Exactly! A short term bandaide, it's nothing that is going to stop civil war, nothing that's going to stop the country from turning into a time bomb even further than it already is. So what do we do, use this surge to simply bring the death counts down a little bit then do the so called cut and run? What is the grand plan here, it is not an end all especially if we are there to help the Iraqi's, if it's to save face on our own failures in the war and get out 'perhaps' it might work..
Who is choosing to look at numbers that are on "their" side? GRIM? What's really sad is, even in your effort to try and trivialize the success our soldiers have had and take their credit away, the numbers you tout from icasualties.org say the same thing. May - 126 through September - 66 That's still the same rough 50%. But, as you've illustrated, we cannot agree that 50% is significant. I can't imagine why. If, over a four month period of time, you lost 50% of your search engine traffic and subsequently lost 50% of your earnings, I'd say just about anyone would say that is significant. This discussion isn't about how the war was started. This simply illustrates that your anti-war position is clouding your judgment regarding success. You are looking at the tiny picture. You are the one trying to take away soldier's success in Iraq by focusing on one month, rather than a four month picture. Again, only you can answer as to why you are doing such, then projecting those shortcomings off on others. Which parts do you disregard? You've presented nothing credible to support this theory, despite having been asked. But, let's suppose it has some truth, rather than just the usual hypothesis you propose. Then it's a good thing. Dead terrorists aren't hiding. The military is not sitting on it's ass over there (despite your efforts to portray such). Their operations are ongoing and they are continually taking out terrorists, including high value targets. However, if your "theory" is correct, then it's great news! Here's why. Those areas of Bahgdad and other locales had been overrun by terrorists. Now, they are able to go in and secure those areas. If you read some of the other articles (probably didn't), they are going in and securing them and STAYING along with Iraqi forces to ensure they stay secure. So if what you are proposing had any substance to it, which it doesn't...it's just your pessimistic theory, then those "insurgents" just lost. Because the surge plan is having huge success and they are not going to get back in to dominate. Just like GRIM. "I'm only going to focus on the negative, like you focus on the positive, but I'm going to put a disclaimer in here so you can't call me on it and make me look wrong, because I can't handle being wrong." Pfft! How weak. I can't imagine why would even think about focusing on something negative, when you are not disappointed? Could you make my point any better for me? The same brave men and women that you want to take their success away. The ones doing the work, making the progress, securing the areas, killing terrorists and reducing violence. But no, not GRIM, he couldn't give them any credit because it would interfere with his pessimism and disappointment. Thanks for making my point again. That's fantastic! They show the same 50% decrease in death tolls. Who would have thought? The other articles I posted showed nearly as much decrease in civilian deaths as well. But we can't thank our soldiers for doing a good job, because GRIM is against the war and against success
Wow nice twists there Gtech, again showing there is no point in discussing anything with you as you make up your own facts, disreguard anything that does not fit your agenda, do not give a shit about the troops safety as you're more worried about supporting the administration than anything. You've proven this over and over I have clearly laid out why I am not ready to jump on the bandwagon. I have given no credit? Seriously? Wow saying it's not a long term solution isn't giving credit? You are a joke pure and simple
Now we're back to the victim role when I prove you wrong? Wouldn't think a big bad weight lifter boy like yourself would need to pretend to be a victim. Speaking of agendas, it's clear your agenda cannot acknowledge a 50% reduction in death tolls and give our soldiers some credit for the hard work they are doing. That's probably part of the new definition of patriotism http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7008717756 Good news or bad news? Twist it, or accept the reality? I suppose for some, it depends on whether GWB is in office (four year patriotism) and whether it fits their agenda.
Or a nightmare, depending on who you ask. We had guys like this 250 years ago. They were known as British Loyalists. Traitors to the colonies who would holler and scream about loyalty to the King, even in the absence of morality or justice for the people.
My Great [9] Grandfather & Grandmother's grave site. He fought in the Revolutionary War. Probably shouldn't mention the Admiral. Some people wouldn't know about service to their country though. Too busy tearing it down and trying to rewrite the definition of patriotism.
We've always been indebted to others. Lives are lost in wars, it's not a new phenomenon. I'm grateful there are people out there, unlike yourself, who are willing to fight for our country. It's a shame you don't feel the same way, especially considering you've never done anything for the freedoms you've stole off the backs of others.
I served my country seven years. My son is serving his country now. How many years have you served? Other than bitch, whine, moan and complain, have you ever done *anything* for your country? By your reasoning, (someone who has never served at all), if one served his country during peace time, it's not honorable. How liberal of you.
Actually, I just quoted something you wrote to me, and added some line breaks. You wrote the "off the backs of others" comment with regards to my family's service. Not so nice when people say the same things about your predecessors is it? In the words of Ron Paul, "I have never met anyone who did not support our troops. Sometimes, however, we hear accusations that someone or some group does not support the men and women serving in our Armed Forces. But this is pure demagoguery, and it is intellectually dishonest."
So that is a "no, I have never served my country?" I figured as much. Thanks for quoting my words. They don't apply to me though. I've served my country, as has generations of my family served their country. We did so, so that people like you could have the right to sit around on a forum all day bitching, whining, moaning and complaining about their country. As anyone can copy a photo and paste it as their own, here's a quick photo I took from our family history album. Just wanted to clear up the slander you made towards my family of 250 years ago.
Then why did you respond to them? I think we already covered that we both have family members who have served. Are you claiming your family member's make you more righteous than me, and in that case, more righteous than anyone else? You see, the problem with fighting for a Republic is that you're fighting for my right to bitch, whine, moan and complain. I suppose they didn't tell you that when you enlisted. It's that crazy thing called "The Constitution" that you swore to protect and uphold. Too bad you didn't take your oath seriously. Where did I slander your family?
To clear up the assertion you made. I'm not talking about your family. I was asking if you have served. You've already confirmed you haven't by avoiding the question three times. I don't need to ask it again. You've already answered. My only claim is to counter your assertion. My family has served this country for generations. I'm proud of that, I'm proud I served and I'm proud my son is serving. As such, you can see why I take issue with those that have never served, but sit around here bitching, whining, moaning and tearing their country down. I enlisted right out of high school in the early 80s. I had no idea there were people out there like you that tear our country down every day. That was just unheard of back then, especially where I came from. Apparently you were raised differently. I took everything about serving my country seriously. I didn't steal my freedoms off the backs of others so I could sit around tearing my country down every day. I don't have to hide behind the Constitution for protection. In the post you made at 10:49 pm.
Actually, it was an assertion that you made. But it's been well established that you like to answer and reference your own posts. Okey dokey smokey. I am proud of you, your family and your son for your collective service. I hope he stays safe. And that's an honest statement. I'm taking issue with the people who bitch, whine, moan and tear me down, for their "perception" that I am bitching, whining, moaning and tearing our country down. This idea will absolutely blow your mind, but in America, we're allowed to debate and disagree. We're allowed to have alternate views and criticize the government. This is not a totalitarian state (yet). Our freedoms of speech, religion etc. are what makes this country great, not our military conquests or the size of our empire. This country is great because it has a tolerant soul, and individuals are respected. Nah, pretty much the same as you. Had to walk 20 miles to school, uphill both ways. Neither rain nor sleet nor snow. Always walking around asking what we could do for our country, not what our country could do for us. You seem to tear up and mock the Constitution daily. It's a shame that members of your family fought for it, and you don't really see any value in that document, just value in who serves, and who doesn't question. Sounds a lot like an authoritarian view to me. I didn't mention your family, I compared your political views and activism to those of British Loyalists. And I stand by it. You refuse to question the government, you refuse to condemn them when they violate the rule of law, get exposed for lying, or try to circumvent the very Constitution you took an oath to protect. Please don't pull the hiding behind the service of your family members bit. You already told me previously it was unacceptable for me to do so. So that's the irony of our situation. You see me behaving like a traitor, and I see you in the same way.
I disagree here. Had you quoted it, perhaps. Not really a big issue though. Just sort of filler for the other things. Thank you. A very kind gesture. How you perceive this, though, is how I perceive when others persistently and ceaselessly attack "our" country. Where you take exception to the comments of others (that other, being for the most part me), I take exception when people tear down my country. So believe me when I say, I know *exactly* how you feel. Exactly! I know America is not perfect. I know it can and should be improved. I know Bush has fricked some things up that has pissed me off as well. I just can't stand the constant tearing down of our country. That offends me in the same manner you feel offended when I point it out. Surely there is some middle ground? I've often said that one doesn't have to support Bush to support their country. I'll never accuse you of such. Ly2 hates Bush with a passion, but he doesn't tear our country down. I won't accuse you of wanting war with Iran, for simply being aware of the horrible things they (not the people) are doing, including killing our troops. Why would it blow my mind? I have some strong opinions about certain things. Tax, the legal system, legalizing marijuana (I'm pro). I'm utterly disgusted with Congress. Increasingly it's becoming "both" sides. Still, I don't tear our country down over it. One shouldn't have to hide behind freedom of speech because they are tearing our country down. You are free to tear our country down, if that's your only purpose, but I'm also free to point it out and take issue with it. You see, freedom of speech and the Constitution works for "all" of us, not just those that need to hide behind it for protection. I only had to walk six miles. Until my 18th birthday in January of my senior year, in which I took the savings I had from working and was able to get my first loan on my birthday to buy a car. You are entitled to that unsubstantiated opinion. There is a huge difference between questioning something (ie: government) and ceaselessly attacking it, our country and our way of life with allegations. One has a period behind it. The other has a question mark. Some people are not aware of that. I perceived it as such. Ceaselessly attacking our country, lobbing false assertions and tearing it down, are not questioning the government. You refuse to condemn terrorists and their actions. I've yet to see you post anything that wasn't a ficticious claim in order to tear down our country. I remember when you tried to claim the Patriot Act was unconstitutional. I corrected that. If a part is deemed unConstitutional by a judge, then they are doing their job and as such, it's a good thing. That doesn't mean the whole Act is unConstitutional. Some people only invoke the Constitution when it pertains to protecting terrorists or shielding themselves with "freedom of speech." Quite telling. I don't have to. I've served myself. I simply cleared the notion of my family regarding the Revolutionary War. I've never seen you stand up for America or our troops. I've seen you tear it down, under the false premise of "just asking questions." Prove me wrong some time. I won't tear you down for it. You have my word.
And by your reasoning the only ones that have "served" the country are the ones that were enrolled in its military. How conservative of you.
Well I figured that since you enjoy making what are clearly black and white statements about the political views of people that do or don't serve in the military for their country that that you might enjoy a general assumption tossed back at you. And I think that I was right.
I'm always grateful for your informative posts, Chant. Remember to study hard for your high school exams so you don't end up in Iraq.