Bush Starts "Second Surge" to Double Number of Troops in Iraq - Page 8 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-25-2007, 03:08 PM   #106
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,641
Local Time: 03:56 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2


It hasnt happened since 9/11.
You don't think it has anything to do with a change of security? Or that we aren't ignoring red flags like men taking flight lessons and not bothering to learn how to land, like certain people did in the past?


Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2

You mean, how many people will have to die in a terrorist attack before people realize that there is a real enemy that wants all of us dead? I dont know, you tell me.
No. How many people did it take to execute 9/11? A handful. None of which were from Iraq

But let's say this surge will "win" the war. Do you really think you'll destroy or capture even the last handful?
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 05:27 PM   #107
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 04:56 AM
Maybe it will work out, cut Bush some slack
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 06:22 PM   #108
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,234
Local Time: 03:56 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2


You're right, instead, if we pull out, Al-Qaeda can come chop off our arms and legs over here.
Riiiight. because Iraq is the only thing keeping Al Qaeda from attacking on US soil again?

Explain the logic behind that one, please.
__________________
Diemen is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 06:49 PM   #109
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,332
Local Time: 01:56 AM
I'll miss my tats when they chop off my arms.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 02:34 AM   #110
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 04:56 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2
[BYou mean, how many people will have to die in a terrorist attack before people realize that there is a real enemy that wants all of us dead? I dont know, you tell me. [/B]


and that enemy never has been, and never will be, Iraqi.

the world is less safe because of Iraq. we are more likely to be attacked because of Iraq. we have spawned a generation that hates the US because of Iraq. we have done precisely what Osama Bin Laden -- and Iran! -- wanted by invading Iraq.

but this has been done in here, over and over again.

not sure i have the patience for "The Iraq Debacle: 201."
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 08:58 AM   #111
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 04:56 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2
[B]

It hasnt happened since 9/11. Our troops being over there puts pressure on the enemy. I heard someone say that because we are over there Al-Qaeda is constantly moving around and on the defense, making it hard for them to plot attacks. Does nobody else see that leaving Iraq would create a space that will absolutely be filled by Iran or Al-Qaeda? Pulling out certainly would not decrease the chance of us being hit again. Al-Qaeda will know that have chosen to lose and that we are weak.



You mean, how many people will have to die in a terrorist attack before people realize that there is a real enemy that wants all of us dead? I dont know, you tell me.
You do realize a terrorist attack can come from anywhere, right?

After all what was one of the largest acts of terrorism on American soil prior to 9/11?

The Oklahoma City bombing, conducted by citizens of the good old U.S.A.
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 09:00 AM   #112
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 04:56 AM
This thread illustrates clearly the danger represented by charlatans like Rush Limbaugh.

Far too many people don't realize that this man is an ENTERTAINER, not a source of legitamte, trustworthy news.
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 12:31 PM   #113
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,332
Local Time: 01:56 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by maycocksean
The Oklahoma City bombing, conducted by citizens of the good old U.S.A.
And they weren't Liberals.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 05-28-2007, 04:33 PM   #114
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:56 PM
Quote:
By all accounts, the results in Anbar have been impressive: Where barely 200 police officers had served in Ramadi, the provincial capital, last summer, now there are more than 8,000. The number of attacks on U.S. forces dropped from 108 a week last year to seven during the first week of May.

"We started remembering what had happened [with Al Qaeda] and how things went, and we decided to fight," said Tariq al-Duleimi, who heads security for Sattar Abu Risha, the young sheik who was the host of the meeting at his compound last October
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-070527anbar-story,1,785371.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

The biggest liability is Bush and the political loss that he has and will continue to incur.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 05-28-2007, 05:58 PM   #115
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,271
Local Time: 04:56 AM
Quote:
"I thought, 'What are we doing here? Why are we still here?' " said Safstrom, a member of Delta Company of the 1st Battalion, 325th Airborne Infantry, 82nd Airborne Division. "We're helping guys that are trying to kill us. We help them in the day. They turn around at night and try to kill us."

His views are echoed by most of his fellow soldiers in Delta Company, renowned for its aggressiveness....

With few reliable surveys of soldiers' attitudes, it is impossible to simply extrapolate from the small number of soldiers in Delta Company. But in interviews with more than a dozen soldiers over a one-week period, most said they were disillusioned by repeated deployments, by what they saw as the abysmal performance of Iraqi security forces and by a conflict that they considered a civil war, one they had no ability to stop.

"In 2003, 2004, 100 percent of the soldiers wanted to be here, to fight this war," said Sergeant First Class David Moore, a self-described "conservative Texas Republican" and platoon sergeant who strongly advocates an American withdrawal. "Now, 95 percent of my platoon agrees with me."
Read it here.

Then there is this guy who wrote an open letter:

Quote:
My name is Donald Hudson Jr. I have been serving our country’s military actively for the last three years. I am currently deployed to Baghdad on Forward Operating Base Loyalty, where I have been for the last four and a half months.

I came here as part of the first wave of this so called "troop surge", but so far it has effectively done nothing to quell insurgent violence. I have seen the rise in violence between the Sunni and Shiite. This country is in the middle of a civil war that has been on going since the seventh century.

Why are we here when this country still to date does not want us here? Why does our president’s personal agenda consume him so much, that he can not pay attention to what is really going on here?

...

Now I am still here in this country wondering why, and having to pick up the pieces of what is left of my friend in our room. I would just like to know what is the true reason we are here? This country poses no threat to our own. So why must we waste the lives of good men on a country that does not give a damn about itself? Most of my friends here share my views, but do not have the courage to say anything.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 05-28-2007, 06:46 PM   #116
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,332
Local Time: 01:56 AM
I'm eagerly awaiting the responses to this from those here who are in love with this war, yet won't go fight it.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 05-28-2007, 08:53 PM   #117
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Jeannieco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: A HEART THAT IS BROKEN IS A HEART THAT IS OPEN
Posts: 4,954
Local Time: 01:56 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2



I hope you're not serious. You are aware that there is not a draft, right? We have an all volunteer military. As a matter of fact, I believe it was your pal Congressman Rangel proposing a draft not too long ago.

If the daughters dont want to join the military, they dont have to. It is not the job or responsibility of any president's children to carry out their father's policy.
Not that I am for a draft but the more time passes the more it occurs to me that a draft is what it will take for people to get off their butts and protest against this occupation in the streets just like Vietnam. When they are finally asked to make the ultimate sacrifice with their own children's blood then maybe this war won't set so well with the miniority that still support it. And for those of us that have opposed it from the beginning it will make our voices louder.
__________________
Jeannieco is offline  
Old 05-28-2007, 09:10 PM   #118
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:56 PM
So you advocate one evil (soft slavery) to protest against another evil.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 05-28-2007, 09:12 PM   #119
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,332
Local Time: 01:56 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Jeannieco


Not that I am for a draft but the more time passes the more it occurs to me that a draft is what it will take for people to get off their butts and protest against this occupation in the streets just like Vietnam. When they are finally asked to make the ultimate sacrifice with their own children's blood then maybe this war won't set so well with the miniority that still support it. And for those of us that have opposed it from the beginning it will make our voices louder.
Be careful what you wish for.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 05-29-2007, 09:01 AM   #120
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 04:56 AM
Washington Post

I Lost My Son to a War I Oppose. We Were Both Doing Our Duty.

By Andrew J. Bacevich
Sunday, May 27, 2007; B01

Parents who lose children, whether through accident or illness, inevitably wonder what they could have done to prevent their loss. When my son was killed in Iraq earlier this month at age 27, I found myself pondering my responsibility for his death.

Among the hundreds of messages that my wife and I have received, two bore directly on this question. Both held me personally culpable, insisting that my public opposition to the war had provided aid and comfort to the enemy. Each said that my son's death came as a direct result of my antiwar writings.

This may seem a vile accusation to lay against a grieving father. But in fact, it has become a staple of American political discourse, repeated endlessly by those keen to allow President Bush a free hand in waging his war. By encouraging "the terrorists," opponents of the Iraq conflict increase the risk to U.S. troops. Although the First Amendment protects antiwar critics from being tried for treason, it provides no protection for the hardly less serious charge of failing to support the troops -- today's civic equivalent of dereliction of duty.

What exactly is a father's duty when his son is sent into harm's way?

Among the many ways to answer that question, mine was this one: As my son was doing his utmost to be a good soldier, I strove to be a good citizen.

As a citizen, I have tried since Sept. 11, 2001, to promote a critical understanding of U.S. foreign policy. I know that even now, people of good will find much to admire in Bush's response to that awful day. They applaud his doctrine of preventive war. They endorse his crusade to spread democracy across the Muslim world and to eliminate tyranny from the face of the Earth. They insist not only that his decision to invade Iraq in 2003 was correct but that the war there can still be won. Some -- the members of the "the-surge-is-already-working" school of thought -- even profess to see victory just over the horizon.

I believe that such notions are dead wrong and doomed to fail. In books, articles and op-ed pieces, in talks to audiences large and small, I have said as much. "The long war is an unwinnable one," I wrote in this section of The Washington Post in August 2005. "The United States needs to liquidate its presence in Iraq, placing the onus on Iraqis to decide their fate and creating the space for other regional powers to assist in brokering a political settlement. We've done all that we can do."

Not for a second did I expect my own efforts to make a difference. But I did nurse the hope that my voice might combine with those of others -- teachers, writers, activists and ordinary folks -- to educate the public about the folly of the course on which the nation has embarked. I hoped that those efforts might produce a political climate conducive to change. I genuinely believed that if the people spoke, our leaders in Washington would listen and respond.

This, I can now see, was an illusion.

The people have spoken, and nothing of substance has changed. The November 2006 midterm elections signified an unambiguous repudiation of the policies that landed us in our present predicament. But half a year later, the war continues, with no end in sight. Indeed, by sending more troops to Iraq (and by extending the tours of those, like my son, who were already there), Bush has signaled his complete disregard for what was once quaintly referred to as "the will of the people."

To be fair, responsibility for the war's continuation now rests no less with the Democrats who control Congress than with the president and his party. After my son's death, my state's senators, Edward M. Kennedy and John F. Kerry, telephoned to express their condolences. Stephen F. Lynch, our congressman, attended my son's wake. Kerry was present for the funeral Mass. My family and I greatly appreciated such gestures. But when I suggested to each of them the necessity of ending the war, I got the brushoff. More accurately, after ever so briefly pretending to listen, each treated me to a convoluted explanation that said in essence: Don't blame me.

To whom do Kennedy, Kerry and Lynch listen? We know the answer: to the same people who have the ear of George W. Bush and Karl Rove -- namely, wealthy individuals and institutions.

Money buys access and influence. Money greases the process that will yield us a new president in 2008. When it comes to Iraq, money ensures that the concerns of big business, big oil, bellicose evangelicals and Middle East allies gain a hearing. By comparison, the lives of U.S. soldiers figure as an afterthought.

Memorial Day orators will say that a G.I.'s life is priceless. Don't believe it. I know what value the U.S. government assigns to a soldier's life: I've been handed the check. It's roughly what the Yankees will pay Roger Clemens per inning once he starts pitching next month.

Money maintains the Republican/Democratic duopoly of trivialized politics. It confines the debate over U.S. policy to well-hewn channels. It preserves intact the cliches of 1933-45 about isolationism, appeasement and the nation's call to "global leadership." It inhibits any serious accounting of exactly how much our misadventure in Iraq is costing. It ignores completely the question of who actually pays. It negates democracy, rendering free speech little more than a means of recording dissent.

This is not some great conspiracy. It's the way our system works.

In joining the Army, my son was following in his father's footsteps: Before he was born, I had served in Vietnam. As military officers, we shared an ironic kinship of sorts, each of us demonstrating a peculiar knack for picking the wrong war at the wrong time. Yet he was the better soldier -- brave and steadfast and irrepressible.

I know that my son did his best to serve our country. Through my own opposition to a profoundly misguided war, I thought I was doing the same. In fact, while he was giving his all, I was doing nothing. In this way, I failed him.
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com