I think many people got hung up with the word "Immediate", because many people are clueless how dug-in we are over there, particularly in the Green Zone.

Here's a fasciniating report on the Green Zone - it doesn't look anything like you think it does:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/warriors/view/

Why did Murtha vote against pulling our troops out of Iraq last week?

When we cut and ran in Viet Nam the Congs stayed over there, my guess is the terrorist are going to follow us home!!!

The proposal voted on was not Murtha's proposal. It was from Congressman Hunter (Republican). This proposal only said the "immediate withdrawal of troops". This is not what Murtha was proposing so of course he voted against it. Even Hunter did.

Hooray for Congressman Murtha! A true hero who actually went when called, unlike Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Cheney's bravado rings so shallow when one realizes he received four or five deferments. The military respects Murtha because the Pennsylvania Congressman is one of them and because he knows firsthand what being put in harm's way really means. The right villified President Clinton for being a "Draft Dodger" but his plan in the Balkans worked without the loss of ONE American soldier! The Bush/Cheney team wanted to go into Iraq before 9/11 and so they made the intelligence fit the scenario by cherry picking. Oh, and before someone says anything, the President and Congress did NOT share the same intelligence.
The NY Times' Frank Rich exposes that lie in his most recent column.

Hugh, you are as silly as many in Congress - but they get paid for ripping you off, and you seem to relish their folly.

No James, It's more like I enjoy seeing people who run their mouths get called to the mat.

Get us out of Iraq! Get us out of Iraq!..OK, lets put it to a vote. What! You vote against getting our troops out of Iraq! 403-3?

Suck egg, two faced hypocrites.

I corresponded for a year with a Marine Major sent to Iraq to train Iraqi soldiers. He is a career Marine trained to fight and follow orders. In one letter he told me about the difficulty of keeping Iraqi soldiers in training. He said many joined to have a job and a paycheck. Absenteeism was a big problem. When many went home on leave, they didn't return.

The following is from him when I had written about a hurricane.

Can you believe I actually miss a good tropical storm to lock the family in the house and give us a little quality time together? Besides, this part of the world hasn't seen rain since early May.

Busy days here and being much closer to Baghdad we're reminded how treacherous the security situation remains in this country. This past week has been particularly unsettling to the people and the coalition forces. I'm beginning to think that Moqtada al Sadr would make for a better matryr than spokesperson. I fear for his type when the US and others are long gone and the Iraqis alone are here to defend themselves.

One observation I've made and please share this with your students, it's one of learned behavior. If you take a country and oppress the population for some 35 years, they lose their will to oppose anything. They literally will let the will of one man, be he good or bad, dictate the course of millions of lives. They are so used to being led by the nose, they don't even recognize it when they are being manipulated. In fact, they have comfort in manipulation and in many ways crave it. The study of our own revolution refutes the assumption many scholars have made that only 30% of the American citizenry supported a break from the King. Even if this were true, look at what those 30% gave the world. It will take another 35 years for the Iraqis to shake off their hangover from Saddam and begin to think for themselves. I honestly believe this.

I agree it's time to bring the troops home. We really didn't win the war. All that we've really done is to contain the enemy. After 50 years let's bring the troops home from Korea. And, let's bring them home from Europe, the Middle East, and the Pacific as well. We can redeploy all of those troops along our borders to protect us in when we go into isolation. Maybe they can better be used to prevent the terrorists from entering our country.

Nobody seems to have any idea who or what the enemy is in Iraq. Nobody has given us a picture of what Iraq could look like when all of the killing is over. So we have no understanding of where we started and no idea where we are going (except that Saddam Hussein has been deposed).
I wonder if Saddam would have left peacefully for a mere $20 billion, and, for another $20 billion we could have sponsored elections (if these were the goals in the first place).
The trouble is that the war in Iraq is a moving target, and the logic to continue our presence is changing to match the catch phrase du jour. We have a "cut and run" policy already: "cut" our social programs and "run" up our debt.

And while we play "arm-chair" soldier/general, people continue to die, NEEDLESSLY!

US military forces should have NEVER been deployed to Iraq! Therefore, they should be withdrawn post haste!

Shalom

Murtha's past support for the war in Iraq has been greatly overstated. He has, to say the least, a long, ecentric and checkered history on this war, which he opposed before he voted for it, only to call for a pullout. Talk about hedging your bets in true John Kerry fashion. Seems like the Democrats have found a flak as spokesman for national security.

When Murtha spoke out recently the Bush hating MSM began lionizing him . The majors were lapping up his irresponsible cut and run proposal while spinning in unison his aboutface as a damaging blow against the war. This was a manufactured story !

Those who have worn the uniform are not immune from a charge of being unpatriotic , if at a time of war they aid and comfort our enemy by accusing the President, without any evidence whatsoever, of lying .

It is unbelieveable that some would equate disagreeing with Bush as "unpatriotic". This is all the Bush/Cheney people can come up with---attack the patriotism of any critics.
The Viet Nam war protestors, no matter how dreadful they seemed at the time, have been vindicated by history. Some holdouts are still around and would take issue with that statement, but I for one believe that we accomplished nothing there other than keeping multi national corporations profitable. We lost tens of thousands and for what? Not even cheap oil. Of course many of our textile jobs are landing there now.

If the mainstream media will print it you will be seeing Sen. Lieberman's recommendation on our position in Iraq tomorrow. Hannity and Combs will be taling about this tonight. Mr. Lieberman hits the bull's eye.

Here is a guy that does what he thinks is right regardless of his policical affiliation. If we had more like him around, we'd be better off.

Murtha was sent out to deliver the 'pull out of Iraq' message by the leader in the house,Nancy Pelosi. They wanted to see if it would fly. It didn't. Had the public reaction overwhelmingly supported his proposal,we would have seen every democrat in the house vote 'yea' on the proposal last week. As it turned out the lack of public support for the withdrawal of troops out of Iraq made the democrats' stones shrink considerably. They were just testing the waters and when they were given the opportunity to 'put up or shut up'... well,we all know what they did.
All imho of course!

neocon, go back and read the bill that was proposed. When that can be comprehended reasonably, then it may be ascertained why the bill failed. Until then...be careful what is stated about that bill. It could come back to "bite" one.

Shalom

DemonDeacon,

Have you no sense of history. Vietnam protestors vindicated.? That is obscene. Ever hear of the Khmer Rouge Communists in Cambodia and the 3 million humans they slaughtered after the U.S. pulled out of Viet Nam. I suggest that you read the " Destructive Generation : Second Thoughts About the '60s " by Peter Collier and David Horowitz.

It is not unpatriotic to oppose the war but it is to say the President lied when he didn't. That straw man won't hunt. Wise up. And if you must comment at least be coherent.

Help an old man out, Ms. Marion. What is the connection between US withdraw from Vietnam and the Khmer Rouge?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmer_Rouge

Bingo "Rocky"!
Seems Dean Wormer's wife did not live during Viet Nam and has no idea that we were never allowed (by law) to be in Cambodia and Laos. (That said, doesn't mean we did NOT go in.) Going in to crush the Khmer Rouge would have been a much more noble war than taking sides in a civil war, but unfortunately Viet Nam was such a disaster that no one had the stomach for it. In the beginning, it did not appear to resemble Viet Nam, but as of late, the similarities are eerie.

My last sentence, above, refers to Bush's war and its similarities to Viet Nam.

OK, Demon Deacon, you've been repeating yourself remarking about the similarities with Vietnam (it's one word, not two). For the uninformed, list for us those similarities that you find so eerie, and then excplain them to us so that the meaning will be perfectly clear.

“The Viet Nam war protestors, no matter how dreadful they seemed at the time, have been vindicated by history.”

Vindicated? How may I ask? Vindicated by proving that the North Vietnamese had no intention of following the peace accords they signed. By proving that doing a little protesting and having Hanio Jane photo-op would override America’s loyalty to our friends and allies? By the wanton abandonment of the people of South Vietnam to murderous and brutally oppressive communism? If the protestors where somehow “vindicated by history” how come millions of boat people fled that country and many dying in the process. You call that vindication?

"We lost tens of thousands and for what?"
To allow communism to spread throughout the area and for millions of people to be slaughtered. You know, it wasn't our concern, why the heck should be care about the people of Vietnam? I’m so glad for the protestors as I’m sure the South Vietnamese people are. After all the communism North Vietamese people are so wonderful, isn’t that what we were told my Hanio Jane? They treated are POWs with such care. What a friggin joke.

Thank you Trish. Deekin and "Off his Rocker" have a distorted view of the truth and history. Our pullout from SE Asia led to the bloodbath in Cambodia, period !

Well I still fail to see the connection.

The timing was right - we left 'nam in '75 and Pol Pot came into full glory, but here's my understanding - please jump in to correct me:

The gooks were using 'nam as a staging area, and eventually Nixon got tired of it and secretly bombed 'em for three years, killing 50 to 100 thousand Cambodians in the process.

During that time, the Khmer Rouge acquired de facto control, and in 1975 - about the same time we pulled out of 'nam - the US backed leader of Cambodia was replaced by our Number 1 Man, Mr. Pol Pot.

I often tell my kids this story (I think it's true): The Khmer Rouge thought those who wore glasses could read. If you could read, you were educated. If you were educated, you were a threat to their power and were therefore quickly excecuted.

OK - so back to the background:

Clearly they were a bunch of Commies, many of the leaders educated in France and early members of the French Communist Party.

Clearly a couple million folks died there though very brutal means.

==

Now here's the question:

Did The Killing Fields happen because Jane sat on a NLF anti-aircraft gun, OR because we had been in the area for over a decade and hadn't really made significant progress in winning the hearts and minds of the people, replacing Communism with Democracy?

OK - now let's talk 'nam-post-US.

We pulled out and things quickly deteriorated to famine conditions. Lot's of folks jumped on rafts to float to the US.

Some say "after the collapse of the Saigon government in 1975, Vietnam stabilized, while Cambodia descended into genocidal chaos". Vietnam'ers living in Cambodia were slaughtered by Pol Pot and his buddies, partially in retaliation for 'nam's refusal to give Cambodia some disputed territory, partly in an attempt to spread Pol Pots vision across Cambodia's eastern border.

This is, I think, what Trish calls "the wanton abandonment of the people of South Vietnam to murderous and brutally oppressive communism". Pol Pot was a Really Bad Commie - but he was not a Vietnam'er.

Or maybe it's this: By 1978, the US and China were growing buddy-buddy, while the US and the USSR were growing increasingly hostile. Cambodia was a key player in the dispute, and 60 to 90 thousand more died in the Sino-Vietnamese Way.

Since then, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam has entered the world as a reasonable place. In In 1986 they gave-up the commie economic model. Recently they have started providing free health care to all under the age of 6 (something we still do not have in the US).

The same question: Did all this happen because Jane sat on a NLF anti-aircraft gun, OR because we had been in the area for over a decade and hadn't really made significant progress in winning the hearts and minds of the people, replacing Communism with Democracy?

My opinion, fwiw:

Quickly slaughter any bastards you see, but know that it's hard to tell bastards from just plain people trying to find some water.

Provide lots of water pumps in the small villages where the seeds of bastardness are sown.

Know that some bastards have yellow skin and slanty eyes, some wear a towel on their head, and some wear three-peice suits and speak English well. Quickly slaughter any bastards you see.

It's the circle of life.

"Did The Killing Fields happen because Jane sat on a NLF anti-aircraft gun, OR because we had been in the area for over a decade and hadn't really made significant progress in winning the hearts and minds of the people, replacing Communism with Democracy?"
First off, let us be clear, Marion said nothing about Jane, I did. Now to your question, not my expertise. However you and Demon keep mentioning “secret” however from the link you provided: “When the U.S. Congress suspended funds for bombing Khmer Rouge positions and limited aid to Cambodia in 1973, the Khmer Rouge made sweeping gains in the country. By 1975, with the Lon Nol government running out of ammunition, it was clear that it was only a matter of time before the government collapsed.”. So doesn’t seem so secret if the US Congress suspended funds. Also from your link, it seems like with no guns there was no way to win. So yes in my opinion our pull-out had a lot to do with it.

“We pulled out and things quickly deteriorated to famine conditions. Lot's of folks jumped on rafts to float to the US.”

Because of famine? James have you ever talked to a Vietnamese person? I assure you I have. The most memorable one was a young guy. I was quite young myself and we worked together. I asked him how did he get to NC. I was floored when he told me the story of his families struggle to escape and how they were boat people. It had nothing to do with famine. For you to say that it was because of famine is wrong. As a matter of fact, you should go visit a Vietnamese community and ask them. I know that during the elections (and even during Hurricane Katrina coverage) many were interviewed. I remember during the elections many didn’t really care for Bush but stated no way would they vote for Kerry because of his Vietnam protesting.

“This is, I think, what Trish calls "the wanton abandonment of the people of South Vietnam to murderous and brutally oppressive communism". Pol Pot was a Really Bad Commie - but he was not a Vietnam'er.”
Re-read my post James. This is what I said: “Vindicated? How may I ask?… By the wanton abandonment of the people of South Vietnam to murderous and brutally oppressive communism?” Where did I mention Pol Pot? I even went so far as to state that the North Vietnamese had no intention of following the peace accords, which they didn’t. So let me be quite clear so you do not misread what I wrote. Although it seems that you and Demon have a wonderful picture of the North Vietnamese people, in truth they were brutal and they slaughtered millions of South Vietnamese when they took over.

“Or maybe it's this”
Or maybe this, contrary to belief, the North Vietnamese weren’t nice people. They decided that they didn’t want any political dissent so they decided the easiest way to silence political dissent was to slaughter to opposition.

“In 1986 they gave-up the commie economic model. Recently they have started providing free health care to all under the age of 6 (something we still do not have in the US).”
Aww in one sentence you say they gave up the commie model, but in the next why they are offering socialist medicine. Here is an idea, Cuba offers free health care also so why don’t you move down there and let us know what a wonderful place it is to live.

“because we had been in the area for over a decade and hadn't really made significant progress in winning the hearts and minds of the people, replacing Communism with Democracy?”

Sorry I was under the impression that the South Vietnamese people were on our side, fighting for democracy or better yet fighting to prevent communism from taking over. I wasn’t aware they actually wanted communism to begin with.

The same question: Did all this happen because Jane sat on a NLF anti-aircraft gun, OR because we had been in the area for over a decade and hadn't really made significant progress in winning the hearts and minds of the people, replacing Communism with Democracy?

JDR, this argument is pure BS and you know it and you know that I know it for we have talked privately about it. So get off the BS wagon JDR and make some valid point instead of attempting to add BS to an already overflowing crapper. You know the connection as well as most of those who have been around that long and especially those who were involved in SEA during Viet Nam and afterward as well. It ain't gonna fly JDR and I ain't gonna let it. Good try though my friend!

AS to the Viet Nam protesters being vindicated. By Whom, more of the same kind of mislead fools who now put out the same old BS of GET OUT NOW. I dang sure have never vindicated them and never will.

Iraq becoming more simular to Iraq was a statement made somewhere up the line. Yep, it is. You have another small group of loudmouth know nothings screaming loud enough to attract a small number of knownothing politicians or a group that will do anything for a vote and they are trying to convince the entire country that this small group of knownothings are smarter than the Generals on the ground so we should get out now. There in is the only simularity. The worse case would be if the knownothings in Washington can stonewall needed domestic legislation long enough and blame it on Iraq that the politicians fear enough for a vote for re-election that we cut and run for the sake of politics.

MRP: I'll have to re-read some tonight ... and I confess to delibrately mixing metaphores as well as Trish and Marion comments ... but right now: no backing down: "winning the hearts and minds through democracy" is the lastest Bush/Cheney/Rummy/Rove strategy

Trish and Marion:

The secret bombing of Cambodia ... are you seriously questioning it's secrecy?

I did not intend to connect famine to boat folk. My understanding is most boat people were already semi-americanized and gave up everything to come here. Those that remained were for a while in a very bad place, including famine.

In 1986, they started moving to a market economy. In 2004, they anounced free health care to the young. Spin that anyway you want - they are just facts.

Did the US fail to stop the spread of Communism? We sure did fail.

Did the actual withdraw of the US from 'nam cause the spread of Communism? You can rightfully argue pulling out created a big vacumn.

Did this US failure allow some wacky Commies to wipe out a few million folks? Yep.

My point about "wanton abandonment" was that Pol Pot did one hell of a lot of killing. When the NVA came south, they killed a lot of euphemistic American-sympathizes, and I think MRP once spoke of genecide of one group (I looked them up and it seems they outcasts that weren't liked by anyone anyway, and they were probably doomed no matter what). I guess I'm looking for evidence that the NVA came in and killed like Pol Pot did - and I've not yet seen that evidence. Please advise.

Did Jane and her Hippy Comrades, in alliance with Dan Rather (it was Walter then) and the rest of the MSM cause the withdraw?

I say no - it was a failure of leadership.

- a failure of leadership to listen to the Military (a military success was actually possible in 'nam)

I personally think a strong military presence is needed in Iraq, but it needs to look alot different than it does now, and ultimately a traditional military success will not be possible - unless we're willing to occupy the entire region - a position taken by Neocons, but not greated warmly by more traditional conservatives like me and bitterly opposed by bleeding heart liberals (which I am wrongly accused of being), as well as a few hundred million young wild and crazy muslims.

- a failure of leadership to provide the American people great reasons for staying - which is the same problem we're having now - but in 'nam it was "foreigners" that were in the Killing fields, failure in the current endeavor will lead to Killing Fields in Kansas.

btw - I do not think it socialism to offer free health care to the young .. It is good conservative economics.

As an example, if we provided prenatal care, the costs of that would be offset many times by the prevention of emergency service or extrodinary care to those that should have had prenatal care but could not afford it. It is no less and no more than a really good return on investment.

Yes JDR the NVA did come in and kill the indiginous people and many of those who had aided the US. Those who fled , fled into Cambodia and Laos where they were killed by the folks there who also were anti-US. It is well documented JDR and I have also told you about it as well as others . I have refered to it in these blogs on several occassions.

Mr. Produce,

You are usually on the righteous side of most arguments at this site and this is no exception. What is it it with " Off his Rocker-fella ". Do you actually know this cretin. His invincible ignorance of history and his gulibility are either feigned or most likely based on his terminal Bush derangement syndrome. As I suggested earlier he really does need to read the " Second Thoughts " book by Collier and Horowitz. ( and seek help or medication )

Trish has it together and makes valuable contributions to this discourse unlike Deacon and JDR who, like you say, simply sling the move-on talking points BS.

JDR,

Have no fear I have not left the battle! LOL I didn't have time to get to your post,questions or comments today. I will try to respond to you tomorrow. Have a good day!

Hey Marion - why not provide some basis for your crap. Sling it, OK - but there is a saying in technical world where I earn my living:

Without data, all you have is an opinion.

I think I'm pretty good about providing back-up data. I will not stoop to put-up or shut-up, but how about don't be a worm.

Sorry for the nastiness - but really ...

Trish provides a basis for her views, she and I read the same stuff and walk away with different views but at least she offers more than a good vocabulary. Please follow her lead.

"His invincible ignorance of history and his gulibility are either feigned or most likely based on his terminal Bush derangement syndrome."

Nice rhetoric - but that's all it is.

"ignorance of history". Show me. I said the withdraw from Vietnam was not the cause of the slaughter of all those people, but I back it up: granting the mid 70's withdrawal created a vacuum, but we quit not because of Jane or them-hippies, but due to the failure of DC leadership - starting with Johnson and continuing through Nixon and little-man Ford.

I challenge you again: Provide a meaningful dissent beyond an O'Reilly: "Oh, That's your opinion".

Terminal Bush derangement syndrome? I don't think Bush is deranged. I think he is an honest guy who is clueless, willing to be led by shortsighted asses using at least one win-election-at-all costs slimy adviser.

Here's some basis: In another letter today, someone blogs about the Branch Davidian disaster in Waco. Here's what happened, using my often unusual [but always with a basis] slant:

Some highly charismatic guy developed a cult following, and he was doing illegal things. He often came to town. Janet Reno was the new Attorney General, and being new and arguably clueless, she took the advise of un-wise men and rather than simply pick the guy up when he can in town for groceries, she opted to do a siege and eventual burn-down.

Here's another identical example: The MOVE group in Phila.: A charismatic guy develops a cult following, and was doing illegal things. W. Wilson Goode was the new Mayor, and being new and arguably clueless, he took the advise of un-wise men and rather than simply pick the guy up when he went out for groceries, he opted to do a siege and eventual burn-down of a city block.

Here's another similar example: Wacko Islamic Charismatic men develop cult followings, and do illegal things. G.W. Bush is the new President, and being new and arguably clueless, he took the advice of un-wise men and rather than simply finish out in Afghanistan, he opts to do the city of Baghdad.

I don't think I ever said he lied - I do often accuse him of being clueless and led by the nose.

Here’s another true story that expresses my thoughts on what we should have done about Saddam:

===

When I was in 5th grade, some friends and I came across a yellow jacket nest. Thinking we were riding the world of a menace, we all grabbed branches with leaves, and started flailing away at the bee hole in the ground – after all, we had shock and awe technology: the branches were broad, and we could swat a wide path to take out whole bunch at a time.

Needless to say, we were stung everywhere, and one would think we were old enough to know better. A small amount of well-placed insecticide would have done so much more.

I think that's what happening in Iraq. The UN investigators were the well-place insecticide, an effective way to go. The lack of WMD's is an empty vindication. My pain comes from knowing what Ayman al-Zawarhihi, one of Bin Ladin's top "terrorists" said with glee upon USA’s entry into Iraq: "The Americans are facing a delicate situation ... If they withdraw, they lose everything, if they stay, they will bleed to death." History will not be kind to this era of the USA, and I fear we are in for decades of horror.

===

P.S. I wrote this a couple years ago as part of a 4 page letter to a kid in my Church. Looking over that entire letter just now, I would not change much - I think my "ignorance of history" has weathered the test of time fairly well. Maybe I'll post the letter here.

Here's the whole long letter - exposing myself more than most do in this blog.

I'm probably more scared now of the Terrorist Movement, and I'm liking Condi - but I find myself remarkably consistant over the past couple years. Go me.

==

Josh, this is for you. Originally it was going to be a letter to the editor, but it has evolved beyond that. These are my thoughts (no one else’s) on direction of our country, based on my experiences, readings, discussions, researches, and other life learnings. Frankly, I am concerned about that direction. This ended up a bit long, but I hope you read this with some fraction of the care in which it was written.

You must not accept this 100%; to do so would be a huge mistake. Equally wrong is to reject this 100%. The idea is to plant some alternate seeds. I can tell you with absolute certainty that no one presently on Earth has all the answers. My hope is you develop your own thoughts, pursue your dreams and have experiences, nurtured by some individual readings, and inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Wednesday is Church night, and last night found me queued with fellow believers for a light supper before the main course of fellowship and faith. Immediately behind me was one of our church youth, a bright young man I’ll call Josh. Josh spoke to the grown-up just in front of me, stating he had “more of those bumper stickers”. It was obvious the young man was looking for encouragement from the other adult, in exchange for youthful enthusiasm.

Having been put in the literal middle of their conversation, I asked “what stickers”. Josh said I would not be interested, a hard reminder that my love of country looks different from that of too many friends, workmates, and churchgoers. I have lost friends over my concern and subsequent outspokenness over what about ½ the people in this country agree is an irrational and ultimately un-winnable war in Iraq, the two-faced direction of this administration, and this election. Sadly we have wilted into a divided country.

Regardless, I asked Josh the same question I ask others: “Why Bush?” Many predictably reply “always have and always will vote Republican”, with no logic or incentive for me to understand. Most fearful was the lady on the Sean Hannity show (I listen to both the left and the right), who said her news came exclusively from Sean and Rush and she could not believe how uninformed most Americans were.

I hear surprisingly few answer the “Why Bush?” question with any reasoned basis, and those that do say morality, character, tax cutting, helping business, or that Bush is The Man for national security.

Josh answered "The War". I then asked why he thought there were 2300 insurgent attacks this past month, and he answered "Because America is there". Well I told you Josh was a smart kid.

I like our President; we would be good neighbors. He has high morals - goodness of human action and character - assuming we overlook things like his viscous attacks on Max Cleland. Dick Cheney, vice-president and second-in-command, has been including in his standard campaign speeches the threat of terrorist attacks on American soil should he not be re-elected. Terrorism is partially defined as coercion and intimidation to advance political ends. Perhaps we should really be scared of Cheney, whose rhetoric is clearly uttered to coerce and intimidate Soccer Moms to advance political ends.

Now GW's a guy that by his own admission does not read newspapers, but relies on advisors like Cheney. Most distressing is the removal from his inner circle of those that do not tow the party line. This takes “for us or against us” to dangerous heights. Have you heard much from Secretary General Powell lately? It’s reported he’s now at odds with the party line. The "town meetings" Bush uses to get local news coverage are stuffed with card-carrying supporters telling him only what a wonderful job he is doing. Bush’s scowls during the first debate may be from 3-½ years of isolation, the lack of hearing other ideas, alternative opinions, and relying exclusively on highly controlled sources of information.

We can forgive Bush his many youthful transgressions, but it is bad character not to forgive others, especially when one's own military record is dental x-rays, which contrasts poorly with the shrapnel seen in another man’s leg x-ray. And don’t for a second be so naïve to suggest Bush could not blunt the Swift Boat folks with one short telephone call. Understand this: for many, politics trumps morality.

It seems to me that as a requirement for of voting for war, lawmakers should have to commit their own children to the front line. Right now, only about 2 of 535 representatives have kids even in the military, and you can be sure neither the Bush not the Kerry kid’s are in the queue. If I truly believed America was at risk, I would go first, and would expect my children and wife to follow. Putting your own family on the line seems a fair litmus test.

Read the actual transcript of Kerry’s 1971 address to Congress. Contrary to the new Swift Boat Ad, he did not say that every ‘nam vet was guilty of atrocities. A few were very clearly very guilty. Learn about Mylai, Vietnam, where more than 500 Vietnamese civilians were brutally killed. Learn about the Tiger Force, an elite secret group that caused the longest war crimes investigation of the Vietnam War.

There is a lot of true evil out there, but you need to know the USA carries no exemptions. God blesses his people, all of them, but there really are a few very bad apples - not many or even most, but a few.

In 1970, I was just a few years older than you are now, Josh. I roomed with a guy - a farm boy from the mid-west, just back from Vietnam. He had a picture of himself bayoneting a dead gook – which is what they called these slant-eyed yellow-skinned people. I asked about it - he said it was pretty common, at least with his platoon, to "practice" on these cadavers. He thought it was funny.

Few dispute Bush tax cuts are slanted to the wealthy, but I don’t know why no-one cares. Frankly, I am a conservative and dislike being horribly in debt. This country is now horribly in debt, but don’t blame it on the war. Iraq may only be $120 Billion to date, but this is going to go on for a long time, so what the heck, let’s give IBM $1.4 billion, Ford $1 billion, and General Motors $833 million … it goes on. We’ll make sure your mom will get an extra $500 so we can look in the camera and say we helped everyone. These are real numbers; I don’t think anyone really comprehends a few trillion dollars.

Call this idea radical, but I think taxes are club dues, paid to fix potholes, educate for the future, for the common good. As King, I’d tell ‘em, “If you want to enjoy the golf course then pay the greens fee and stop lobbying to weasel out of your fair share”. Let’s instead focus on saving and spending wisely. Repeated calls for simplistic tax cuts is simply my generation borrowing heavily from your future, Josh.

Tort reform falls into a similar category. If lawyers were not getting obscenely wealthy off the awards, if we required those making over a few million a year to send most of it to pay club dues (which is how it was originally set-up) many of these lawsuits simply would not happen. I’m not saying Kerry will do anything, but neither will Bush.

Read a little about the history of personal income tax. Set up in 1913, the first $3000 was tax free – which meant the overwhelming majority did not have to paid anything. Over the years, the upper brackets have gone from a high of 90% to a low of 31% -rising and falling like a camel’s hump. Meanwhile, taxes for the poorest Americans have risen slowly by steadily – like the hills of NC heading west. By the way, the largest tax cut in U.S. history came under Jimmy Carter.

One more on club dues – how much is anyone worth? Is it right that Julia Roberts should earn more for 6-months of movie making that 400 teachers combined earn for a year of teaching children? Do the math.

Taking Care Of Business. Josh, if you ever get to join the board of a large corporation, and only then, you will benefit from Bush’s business programs. Corporate welfare is a fair label, see above. I have personally experienced the pain of a job going overseas, with my tax dollars helping to make that happen. The loss of jobs in this country is very real, as is the lowering of our living standards. Don’t spout the unemployment number as success; it is a complex calculation. As a partial example, after 6 months, one is removed from fellow-worker assistance in grocery buying (where do you think the money comes from?). Given a long recession, or our current “jobless recovery” (only a partially true label), the number will naturally decline every month, regardless of who really is still looking for work.

Companies now get rid of workers by purchasing from overseas, lowering costs and adding numbers to the productivity report so the economy is officially growing. Of course, the worker who was out-sourced from Pillowtex at $18 per hour may (or may not) be able to re-enter the service field at $10 per hour, but higher productivity means higher salaries can now be paid to board members, so the average goes up and Government numbers look better. We are racing towards the third world, with a huge chasm between peoples. The worst element is that the folks in charge make the rules. Learn about the coal strikes early in the last century: company owners had coal for their home furnaces, so they boldly stated they didn’t care if most of the country froze – they had no incentive to pay workers a living wage.

Here’s one bit of pork I doubt you yet care about: Cheney and company decided industry should not have to clean up after themselves, so they quietly stopped the oil industry tax that subsidized the Superfund, which is now out-of-gas. Good thing our church is not near any of the 29 Superfund sites in North Carolina. These sites will have be cleaned eventually – using tax dollars from you, Josh.

There are a few who answer the “Why Bush?” question with single issue answers. I’m really opposed to abortion, but I thought we were a free country, and it troubles me that “Conservatives” who are supposed to believe: “The Government that governs least, governs best”, want to dictate absolutism.

I’m more uncertain about the stem cell research question, I have not looked into the issues, but I find it remarkable that Nancy “Just Say No” Reagan flip-flopped on this issue, once it became a personal tragedy to watch her husband’s brain rot, and then she learned a cure may be out there. The same is true about Rush – who for years preached a no-tolerance drug policy, until it personally effected him. Like I said above, there is nothing currently on Earth that one can be absolutely certain about.

Back to Homeland security, have you noticed we no longer fight “terrorists”? We now fight “insurgents”, who happen to be the same people President Reagan called Freedom Fighters: Proud People willing to kill and be killed to establish their own nation. It will not be a nation you would like – they don’t sell Burka’s at Talbot’s so count my wife out – but it’s their nation. Self-determination is a core American principle, and it can be argued we are hypocritically depriving these people of choice. Contrary to the simplistic rhetoric we’re hearing from this administration, they don’t hate our freedom, they hate us for limiting theirs.

Along with their own idea of freedom, they want their oil fields back, believing their God given resources are being exploited by a selfish first world energy policy that’s as old as Henry Ford the 1st and recently re-invented by Cheney’s Secret Energy Squad featuring Kenneth Lay, infamous for his integrity. One has to question the wisdom of providing $100,000 in write-offs to every US business that purchases a gas-guzzler, and exempts SUV’s from CAFÉ standards, and with enough corporate pork to inspire a bunch of books. Read a couple of those books, Josh.

Condi Rice would have more credibility with me if she did not have an oil tanker named after her, and also if her education were in Middle East politics, instead of the now-defunct Commie Russians.

Here’s another true story: When I was in, perhaps 5th grade, some friends and I came across a yellow jacket nest. Thinking we were riding the world of a menace, we all grabbed branches with leaves, and started flailing away at the bee hole in the ground – after all, we had shock and awe technology: the branches were broad, and we could swat a wide path to take out whole bunch at a time. Needless to say, we were stung everywhere, and one would think we were old enough to know better. A small amount of well-placed insecticide would have done so much more.

I think that's what happening in Iraq. The UN investigators were the well-place insecticides, an effective way to go. The lack of WMD's is an empty vindication. My pain comes from knowing what Ayman al-Zawarhihi, one of Bin Ladin's top "terrorists" said with glee upon USA’s entry into Iraq: "The Americans are facing a delicate situation ... If they withdraw, they lose everything, if they stay, they will bleed to death." History will not be kind to this era of the USA, and I fear we are in for decades of horror.

Going into Iraq with very limited international support, the UN rapidly left at the first sign of strife, with the Red Cross was right behind them. The Terrorists quickly learned that by beheading a few folks, they could cleanse their Holy Land of Filipino Occupation. Taking the lesson from that success, held a few French hostages, trying to force France into allowing school children to wear headscarves to school.

It doesn't matter what I believe - most of the Islamic world believes the US has imperialist intent on Iraq. Watch out for Saudi Arabia, because the Royal Family is viewed as corrupt old and about to die leaders, and know one knows who will replace them - the Royal Family Children have a world wide reputation for walking way outside the lines when outside the country.

Add it up, and don’t be thinking we’re safer here, because occupying Iraq has motivated a religious war against anything and everything American, including the currently targeted Iraqi puppet regime, and sooner then later, the soccer fields our American kids play upon.

I can go on, but if you’ve read this far and before you go away mad, if you think Your Government is above all this, pray your mom voted for McGovern, because in a just-released 1972 pre-election Nixon / Kissinger tape, those two concede Vietnam is "lost", but decide to stay at war to assure Nixon's Re-Election. Final score: 520-to-17. Go Tricky Dick, show steadfast consistency, stay the course. Only 561 US troops died in ‘nam that year, but that’s no consolation to the widows and mothers.

Learn also about the Tonkin Resolution, passed with limited debate and only two dissenting votes (sound familiar?), “to take all necessary measures” against … well you never worried about the Communists, but we were terrified, and that’s no joke. After 55,000 Americans died holding up the dominos, the administration stated they had “failed” to inform Congress what really happened to inspire the quagmire: malfunctioning sonar and radar equipment (sounds like flawed intelligence to me).

By the way, those nasty Communists are kicking our capitalist nation right smartly now, thank you.

You’re a bright kid, Josh, I’m sure you will make us proud once you learn to make you own decisions, but I’ll be really glad when you truly start the process: growing into your own man, based on your life experiences, including both formal and street-smart education.

Don’t forget to register for the draft – although the Patriot Act requires your High School to send the Government your name and address to assure you get a reminder, which includes a warning that it is a federal crime - a felony - to not register. I know we’ve been promised no draft, but things change, and for the third and final time, there is nothing currently on Earth that one can be absolutely certain about.

POSTSCRIPT:

“We are at war … it will get worse and worse until every man, woman, and child in this country will have to stand up and be counted and say whether they are on the side of right and freedom or if they are on the side of Saddam Hussein. I will show you documented proof that this man stands for evil and that he is evil, and that his whole life is devoted to undermining everything that you and I and Johnny and every freedom loving American … "

Sounds like George Bush is protecting our country. There are, however two flaws in the above. First, this is not George Bush, it is the sinister character Angela Lansbury played, speaking in earnest to her son, in the original Manchurian Candidate, which interestingly was pulled from circulation for 25 years because the movie depicts assassination for political purpose, and shortly after its release, JFK was shot. The second flaw is the one edit made: substituting Saddam Hussein for Thomas Jordan – the movie character who represented that which is truly good in America, but who was blacklisted as a Commie by the vast right wing conspiracy – wait, that’s confusing eras again!

Seriously –when you again hear the “Us against Them” rhetoric – remember to think it through, and we do need to stand up and be counted, but appreciate that just because your are told something, that does not make it an absolute truth.

Thank YOU!
Your words are so true and are heartfelt.
As for Bush's speech yesterday, there is an
old southern saying: "You can whitewash the outhouse, but the smell's still in there"

We will all pay dearly for this misguided foray into the middle east, and for the tax cuts that will not affect most of the bloggers who support it. It seems to me that many confuse changing minds as weakness. It shows maturity and a world view that is not myopic. Thank you again for your last post!

JDR,

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

You must love to hear yourself babble or perhaps the substance you are taking gives rise to uncontrollable outbursts of incoherent BS.

Marion:

I think by writing. You obviously don't think, but you do enjoy being ugly.

Prove me wrong, please.

To any one else:

I will retract my year ago thoughts about the terrorists only wanting to establish their own nation. I'm no longer convinced thay would settle for that.

Some might, but others won't, including Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (veteran of the Soviet-Afghan War, supported at the time by the US, of course), and his followers who are taking this to a world level.

It may still be true "they don’t hate our freedom, they hate us for limiting theirs", but it seems some of them really do just want all infidels dead - kinda a mirror image to radical neoconism.

Let's just nuc' the entire region and be done.