in case you thought Patraeus was apolitical ...

[BVS]

[Irvine511]

Originally posted by AEON


Yes. That is exactly what I want to tell Sean Penn, Cindy Sheehan, and the lovely Code Pink women.

please don't compare them to the legitimate anti-war position, which is that this war, as Petraeus agrees, has not made us safer.

and please don't fall for blaming a few silly leftist elements for the failures of this administration. and please don't buy into the "stabbed in the back" narrative that they're trying to create.

this war is failing because we have an incompetent administration who launched an ill-conceived, non-planned, unnecessary war on a political timetable, and we're paying the price for it. as have hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.

we are not safer. this is not a debatable point. this is what all of our intelligence agencies say.

[AEON]

Originally posted by Diemen
Right. Because they're the ones causing the real damage to America and its reputation.

Yes.

[phillyfan26]

Originally posted by AEON


Yes.

Are you serious?

[AEON]

Originally posted by phillyfan26


Are you serious?

Perhaps. Quotes like this are a bit disturbing:

"I was raised in a country by a public school system that taught us that America was good, that America was just. America has been killing people, like my sister over here says, since we first stepped on this continent, we have been responsible for death and destruction. I passed on that bullshit to my son and my son enlisted. I’m going all over the country telling moms: ‘This country is not worth dying for.’

I would never have let [Casey] go and try and defend this morally repugnant system we have. The people are good, the system is morally repugnant.

They’re a bunch of f**king hypocrites! And we need to, we just need to rise up. We need a revolution!"

[Irvine511]

firstly, i don't see what's so awful about what Cindy has said. i don't agree with all of it, but for us not to acknowledge things like the Native American genocide and our involvement in many Cold War mix-ups that resulted in the deaths of 10s of thousands would be totally delusional. i'm far more fearful of "National Greatness" conservatives who basically think that if the US does something, it is by definition the right thing to do.

that said, do you really think that Cindy freakin' Sheehan is a greater threat to the US and its reputation than George W. Bush?

anyway, what's going on now is very simple -- the administration is simply running out the clock so they can pass this abomination on to the next (probably Democratic) president.

they don't care about our troops. the never have. they never will.

[BVS]

Originally posted by AEON


Perhaps. Quotes like this are a bit disturbing:

"I was raised in a country by a public school system that taught us that America was good, that America was just. America has been killing people, like my sister over here says, since we first stepped on this continent, we have been responsible for death and destruction. I passed on that bullshit to my son and my son enlisted. I’m going all over the country telling moms: ‘This country is not worth dying for.’

Well you can't deny certain morally reprehensible acts that this country has executed.

Originally posted by AEON

I would never have let [Casey] go and try and defend this morally repugnant system we have. The people are good, the system is morally repugnant.

The people are good, and the system is pretty bad, on all sides. You can't deny that.

Originally posted by AEON


They’re a bunch of f**king hypocrites! And we need to, we just need to rise up. We need a revolution!"

Most supporters of this war, in this forum that were of age that have been asked if they would serve, they said no. How many in Washington have children in the war? The list of hypocricies goes on and on.

[AEON]

Originally posted by Irvine511


that said, do you really think that Cindy freakin' Sheehan is a greater threat to the US and its reputation than George W. Bush?

Anyone demanding a revolution to overthrow the US government is a threat.

[AEON]

Most supporters of this war, in this forum that were of age that have been asked if they would serve, they said no. How many in Washington have children in the war? The list of hypocricies goes on and on. [/B]

I joined in 2003. Senator McCain has a kid in the war. General Petraeus also has a kid in the Army.

[BVS]

Originally posted by AEON


Anyone demanding a revolution to overthrow the US government is a threat.

I really don't think that's what she's talking about... what a stretch.

MLK lead a revolution without any "overthrow"...

[AEON]

Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


I really don't think that's what she's talking about... what a stretch.

MLK lead a revolution without any "overthrow"...

Comparing Cindy sheehan to MLK is a both a stretch and an insult.

[BVS]

Originally posted by AEON


I joined in 2003. Senator McCain has a kid in the war. General Petraeus also has a kid in the Army.

Yeah, I realize that. But it doesn't make for the fact, that MOST are hypocrites...

[BVS]

Originally posted by AEON


Comparing Cindy sheehan to MLK is a both a stretch and an insult.

Once again the point went flying over your head.

[Bluer White]

he wasn't asked if the surge was making us safer. he was asked if the entire mission was making us safer. [/B]

Losing Iraq to AQ/Iran would make us considerably less safe....no matter our foolishness that caused this whole mess.

[A_Wanderer]

Originally posted by AEON


Anyone demanding a revolution to overthrow the US government is a threat.

Jefferson had some things to say on the subject.

[AEON]

Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Jefferson had some things to say on the subject.

True. But loyalty to Jefferson wasn't in the oath I took to protect the Constitution from all enemies...foreign and domestic.

Do I think Cindy can actually carry this out? No. However, the "system" she and her collegues want to bring down is a constitutional republic. Should we simply stand by and allow it to happen? What would they replace it with? (most of us could guess)

I respect the right for people to disagree. As much as it makes me sick, I also respect the right for protesters to march against the war. However, as soon as people start screaming about a revolution - then we enter into a new game.

[Irvine511]

Originally posted by AEON


Anyone demanding a revolution to overthrow the US government is a threat.

why would you take her so literally?

but this is what the Right wants -- let's not talk about the war, let's talk about real threats, like CINDY SHEEHAN!!!

we won't lose to Iraqi teenagers, we'll lose to CINDY SHEEHAN!!!

[BVS]

Originally posted by AEON

However, the "system" she and her collegues want to bring down is a constitutional republic. Should we simply stand by and allow it to happen? What would they replace it with? (most of us could guess)

I really think you are reading too much into this and are stretching too far...

Many are dissatisfied with what is essentially a two party system, many are dissatisfied with a Congress that isn't being held accountable, etc... and I'm talking about both sides. So your assumptions seem either brainwashed, black and white, or at the very least a very big over reaction.

[Diemen]

Originally posted by Bluer White


Losing Iraq to AQ/Iran would make us considerably less safe....no matter our foolishness that caused this whole mess.

Entering Iraq in the first place made us considerably less safe.

[phillyfan26]

People don't want to overthrow the government, they want new leaders and corrections made to the system. That's the "revolution" that these more extreme protesters want.

What have we accomplished in Iraq, what are we going to accomplish in Iraq, and how does it make America safer? Those are important questions.