American Right Wing beats up on grieving war mother

[pilferk]

U protestors are so brain washed it is hilarious.

The woman didnt protest cause she didnt have the information

that is hilarious

U people act like The Sheehan's lived under a rock or something without TV or newspapers.

Bottom line is, she supported the war until her son got killed and had to place the? blame on someone.

Her son RE ENLISTED TO FIGHT, what part of that cant some of u understand

he wasnt brainwashed, he wasnt kidnapped, he wasnt forced

HE CHOSE TO FUCKING FIGHT

therefore he supported the war and its cause.

His mother is just bitter cause she lost a child

I mean its as simple as 1-2-3

U all are just too die hard bleeding heart liberal to see the truth when its in clear black and white.

Interesting....

Of course, it contradicts the actual words that have come out of her mouth, but...hey...whatever you wanna make up to support your view of the world, eh?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9137815/

[Dr. Blutarsky]

U protestors are so brain washed it is hilarious.

The woman didnt protest cause she didnt have the information

that is hilarious

U people act like The Sheehan's lived under a rock or something without TV or newspapers.

Bottom line is, she supported the war until her son got killed and had to place the? blame on someone.

Her son RE ENLISTED TO FIGHT, what part of that cant some of u understand

he wasnt brainwashed, he wasnt kidnapped, he wasnt forced

HE CHOSE TO FUCKING FIGHT

therefore he supported the war and its cause.

His mother is just bitter cause she lost a child

I mean its as simple as 1-2-3

U all are just too die hard bleeding heart liberal to see the truth when its in clear black and white.

You forget, some people are not capable of counting to 3. Or putting 2 and 2 together. Or seeing reality past the politics. Or using their own brain. Or seeing the obvious.

[pilferk]

Her son Casey is a hero. She is not.

How come we never heard from her last year in the weeks after her son`s death? ( That is when she met with President Bush)

In the bigger picture, I think a lot of the protestors have an ideal that is not based on reality. No one likes war, but pulling out of Iraq now would be disasterous to that country and show the rest of the world we don`t follow through with what we say.

We didn't hear from her for 2 reasons:

1) She was still under the impression, given the information at hand, that the war was justified.? It's only AFTER the fact that Ms. Sheehan was "briefed" on the fact that the reasons given, at it's inception, were not valid

2) When she DID find out, she didn't go screaming from the mountain tops to the press.? Just as, when we discuss issues here, you don't read about them on CNN or MSNBC or FOX News.? We heard about it when she made her position VERY public.

I think protestors realize that we can't pull out, willy nilly, of Iraq.? I think, of course, that it's easier for the right to portray them as a bunch of irrational kooks and crackpots, however, in order to minimize their protest, than it is to actually listen to their voices.? We've discussed (I think ad nauseum) the uses of that tactic.? The truth, of course, is somewhere closer to center.

What most of the protestors (including Ms. Sheehan) have ACTUALLY SAID (in the press) is that they DON'T want us to pull out immediately.? What they'd like is an exit strategy to be created and a time line for evac to be laid out.? ?I think, largely, none of the protestors expect all our troops to be home tomorrow, or next week, or even next month.

There already is an exit strategy.? As soon as the Iraqis can take over the main security role then the US will begin to withdraw the troops.? I'm not really sure what Ms. Sheehan doesn't understand about this.? I honestly think she doesn't care, her own words have shown her to be an extreme left wing kook who is pissing all over everthing her son fought and died for.? She has also made some comments that have an anti semitic tone typical of the extreme left.

If she wants to get the troops home soon then she would be better off not giving encoragement to the enemy, which is all her activities have done so far.

There is no exit strategy. ?Even the members of the administration have admitted it. ?There is no exit timeline. ?Even the members of this administration have admitted it. ?It's been well publicized.

Once again, I point out that, rather than address the issues, you're assasinating her character. ?She is not a "kook". ?She is hardly pissing all over what her son fought and died for (which, FYI, includes FREEDOM to speak your mind in this country, in case you've forgotten).

And anti-semetic comments? ?Where the fuck do you get that from? ?And ascribing them to extreme leftists? ?Are you insane? ?You do know what a liberal is, right?

Again, way to spout the party line....

[pilferk]

You people claiming that any of these brave men and women fighting for our country are doing it because they have somehow been "brainwashed" are fucking idiots.? That's total disrespect to their loyalty and bravery.? You're saying if they knew any better they wouldn't be doing what they're doing.

Nobody has said the TROOPS are brainwashed.? Military personell follow orders.? That's their job, regardless of their personal feelings.? They do it very well, and I thank them for protecting our country.? But, disagreeing with the commander in chief does not mean (no matter HOW much the right wants it to) that you don't support the troops.

Look up what constituency means.? When I'm talking about "programming" (which, FYI, is not "brainwashing".? It's a common political tactic used by every political party...it involves repeating the same thing, ad nauseum, until it's internalized and regurgitated as fact....it's rote memory.), I'm speaking of the voters, themselves.



Once again, people "reading into", instead of reading.

[pilferk]

The thing is, not everyone thinks the war is stupid

Many many soldiers dont feel that way and just because some of you think its stupid doesnt make it stupid.

I dont agree with her, she has her right to piss and moan, I have my right to say whatever I want to about her.

In my eyes she is wrong and disrespecting her son's memory.

57% of the country disagrees with Bush's handling of Iraq....according to his approval ratings released just the other day.

So lets not start with the "not everyone" arguments or the "some of you" comments. 

You have a right to not agree with her, and to form your own opinion based on whatever you want to base it on, as do we all.

In my eyes, she's exercising precisely the freedoms our men and women in the military fight to protect.

[pilferk]

I wonder if Sheehan will have anything to say about Hurricane Katrina?

We do have an exit strategy. When Iraq can provide their own security, we will leave.

That's not an exit strategy.  And you know it.

And so does this administration.

[pilferk]

U protestors are so brain washed it is hilarious.

The woman didnt protest cause she didnt have the information

that is hilarious

U people act like The Sheehan's lived under a rock or something without TV or newspapers.

Bottom line is, she supported the war until her son got killed and had to place the? blame on someone.

Her son RE ENLISTED TO FIGHT, what part of that cant some of u understand

he wasnt brainwashed, he wasnt kidnapped, he wasnt forced

HE CHOSE TO FUCKING FIGHT

therefore he supported the war and its cause.

His mother is just bitter cause she lost a child

I mean its as simple as 1-2-3

U all are just too die hard bleeding heart liberal to see the truth when its in clear black and white.

You forget, some people are not capable of counting to 3. Or putting 2 and 2 together. Or seeing reality past the politics. Or using their own brain. Or seeing the obvious.

 

Back to the mud slinging again.? Of course, if you disagree with GnRFL...you must not be able to count, add, see reality or use your brain!

 

And, of course, it has NOTHING to do with the topic at hand.  But it's a nice, sensational straw man we can all gather around and burn, eh?

[Dr. Blutarsky]

I am being sarcastic, not literal. I did not mean to personally offend anyone.

I just don`t get how you can not see another point of view that is very logical even if you don`t agree with it.  Hey, we agree we disagree.

[Surfrider]

The thing is, not everyone thinks the war is stupid

Many many soldiers dont feel that way and just because some of you think its stupid doesnt make it stupid.

I dont agree with her, she has her right to piss and moan, I have my right to say whatever I want to about her.

In my eyes she is wrong and disrespecting her son's memory.

57% of the country disagrees with Bush's handling of Iraq....according to his approval ratings released just the other day.

So lets not start with the "not everyone" arguments or the "some of you" comments.?

You have a right to not agree with her, and to form your own opinion based on whatever you want to base it on, as do we all.

In my eyes, she's exercising precisely the freedoms our men and women in the military fight to protect.

I think D's point is that there is a 43% that still agrees with the war despite all of the things you guys have stated.  Ironically, a great percentage of these people are the ones that are actually there.  To presume to know more than these people, or to claim that they were brainwashed is a bit offensive.  Is that 43% stupid and ignorant?  Or do they just have a difference of opinion?  Maybe they think that removing an evil dictator and trying to bring democracy to a region that has never seen it before is enough to risk their own lives for.  Who are we to question what they want to live their lives for?  I believe Casey reinlisted after no WMD's were found?  I am not saying I necessarily agree with the pro-war postion, but reading the posts on this thread looks like the common we know more than you montra from the left.

Just my thoughts

[Dr. Blutarsky]

The thing is, not everyone thinks the war is stupid

Many many soldiers dont feel that way and just because some of you think its stupid doesnt make it stupid.

I dont agree with her, she has her right to piss and moan, I have my right to say whatever I want to about her.

In my eyes she is wrong and disrespecting her son's memory.

57% of the country disagrees with Bush's handling of Iraq....according to his approval ratings released just the other day.

So lets not start with the "not everyone" arguments or the "some of you" comments.?

You have a right to not agree with her, and to form your own opinion based on whatever you want to base it on, as do we all.

In my eyes, she's exercising precisely the freedoms our men and women in the military fight to protect.

I think D's point is that there is a 43% that still agrees with the war despite all of the things you guys have stated.? Ironically, a great percentage of these people are the ones that are actually there.? To presume to know more than these people, or to claim that they were brainwashed is a bit offensive.? Is that 43% stupid and ignorant?? Or do they just have a difference of opinion?? Maybe they think that removing an evil dictator and trying to bring democracy to a region that has never seen it before is enough to risk their own lives for.? Who are we to question what they want to live their lives for?? I believe Casey reinlisted after no WMD's were found?? I am not saying I necessarily agree with the pro-war postion, but reading the posts on this thread looks like the common we know more than you montra from the left.

Just my thoughts

Great point 

The only ones who really know what is going on there are the soldiers in Iraq. Media coverage doesn`t portray an accurate picture.

[pilferk]

I am being sarcastic, not literal. I did not mean to personally offend anyone.

I just don`t get how you can not see another point of view that is very logical even if you don`t agree with it.? Hey, we agree we disagree.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

And yes, I guess we do agree to disagree.

[pilferk]

The thing is, not everyone thinks the war is stupid

Many many soldiers dont feel that way and just because some of you think its stupid doesnt make it stupid.

I dont agree with her, she has her right to piss and moan, I have my right to say whatever I want to about her.

In my eyes she is wrong and disrespecting her son's memory.

57% of the country disagrees with Bush's handling of Iraq....according to his approval ratings released just the other day.

So lets not start with the "not everyone" arguments or the "some of you" comments.?

You have a right to not agree with her, and to form your own opinion based on whatever you want to base it on, as do we all.

In my eyes, she's exercising precisely the freedoms our men and women in the military fight to protect.

I think D's point is that there is a 43% that still agrees with the war despite all of the things you guys have stated.? Ironically, a great percentage of these people are the ones that are actually there.? To presume to know more than these people, or to claim that they were brainwashed is a bit offensive.? Is that 43% stupid and ignorant?? Or do they just have a difference of opinion?? Maybe they think that removing an evil dictator and trying to bring democracy to a region that has never seen it before is enough to risk their own lives for.? Who are we to question what they want to live their lives for?? I believe Casey reinlisted after no WMD's were found?? I am not saying I necessarily agree with the pro-war postion, but reading the posts on this thread looks like the common we know more than you montra from the left.

Just my thoughts

I hate to beat the dead horse, but people seem to be "reading into" what I write, rather than "reading it".? Perhaps it's my fault for not being clear or, perhaps, it's the heat of the discussion.

My point to D was that his characterizations painted a picture that would imply the majority are behind the war.? That's not an accurate picture, so it's best if he leaves those particular comments be, or, in fact, turn them around so they rightly paint the picture of being in the minority.

In addition, no one, anywhere on this thread, has said the troops have been brainwashed.? No one.? I assume you're ascribing the comments to me...but, read again what I've written. I'm not commenting on their support of the war, just the comments they make when talking about Ms. Sheehan (and other, high profile, issues). And even then, I do not say they are "brainwashed".? They are simply "programmed" with a stock response by this administrations supporters,. by taking advantage of rote memory.? Nor do I think the troops, nor the people who support this war, are ignorant or stupid. I just disagree with them.? Heartily and fundamentally.? But again, that's not what this thread is about.? This thread is about Ms. Sheehan, and the questions she's asked.? Everything else thrown up is a smokescreen...a straw man...sent up because, when it comes down to brass tacks, no one can answer the woman's questions without the answers shedding poor light on this administration.  Instead, you see things like "she's a kook" and "she's a crackpot" and "She's pissing all over Casey's memory" and, the best so far, accusations that she's an anti-semite.  ANYTHING and EVERYTHING to avoid having to actually answer the questions and address her points.  Telling, eh?

Casey re-enlisted (documented in the press) AFTER WDM's were not found, but BEFORE it was made obvious that the intelligence upon which we based the assumption that they were there was proven not only to be incorrect, but shaky from the start. Not that it really matters.

Personally, I don't think it mattered to Casey.? Just as I don't think it matters to many of the troops.? They have volunteered to defend our country, one of the most noble undertakings you could dedicate your life to.? They do it with the understanding that their lives are not their own, and are subject to the direction of the Commander in Chief.? They, like any good soldiers, support their Commander through thick and thin, personal feelings be damned.? That's what soldiers do.? It's about honor. It's about nobility. It's about providing safety for your countrymen.? But that's just what I think.? Without Casey sitting here to tell us what his feelings are, it's all just speculation and, depending on your opinion, your speculation is just going to support that opinion...because the truth is, there is no truth.? Again, not that any of that matters.

Cindy Sheehan is not a soldier.? I'm not a soldier.? It's not my job to follow, without question, the current administration.? And I will disagree with it.? Heartily and fundamentally.? And I will continue to use the freedoms Casey, and those like him, have fought so hard to ensure I have.

[Surfrider]

I hate to beat the dead horse, but people seem to be "reading into" what I write, rather than "reading it".? Perhaps it's my fault for not being clear or, perhaps, it's the heat of the discussion.

I think the problem is that there are two arguments that are being made in this thread.  First, the comments by yourself that there are fundamental questions about the war that aren't being satisfactorily answered by the administration.  There is no doubt that this is true.  Of course there was bad intelligence, and many of the reasons for the war were proven not to exist.  However, this is beating a dead horse.  You are going to get those on the right say that Bush could only make a decision based on the knowledge that he had, which was based on many thigns.  You are going to get those on the left say that Bush lied and went to war for alterior motives.  The fact is, answering the questions returns us to the same debate that took place before the war, and during the elections.

What do you expect Bush to say?  The war was a bunch of BS.  We never should have went in?  Your son died for nothing?  First, I don't necessarily believe that he thinks her son died for nothing, and he told her that.  Second, what good would it do for Bush to undermine the war and ruin the morale of the troops?  You guys are asking him to do something that neither he nor any President in his position would do.  The fact is we are there, and if the administration determines that the best course now is to stay in Iraq, then undermining the cause and telling a mother that her son died for nothing would do nothing but hurt our efforts.  Seriously, I am not sure what you expect from him. 

The second line of discussion that is being debated in this thread is whether Ms. Sheehan should be doing what she is doing.  NO question she has the right to, but is she honoring her son's memoory by doing what she is doing.  Ms. Sheehan and her son disagreed over the merits of the war, and he enlisted despite her disagreement.  The fact is many people differ in their opinions about the war.  Ms. Sheehan and her son were two of those people.  By using her sons death for the political agenda that her son specifically disagreed with his mother on, I do not think you can characterize her efforts but as something that her son would not have approved of.

My point to D was that his characterizations painted a picture that would imply the majority are behind the war.? That's not an accurate picture, so it's best if he leaves those particular comments be, or, in fact, turn them around so they rightly paint the picture of being in the minority.

Well this changes all of the time, and only in the last six months or so has support for the war dipped below majority approval.  His point wasn't that there is majority approval, but that there is almost a dead split over approval of the war.

In addition, no one, anywhere on this thread, has said the troops have been brainwashed.? No one.? I assume you're ascribing the comments to me...but, read again what I've written. I'm not commenting on their support of the war, just the comments they make when talking about Ms. Sheehan (and other, high profile, issues). And even then, I do not say they are "brainwashed".? They are simply "programmed" with a stock response by this administrations supporters,.

Programmed or brainwashed, I think you are guilty of playing the same game of semantics that you accused others of playing in a different thread.

by taking advantage of rote memory.? Nor do I think the troops, nor the people who support this war, are ignorant or stupid. I just disagree with them.? Heartily and fundamentally.? But again, that's not what this thread is about.?

No, but there are quite a few posts that assume that anyone that agrees with the war does so because they did not know the truth and were lied to. 

This thread is about Ms. Sheehan, and the questions she's asked.? Everything else thrown up is a smokescreen...a straw man...

You seem to have built the same strawman that you accuse others of building.  The title of the thread is "right wing beats up on greiving mother."  Certainly, such a thread would include a debate of whether she is right, and whether she is doing something that her son would fundamentally disagree with, wouldn't it?  In fact, by reading the title this is what I would presume the discussion was about.  By focusing on the questions instead of focusing on whether the right wing should be beating her up, you have created your own strawman.

sent up because, when it comes down to brass tacks, no one can answer the woman's questions without the answers shedding poor light on this administration.? Instead, you see things like "she's a kook" and "she's a crackpot" and "She's pissing all over Casey's memory" and, the best so far, accusations that she's an anti-semite.? ANYTHING and EVERYTHING to avoid having to actually answer the questions and address her points.? Telling, eh?

I will be the first to agree that her questions cannot be answered in a satisfactory way.  The anti-semite comment was laughable.  However, I did hear her refer to the insurgents as freedom fighters.


Just my thoughts

[pilferk]

What do I expect Bush to say?  I EXPECT him to say exactly what he has said: Nothing.  Because it's obvious where his answers would lead to.  But then, that's the whole point of her questions, aren't they?  So, what you've essentially said in the first part of the response is...well...just go with the status quo?  Ignore what you think is a huge mistake for our country because...what? It might make the administration look bad?  Don't seek answers to the questinons because it might "rock the boat"?  Thank GOD our forefathers didn't feel that way!

Well this changes all of the time, and only in the last six months or so has support for the war dipped below majority approval.  His point wasn't that there is majority approval, but that there is almost a dead split over approval of the war.

Me thinks you should read his wording again, and how he applies the smaller "some of you" when referring to those that don't support the war.  If he chose the words lightly, and that was not his intent, he should clarify (which is why I suggested he just leave statements of that nature from his posts).  But if he was purposefully insinuating that those that disapprove of Bush's actions in Iraq were in the minority...he was wrong.

Programmed or brainwashed, I think you are guilty of playing the same game of semantics that you accused others of playing in a different thread.

On the contrary, I used the word VERY carefully.  It's not a game of semantics, actually. It's saying what I mean. "Programming" responses to your constituency is a pretty widely known and used political tactic.  It has absolutely NOTHING to do with "brainwashing".  That's why I used the word I did.

You seem to have built the same strawman that you accuse others of building.  The title of the thread is "right wing beats up on greiving mother."  Certainly, such a thread would include a debate of whether she is right, and whether she is doing something that her son would fundamentally disagree with, wouldn't it?  In fact, by reading the title this is what I would presume the discussion was about.  By focusing on the questions instead of focusing on whether the right wing should be beating her up, you have created your own strawman.

By taking my quote completely out of context, and applying it to something it was not meant to be applied to, YOU are building the straw man.  Nice job on it too. 

My original quote, of course, referred to the comments about "brainwashed troops" and the left thinking anyone who supports the war is ignorant and stupid.  Straw men, both.

And the discussion IS about her questions and all aspects thereof (and the fact she's been beaten up over asking them relays directly to that).

As for how Casey might have felt by his mother's action...again, we return to the shadow of speculation.  You prefer to think he would have disapproved, because it supports your existing opinion.  I prefer to think otherwise, for like reasons.  The truth is...neither of us knew Casey, or have any idea how he might have felt.   And the one person who DID know him well, and might be able to predict how he would react...is doing exactly what you find so distasteful.

[D]

And I'm sure you know more about her son's life then she does....enough to know that she is disrespecting it.....

As for thinking the war is stupid: Bush's most recent polls give him a 40 percent approval rating for the war.

Guess what the rest thought?

Ok So I dont know her son enough to know but yet YOU know her son enough to know that he was brainwashed and lied to.

Great Contradiction!


43 percent support the war

that is still a pretty large fucking number, U have to take into account that there are probably more democrats than republicans in the United States and of course most of them would be against Bush if he donated a billion dollars to the Hurricane relief *they'd find some angle*

Im an independent, I dont take either side just out of habit, I like Bill O Reilly, but I also love Bill Maher, I though Bill Clinton was the greatest president ever.

I do feel however that If we are gonna stay in Iraq we need to finish the job, so either fight or get out.

My point is this

here is how Cindy Sheehan is desecrating her son's legacy.

He obviously war his uniform with pride and dignity,he was obviously in the 43 percent who supported the war, he was the one fighting over there voluntarily for the 2nd time.

He believed in what he was doing, took pride in what he was doing, was willing to RISK his life for the cause.

For his mom to say he died for a bullshit thing just pisses all over what he believed in


Dont tell me I dont know what he believed in because for someone to RE ENLIST after no WMD's were found proves that he supported liberating Iraq.

The Left acts like he lived under a rock and was a 5 year old retard who had access to zero information

that is insulting Casey Sheehan's intelligence and I think that makes the left look like jackasses who will do anything to criticize Bush.

I actually leaned more to the left before all this but the left's atttitudes are making me lean the other way.

[Surfrider]

What do I expect Bush to say?? I EXPECT him to say exactly what he has said: Nothing.? Because it's obvious where his answers would lead to.? But then, that's the whole point of her questions, aren't they?? So, what you've essentially said in the first part of the response is...well...just go with the status quo?? Ignore what you think is a huge mistake for our country because...what? It might make the administration look bad?? Don't seek answers to the questinons because it might "rock the boat"?? Thank GOD our forefathers didn't feel that way!

No, I am simply saying the same things have been debated endlessly.  Her questions are nothing but round 6 to the same debate.  Yet, some still would rather rehash that debate of whether we should have went to war, instead of debating what to do now that we are there.

By taking my quote completely out of context, and applying it to something it was not meant to be applied to, YOU are building the straw man.? Nice job on it too.?

I am not going to go back and look, but I am pretty sure you claimed quite a few times that debating whether she should be saying what she is saying is a strawman. 

My original quote, of course, referred to the comments about "brainwashed troops" and the left thinking anyone who supports the war is ignorant and stupid.? Straw men, both.

That is not exactly what D was saying though.  He was arguing that she shouldn't be saying what she is saying.  Your constant response: strawman.

As for how Casey might have felt by his mother's action...again, we return to the shadow of speculation.? You prefer to think he would have disapproved, because it supports your existing opinion.? I prefer to think otherwise, for like reasons.? The truth is...neither of us knew Casey, or have any idea how he might have felt.? ?And the one person who DID know him well, and might be able to predict how he would react...is doing exactly what you find so distasteful.

Of course the one person was the one that initially disagreed over his decision to join the military in the first place.  I am not preferring to think that he supported the war because it supports my position, I am simply stating it because I believe that was the case.  I am pretty neutral about her arguments, and I stated that they couldn't be answered adequately by the adminstration.  I do know that Casey enlisted and asked to go into Iraq.  He then reinlisted after the war started.  Considering that most military people I have talked to still support the war, I would have to think that he would probably still support the war.  Your view to the contrary is supported by your own view that the war was wrong, which you previously admitted was contrary to the views of most servicemen.  Furthermore, your argument is supported by what Cindy Sheehan says, the person who he disagreed with over the war, and chose enlist twice despite her feelings over the war.  To me it seems that you prefer to think that he would have disagreed with the war because it supports your position.  I just have to look at his previous support for the war, I do not see any evidence that he ever changed his mind before his death.

[pilferk]

I am not going to go back and look, but I am pretty sure you claimed quite a few times that debating whether she should be saying what she is saying is a strawman.?

Maybe you should go back and read it again.? I said debating her character is a straw man.? Her "character" (or the right's perception of it) has no bearing on whether she should say what she's saying.? Calling her a kook and a crackpot, specifically.

That is not exactly what D was saying though.? He was arguing that she shouldn't be saying what she is saying.? Your constant response: strawman.

Incorrect.? I used the straw man comment? ONLY on the assertions that I mentioned in that piece of my post. I addressed his specific concern that she shouldn't say what she's saying later in the post.? Again, "reading into" instead of just reading it.

For posterity, here's the quote:
"In addition, no one, anywhere on this thread, has said the troops have been brainwashed.? No one.? I assume you're ascribing the comments to me...but, read again what I've written. I'm not commenting on their support of the war, just the comments they make when talking about Ms. Sheehan (and other, high profile, issues). And even then, I do not say they are "brainwashed".? They are simply "programmed" with a stock response by this administrations supporters,. by taking advantage of rote memory.? Nor do I think the troops, nor the people who support this war, are ignorant or stupid. I just disagree with them.? Heartily and fundamentally.? But again, that's not what this thread is about.? This thread is about Ms. Sheehan, and the questions she's asked.? Everything else thrown up is a smokescreen...a straw man..."
Plain as day and in black and white.? I even reiterate the thread is ABOUT MS. SHEEHAN, AND THE QUESTIONS SHE'S ASKED.?

Of course the one person was the one that initially disagreed over his decision to join the military in the first place.? I am not preferring to think that he supported the war because it supports my position, I am simply stating it because I believe that was the case.? I am pretty neutral about her arguments, and I stated that they couldn't be answered adequately by the adminstration.? I do know that Casey enlisted and asked to go into Iraq.? He then reinlisted after the war started.? Considering that most military people I have talked to still support the war, I would have to think that he would probably still support the war.? Your view to the contrary is supported by your own view that the war was wrong, which you previously admitted was contrary to the views of most servicemen.? Furthermore, your argument is supported by what Cindy Sheehan says, the person who he disagreed with over the war, and chose enlist twice despite her feelings over the war.? To me it seems that you prefer to think that he would have disagreed with the war because it supports your position.? I just have to look at his previous support for the war, I do not see any evidence that he ever changed his mind before his death.

Again, speculation.? And no better founded than those that feel otherwise.? You're basing your speculation on actions he took without full knowledge.? You have no earthly idea what his actions would have been, or how he would have felt, if given the whole story. Neither do I. That's one of Ms. Sheehan's points, actually.? And given the way public opinion has swayed, now that the "truth" has come to light, I don't think it remotely unreasonable to think he MAY have changed his mind. Or he may not have.? Given the uncertainty...the argument is relatively pointless.? You're going to believe what supports your position, no matter if you deny the reasoning behind it or not.? If you disagree with Ms. Sheehan, you're probably going to think she's "pissing" on Casey's memory.? If you agree with her...probably not so much.

Fundamentally, since this argument is one of opinion only, on this point we're all going to have to agree to disagree.

FYI, just so you all don't think I'm abandoning you, I'm going to be "unavailable" for the next few days...possibly a week or so.? I've volunteered to help out with some efforts at my place of business to help out the refugees down along the Gulf Coast.? While I won't actually be travelling down there, I won't exactly have easy access to a "for fun" PC, either.  I'll probably have limited net access going forward for a bit, though I anticipate I'll be back online by the middle of next week.

Be safe, you all.? And realize how lucky you are to have families, friends, food, water, etc (even if the gas prices are outrageous) near you.

 

[D]

I just think its hilarious

The soldiers arent mindless idiots

Extremist Left Wingers feel that if they believe a way it becomes fact and no other opinions matter.

That is a very bad way to look at things.

I don't have my feet stuck in concrete on one side or the other.

U all act like you were in the recruitment rooms with the soldiers or something, u act like u are in the briefing rooms

u have no proof the soldiers are being lied to, im very sure they know the score, they have more access to the info than any of us.


I say it would be a huge thrill to have Iraqi people come up to u and thank u for freeing them, thats doing something right there.

If u dont support it, dont sign up and fight but dont question the intelligence or insult the integrity of those who do support it and choose to fight.

[SLCPUNK]

The thing is, not everyone thinks the war is stupid

Many many soldiers dont feel that way and just because some of you think its stupid doesnt make it stupid.

I dont agree with her, she has her right to piss and moan, I have my right to say whatever I want to about her.

In my eyes she is wrong and disrespecting her son's memory.

57% of the country disagrees with Bush's handling of Iraq....according to his approval ratings released just the other day.

So lets not start with the "not everyone" arguments or the "some of you" comments. 

You have a right to not agree with her, and to form your own opinion based on whatever you want to base it on, as do we all.

In my eyes, she's exercising precisely the freedoms our men and women in the military fight to protect.

I think D's point is that there is a 43% that still agrees with the war despite all of the things you guys have stated.  Ironically, a great percentage of these people are the ones that are actually there.  To presume to know more than these people, or to claim that they were brainwashed is a bit offensive.  Is that 43% stupid and ignorant?  Or do they just have a difference of opinion?  Maybe they think that removing an evil dictator and trying to bring democracy to a region that has never seen it before is enough to risk their own lives for.  Who are we to question what they want to live their lives for?  I believe Casey reinlisted after no WMD's were found?  I am not saying I necessarily agree with the pro-war postion, but reading the posts on this thread looks like the common we know more than you montra from the left.

Just my thoughts

I hate to beat the dead horse, but people seem to be "reading into" what I write, rather than "reading it".  Perhaps it's my fault for not being clear or, perhaps, it's the heat of the discussion.

.

No, it's no accident. It is what people do, when they are wrong, and have to find a way to win an argument.

They create a new one.

[SLCPUNK]

Ok So I dont know her son enough to know but yet YOU know her son enough to know that he was brainwashed and lied to.

I didn't say I knew her son. I said she did....

The reason given was false: WMD, we were lied to from day one. Enough evidence has been given to write numerous books, and have right wing cabinet members come forward to give interviews.

Great Contradiction!

Wrong analogy!


43 percent support the war

I'm sure they are very proud. Kinda like an old woman with a cane denying help when crossing the street.


that is still a pretty large fucking number, U have to take into account that there are probably more democrats than republicans in the United States and of course most of them would be against Bush if he donated a billion dollars to the Hurricane relief *they'd find some angle*

HUH?

For his mom to say he died for a bullshit thing just pisses all over what he believed in

Says you. You= Not his Momma.

And she would know, better than you if that "pissed on what he belived in" or if he believed in it as you portray to begin with.

The Left acts like he lived under a rock and was a 5 year old retard who had access to zero information


The left acts like this woman has a right to speak and not have her character assisinated.

I think that makes the left look like jackasses who will do anything to criticize Bush.

This is part of the argument I never understood. That we'll do "anything" to criticize the president. Yea, we just want to find a reason to hate the man.....

This is a blanket, basic statement, with no merit. People then follow and repeat this statement. It is another form of slinging mud and strawman. Claiming the left just "hates" the president. Dumb.

Dont tell me I dont know what he believed in because for someone to RE ENLIST after no WMD's were found proves that he supported liberating Iraq.

Mom feels otherwise. You can only speculate.

And really reading this you have won..... You have won because you have taken the original argument and turned it into a comletely different topic. You guys have all pressed on long enough, to spin this around into something that you created. The strawman has come alive and here I am defending this woman...unreal.  Congrats, you are ready to register republican.

I actually leaned more to the left before all this but the left's atttitudes are making me lean the other way.

Go listen to O'reilly then, he should lull you right to sleep.