protest in front of the recruiting offices. There are several government buildings here in town and in nearby towns that would have been more appropriate. When you protest in front of a recruiting office, the perception is you are protesting soldiers, regardless of true intent.


Bravo!! Author, author!!

0

lilsuzy 6 years ago

Great post jonny_quest

0

logrithmic 6 years ago

The protests were justified. This war was a war crime. I'm proud that some decided to take to the streets. Meanwhile, the other 3/4 of the American population that wants the war to end are too busy watching Survivor or American Idol to do anything about their desire. Who can blame them. To stick your neck out in public could bring scorn, charges of lack of patriotism, government surveillance, being put on no-fly lists, and potential ramifications at work.

Support the troops? The best way to support the troops is to bring them home from an illegal police action in support of empire and for the benefit of the oil companies.

God bless America.

0

kansas778 6 years ago

Dorothy is right, they were ordered to volunteer or re-enlist, they had no choice!

0

Mariann 6 years ago

Red peters.....is it conman back? speakes like it. HE who thinks he is a world class general when all he did was clean floors in the army....:)

0

jonny_quest 6 years ago

As an old military guy myself, I appreciate that many people serve(d) in various capacities in the military. However, that in itself, does not mean they are more patriotic than someone else; it does not mean they served their country better than someone else; and it certainly does not mean they deserve automatic, blind respect.

Many times the people that bark agaisnt protestors with responses like, "I defended your rights", "I fought for my country", "love it or leave it" are frequently ignorant of reality and have no capacity for critical thinking. They are dangerous because they are easily manipulated into despotism, fascism, corporatism, militarism, etc.

Thanks to those that serve and thanks to those that protest. We need them both.

0

overplayedhistory 6 years ago

Protesting is nothing but therapy for those trying to come to terms with their powerlessness, much like blogging on these threads. Yes I am guilty. You want to affect things, follow the recruiters around with a lawyer and a video camera, quit paying taxes, or teach a kid how to read.

0

overplayedhistory 6 years ago

"The occupation of Iraq has absolutely nothing to do with our national defense. Our military is fighting and dying for the world's billionaires."

Amen.

0

overplayedhistory 6 years ago

I am just curious how many people here think the War is responsible for the poor economy? It blows my mind how they poll these issues against each other for top concern, as if one is not the direct result of the other. I want to see a poll that asks how many Americans think the economy is the direct result of the war. My point is, the arguments for staying in Iraq are good ones for a country that can afford it. I would rather take our chances with terrorists grown in camps that would appear in the absence of our presence and make ourselves strong again than stay. If Iran (Persia) returns as a world power as a result than we will deal with them by making sure we don't need their oil. I think radical Sonnies/Al Qaeda will keep old Persia busy.
I still like the idea of splitting Iraq into three countries.

0

mick 6 years ago

The occupation of Iraq has absolutely nothing to do with our national defense. Our military is fighting and dying for the world's billionaires.

0

TheYetiSpeaks 6 years ago

"The protester's outrage is aimed at the architects, not the guys on the ground."

Then do not have your protest in front of the recruiting offices. There are several government buildings here in town and in nearby towns that would have been more appropriate. When you protest in front of a recruiting office, the perception is you are protesting soldiers, regardless of true intent.

0

max1 6 years ago

"Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran" -words of John McCain and Rev. John Hagee, whose endorsement McCain was thrilled to receive.

Jingo: We don't want to have to fight, but by Jingo if we do We've got the ships, we've got the men, we've got the money too.

Well, Kansas778 certainly is't going to fight. He'll continue to sit on his ass and cheerlead from the sidelines with his pom-pom girls, so: We've got the ships, but we ain't got the men, and we ain't got the money either, but our pom-pom squads are cheering "one out of three ain't bad"

0

Dorothy Hoyt-Reed 6 years ago

kansas778 Your sarcasm is quite clear. However you seem not to understand what the military is and should be. They are trained to follow orders. It must be this way or we would have military coups like other countries. That's why civilians need to protest the war. The soldiers have nothing to do with the decision to invade a sovereign country, that blame goes entirely to the politicians. The soldiers follow orders, and must continue to do so, or we'll end up under a military dictatorship. What do you think boot camp is all about. It's stripping away the individual to be part of the group. I support our troops, because they are required to do what the commander in chief tells them, but it's that commander that I condemn, and I hope his payback comes sooner than later. He is no leader, has no concept of other cultures (American or foreign) but his own old money background. He is a wimp and failure who is directly responsible for the deaths of our soldiers and he has protected the life of one of our worse enemies, bin Laden, probably as a favor to the Saudis, his buddies. He has taken our soldiers from a noble fight (Afghanistan) and made them fight a war for oil and the profit of war gouging companies like Haliburton. Do I think our military is being abused, yes. Are they aware of it? More than you think. Do they still have to follow orders? yes, we must maintain civil rule over the military.

0

kansas778 6 years ago

You're right Jonas, us well articulated, annointed, ones should do the thinking around here. After all, we are intelligent enough to tell people that what they voluntarily signed up for is wrong, evil, and stupid, but they are not. It's not their fault they didn't have the enlightenment we have, and got suckered by Bushco into this illegal and immoral war they are fighting.

0

uhadmeatsmellthis 6 years ago

"Protests justified"

I agree, if I try and think like an AQ leader. It's way past disrespecting troops; try 'killing' troops---more accurate.

0

jonas 6 years ago

Wow, what a bunch of thoughtless responses.

Christy: That was pretty well articulated, but you will unfortunately find that there will be some who are unwilling or incapable of separating protesting the war from disrespecting the troops. Probably because sticking to that line is the only way that they can find their position to be defensible.

0

OnlyTheOne 6 years ago

Northtown and I served my country in 62! Do you have any idea what was happening then? And I wasn't' drafted! You "love it or leave it" folks haven't the slightest idea what it's about!

0

OnlyTheOne 6 years ago

kansas778 you disgust me! Enough said.

0

Buggie7 6 years ago

Tribal I dont believe you wer catching Kansas 778's sarcastic break up if what Christy said. He just put it in laymens terms. Ha Ha Kansas I get what you were saying and Christy you need to find another soccer mom -past time cause this one isnt working for you.

0

Red_Peters 6 years ago

This LTE would be music to Ho Chi Minhs' ears.

In a word, if a may, point out the very crowd who again beat Bush about the head and neck when he made the Vietnam reference, is the same crowd who forget HCM, a master propagandist, like AQ is now, was embraced by protesters, ultimately by hook or by crook, forcing America out after 50,000 plus dead and about 800,000 wounded and the costs that in inflationary measure, dwarfs the Iraqi War. Basically another angle that exposes the fringe left for what they are.

Who was that president that dumped us headlong into Vietnam? That would be LBJ.

0

kansas778 6 years ago

tribal, no, they don't, that's the point I was making.

0

jimbrad 6 years ago

I served my country for 30 years - ten years of reserve duty and 20 years of active duty. I retired from the Army almost 16 years ago. I saw no duty in any conflict area. I was always in another place that needed my presence to maintain the peace. I served in the Army to protect all of your rights to protest - in a peaceful manner, I might add - anything you disagree with, be it governmental or personal.

However, when it comes to burning my flag, downgrading my former, present and future comrades in arms in any way, and threatening to overthrow my government by force I take a personal exception to "your rights".

In answer to "Christy", the U. S. Army is the best equipped and best trained army in the world.

The enemy is able to adapt to our defenses for the simple fact that they know what our defenses are and and find ways to defeat them. The Department of Defense is constantly devising ways to try to stay one step ahead of the enemy. When the war started, no thought was given to IED's. We expected a conventional war, hence no up-armored wheeled vehicles. Now we have them. They work.

I can talk for days on this subject, but I must go to church this morning and pray for the unenlightened.

"I was a soldier, I am a soldier, I will always be a soldier"

0

northtown 6 years ago

Protest the war,you have the right!!! But do not condemn our troops or disrepect our and your countries flag!!! If you don't like it then get out,move to another country!!! Just another Lawrence jerk,that makes this city look bad. Go walk with the Phelps family and feel real proud of youself!!!!!!!!!!!!Get a job and a life!!!!!!! I served my country in 1967,when they still had the draft,bring it back,teach these people how to live and respect the country they live in and will depend on some day...

0

tribalzendancer 6 years ago

kansas778, you're the one being disrespectful. It's unfortunate you can't engage in intelligent discussion. Anti-war protesters do support the troops. That's the point Christy was making.

Let's broaden the discussion shall we: here are some great online documentaries on the subject:

Media & War: http://www.filmsforaction.org/films/?Subject=8

War & Peace: http://www.filmsforaction.org/films/?Subject=13

0

kansas778 6 years ago

Yes, don't you dumb soldiers understand? Since you were duped into joining the service because you are poor and unenlightened (unlike Christy and I) we don't blame you personally for being a pawn in someone else's schemes. In fact, like a parent and their kids (if you were mature like us you would have known better), we only care for your safety, and we want to bring you home, because we don't think you are smart enough to know that what you signed up for was a dangerous job. We know you tried, but let's face it, you aren't good enough to win this war, so just give up and come home. But we don't mean any disrespect.

0

i_tching 6 years ago

Support the troops. End this quagmire. Bring them home.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.