News-Record.com

I will come back to this after I have counted to 1000. To question my patriotism because I have never bought into this crap is BS.

So I will leave it for now as to only say Wayne you need to put down that glue you are sniffing because your brain seems to be fried enough.

It is VERY UNPATRIOTIC to blindly follow an administration into war for the sake of not wanting to rock the boat. Not to mention very STUPID.

I will continue to show my patriotism by voicing my opposition to this Iraq-mire.

Oh yea, about allowing Iraq to be turned into a terrorist breeding ground or whatever, isn't it already??

Peace without liberty is slavery.

I'm with you Hayes. There's more stupid in that letter than I care to deal with on a Saturday.

Seeing as how public support for the war has fallen drastically in recent months, is it possible that even Republicans are now second guessing the war?? Dare we call them "unpatriotic"?? And can you please show proof that President Bush did not lie about the cause of the war? The premise of war was because of WMD's. Not freedom or liberation. The information he presented to us turned out to be false. Therefore, he lied. It doesn't matter where the information came from. If he presented it as fact, then he needs to be held responsible.

Iraq will never be free. Not without the United States there to babysit them. From the minute we pull out of there, the country will begin to tear itself apart from its rampant factionalism (the Sunnis, the Shiites, the Kurds, several more). Those who are this war's strongest proponents have yet to comprehend something: that Iraq is still an *artificial* country, created by the British from the burned-out remains of the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War I. Exactly as they did when they put together Yugoslavia. And the only reason THAT country didn't commit suicide so readily is because Marshal Tito wasn't the kind of man who would hesitate to point a gun at anyone causing trouble. That's the very same role that Saddam Hussein had in Iraq (which isn't a defense of him at all). And now the United States has become just like Tito and Saddam. We didn't have to buy this mess, but our idiot "leaders" wanted it. And now we're all going to have to pay for it. Not that the warhawks will actually complain of course: it's easy to root and cheer for a war when you're safely ensconsced behind a keyboard, far and away from sullying one's hands with REAL fighting.

By the way, ten U.S. Marines died yesterday from a roadside bomb in Fallujah. That's ten more meaningless deaths to add to the warhawk's bodycount. Ten lives that could have had far greater purpose and merit than perishing for no obvious reason whatsoever. But the warhawks have their war, that's "their" president who won the election, they don't have to do any fighting on their own... so of course their consciences are clear of the whole matter.

Soulless mongrels, all of them.

"it's easy to root and cheer for a war when you're safely ensconsced behind a keyboard, far and away from sullying one's hands with REAL fighting."

It's also easy to spew your drivel when you're safely ensconsced behind a keyboard, far and away from sullying one's hands with REAL fighting.

Ever talk with any of the returning soldiers directly knightstuff? I have spoken with many, including church members, a few family members of friends, and some clients, the ones I spoke with are very postive about the efforts and sacrifices they are making and sick & tired of the Cindy Sheehan mentality you must proudly espouse. So keep up the doom and gloom, it's typical, it's predictable and it's expected.

IMO, folks of your ilk want us to lose this war, because losing is a defeat for Bush. Bad news for America is good news for the left. Stay tuned for the upcoming Iraqi elections.

Dan, as a pacifist (you know, you like to note it for me), I abhor war (ANY WAR)!

It seems trite to me that the only comment made that was addressed concerned "sitting behind a keyboard..." So, what about the other things mentioned by theknightshift or Mark?

Those uncommented remarks have too much merit and validity to criticize. And then to subliminally attack the writers is simply irresponsible. Address points, not people!

And for the initial LTE writer to even suggest (and Dan as well) that I am unpatriotic is, in Hayes' words, BS! I love America and should not even have to say it like this. Just because of the aforementioned, does not mean that I have to love everything that America does. And this time I definitely do not!

When will the senseless slaughter of Americans end? When will our leaders come to realize that we have been lured into an irrational situation and that we MUST STOP and bring our young soldiers home? IT MUST START NOW, with EVERYONE SPEAKING OUT!

Shalom

Give the knightshift credit Dan, he went through a whole rant and never called Bush by name. A Dr.would call this remarkable progress.
Knightshift, those 'sullying' their hands with the REAL fighting are there by volunteering for the armed forces,something you lack the capacity to comprehend. You have the freedom to rant thanks to those who have the balls to 'sully' their hands fighting.

Go count to 1000.

They volunteered to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. Not to become the unwitting pawns of "leaders" who never even served in the military to begin with.

But being a neocon, you probably woulnd't understand what the Constitution of the United States means even if I had three weeks to explain it to you. Neo-conservatives have already demonstrated they loathe everything that noble document - and her signers - ever stood for.

Ignore neocon Chris. He couldn't serve anyway. He was ineligible before "don't ask don't tell".

Darryl my friend, stay within the correct blog. I didn't mention you here, that was in the Carter blog. The last time I checked the N&R didn't require me to comment on the entirety of a given letter or it's responses. I thought I was free to comment on whatever I wanted, have the rules changed?

Where is the personal attack patrol? I have been attacked by knightshift's white knight in shining armor. lol lol

Dan, learn to comprehend what is written! I was making reference to something. Most reading this should comprehend that point.

After one sentence, I commented regarding this letter. I never specifically mentioned the letter from yesterday directly. It was referenced without naming it. Therefore, address what is written here, not somewhere else.

Shalom

Wayne,

I think it is great that the editor gave you a forum to express what many Americans, including military families , are feeling. These twerps such as Darryl are like fleas on a dog. A good bath of truth will drown them. Semper Fi !

I have counted to 1000 and have chosen to return and respond indirectly to waynes letter.

But first marionWORMer when you refer to many apparently you are not refering to the current polls about how people feel about the war. Update your numbers.

What I dont understand and get frustrated by is the constant attack about who is the most patriotic or intelligent here. Sorry but being for this war doesnt make one more patriotic than someone who doesnt and having a different opinion to yours doesnt make the other an idiot. I
have supported all wars fought since my birth with the exception of this war and as a person who studied history and wars I support most of the wars we were involved in the past. I believe in this country and its principles and would never do something as burn the flag. But I never felt my patriotism for this country dropped because I dont support why we are in Iraq and to have it questioned by anyone is WRONG.

CNN International had an interesting piece on the homefront. It interviewed families,mainly from military towns who had different views of the war. Some supported the reasons at first but are now against the war while some were against it at first but now support it. One father who lost his only son DID NOT support the war at first and still hates the reason for being there BUT feels with great passion we must finish the job now and he was extremely angered when he saw his son name being used by anti-war activists. What really came out in this that even on military bases there is no one common feeling but ONE.

The ONE question and feeling that all shared was this: Will my son/daughter/father/mother/husband/wife make it home alive or must I plan a funeral? They didnt care about making Bush look good or making the democrats look right.

Sorry Dan but when I see the bad news in Iraq I dont do a celebration dance on Bushes image; americans are dying for this bad news and there is nothing to celebrate. Bu it does prove what I felt about us going into this war and more so that I dont need to apologize for my opposition to it.

But let me ask I question. Lets move beyond why or should we be there and lets look at the strategy. Apparently we are unpatriotic if we even question how this war is fought.
So my question is:How many americans must die before my question of our current strategy, I strategy is see as flawed, is no longer seen as unpatriotic but seen as a legitimate question? And also many say our questioning of this war is killing americans but how many americans soldiers would be alive today or would not die if we had a better strategy or did it right going in?Isnt supporting a flawed strategy killing americans just as much as questioning this war?

Here's what I want for Christmas:

I want the rhetoric to morph into a legit' degate about what the hell we're doing.

The original letter calls un-patriotic those that oppose the current "strategy"

There is evidence anti-war movement will embolden an enemy.

While ehe media does exaggerate the negatives - our so-called leaders are equally guilty of not pointing out the positives.

Pointing out positives are individual soldiers (who have credibility) and the talk-radio wackos who equally spread overt 1/2 truths.
How does one distinguished which is which?

The President and crew may or may not be guilty of outright lying, but they are clearly guilty of spreading overt 1/2 truths - and we cannot distinguished what is what.

It is not clear that premature withdraw will enable terrorists to will take over Iraq.

It is clear that premature withdraw will embolden terrorists to wreak havoc on the world.

It is not clear what "premature" really means.
It is not clear what "withdrawl" really means. The President and crew have done a terrible job of helping the American public understand. They have not won the support, and they are more guilty then the fickle American public.

The Taliban may no longer rule Afghanistan - but they are still there, and arguably their strength is growing or at least not being diminshed.

It is unclear the terrorists are a rat trap, if they will perpetually fail to topple any new Iraqi government, or start a civil war, or any other assertion.

Iraq may be a beacon of hope for some Arabs, but the model being promoted there by America is not a universal Arab desire.

We removed Saddam, but there was more stability in Iraq with him - note stability is not always better than alternative nowns. Iraqis are not enjoying the freedoms they were promised. Most are hanging in there in the hope for hope.

The President and crew hold the responsibility for this war, and they may be losing the debate.

They first screwed up by going in half-cocked and they have committed huge mistakes - but they have lolly-gogged for two years until the whole thing is running away from them. Now, all they seem to care about is next years elections.

The "opposition" may have screwed up by accepting the flag-waving half-cocked plan, but they are now making a huge mistakes by their current flag-waving half-cocked non-plan - which is only caring about is next years elections.

Politicians are weak-kneed. Hello ....
America is getting royally screwed by two non-leadership partys.

Now let’s look at these Comments:

Hayes is counting to 10 – make that 1000, but ultimately is frustrated by the lack of meaningful debate.

Harper thinks it’s silly to blindly follow an administration – what a concept. Reverse the situation: Suppose Clinton had gone half-cocked after Al Qaida – after three years what would the Republican Party be saying?

Mark wants to discuss overt lying vs. selective truth telling vs simple ignorance vs politics.

Knightshift thinks we need to review the Constitution of the United States and come home now, letting Iraq split into three, assuming that will rid the world of the Islamic fundamentalist threat.

Dan blames Knightshift for losing the war.

Darryl want’s us all to get along.

Neocon and Worm support our troops, but give a free pass and blind support to Bush.

JDR is also frustrated by the lack of meaningful debate - and is looking for a meaningful strategy to rid the world of the very-real Islamic fundamentalist movement

Hayes, my point is that in the liberal press and with liberal politicians bad news for America is good news for them. Not just Iraq, but the economy and other events. They think bad news will make voters switch over to their side. The problem is they have no message, plan, or agenda other than whining about the evils of Bush. They are working on their "plan" and will announce it in January I believe. I don't have to work on a plan for the principles in which I believe for petes sake.

The Democratic party, which has been overtaken by the far left, stands for higher taxes, more spending, withdrawal in Iraq, abortion on demand (even for a teenage girl without parental notification), removal of God from the public square (Happy "Holidays" by the way), government controlled healthcare, just to name a few. They can't be truthful and run on these beliefs as they will lose, so they need to cloak these beliefs into something more palatible.

You on the other hand are a level headed person so I'm sure you don't relish the deaths of our soldiers.