and hope they are done.

Months ago, during the build up to the Iraq War, I had quarrels with a lot of my aquaintances over the Saddams violation of UN resolutions vs. the bedlam that this incursion would spark.

Iraq turned out far worse than even I imagined.c

Well, it would be fun to gloat, if it wasn't so sad. This stone cast into this pool has caused ripples that will dog us for years to come, both fiscally, politically and who knows what else. The latest revelations of Iraqi prisoner abuse and the Al Quaida'e beheading of the American civilian, if in fact he was a civilian is just the beginning.

The thought that this administration used the collective grief over 9/11 to rally the masses to support this crusade makes me angry. Angry, but powerless.

It is time to begine an orderly withdrawl of Iraq. We have no credibility. Let's spend thoee billions of dollars at home. Those sums we spent in Iraq builds a pretty good security system.

Some times I dream of a call to arms....and think...what if people who disagreed with the the Iraq occupation, just decided to stop paying their taxes? It's time for the people to send a message. Rage Against the Machine.

But again...like many things.....its just a dream.

about how this happened. See link.

It is my analysis that it is better to be over there playing an away game, than over here playing another 9/11 home game.  I don't think we have the option of not participating in the game.  My .02

You're exactly right, Catlin. But the posters you're responding to have the tinfoil hats screwed down too tight upon their heads to figure it out.

RLTW

  If things would have gone well in Iraq, make no mistake this admin would already have invaded Iran or Syria.  The ONLY reason that hasn't happened is because the insurgency in Iraq has bogged down our military in Iraq.

Dispite the the fictitious justification from the Bush Administration that the Iraq invasion was to prevent another 9/11, the Bush gov't had been planning to overthrow Saddam well before 9/11, because either he had a personal vendetta against Saddam, or the desire to benefit the oil interests that were Bush's major campaign benefactors.  Saddam was exploiting his own country, there is no doubt of that.  But Al Qaida (the folks responsible for 9/11) were the sworn enemies of the Saddam regime.  There was never an Al Qaida presence in Iraq until WE created a power vaccuum there by overthrowing Saddam.  WE created the circumstances by which Al Qaida could re-vitalize itself and recruit disaffected Iraqis to their cause by overthrowing Saddam.  

Judged purely on the basis of what the effect of the Iraq war has been on Al Qaida, and making the U.S. safer against terrorism, there can be no doubt that Iraq (as opposed to the Afghanistan war - which DID significantly harm Al Qaida) is a complete failure.

Just an ability to weigh the facts and make reasonable decisions.

And that is how the Taliban school of thought came about in America.

The Taliban school of thought has finally taken over. Soon, after we invade Syria and Iran, we will put the women in Burqas, rip out the tongues of Administration critics, and slowly hack-off the heads of infidels with combat knives, all on prime-time television! All will be financed with Iraqi oil money, just like the U.N.! Come see the oppression inherent in the system!

Or, we could try reasoned debate. But some are too busy spouting off half-baked accusations and silly conspiracy theories for that.

RLTW

-- Modified on 5/13/2004 11:45:39 AM

Not about Burqas.  The Bush Administration, especially in the personages of Cheney and Ashcroft, and to a lesser extent, Rumsfeld, have a proclivity for comparing legitimate dissent with their policies to treason, or to giving aid and comfort to the enemy.  Frankly, that is obscene, and it is very much an attitude that the Taliban would have admired.  Look at what Cheney and Ashcroft have said for the record about folks who disagree with the Patriot Act, if you would like to see examples of this.  Ashcroft in particular would have been VERY comfortable as the Attorney General for the Taliban if only they would worship Christ like he does, rather than that heathen Mohammad.

When you see the writing on the wall it makes sense to read it.
Ashcroft has made his priorities clear, he's out to become the Oliver Cromwell of the millennium. Sanitized media, continued attempts to erode women's right to choose, unbridled attacks on administration dissenters, veiled attacks on those who question policy labelling them as unpatriotic ala Max Cleland, etc.
I don't believe for a moment that the physical abuses favored by the Taliban and Hussein are what the Bush administration is shooting for, but that doesn't mean I want to live in a world like the one described in "A Handmaid's Tale."
How about you? Do you really support Ashcroft's agenda? Does the fact that we are not cutting off body parts and filling mass graves excuse what went on since October with the full knowledge of the Bush administration? Does addressing the abuses after documetary photos were published exhonerate them when they sat on the info for months?
It's ok to answer - I removed my piercing before typing this.

  An appeal for reasoned debate from a person who had the audacity and the nerve to question my independent judgement of Kerry because I had not served in combat??  To suggest that only people who have served in combat could form an opinion on kerry's service shows how far into the twilight zone one's mind has deteriorated.  The suggestion was so damn ignorant that it truly deserved to be associated with the Taliban school of thought.  
   At every turn before the war, anyone who dared critize or question this admin was muzzled under the guise "aiding and abetting the enemy" or being "unpatriotic."  Even the 4 star general Shinseki who dared suggest that up to 200,000 could be necessary to stabilize the situation was margianilized to the sidelines because that number didn't fit the political agenda of this admin.   Forget politicians, but a loyal 4 star general was discredited and sidelined like some pauper for suggesting a troop count.  Turns out he was right after all.  And then to have the pic of a vietnam war veteran shown next to saddam by a draft dodgger for political purposes was appalling.  Any call for reasoned debate there??

Please show me where I have ever stated that anyone who did not serve in combat had no right to opine on the Kerry-Vietman issue. In addition to factual challenges, you can't even keep track of who you're replying to.

No one has been "muzzled" for criticizing the Bush administration. Don't even try to pass off that bullshit claim here. The only people who are being "shouted down" are those that show support for the President at Move-on.org and ANSWER rallies. The majority of far-left discussion boards like Indymedia and DU won't even allow contrarian views to be posted on thier sites. Freedom of speech does not equal freedom from return criticism. General Shinseki was not marginalized because his force estimates contradicted other Pentagon planners. He was criticized, then he retired as had been planned. And good ridance to the Chairborne General who took the Black Beret from the Ranger Regiment and gave it to every REMF in the Army so they would feel "elite". He is a discredit to the Ranger Tab he wears upon his left shoulder. And you still don't have your facts straight about the Cleland ad. I stand by my earlier contention that you have not even seen it.

RLTW

Right On Bro!

Furthermore, I do not believe that any Branch of the United State Military ever opines that any military issue if off limits for civilian debate, especially those of politicians.

It's always the SOS from the left, they acuse everyone else of what they do and do consistantly!

And I couldn't agree more heartedly with your appraisal of General Shinseki, the Army's Minister of Pyschobabble!

RLTW,
  You indeed did not make the statement implying I could not opine on Kerrys service due to lack of my service.  It was HB495 who made that idiotic statement earlier.  
  Since Im not a member of the left either I will also agree with you that the far leftist loonies like Jeanine Garafalo are extremely vile, offensive, and flat out idiotic.  They spew out nothing but poison!!  
  You as an American have yet to condemn the airing of a war veterans face next to Saddam which is just despicable.  Bill Clinton was being called every dirty name in the book and his policy in Kosovo constantly being undermined by really dirty accusations yet I don't ever once remember seeing the pics of draftdodgers like Delay, Burton, or Barr being shown next to Milosovich.  Its the first time ever a war veteran was placed next to a brutal dictator, and in a political ad at that, and by a draft dodger.  The fact that you can't condemn that simple act as an American is simply apalling.  Simply sick!!

If you're fixated on your penile piercing, that's cool. It doesn't matter to me. I'll concede some agreement with you about Ashcroft as AG, Tommy should be able to make as many bongs as he can sell. But the charges of "unbridled attacks on administration dissenters, veiled attacks on those who question policy labelling them as unpatriotic " are the same claims that the Republicans made against the last Administration, and they're the same claims that will be made against future Administrations. I addressed that and the Cleland issue in my response to Toomuchvodka. Now, your claim that the evil Bush has somehow been involved in a cover-up of the abuse scandal doesn't hold up to the facts. CENTCOM released this press release back in January:

January 16, 2004
Release Number: 04-01-43
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
DETAINEE TREATMENT INVESTIGATION
BAGHDAD, Iraq – An investigation has been initiated into reported incidents of detainee abuse at a Coalition Forces detention facility. The release of specific information concerning the incidents could hinder the investigation, which is in its early stages. The investigation will be conducted in a thorough and professional manner. The Coalition is committed to treating all persons under its control with dignity, respect and humanity. Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, the Commanding General, has reiterated this requirement to all members of CJTF-7.

Being a Veteran you should know a little about the UCMJ and how JAG investigations work within the Chain of Command structure. Like the Tinfoil Hat Brigade, you're grasping at things to directly blame on the Evil Bush.

RLTW


-- Modified on 5/13/2004 8:24:13 PM

-- Modified on 5/13/2004 8:36:35 PM

that with all the pining over this terrible ad that you might find a link to it on any of the zillions of democrat and lefty sights and share it with us.

You EV have bought into a lie.  You never saw the ad, if you did then you are simply attempting to repeat it over and over again to make the lie true.  The problem is, the poeple of Georgia are all witnesses to the fact that it just did not happen.

Speaking of sick, I would suggest that continuing to blabber this claptrap day after day is pretty, well sick!

If you can find it, link it!  If not, get over yourself and learn a new song.

http://www.gainesvilletimes.com/news/stories/20021016/opinion/297860.html
http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20021025.html
http://www.veteransforpeace.org/Max_Cleland_070303.htm
http://www.timeswatch.org/articles/2004/0226.asp

Whether the pictures were juxtaposed or flashed in quick succession, the intent and the message was clear - he, an honorable warrior, a triple amputee - he gave 3 of his limbs for his country - was smeared because he dared vote against the Patriot Act. Those are Republican tactics, pure Karl Rove at his evil best.

Puck,
  Its not that Bribite and RLTW did not know about or remember the ad.  They were counting on the fact that absolutely no one would take the time to do what you just did.  And yes I did see the ad.  Because the ad was so controversial it was being shown on talk shows during the debates.  The ad does show Clelands face.  
  Even now there will be no condemnation of that ad.  You don't have to be Republican or Democrat to be disgusted by that ad.  And to think that ad was being run against a veteran by some draft dodgger.  The ad was specifically meant to insinuate that Cleland was unpatriotic and "aiding and abetting the enemy"  by not voting  for the bill.  That ad crossed such a hideous line that I honestly believe Chambliss should be thrown in the middle of Najaf without any body armor so he too knows what its like to have a few limbs missing.  Anyone who doesn't condemn that ad simply as an American is a traitor, unpatriotic, and a coward.  In line with the logic of the ad, if someone doesn't condemn the ad they hate the military and support Osama.  

Did I miss the link?  Since that is what has been contended, and pined about here, where is the actual picture?

Furthermore, Cleland was in office for 6 years, the Patriot Act was in his last year in office.  His opposition votes on military issues extend to his entire term - 4 of which were with Clinton as President.  

I still maintain that his voting record is fair game.  I also contend that if the ad was as you and EV contend, it would be widespread on the web, not just in some liberal pundits columns.  Which is all that you provided.

It would appear to me that the only one who actually saw the ad was RLTW, and even if he comes from a different point of view from your own, he seems like a pretty level headed guy to me, who I believe actually said he voted for Cleland the first time and became disinchanted with his anti-military voting record.  Understandable, especially in lieu of 9/11.

-- Modified on 5/14/2004 5:51:59 PM

As long as you exercise your right to vote.
    I have said before and I say it again.  Saddam had to go at some point and we had to make him leave, but we had massive unfinished business in Afganistan and our timing of the Iraq invasion was very bad.  The blood of our citizens and friendly visitors to our country are on the hands of people who are getting respite in Afganistan because the administration took the focus and critical resources away from the hunt for those monsters.

BTW, the "i" on Puck was arthritic fingers.

Search away, but please have the honesty to post all that you have found, I think you will find the RLTW was correct that what you believe is Urban Legend.

The main reason that the Dem's continue to pine over this is it cost them control of the Senate.  Chambliss beat him, Cleland's votes on defense did not represent mainstream Georgia nor did his support of barring the Boy Scouts from using public buildings!  Maybe Cleland should have run in a more liberal state.

The use of images of our enemies in an ad exposing Cleland's voting history  on defense issues could only be seen as an attack on his patriotism by Democrats.  When dem's attack its just fine, any response is hate speech to them.  Get over it, Chambliss is the junior Senator from Georgia and years of pining about it will never change that.

BTW, Tom Daschle is next to start collecting his pension.  Keep and eye on the South Dakota race, I just sent John Thune a hundred.

This debate reminds me of San Antonio filing a protest against the Lakers for beating them last night!