I guess this makes perfect sense

[Shogun]

to some people any criticizing IS bashing.


the logic behind the list above is pretty weak, dude.

sounds like ken mehlman's version of the lowards prayer.

 

[maineman]

Questioning and bashing are not the same.
Criticizing and bashing are not the same.
I am not talking about any president per se, but the office.

YOUR words:

You cant support the troops and oppose the war.

and since fucking-when was bashing the president the same thing as bashing the troops? Since when do I have to temper my distaste for the ineptitude in the white house or risk being called someone who doesn't support the troops???

I do not support the president. I do support the troops. I ds think you are a moron.

 

[Gunny]

YOUR words:

You cant support the troops and oppose the war.

and since fucking-when was bashing the president the same thing as bashing the troops? Since when do I have to temper my distaste for the ineptitude in the white house or risk being called someone who doesn't support the troops???

I do not support the president. I do support the troops. I ds think you are a moron.

The bolded statement is correct. You cannot support the troops and oppose the war. Saying the war is illegal is calling those who are on the ground conducting that war criminals for doing so, and telling them that what they are doing is morally wrong.

No amount of Red Cross packages filled with chips and socks is going to offset the damage done to morale and in some cases their mental health.

 

[DeadCanDance]

The bolded statement is correct. You cannot support the troops and oppose the war. Saying the war is illegal is calling those who are on the ground conducting that war criminals for doing so, and telling them that what they are doing is morally wrong.

No amount of Red Cross packages filled with chips and socks is going to offset the damage done to morale and in some cases their mental health.

So when republicans opposed somalia/kosovo/bosnia, then republicans were anti-troop?

 

[Gunny]

So when republicans opposed somalia/kosovo/bosnia, then republicans were anti-troop?

Did they? Seems I only hear lefties making such a claim. I don't recall anything of the sort happening.

I will also point out the difference between not supporting the troops and being anti-troops. I have not accused anyone of being anti-troop unless their own words were the evidence, and specifically as this thread is concerned have not at all.

I just have a hard time reconciling "I support the troops" with claiming the troop is in fact engaged in illegal and immoral activity. As a former troop, I know EXACTLY how I would view that, and what I would think of the people who claimed it.

 

[DeadCanDance]

Originally Posted by DeadCanDance: So when republicans opposed somalia/kosovo/bosnia, then republicans were anti-troop?

Did they? Seems I only hear lefties making such a claim. I don't recall anything of the sort happening.

snip.

Quotes from when Clinton committed troops to Bosnia:

"You can support the troops but not the president."
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years."
--Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?"
--Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

"[The] President . . . is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."
--Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)

"American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy."
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."
--Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush

"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning . . I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."
--Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
--Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

 

[DeadCanDance]

so, according to the standards set forth by several posters here, republicans were anti-troop in the 1990s.

 

[Gunny]

Originally Posted by DeadCanDance: So when republicans opposed somalia/kosovo/bosnia, then republicans were anti-troop?



Quotes from when Clinton committed troops to Bosnia:

"You can support the troops but not the president."
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years."
--Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?"
--Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

"[The] President . . . is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."
--Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)

"American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy."
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."
--Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush

"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning . . I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."
--Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
--Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

I don't see where much if any of this supports your assertion. The closest I see is "You can support the troops but not the President." That really isn't relative to "I support the troops but not the war."

The troops carry out the war. They do not carry out "the President."

What I see here is you cherrypicking Republican quotes on one issue and trying to apply them to another. Most of the quotes don't even apply to this topic.

 

[DeadCanDance]

I don't see where much if any of this supports your assertion. The closest I see is "You can support the troops but not the President." That really isn't relative to "I support the troops but not the war."

The troops carry out the war. They do not carry out "the President."

What I see here is you cherrypicking Republican quotes on one issue and trying to apply them to another. Most of the quotes don't even apply to this topic.

LOL

Man, and I had you pegged for a straight shooter, not a spin artist.


"I Support the troops, not the president"
"Its a Failed Policy"
"Explain to mothers why their sons are coming home in body bags"

etc

 

[DeadCanDance]

face it dude...enough with the spin.

You said if you criticize a war, then you are against the troops.

Many of these republican quotes are critical of the war, of the president, of the policy.

These republicans were anti-troops in the 1990s, in accordance with the very standards you and the other poster just mentioned.

 

[Gunny]

face it dude...enough with the spin.

You said if you criticize a war, then you are against the troops.

Many of these republican quotes are critical of the war, of the president, of the policy.

These republicans were anti-troops in the 1990s, in accordance with the very standards you and the other poster just mentioned.

There's no spin. I just have neither the time nor the effort to dedicate to dissecting the shit out of your bullshit post, and scattering what's left in the wind.

There are maybe two quotes in that post that apply to the topic. The rest is YOUR spinning shit into them that isn't there. A vague statement on defining a mission doesn't support your argument worth shit; yet, you have two of them in there.

Now, would you like to compare the magnitude of your little half-dozen quotes from various places to JUST Pelosi and REID's big mouthes? Nevermind the rest of the herd of sheep.

NOTHING in your posts says "I support the troops but not the war." That is the statement I addressed and I don't care if you quote Winston Churchill saying otherwise, I would disagree with his opinion.

Straight enough for you?

 

[DeadCanDance]

"This is President Clinton's war, and when he falls flat on his face, that's his problem." -Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN)

"You think Vietnam was bad? Vietnam is nothing next to Kosovo." -Tony Snow, Fox News 3/24/99

“Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?” –Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

"These international war criminals were led by Gen. Wesley Clark ...who clicked his shiny heels for the commander-in-grief, Bill Clinton." -Michael Savage

"This has been an unmitigated disaster ... Ask the Chinese embassy. Ask all the people in Belgrade that we've killed. Ask the refugees that we've killed. Ask the people in nursing homes. Ask the people in hospitals." -Representative Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

 

[DeadCanDance]

Recall that these republican anti-war criticisms came during a conflict that cost ZERO american lives, and as measured by the standards of the iraq war, were a stunningly successful and well managed campaign.

 

[Gunny]

"This is President Clinton's war, and when he falls flat on his face, that's his problem." -Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN)

"You think Vietnam was bad? Vietnam is nothing next to Kosovo." -Tony Snow, Fox News 3/24/99

“Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?” –Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

"These international war criminals were led by Gen. Wesley Clark ...who clicked his shiny heels for the commander-in-grief, Bill Clinton." -Michael Savage

"This has been an unmitigated disaster ... Ask the Chinese embassy. Ask all the people in Belgrade that we've killed. Ask the refugees that we've killed. Ask the people in nursing homes. Ask the people in hospitals." -Representative Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

LMAO ... you're SERIOUSLY lost in the sauce when it comes to me. Quoting Hannity, Savage and Tony Snow to ME? I could care less what they have to say and don't listen to them and never have.

I disagree with Lugar's statement, and while I don't know in what context Scarborough made his, on the surface, I don't agree with his either.

 

[Gunny]

Recall that these republican anti-war criticisms came during a conflict that cost ZERO american lives, and as measured by the standards of the iraq war, were a stunningly successful and well managed campaign.

Well yeah, long as you want to compare apples and oranges. Euorpeans aren't Arabs, and conventional tactics worked fine with them. It DID cost UN lives, so that is dishonest since the US provided air support. Lot easier to control your losses when someone else is running the show AND you can pick and choose your participation.

However, I had no problem with being involved in Yugoslavia with the exception that I would have been one of those who refused to wear that pussy blue UN helmet. I didn't enlist to serve the one world order.

 

[DeadCanDance]

LMAO ... you're SERIOUSLY lost in the sauce when it comes to me. Quoting Hannity, Savage and Tony Snow to ME? I could care less what they have to say and don't listen to them and never have.

I disagree with Lugar's statement, and while I don't know in what context Scarborough made his, on the surface, I don't agree with his either.

Quoting Hannity, Savage and Tony Snow to ME? I could care less what they have to say and don't listen to them and never have.


But, that's not the point is it? You said you didn't think republicans criticized the bosnia and kosovo campaigns.

Whey I showed you that they did, the correct response from you would have been: "Wow, thanks I didn't know that. I guess according to my standards, some republicans were anti-troops in the 1990s"

 

[Gunny]

Quoting Hannity, Savage and Tony Snow to ME? I could care less what they have to say and don't listen to them and never have.


But, that's not the point is it? You said you didn't think republicans criticized the bosnia and kosovo campaigns.

Whey I showed you that they did, the correct response from you would have been: "Wow, thanks I didn't know that. I guess according to my standards, some republicans were anti-troops in the 1990s"

Now who's spinning? I asked if they did ... "I don't recall" and "I don't think" are not synonymous.

The correct response was as it is. For one, I consider none of them anti-troop, as already explained. Two, it's quite a stretch to try and use some of those ambiguous statements to support your argument.

And just for definition purposes, when you said "Republicans" in your initial statement, I was under the impression you were speaking of Republican lawmakers/politicians. If you are going to include every hack with an "R" on his card there is no doubt that there were and are some who would oppose Democrat policy just because it is Democrat policy ... kind of like you do anything Republican on this board.

Hannity and Savage in particular are bobbleheads. Seems you Dems listen to them and give them FAR more credibility than any conservatives I know.

 

[doniston]

It has everything to do with supporting the troops.

As usual, you PRESIDENT BUSH bashing bitter idiots run on emotion and are totally deprived of using any logic or intelligence. You admit it yourself, you are PROUD (an emotion) to be a Bush Basher (not a very tolerant POV, considering its an emotion thats driving it, just like racists).

As usual, Kerry supporters are talking out of both sides of their mouths and are strattling the fence with no morals or steadfast values other than. "mommy, I didnt get what I want !!!!!! Waaaaaaaaaaaaa"

You cant support the troops and oppose the war.
You cant bash the President, whomever he is at the moment, and claim to be patriotic.
You cant claim to be compassionate, and be so vile at the same time.
You cant profess "freedom of speech" and then support shouting down speakers, who happen to be conservative, so they cant give their speeches.
You cant misquote and distort the Bible and claim to be solid Christians.
You cant distort and re write the Constitution and then claim it is the law of the land.
You cant rewrite history and then claim to be informed.
You cant appoint activist judges and then be upset when they use imminent domain to provide profits for big business.
You cant be opposed to big business and then vote for a guy who is a billionaire because of big business.
You cant support the troops and then vote for a guy who tried to suppress the military vote.
You cant support an open and honest media and then support a guy who knowingly presented bogus documents on a national broadcast.
You cant blame the republicans without taking blame yourself, when your party also voted for what you are condemning.
You cant support that we are a land of laws, when you support contradicting laws that make the fetus non human when the woman wants to kill it, but HUMAN when someone else kills it. Inconsistency is the worst attribute in the law to keep it from being a system of JUSTICE.
You cant support the war on terror, then expose the methods we use to collect information on them, and then turn around and also claim the administration is so inept in running the war.
You cant claim equality for all, when your main organization, ACLU, supports only non white middle aged MEN.
YOu cant support the black community and then deny them freedom of school choice, while also claiming to be pro choice.
You cant support education for all, then support the system that graduates 90% of some schools black students who cannot read or write.
You cant claim to support DEMOCRACY, and support redistributing the
wealth.
You cant claim to support science at all times when you support abortion while the scientific community has proven a fetus is a living human individual.
You cant claim to be open minded, then refuse to even discuss whether global warming is happening, and/or being caused by humans.
You cant claim to be pro peace and then become violent when others oppose your point of view.
You cant claim to put kids first, then use them as social experiments for gay marriage
You cant claim marriage is just a piece of paper, then claim gays are being hurt so bad because they cant marry
You cant claim to be pro peace and then take peoples money at the barrel of a gun.
You cant be opposed to violence, then deny law obiding, respectful citizens the right to carry a gun to prevent violence from being inflicted upon them and their family and property....
You cant claim to be a mature, intelligent adult, then spend eight years whining and crying that you got cheated......

....that is, without being delusional.

YOU CAN'T BE FOR REAL --under any circumstances

This only thing you left out is the kitchen sink.

 

[doniston]

Questioning and bashing are not the same.
Criticizing and bashing are not the same.
I am not talking about any president per se, but the office.

But that's where we differ. "WE" are talking about a "SPECIFIC" president---not the office.

 

[maineman]

The bolded statement is correct. You cannot support the troops and oppose the war. Saying the war is illegal is calling those who are on the ground conducting that war criminals for doing so, and telling them that what they are doing is morally wrong.

No amount of Red Cross packages filled with chips and socks is going to offset the damage done to morale and in some cases their mental health.

oh, bullshit. Have you EVER heard me say that the war was illegal or that I thought those on the ground conducting it were war criominals for doing so.

This kind of righteously indignant false outrage is really beneath you, gunny.

I support the military. totally. I hope and pray that every round they fire finds its target. I hope every round fired at them misses. I want their mission to succeed.

On the other hand, I disagree with invading Iraq as a logical or meaningful or productive way to prosecute the war against islamic extremism.

What the troops are doing on the ground is morally neutral. They are doing what the civilian military command has told them to do and they are doing it with skill and professionalism...just like they were trained to do...just like I expect them to do. They do not determine the mission, they only execute it.

My beef is solely with the monkeys in suits in this administration who have wasted five years, a trillion dollars and 31K dead and wounded Americans getting NOTHING back for that cost but 4K full coffins.