An ode to liberals

[SLCPUNK]

I could never imagine protesting a war we are currently fighting.  I would never do that to our troops. 

I would never send my troops to fight on a lie for starters. That might be one way to respect our troops. That is what pisses me off about you guys so much. You blab all day about "the troops" yet find it perfectly ok that they were marched of to die on a lie: WMD. For NOTHING. That is ok. But if somebody says "war is bad" then all of a sudden "We are sending the wrong message to our troops" what a load of shit.

Also, there is no evidence that protesting the war is bad for the troops. You have provided none-right wing articles do not count. While plferk has provided evidence that the moral as at an all time high.

Let me ask you something Charity: These troops are getting shot at, having limbs blown off, killed and seeing their buddies killed. Do you really think some people here protesting the war (on the other side of the world) is going to get back to them and diminish their morale? You can't hardly be serious.

You think that is more profound then being fucking shot at? Or having things blown up around you? Or having your buddies killed? You really believe that?

[Skeba]

I do believe that people not being behind a war does affect the troops morale... It is one thing to put your life on the line every day because of what you believe in and what the whole country believes is right, than to be fighting with a feeling that you're fighting someone else's war. I believe, that sometimes in the middle of all that is horrible, one of the only things that keeps you going is that you know that you're doing it for a reason.

I'm not sure what to say about the polls on the troops' morale. A big percentage of the troops will give higher ratings for the morale as they know that low morale feeds on itself (dunno if that made any sense).

That's what Charity Case prolly meant when he wrote about perspective. From his point of view protesting would be a slap in the troops' face with real affect on the troops, while you seem to think that it doesn't.  It is a difficult subject... How do you get the attention of the leaders of the country without affecting the people fighting the war in a way that can be fatal in a combat situation.

[RichardNixon]

I do believe that people not being behind a war does affect the troops morale... It is one thing to put your life on the line every day because of what you believe in and what the whole country believes is right, than to be fighting with a feeling that you're fighting someone else's war. I believe, that sometimes in the middle of all that is horrible, one of the only things that keeps you going is that you know that you're doing it for a reason.

I'm not sure what to say about the polls on the troops' morale. A big percentage of the troops will give higher ratings for the morale as they know that low morale feeds on itself (dunno if that made any sense).

That's what Charity Case prolly meant when he wrote about perspective. From his point of view protesting would be a slap in the troops' face with real affect on the troops, while you seem to think that it doesn't.? It is a difficult subject... How do you get the attention of the leaders of the country without affecting the people fighting the war in a way that can be fatal in a combat situation.

Were the German citizens of the 30s and 40s ok not to have spoken up against Hitler, simply because it would have damaged the morale of the German troops? If your country is doing something wrong, it is your obligation as a citizen of the world to say so.

[Skeba]

Are you comparing Hitler's actions to what Bush has been doing? I believe that what Bush is doing is wrong, but I really don't think that a realistic comparison can be made between the two.

[RichardNixon]

Are you comparing Hitler's actions to what Bush has been doing? I believe that what Bush is doing is wrong, but I really don't think that a realistic comparison can be made between the two.

No, I don't think Bush is as bad as Hitler. But I am asking, Bush aside, should the German people have accepted the actions of Hitler and supported his policies in order to ensure the morale of the troops?

[Skeba]

No, I don't think that they should've accepted his policies. There was something so profoundly wrong with what he was doing. His policy got so many people killed, and would've gotten a lot more killed, with no justification, and out of pure insanity.

[Izzy]

Let me ask you something Charity: These troops are getting shot at, having limbs blown off, killed and seeing their buddies killed. Do you really think some people here protesting the war (on the other side of the world) is going to get back to them and diminish their morale? You can't hardly be serious.

You think that is more profound then being fucking shot at? Or having things blown up around you? Or having your buddies killed? You really believe that?

Indeed

Aren't they fighting for ours and others right to free speach?

[RichardNixon]

No, I don't think that they should've accepted his policies. There was something so profoundly wrong with what he was doing.

And I think there is something profoundly wrong with what Bush has done and is doing. Is it as bad as Nazi Germany? No. But is it bad? Yes.

[Skeba]

I understand your point.

But instead of putting the focus on the war protestors, the main goal should be in getting the troops back and getting some sort of order to Iraq, so that the country won't be in mayhem after the troops have been pulled.

And that is something that needs everybody's attention on the political view, no matter what the your party is or whether you were for the war or not.. And I, for one, don't believe that either extreme solution is good.. Just pulling out could be a disaster, just as leaving the troops there without any info on when they're coming home is no plan either. But I think that some good progress will be made in the next few coming weeks. I hope.

[RichardNixon]

Just pulling out could lead to disaster, but "staying the course" to nowhere is also a bad idea. No matter what the US does, people will get killed.

[Charity Case]

Let me ask you something Charity: These troops are getting shot at, having limbs blown off, killed and seeing their buddies killed. Do you really think some people here protesting the war (on the other side of the world) is going to get back to them and diminish their morale? You can't hardly be serious.

I think your protesting on a gnr message board doesn't demoralize the tropps.  I think that when someone like Sheehan pulls what she pulled and it becomes a story all over the world...I think that could have a negative impact on the troops.  The bigger problem with so much protesting and so many blatant attacks on the president is not so much the message it sends to the troops as it is the message it sends to the enemy.  I think the enemy loves it when Americans protest the war.  So if the enemy loves the protest (which is logical don't you think) then I don't want to be associated with it in any way.  I think you have to be a loser to some degree to knowingly do something you know helps the enemy.  It is fundamental.  I don't want to do anything during war time that could either demoralize our troops or give encouragement to our enemies.  Very simple concept.

I think people like Sheehan and Moore are danagerous.  I think they cause the US more harm than anything.  I'm sure the terrorists loved Farenheit 911.  I'm sure they love seeing Sheehan demostrate the way she did.  Hell, they can't buy that kind of propaganda.  So, if you know it is encouraging the enmey...why do it?  Only reason I can think of is people like that are unAmerican or ignorant.

As for you and the liberals here,...I think healthy dialogue is perfectly fine.  I think discussing the subject is a good thing.  However, when you are unwilling to say even the smallest good thing about our country (and slc I haven't seen you post one positive thing about the US ever), and when everything comes across as a whining fit, you lose my attention.  For example, during the past few days we talked about using propaganda in war.  Many liberals here posted articles showing how aweful it is that we would do that.  I stated that it is a good stratgey and that it has happened in every war to date.  Pilferk at least stated that he agreed that using propaganda during the war is a good idea.  See, I have no problem with someone who is on the opposite side of a discussion but can concede to the obvious.  slc, not to pick on you, but I have never seen you concede anything.  I have seen everyone else on both sides of this arguement concede points, except you.  You continue to look at things through such bias and you are are obviously so prideful, that you can't concede anything to the opposition (even something obvious like leaving Iraq now would be the wrong thing to do).

[Charity Case]

I do believe that people not being behind a war does affect the troops morale... It is one thing to put your life on the line every day because of what you believe in and what the whole country believes is right, than to be fighting with a feeling that you're fighting someone else's war. I believe, that sometimes in the middle of all that is horrible, one of the only things that keeps you going is that you know that you're doing it for a reason.

I'm not sure what to say about the polls on the troops' morale. A big percentage of the troops will give higher ratings for the morale as they know that low morale feeds on itself (dunno if that made any sense).

That's what Charity Case prolly meant when he wrote about perspective. From his point of view protesting would be a slap in the troops' face with real affect on the troops, while you seem to think that it doesn't.? It is a difficult subject... How do you get the attention of the leaders of the country without affecting the people fighting the war in a way that can be fatal in a combat situation.

That was black and white.  It was wrong.  And their citizens would have been shot for protesting.  This situation is gray at best and our citizens are free to say what they want.  It is two entirely different situations.

Were the German citizens of the 30s and 40s ok not to have spoken up against Hitler, simply because it would have damaged the morale of the German troops? If your country is doing something wrong, it is your obligation as a citizen of the world to say so.

[Charity Case]

Just pulling out could lead to disaster, but "staying the course" to nowhere is also a bad idea. No matter what the US does, people will get killed.

Very true.  So if that is given, what options do the the US have?  Only one that I can see, and that is to see this through to the end.  To stay there and follow through with the plan that has been stated for a while now:

1.  Train Iraqi's to take care of their own country

2.  Get a government in place that represnts the people

3.  Make sure stability is attainable

4.  Leave

I mean that is pretty dumbed down, but it makes perfect sense..as it did in Bush's 2005 State of the Union address and every time it has been stated since.  The Iraqi's are obviously making progress.  So we stay put and help out until that progress is sufficient to allow them to do things on there own.  A timetable hasn't been given beause no one knows for sure yet when that might happen.  I think when Bush's term i sup, tpeople will have a more positive view of this war (at least I hope).

[Where is Hassan Nasrallah ?]

a soldier is not there to talk or think. it's a machine. he and his rifle.
if soldiers start debating on sheehan or whatever ... they can go home. they chose to be soldiers. military stability is based on the fact that you don't think. you just obey.

am i right or am i right ? am i right ?

[Charity Case]

Your are right except you are forgetting 1 important thing.  They are not robots.  They are actual real people with emotions and feelings.  When we create a soldier with no feelings and no emotions, we will be invincible.  But that is a discussion for a cloning topic.

[Izzy]

When we create a soldier with no feelings and no emotions, we will be invincible.?

 

If u want to see what soldiers without feelings do read up about the war Nazi Germany fought against the USSR. Didn't make them invincible but it did kill about 30 million people.

If u want to see soldiers with no feelings in a more recent context check the pictures of US troops abusing Iraqi prisoners.

And if u want to see someone with absolutely no clue what they are talking about check posts by Charity Case

[Izzy]

I think your protesting on a gnr message board doesn't demoralize the tropps.? I think that when someone like Sheehan pulls what she pulled and it becomes a story all over the world...I think that could have a negative impact on the troops.? The bigger problem with so much protesting and so many blatant attacks on the president is not so much the message it sends to the troops as it is the message it sends to the enemy.? I think the enemy loves it when Americans protest the war.? So if the enemy loves the protest (which is logical don't you think) then I don't want to be associated with it in any way.? I think you have to be a loser to some degree to knowingly do something you know helps the enemy.? It is fundamental.? I don't want to do anything during war time that could either demoralize our troops or give encouragement to our enemies.? Very simple concept.

What ''encourages'' the ''enemy'' is an invasion of their home, involvement in Israel and a quite understandable belief that America is out to get them because they are Muslim

That's what gets them blowing up troop convoys not political debates on tv

I think people like Sheehan and Moore are danagerous.? I think they cause the US more harm than anything.? I'm sure the terrorists loved Farenheit 911.? I'm sure they love seeing Sheehan demostrate the way she did.? Hell, they can't buy that kind of propaganda.? So, if you know it is encouraging the enmey...why do it?? Only reason I can think of is people like that are unAmerican or ignorant.

The ol' patriotism angle - i love it. I also love how those that dare to think independently are ignorant while those that instinctly back the flag are the open minded ones

As for you and the liberals here,...I think healthy dialogue is perfectly fine.

Thank god for that!

However, when you are unwilling to say even the smallest good thing about our country (and slc I haven't seen you post one positive thing about the US ever),and when everything comes across as a whining fit, you lose my attention

Lol - so the value of posts correlates with your pro-American position

And SLC regularly posts in a way that shows his love of America - maybe u should read a few more of his posts?

and when everything comes across as a whining fit, you lose my attention.? For example, during the past few days we talked about using propaganda in war.? Many liberals here posted articles showing how aweful it is that we would do that.? I stated that it is a good stratgey and that it has happened in every war to date.? Pilferk at least stated that he agreed that using propaganda during the war is a good idea.? See, I have no problem with someone who is on the opposite side of a discussion but can concede to the obvious.? slc, not to pick on you, but I have never seen you concede anything.? I have seen everyone else on both sides of this arguement concede points, except you.? You continue to look at things through such bias and you are are obviously so prideful, that you can't concede anything to the opposition (even something obvious like leaving Iraq now would be the wrong thing to do).

 

A propoganda war being a good thing? Twisting the truth a good strategy.

If what the glorious west is doing is ''right'' - why do we need propoganda?

[Booker Floyd]

For example, during the past few days we talked about using propaganda in war.? Many liberals here posted articles showing how aweful it is that we would do that.

Isnt it a bit dishonest of you to blame liberals when you discovered, under pretty embarassing circumstances, that a Republican senator has a major problem with it as well?

[Charity Case]

For example, during the past few days we talked about using propaganda in war.? Many liberals here posted articles showing how aweful it is that we would do that.

Isnt it a bit dishonest of you to blame liberals when you discovered, under pretty embarassing circumstances, that a Republican senator has a major problem with it as well?

I blame the liberals here because it is the liberals here that are posting the articles.  If there are non-liberals out there that think using propaganda in war is wrong, then they are just as wrong about this subject imo.  But I was specifically talking about the board members as can be seen by "Many liberals hereposted..."

And why would I be embarassed about being lied to?  You mock Hannity for his tactics and then turn around and use the same tactics.  Are they legitimate tactics or not?  We've been over this.  I didn't respond to the content of that post, only the person you lied about being the author.  I think you know by now my feeling on the content of the post.  The guy is wrong. 

[Guns N RockMusic]

When we create a soldier with no feelings and no emotions, we will be invincible.?

 

If u want to see what soldiers without feelings do read up about the war Nazi Germany fought against the USSR. Didn't make them invincible but it did kill about 30 million people.

If u want to see soldiers with no feelings in a more recent context check the pictures of US troops abusing Iraqi prisoners.

And if u want to see someone with absolutely no clue what they are talking about check posts by Charity Case

Izzy you really are clueless.  How on god's earth can you label US Soldiers as calloused and cold, lacking all emotions because they took nude pictures of Iraqis.  Calloused and could would be the Islamic terrorists who target and behead innocent civilians.  Then again, you've already stated that this behavior is acceptable because it works for their culture.  You're so full of bullshit and just thinking about your blind arrogance and tolerance of racism and sexism makes me irate.  Your arguments are so fundamentally flawed in both reality and logic.  Take your latest dump for example:  US soldiers possess no emotion because they "tortured" Iraqis.  An intelligent an objective person might argue that US troops "tortured" Iraqi POWs because of the outrage and for the revenge of comrades killed by these bastards.  Your hypocrisy will never end.  Have you ever actually participated in an intelligent debate and been complimented by the other side because your arguments and claims are laughable at best.  Fortunately no person in any sort of power or influence shares your outrageous views, I mean you're. out there even for Chirac.