Daily Kos: "How Quaint"

[dilloduck]

Really? I am "of age" if I really push it (though getting a bit past my prime at 56), I believe in the war; I am not about to shut up.

I can only assume you hold the same standards about everything else so I will say that anyone who has never been there and done that has no bussiness speculating about how the war should be won, whether or not the plan is working, and how soldiers and Marines should tactically execute the war.

 

[jillian]

Jillian, you say such stupid things, but I know you're not this dumb. Do you believe in public trash removal? probably. But do you personally pick up trash for a living? Probably not. It's just so mentally vacant to believe one cannot have an opinion regarding use of public resourcs unless one does that particular thing himself. Get a thought, get a clue. Take a vitamin or something, because you're deficient.

What I believe is that baby trolls like RSR who have large internet muscles and do nothing but hurl insults and disrepect should put up or shut up.

Pretty reasonable I think.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

What I believe is that baby trolls who do nothing but hurl insults and disrepect should put up or shut up.

Pretty reasonable I think.

No. You're being a bully and making crap arguments because you know how untenable your position is.

 

[Avatar4321]

What are you 18? 19? I think if you believe in the war so much, troll-boy, you should go enlist..... until then, you're a chickenhawk who wants other people to die for you and disrespects men who really served.

That really doesnt address the point he made. The fact is that prominent Democrat leaders treat our troops like they are terrorists out there killing random civilians when nothing could be further from the truth. Rather than support out troops they are doing everything they can do undermine our troops.

And its sad why they act like that. Because they have positioned themselves so that they can only win if America fails. So America has to fail or they wont get their power back.

 

[Avatar4321]

Yelling at people about, why aren't you signing up for Iraq, is a ploy right out of the handbook of Du underground...
I think it makes a person look stupid, but hey, whatever blows their skirts up I guess...

I knew I'd seen a few people who are here, over there..

Blows their skirts up?? well thats not an image ive ever had before. Thanks

 

[Avatar4321]

As opposed to George "my daddy got me in the national guard so I wouldn't have to go to Nam" Bush jr?

As for the political future, November will be interesting for sure...

The fact that you believe that crap shows the irrational hatred you have for the President.

The President volunteered to go into the National Guard. I know thats hard to believe for such staunch supporters of Draft Dodgers and traitors, but its a fact. The President didnt need his "daddy" to get him in.

And thank you for demonstrating your dislike for the National Guard. Whats funny is that when you guys start attacking the President we see how you really feel about the military.

The National Guard fought in Vietnam. The National Guard has found in Aghanistan and Iraq. You dont join the National Guard, or any branch of the military, so you can be safe. You do it knowing that at a moments notice you are going to be called to defend your nation and may have to make the ultimate sacrfice.

But its obvious that you dont respect the National Guard, and Im willing to bet if President Bush was a Marine you would be showing your disrespect for the Marines just as much as the National Guard.

You can support the war without going out there and fighting with the troops. But you cant support the troops while trying to undermine what they are fighting for. And until Democrats realize that they wont get their power back. Because quite frankly no one is going to give them power to defend us when they demonstrate their inability or lack of desire to defend us. We arent about to commit suicide.

 

[jillian]

That really doesnt address the point he made. The fact is that prominent Democrat leaders treat our troops like they are terrorists out there killing random civilians when nothing could be further from the truth. Rather than support out troops they are doing everything they can do undermine our troops.

And its sad why they act like that. Because they have positioned themselves so that they can only win if America fails. So America has to fail or they wont get their power back.

Actually, I don't think he makes any points at all. You, however, raise interesting ones. I think the right thinks that any criticism of this president's policies is tantamount to wanting to lose or being opposed to fighting terrorists. Many simply think we have gotten ourselves into a quagmire. That doesn't justify demeaning the service of men like Murtha, or doing something disgusting like morphing Max Kleland's face with OBL's just to win an election. One is free to disagree with these men. But I think their sacrifices give them a dispensation from disrespectful politicking. I give conservatives wide berth when they've served, too, as I've made clear. Anyone who's been in the line of fire for this country, while not automatically deserving of agreement, is certainly deserving of being treated respectfully.

But on the issue, when someone like Murtha, who was all for the war in Iraq, initially, re-evaluates, instead of suddenly calling him names, it should give one pause to at least question WHY he's re-evaluated, particularly given all of his ties to the pentagon.

As for Durbin's use of the word Nazi, I have a particular distaste for that word being thrown around thoughtlessly. Only Hitler was Hitler and only Nazis were Nazis. Overuse of the term undercuts what really occurred.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I think the right thinks that any criticism of this president's policies is tantamount to wanting to lose or being opposed to fighting terrorists..

But the recommendations of your party, cutting and running, IS tantamount to wanting to lose and being opposed to fighting terrorists. Quit being so intellectually dishonest. It's not the act of criticism we have a problem with, it's the actual merit of your ideas. They are simply meritless and stupid.

 

[Avatar4321]

Actually, I don't think he makes any points at all. You, however, raise interesting ones. I think the right thinks that any criticism of this president's policies is tantamount to wanting to lose or being opposed to fighting terrorists. Many simply think we have gotten ourselves into a quagmire. That doesn't justify demeaning the service of men like Murtha, or doing something disgusting like morphing Max Kleland's face with OBL's just to win an election. One is free to disagree with these men. But I think their sacrifices give them a dispensation from disrespectful politicking. I give conservatives wide berth when they've served, too, as I've made clear. Anyone who's been in the line of fire for this country, while not automatically deserving of agreement, is certainly deserving of being treated respectfully.

But on the issue, when someone like Murtha, who was all for the war in Iraq, initially, re-evaluates, instead of suddenly calling him names, it should give one pause to at least question WHY he's re-evaluated, particularly given all of his ties to the pentagon.

As for Durbin's use of the word Nazi, I have a particular distaste for that word being thrown around thoughtlessly. Only Hitler was Hitler and only Nazis were Nazis. Overuse of the term undercuts what really occurred.

Jillian, we arent talking about disagreeing with the President. We are talking about Prominent Democrat leaders explicitly calling our troops terrorists, claiming they are Nazis, making up lies about them intentionally killing civilians. You can disagree with the President without making up crap about our military.

The fact of the matter is you can disagree with the policy, but once its been set and the troops are in place you shouldnt be wanting us to lose. Its clear that Democrats want us to lose. If we win, they lose politically. If it wasnt so they wouldnt be so actively trying to undermine the war.

And it doesnt take a genius to figure out why Murtha has changed his mind. its politically expedient for him. He can get power in His party. So he is. Its human nature.

 

[GotZoom]

Become a Cause Celebre! Demand to be inducted and fight ageism and sexism! You want to do you part! So get down to the recruiting agency right now! Hire a good lawyer and you'll me marching on Sadr before you know it!
On a more serious note, anybody of age who believes in the war should either sign up or shut up IMO....

Even my Mom?? Grump--the chicken hawk argument is so wrong in so many ways that I can't believe you would resort to it.

It's all he has. He has no facts..he has to resort to this.

By the way, I just hung up with my 95 year old grandmother. She is VERY pro-Bush and pro-war. I told her how much of a phoney she was because she wasn't down at the recruiting agency demanding she be allowed to serve her country.

 

[Dr Grump]

Become a Cause Celebre! Demand to be inducted and fight ageism and sexism! You want to do you part! So get down to the recruiting agency right now! Hire a good lawyer and you'll me marching on Sadr before you know it!
On a more serious note, anybody of age who believes in the war should either sign up or shut up IMO....

Even my Mom?? Grump--the chicken hawk argument is so wrong in so many ways that I can't believe you would resort to it.

Dillo, I've seen your pic, and you look about 40ish to me. All things being equal I reckon your mother had you when say, she was 22. So she is probably in her earlies 60s. Did you see the anybody of age part of my post. The US armed forces are now recruiting 60 year olds? And yes, I am serious. If I truly believed in the war in Iraq and was of age why wouldn't I join up?

 

[Dr Grump]

Really? I am "of age" if I really push it (though getting a bit past my prime at 56), I believe in the war; I am not about to shut up.

I can only assume you hold the same standards about everything else so I will say that anyone who has never been there and done that has no bussiness speculating about how the war should be won, whether or not the plan is working, and how soldiers and Marines should tactically execute the war.

Comparing apples and oranges. If one does not believe in the war, and their taxes are being used to fight it, then they have every right to comment on it.

 

[Dr Grump]

That really doesnt address the point he made. The fact is that prominent Democrat leaders treat our troops like they are terrorists out there killing random civilians when nothing could be further from the truth. Rather than support out troops they are doing everything they can do undermine our troops.

And its sad why they act like that. Because they have positioned themselves so that they can only win if America fails. So America has to fail or they wont get their power back.

I think you overstate your case. With Murtha, all he is saying is if US troops have committed atrocities they should be brought to trial and there should be no cover up.

 

[Dr Grump]

It's all he has. He has no facts..he has to resort to this.

By the way, I just hung up with my 95 year old grandmother. She is VERY pro-Bush and pro-war. I told her how much of a phoney she was because she wasn't down at the recruiting agency demanding she be allowed to serve her country.

What "facts" have you got? And since when have 95 years olds been of age to join the military?

 

[GotZoom]

What "facts" have you got? And since when have 95 years olds been of age to join the military?

Pretty ridiculous huh?

Just as ridiculous as you saying the only way for "of age" people to show their support of the war is to serve.

 

[Dr Grump]

The fact that you believe that crap shows the irrational hatred you have for the President.

The President volunteered to go into the National Guard. I know thats hard to believe for such staunch supporters of Draft Dodgers and traitors, but its a fact. The President didnt need his "daddy" to get him in.

And thank you for demonstrating your dislike for the National Guard. Whats funny is that when you guys start attacking the President we see how you really feel about the military.

The National Guard fought in Vietnam. The National Guard has found in Aghanistan and Iraq. You dont join the National Guard, or any branch of the military, so you can be safe. You do it knowing that at a moments notice you are going to be called to defend your nation and may have to make the ultimate sacrfice.

But its obvious that you dont respect the National Guard, and Im willing to bet if President Bush was a Marine you would be showing your disrespect for the Marines just as much as the National Guard.

You can support the war without going out there and fighting with the troops. But you cant support the troops while trying to undermine what they are fighting for. And until Democrats realize that they wont get their power back. Because quite frankly no one is going to give them power to defend us when they demonstrate their inability or lack of desire to defend us. We arent about to commit suicide.

And yet the rabid right had no such qualms dissing Kerry and his service. At least he went. And if you don't think for one second George Bush Snr was looking out for his boy, then I think you are just being naive. Maybe you just want to think the best of him, which is fine, but going by his frat boy record before he "saw the light", George jnr was nothing but a drunk who headed one failed company after another. And the thing about Kerry that cracks me up is he got three purple hearts and a silver and bronze star and EVERY one of those citations (according to the rabid right) were earned under dubious circumstances. One being earned under such circumstances? Sure. Two? Maybe. Five? Doesn't even pass the giggle test.....

 

[Dr Grump]

Pretty ridiculous huh?

Just as ridiculous as you saying the only way for "of age" people to show their support of the war is to serve.

As I said, if I was a fervent supporter of the war I'd be itching to join. I'd put up or shut up. I note none of you have given a counter argument other then "what a typical thing to say" or "how ridiculous"...not so much an argument, not even a piss-weak excuse, just an unsubstantive statement...

 

[GotZoom]

As I said, if I was a fervent supporter of the war I'd be itching to join. I'd put up or shut up. I note none of you have given a counter argument other then "what a typical thing to say" or "how ridiculous"...not so much an argument, not even a piss-weak excuse, just an unsubstantive statement...

What is to counter? You say they should join. We say there are many things to show support.

Your argument that the ONLY way to show support is to "put up or shut up;" join or you really aren't supporting the way...well, that is just piss-weak.

I also think it is pretty piss-weak for you to defend John Kerry. Here is a Vietnam War Veteran - hero in some people's eyes - who said and did the following:

On April 22, 1971, Kerry became the first Vietnam veteran to testify before Congress about the war, when he appeared before a Senate committee hearing on proposals relating to ending the war. Kerry began with a prepared speech, in which he presented the conclusions of the Winter Soldier Investigation, where veterans had described personally committing or witnessing war crimes. Controversially referring to US servicemen in Vietnam as having been sent "to die for the biggest nothing in history," Kerry alleged that the military had "created a monster" in the form of violence-prone American soldiers, and recounted that soldiers had personally recollected stories of having "personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads," of Vietnamese citizens and rampaging across Vietnam "[razing] villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan".

Most of Kerry's testimony addressed the larger policy issues. Kerry expressed his view that the war was essentially a civil war and that nothing in Vietnam was a realistic threat to the United States. He argued that the real reason for the continued fighting was political purposes: "Someone has to die so that President Nixon won't be, and these are his words, 'the first President to lose a war.'" That conclusion led him to ask: "[H]ow do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?"

The day after this testimony, Kerry participated in a demonstration with 800 other veterans in which he and other veterans threw their medals and ribbons over a fence at the front steps of the U.S. Capitol building to dramatize their opposition to the war. Jack Smith, a Marine, read a statement explaining why the veterans were returning their military awards to the government. For more than two hours, angry veterans tossed their medals, ribbons, hats, jackets, and military papers over the fence. Each veteran gave his or her name, hometown, branch of service and a statement. As Kerry threw his decorations over the fence, his statement was: "I'm not doing this for any violent reasons, but for peace and justice, and to try and make this country wake up once and for all." Some have questioned whether he gave up his own medals or just his ribbons during the demonstration at the Capitol. Tom Oliphant has gone on record supporting Kerry's account.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kerry#Controversy_over_military_service_and_awards

-----

Now there is a role model.

Piss-weak.

 

[Dr Grump]

What is to counter? You say they should join. We say there are many things to show support.

Your argument that the ONLY way to show support is to "put up or shut up;" join or you really aren't supporting the way...well, that is just piss-weak.

I also think it is pretty piss-weak for you to defend John Kerry. Here is a Vietnam War Veteran - hero in some people's eyes - who said and did the following:

On April 22, 1971, Kerry became the first Vietnam veteran to testify before Congress about the war, when he appeared before a Senate committee hearing on proposals relating to ending the war. Kerry began with a prepared speech, in which he presented the conclusions of the Winter Soldier Investigation, where veterans had described personally committing or witnessing war crimes. Controversially referring to US servicemen in Vietnam as having been sent "to die for the biggest nothing in history," Kerry alleged that the military had "created a monster" in the form of violence-prone American soldiers, and recounted that soldiers had personally recollected stories of having "personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads," of Vietnamese citizens and rampaging across Vietnam "[razing] villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan".

Most of Kerry's testimony addressed the larger policy issues. Kerry expressed his view that the war was essentially a civil war and that nothing in Vietnam was a realistic threat to the United States. He argued that the real reason for the continued fighting was political purposes: "Someone has to die so that President Nixon won't be, and these are his words, 'the first President to lose a war.'" That conclusion led him to ask: "[H]ow do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?"

The day after this testimony, Kerry participated in a demonstration with 800 other veterans in which he and other veterans threw their medals and ribbons over a fence at the front steps of the U.S. Capitol building to dramatize their opposition to the war. Jack Smith, a Marine, read a statement explaining why the veterans were returning their military awards to the government. For more than two hours, angry veterans tossed their medals, ribbons, hats, jackets, and military papers over the fence. Each veteran gave his or her name, hometown, branch of service and a statement. As Kerry threw his decorations over the fence, his statement was: "I'm not doing this for any violent reasons, but for peace and justice, and to try and make this country wake up once and for all." Some have questioned whether he gave up his own medals or just his ribbons during the demonstration at the Capitol. Tom Oliphant has gone on record supporting Kerry's account.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kerry#Controversy_over_military_service_and_awards

-----

Now there is a role model.

Piss-weak.

And THAT is the reason the Swift Boat boys and their sponsors went after Kerry. His record in Viet Nam was honorable, what he did when he got back is what pissed them off. I agree with his second and third actions. Viet Nam posed no threat to the US and was a civil war. It's not like Diem et al were beacons of democracy. I guess if you believe the domino theory, that might have been a "reason". As for throwing their medals away, they earned 'em, and they had the right to do whatever they wanted with them. As for accusing others of atrocities, he should have backed them up. And if you are really after role models, what is Dubya doing in the WH. A former drunk and coke snorter. Are you holding him to his past or judging him on the here and now?

 

[Dr Grump]

Your argument that the ONLY way to show support is to "put up or shut up;" join or you really aren't supporting the way...well, that is just piss-weak.

Where have I said that was the ONLY way? Hint: I didn't. I'm just saying that if I was of age and believed in the war I'd be itching to join up. I'm surprised that those who DO believe such, aren't...