Are they changing their tune?

[SethFWF]

apnews.excite.com/article/20050821/D8C4CCNO0.html

Not that I really think there's much similarity, one person said though that the big difference is that the terrorists do not have an ideology like North Vietnam had... I believe they do, every bit as crazy and dangerous.

This 4 more years crap is ridiculous, while the Repubs continue as I type to say how great things are over there. Do what we have to do right now and get the fuck out of there! It's going to be hell over there for decades to come at least, we got the dictator out...they need to run their own country right now with no more expense to US lives and money.

I wonder what this guy would do should he run and win for prez?

Seth

[Abate]

www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9032036/

yep, hey: lets keep listening to the guys who have never actually been to war or seen war first hand. they definitely know more than guys like this.

wake up people. how much longer to we have to endure mistakes before we just admit we were wrong. stop being proud, and start being Americans.

props to you Seth, and anyone else who has enough shreds of common sense to know this was a ridiculous war from day one. never give in to stupidity, no matter how many people want to walk off a bridge.

[SethFWF]

I predict that in one or two years, many of the Bush administration(whether still current or ex members) will begin to speak out more against the war and decisions leading up to it. Starting with Colin Powell, let some more time go by and we'll hear a different tune from him. But several will never admit no matter what happens that it was a mistake...how much more respect might they get if they could do so?

On the flip side, I hope I'm wrong and things change dramatically over there...in which case I will admit I was wrong. I have very little to be proud of, I've had it all kicked out of me...and it's a good thing since pride comes before a big fall. Right now, pride is kicking this admins ass...hopefully things start to get better. Best way to begin that process is get out of there and concentrate on our borders.

Seth

[Shark Black]

They've already admitted that intellegence on WMD was faulty. What the fuck else can they do? The CIA bungled it. Clinton said they had them, John Kerry said they had them, The Brittish said they had them, The Russians said they had them. Saddam fooled them all. And now these pussy armchair liberal dickweeds are saying it was all GEorge Busshes fault.

Bullshit. Let move on...

Speaking of Saddam.
Getting rid of Saddam, Brilliant! But history is being rewritten as we speak.

and... It's pretty amazing how this so called anti-war movement is being trumped up by the media. Cindy Sheehan gets all the press and the equal number of counter protesters get shit for coverage. Their all a bunch of jobless yayhoos.

The best way to honor our servicemen's and women's sacrifice is to finish the job and then bring them home as heroes. To cut and run is the worst fucking idea ever. What message does that send the terrorists? Chuck Hagel is playing politics so he can run for president that's all. And who's there to glorify his pettiness? The Media. And BTW, Chuck Hagel is barely a republican.

We should have upped the number of soldiers more than a year ago and cleaned their clock. They should have replaced Rumsfeld in 2004, because that was and is his thing. But because with Rummy they are pussy footing around. Iraq is messy.

Speaking of pussies, God willing the pussy pullout people will not have their way and we will get the fucking job done. Iraq will have their constitution, and they will have their democracy. I'm sure it will be a bit messy for some time but we'll be out of there in less than 2 years.

And remember we have an all volunteer army. And most of them believe in this mission. We should support them, by letting them finish it. This Viet Namish defeatism is so out of line and it disgusts me.

PS. I don't care what anyone says, it's these ultra left wingers sabotage that kill more soldiers than anybody.

They give moral support to the enemy, and encourages them to keep fighting. Every time these idiots get their message aired it is immediatelyy spread throught the middle east. They hear them....

It make's me ill.

Disagree with the policy but let our men and women win!

Not giving the armed services the means to win is unacceptable. I think there is so much more we could do to help them win.

And we should be winning this one by a lot larger margin than we are now. There is so much each and every american can do to help them win but some are negative nabobs and more are devious politicos.

Pulling out early will be the worst outcome.
Ask any of your Vietnamese neighbors....

They'll tell you.

[SethFWF]

I agree with just about everything you said, I do however harp a lot on the 'we shouldn't be there in the first place' thing and I apologize.

But one point that we aren't on the same page about is this, 'we're pussies if we cut and run, like all the pussy Democrats and Liberals want us to do'. There's nothing pussy about saying 'we got rid of your dictator and his sons, now since this is still your country and we haven't planted a flag here...it's time for us to stop losing our people and money. Please, take it from here'.

Pride is a sure killer, whether it's individuals or countries...we wouldn't even have to swallow our pride by leaving there in a logical amount of time from here. Finish the job, yes...but let's not make the 'job' drag out for another 2 or 4 years.

And the comparison to Vietnam I think is only that it looks like we are getting bogged down in a war that many people are wondering what the point was in the first place.(not 9-11) It's not nearly as bad of course, but unneeded death is death wherever it happens.

Seth

[Shark Black]

sethfwf said:

But one point that we aren't on the same page about is this, 'we're pussies if we cut and run, like all the pussy Democrats and Liberals want us to do'. There's nothing pussy about saying 'we got rid of your dictator and his sons, now since this is still your country and we haven't planted a flag here...it's time for us to stop losing our people and money. Please, take it from here'.


Seth

I agree wholeheartedly but we should finish the job first and then get out. Someone has to provide security until they can provide for themselves. They are almost there. It's no time to quit when we are getting closer to the finish line.

Once the Constitution is written, and I hope they can get this done soon. Then they have the referendum to make it law. Then there will be new elections. All the while creating an Iraqi army and security forces to help protect Iraq and prevent it from degrading into a civil war, then we go home.

So many have said there is no plan to get out. There it is.... Sounds like a plan to me.

It's been a tough road, but it's just time to suck it up and let the warriors do their thing, and hopefully something resembling a safe free society will emerge. And I know us getting out of there is one of the most important pieces of that puzzle. I think that the will go a long way to easing the tension many in that country feel about having non muslims there. And I hope that happens sooner rather than later. And we all should do what we can for our servicemen and women and for the Iraqis.

Protesting the war at this point is just not very productive for either.

And yes it did suck that our CIA was so inept as to get so many things wrong in the first place... But we did this to them by tying their hands in so many bureaucratic ways.

That all just more fodder, like those idiot guards at Abu Ghraib for the peaceniks. Now it was plain embarrasing and painful, but that shouldn't keep us from doing what needs to be done to give the Iraqi's the country they deserve.

[Sir Van Talvin]

sethfwf said:

But one point that we aren't on the same page about is this, 'we're pussies if we cut and run, like all the pussy Democrats and Liberals want us to do'. There's nothing pussy about saying 'we got rid of your dictator and his sons, now since this is still your country and we haven't planted a flag here...it's time for us to stop losing our people and money. Please, take it from here'.

Pride is a sure killer, whether it's individuals or countries...we wouldn't even have to swallow our pride by leaving there in a logical amount of time from here. Finish the job, yes...but let's not make the 'job' drag out for another 2 or 4 years.

And the comparison to Vietnam I think is only that it looks like we are getting bogged down in a war that many people are wondering what the point was in the first place.(not 9-11) It's not nearly as bad of course, but unneeded death is death wherever it happens.

Seth

Ho-boy! #frustrated#

Historical perspective time!

How "pussy" would it have been to say in 1945, "Okay, we ended the 3rd Reich, but since this your land and we haven't planted any flags here, why don't you Europeans just take it from here? I mean, we've already lost a lot of lives and money and we don't want to lose any more lives or money helping you guys stabilize yourselves." To be sure, the Cold War didn't take a lot of lives, but it damn sure took a lot of money. Plus, there was no timetable for withdrawal. Withdrawal (from Berlin, at least) came AFTER the threat of Soviet aggression had evaporated. I believe history has already vindicated each successive President for staying the course. That sacrifice was worth it.

Go back another century to the Civil War. It sure wasn't very popular at the beginning with the Union forces getting their asses handed to them by the Confederates. Nor was it particularly popular when things slowly turned around in the Union's favor while men were still dying and brother was still fighting brother. It was only AFTER the conclusion of the war that Lincoln was vindicated for staying the course. That sacrifice was worth it.

Go back yet another century to the Revolutionary War. George Washington had a ragtag bunch of fighters who weren't really winning the war against the British (geez, how long did that war drag on?). The "nation" was divided back then (Loyalists -- remember those guys?). I can reasonably assume that there were quite a few people back then who wondered what the point of it all was. But through all the adversity Washington pressed on (I suppose you could call it *gasp!* pride). Because he pressed on -- and with the timely help of the French (who were the good guys back then) -- we have this nation today that guarantees the right of weak-stomached people to speak their minds. So, of course, AFTER the conclusion of the war Washington was vindicated for staying the course. That sacrifice was definitely worth it.

Vietnam is a doesn't even deserve to be compared here. There was no political will to actually WIN that war. That's how come people were dying needlessly: because they died in the ABSENCE of a pursuit of total victory. Really, the same thing is true of Korea with that "police action" nonsense. MacArthur said it best: "In war, there is no substitute for victory." If you fight a war without the aim or the will to win, then you have died for nothing. That's the defintion of an unneeded death.

Bottom line: you can't have victory without sacrifice.

[SethFWF]

Take your complete last paragraph and apply it to Iraq. Find all the differences in our ideology now as opposed to then and the differences in their ideologies all you want, while the wars themselves are very different...what exactly are we doing for Iraq? Providing them Democracy? Maybe, but creating another Isreal is more like it. Better than it was? Maybe, but also maybe not much. Should it turn out that way, it won't be any different than those 2 wars.

The comparisons to those other wars are off base IMO. In the creation of our own country or direct defense of our own country, pride and steadfastness is warranted and should be applauded. Of course I'll go back again to the fact that we shouldn't be there in the first place and then say we're there too long already and have lost too much already...the cost vs. the reward is not there as in the other cases.

Seth

[Shark Black]

The cost, if we don't cut and run like a bunch of losers, is worth every penny. The cost of cutting and running is HUGE! Talk about not worth it. If that were to happen then what was the price for leaving Iraq in their time of need. And those that gave their lives for the cause of a free Iraq, in the cause of freeing Iraq from Sadaam, in the cause of justice and a safer US are bona fide hero's. The armed services are there because they want to be, they enlisted. You can't tell them what cost is too high. They know why they are there. Almost all them agree with why they are there. When Iraq is on it's feet and the terrorists are defeated it WILL be worth it.

[Sir Van Talvin]

sethfwf said:

Take your complete last paragraph and apply it to Iraq. Find all the differences in our ideology now as opposed to then and the differences in their ideologies all you want, while the wars themselves are very different...what exactly are we doing for Iraq? Providing them Democracy? Maybe, but creating another Isreal is more like it. Better than it was? Maybe, but also maybe not much. Should it turn out that way, it won't be any different than those 2 wars.

The comparisons to those other wars are off base IMO. In the creation of our own country or direct defense of our own country, pride and steadfastness is warranted and should be applauded. Of course I'll go back again to the fact that we shouldn't be there in the first place and then say we're there too long already and have lost too much already...the cost vs. the reward is not there as in the other cases.

Seth

What are we doing for Iraq? The noble cause of nation-building. It doesn't compare to Israel because Israel was created by the UN with the drawing of lines on a map. Israel then had to fight its "Independence War" after (not before) the lines had been drawn.

I'll be back later to address the comparisons to other wars

[SethFWF]

I should always put the disclaimer in that I support the troops 100%, the wife and I put a package together sometime ago when they were collecting and will do it again. And as I've said before, we do need to finish the job and not leave half-assed.

I still maintain that a better plan should have been implemented, we rushed in there like a bunch of drunks to a brawl and things are not going nearly as good as they could have with more time and planning. But Bush wanted to make his mark quick and let the world know how "tough he is". While the people who protest against an ill advised war are pussies.

Can't change the past though, but I do think as time goes on, the changing of the tune will be more prevelant because of the aforementioned.

Seth

[Sir Van Talvin]

sethfwf said:

Take your complete last paragraph and apply it to Iraq.

This is where I confess to being confused #huh#. I can't apply that last paragraph to Iraq because the whole point of it was to show how Iraq and Vietnam don't compare to each other. The politicians placed too many restrictions on the Armed Forces in Vietnam which effectively rendered them unable to actually achieve victory over the enemy (absolutley not the case in Iraq).

sethfwf said:

Find all the differences in our ideology now as opposed to then and the differences in their ideologies all you want, while the wars themselves are very different...what exactly are we doing for Iraq?

My argument isn't about finding all the differences in our ideologies. It's about the similarities between those who oppose a war or conflict of their time to other opponents of wars/conflicts from their respective times.

sethfwf said:

The comparisons to those other wars are off base IMO.

If you're going to say that those comparisons are off base, then you had better lend some credibility to that claim by explaining how it is so.

sethfwf said:

In the creation of our own country or direct defense of our own country, pride and steadfastness is warranted and should be applauded.

Wellllll.........

Only two of our nation's wars ever involved "direct defense": War of 1812 and the Pacific Theater of WWII (Wake Island, Philippines, etc.)

sethfwf said:

Of course I'll go back again to the fact that we shouldn't be there in the first place and then say we're there too long already and have lost too much already...the cost vs. the reward is not there as in the other cases.

Now we're coming to the crux of the matter. Each war or conflict that I mentioned before had opponents and naysayers -- people like you who said, "We shouldn't be in __(insert your favorite war here)__!" only to realize later on that the reward was worth the cost.

There were critics and naysayers against each and every war fought by this country. It was only AFTER these wars were over that everyone could evaluate the cost vs. reward. What's the reward for the costly fight against the British in the Revolutionary War? What's the reward for the costly fight to keep the nation together in the Civil War? What's the reward for the costly fight against the Third Reich in WWII (remember: before Dec. 1941, this nation was overwhelmingly isolationist)? What's the reward for the costly arms race and military buildup against the Soviet Union during the Cold War? The answer to each question should be quite obvious because of the benefit of hindsight. I'm pretty sure that no one today can say that any of those wars should have been cut back because of the high cost in money and lives (of course, few people died directly because of the Cold War -- but the point is the same).

One other thing: whatever reason we invaded Iraq doesn't matter anymore. It matters that we're there and we that have to stay there to help rebuild that nation. Just because a good argument can be made for not going there in the first place doesn't automatically mean we shouldn't stay and help fix what we broke.

[SethFWF]

"This is where I confess to being confused . I can't apply that last paragraph to Iraq because the whole point of it was to show how Iraq and Vietnam don't compare to each other. The politicians placed too many restrictions on the Armed Forces in Vietnam which effectively rendered them unable to actually achieve victory over the enemy (absolutley not the case in Iraq)."

I was trying to say that your comments about those other wars are likely to be the same things said about Iraq in the future, in different ways of course. As I said, we've brought upon another type of volatile environment to replace the other one, maybe some good has been done...but there will be turmoil there for many years to come despite what we've done. Maybe at some point the reward will present itself, not sure if I'll be alive by then because this global war that's brewing is just starting in Iraq.

"If you're going to say that those comparisons are off base, then you had better lend some credibility to that claim by explaining how it is so."

I think what I said explains it somewhat, in the direct protection and defense of your country...by all means, kick ass and ask questions later. In the creation of our country, by all means...do what needs to be done. Iraq wasn't a direct threat to us, not any more(and a lot less actually) than a dozen other countries. Creating Democracy in that part of the world is not akin to creating this country, we can lose 100 million lives and spend a kagillion dollars doing that all over the world also while our borders and mass transit aren't getting the money and attention they need. There wasn't a dire need to kick ass without asking the pertenent questions in this case.

"One other thing: whatever reason we invaded Iraq doesn't matter anymore. It matters that we're there and we that have to stay there to help rebuild that nation. Just because a good argument can be made for not going there in the first place doesn't automatically mean we shouldn't stay and help fix what we broke."

And yes, on this we do agree. We do need to finish the job, but there will always be people just like with Vietnam who will question why the hell we were there in the first place. Redundant?, yes...can't change the past. But I think something can be learned from this, although I question how much humans and especially politicians really learn from the past.

Seth

[spyder]

we were discussing this wednesday, well being in iraq and the protests against the war....and a question was raised, 'where are all the true patriots these days?'

cindy sheehan is doing nothing but cheapening her own sons death. we have an all volunteer service. in joining the service you get to enjoy a job that you won't be fired from (unless of course you screw up royally), free education and travel. you know, when you sign on that dotted line there may be a chance that you will be called into duty for war.

we've lost less in this war than we lost on that day in september. how about the mothers, sons, daughters, fathers, grandmothers, grandfathers etc. that lost a loved one that was going to work!?! visit ground zero. it'll smack you right in the face.

any loss of life is tragic, but the victims of that day in september didn't sign up with the chance to go to war to lose their lives.

should we run the world? maybe not. just let the dumb bastards blow each other up but when they start f**cking around with innocent people on our soil maybe they need to be taught a lesson.

innocent people are losing their lives over there but most of the blood shed is from their own kind.

probably not making much sense. it's been a long week and i feel i've been mindraped.

[SethFWF]

I agree wholeheartedly spydy, I only think we should have spent the resources #1 on crippling Al Qaida(more) and taking out Bin Ladin, #2 securing our own country. Going after Iraq should have been much lower on the list and their connection to 9-11 is very small at best.

But we are there, hopefully I will be dead wrong in the coming years and things will go much better.

As far as Sheehan, she's grieving in her own way. IMO, there's no reason Bush shouldn't talk to her for awhile rather than jokingly look for WMDs under his podium.

Seth