President Bush Issues 48 Hr. Ultimatum....Please Pray For Our Soldiers

[Anne FS]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CourtneyLiz [who is quoting someone else]:
Why do we purport to be fighting in the name of liberating the Iraqi people when we have no interest in violations of human rights—as evidenced by our habit of looking the other way when they occur in China, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Syria, Burma, Libya, and countless other countries? .....
This also is not the time to ask whether diplomacy was ever given a chance. Or why, for the last 10 years, Iraq has been our sworn archenemy, when during the 15 years preceding it we traded freely in armaments and military aircraft with the evil and despotic Saddam Hussein.
.....Afghanistan....... We sure got out of that place in a hurry once it became clear that the problems were too complex to solve with cruise missiles.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So are you saying that we should also attack China, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Syria, et al??


diplomacy not given a chance?!? Uh, 12 YEARS of diplomacy and how many UN resolutions? Count 'em up. 12 years of diplomacy.

Again, you're saying that since we once supported Hussein, who promised to bring a freely-chosen govt. to Iraq, that now that he has proven to be, as you say, 'evil and despotic', we should CONTINUE to support him and not change our ways? Oh, that's brilliant. You're mad because we are not SUPPORTING Hussein? Great.

Uh, we are not out of Afghanistan. Hello? Who said we were finished in Afghanistan? We are still hunting Al Queda there, but you know, Afghanistan has its own leader and its own govt. under Hamid Kharzai. So you are saying it was wrong for the US to let Hamid Kharzai run his own country and make his own decisions while we continue to hunt Al Queda? You're angry that we go in, and angry that we let the citizens run their own land. Perfect. What poorly written drivel (NOT by CourtneyLiz, she just posted it).

[This message was edited by Anne FS on Apr. 03, 2003 at 08:53 AM.]

[Ridin' Fool]

Clinton was not in the hot seat over bombing Iraq in '98 because, as we all know, Hussein is a nasty, evil man, so it seemed justified... and the biggest thing, Clinton did not seek UN approval! Had he done so and been shut down as GWB was, I would imagine he would have received the same flaming and criticism! As a "conservative", I supported Clinton's actions in '98.

Anyone ever seen the movie "Blackhawk Down"? I was mortified and aghast that our government allowed the event to happen, and basically left our men behind to die. It was during the Clinton administration and quite frankly, I don't remember hearing much of it at the time other than the awful seen of a dead soldier being paraded in the streets. Chilling movie that reminds you the sacrifices our military troops make in the name of liberty, for other countries!

Can't remember which page debate unfurled about whether or not we're still hunting for Al Qaeda, but here's a link to a good report...
Al Qaeda/Iraq Ties

[lilblackhorse]

well, reading that it looks like Iran is next...wonder how many wars we can fight at once?

Elippses Users Clique........
Co-Founder Occularly Challenged Equine Support Group

[Anne FS]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ridin' Fool:
Anyone ever seen the movie "Blackhawk Down"? I was mortified and aghast that our government allowed the event to happen, and basically left our men behind to die. It was during the Clinton administration and quite frankly, I don't remember hearing much of it at the time other than the awful seen of a dead soldier being paraded in the streets. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I neither saw the movie nor read the book. I watched the news. What do you mean that our government 'basically left our men behind to die'? Please explain that statement.

If the men had been 'left behind to die' casualties would have been much less. The overnight firefight was the result of trying to retrieve the crews of 2 Black Hawks, the second one trying to rescue the first, then the rescuers trying to rescue both Black Hawks had to be rescued themselves. Had we left behind the first BH crew, only they would've been lost. It was the fact that the Somalis knew the Americans would insist on rescuing even their dead comrades that the Somalis counted on - they knew it would be almost impossible but we'd attempt it anyway.

Who did we leave behind?

As I recall, 99 soldiers spent the night on the ground until they could be retrieved, resulting in 18 dead and 75 wounded for the US; for the Somalis, 500 dead and almost 1000 wounded (although some say the Somali count is higher).

If you didn't 'hear much of it at the time' you just weren't reading or watching. It was a HUGE story with constant coverage.

[buryinghill1]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ridin' Fool: I was mortified and aghast that our government allowed the event to happen, <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
It happened in every war. Friends who went to Nam told me of similar instances. A platoon gets flown out of an area and suddenly you'd see a guy left behind. But the choppers kept flying.
I have heard this story more than once. Or they'd leave a guy behind who they knew would never live. They'd give a guy a handgun and fill him with morphine. Makes me sick remembering the story. My friend Gary sobs when he repeats these stories. It's nearly 40 years later and he still cries... And he's nearly 60. I once asked if he ever killed another US soldier and he never replied. I'll bet he did, or he knows other who have killed a buddy. Better to die quickly than suffer.

[Anne FS]

You're right, ynh, what you describe does happen, but the point here is that in Mogadishu it didn't happen. I know I certainly appreciate the motive behind 'leave no man behind' but when that policy results in even more deaths it is sometimes hard to take. I know there are cases where leaving behind one meant that 20 lived who otherwise would be dead.

[hobson]

The thing I vaguely remember about the "black hawk down" incident, that did not appear in the film (a horribly racist piece of crap that bore little resemblance to the book), is that it was a frightfully terrible decision to use a helicopter of that type in an urban setting. The power of the wind created by the --whatever you call the flappy things, I'm not a helicopter expert! -- was so strong that it ripped an infant from its mother's arms, killing the child, and injured quite a number of people, which the city residents found intolerable. I remember reading this in european news reports around that time.

The word at the ecpr conference, just ended in Edinburgh, is that no matter how you feel about the justification of this war, we can now expect other intolerable dictatorships to commence working as hard as they can to acquire nuclear weapons in order to prevent a "pre-emptive" invasion from happening to them. There will be real trouble if the situation in Pakistan deteriorates further; should the currently questionable military-coup regime be toppled in favor of a fundamentalist Islamic one, nukes would probably be sold freely to other anti-american states. They probably are being sold now. The understanding is taken to be: "if you get nuclear weapons before the US focuses on you, then you won't get invaded."

[Anne FS]

You know though, hobson, that would happen even w/o this war.

People have hated America since it started, and 9/11 showed that we were at war and didn't even know it. Who's that guy, Woolsey? the ex-CIA chief, who says that WWIV has been going on for several years already and the USA didn't even notice until 9/11. Trying to procure nuclear weapons has been going on for DECADES by many nations; this isn't new at all, it's new that US citizens are begining to sit up and take notice, but there's nothing new about it.

Besides, scary thought, I think Bush-like admin. will go to war whether or not their opponents have nuclear weapons. I really don't think it'll stop their decisions to go.

(P.S. the Woolsey guy says that WWIII was the Cold War)

[Anne FS]

Found an article re: Woolsey, who was CIA Director under Clinton, and so we don't pin this war just on Bush, Woolsey definitely felt Saddam was a threat. I have to sheepishly admit that I forgot Hussein did try to assassinate the first G. Bush.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...4/230153.shtml

[hobson]

"Besides, scary thought, I think Bush-like admin. will go to war whether or not their opponents have nuclear weapons. I really don't think it'll stop their decisions to go."

Well, that's certainly the "flaw in the slaw." But as I said, this is not my original thought but that of the people who make a living thinking about this stuff all day. Sure we know other regimes have been trying to build nuclear programs. The difference now is the urgency following a pre-emptive war--the stakes, from the point of view of the non-american world, are exponentially higher. With the ex-soviet states and Russia being barely able to control what's happening with their nuclear weapons and nuclear energy reactors, we also are in a world where the raw materials are more readily available than before.

[dcm]

How is this for simplification:

We are damned if we do, and damned if we don't.

The fact is we are there, so let's show some support for our troops who are over there giving their lives for our country whether you agree with the war or not.

Here is a letter from a US Navy corpman to his mom, written in response to her question if he would object to her attending an anti-war rally:<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Dear Mom,

It's really your decision to march if you want to or not. You are the one who has to decide if what we are doing out here is right or not. My opinion is not yours.

I do, however, have things I would like for you and Grandma and everyone else at home to know.

I am a United States soldier. I was sworn to defend my country against all enemies, foreign and domestic. People may not agree with the things we are ordered to do. I would like to address those people by telling them that terrorism is not only a threat to us as Americans, but to many other innocent people in the world.

What type of country would we be if we didn't defend the rights and freedoms of others, not because they're Americans, but how about just because they're human?

We live in a country where people feel secure with their daily lives. They do business like usual and don't worry about the thought of terrorism actually happening to them.

The people of 9-11 thought the same thing. We now know that it can happen to anyone at any time.

Yet as Americans we're afraid of losing our soldiers to defend our security. I can only speak for myself when I say that my life is an easy expense to ensure that my family and friends can live in peace.

I strongly believe in what we are doing and wish you were here to see for yourselves the honor and privilege that American soldiers aboard this ship are feeling, knowing that we are going to be a part of something so strong and so meaningful to the safety of our loved ones. Then you would know what this potential war is about.

We will stand tall in front of terrorism and defeat it. We as soldiers are not afraid of what may happen. We are only afraid of Americans not being able to understand why we are here.

I ask for your courage as Americans to be strong for us; I ask for your understanding in what we believe is right. I ask for your support in what we are sworn to do: defend our country and the life of all.

We will succeed in our task and will end the threat of terrorism in our back yard. We will also end the threat of terrorism in our neighbors'.

We have to remind ourselves of what this country stands for: life, liberty and justice for all. In order to maintain those rights we have to stop the threat of terrorism.

I am proud to be here. I will be coming home, but not until I know that it's going to be safe for all Americans and for everyone I love.

My family is first. My country is where they live. I will defend it.

Lonnie J. Lewis
Navy corpsman
C Co. 1/4 WPN PLT
UIC 39726
FPO AP 966139726


P.S. Mom, please send this to everyone who has a hard time understanding why we are here. Ask the paper to put what I've said in a column so that others will know why we are here and what we are here for.

I love you all and will be home soon. I left my address so that if anyone feels like writing to let me know how they feel, they can. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

His mom did not go to the anti-war rally. True story, found on Snopes

lauriep - I shortened it.
********
I'm just the mom.

Proud Member: Thoroughbred Clique, Danish Warmblood Clique, & Support Your Servicemen Clique

[Pixie Dust]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dcm:
How is this for simplification:

_We are damned if we do, and damned if we don't._

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL, now that I can agree with.

But most of the anti-war folks I talk with do not advocate doing nothing.

[dcm]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bgoosewood:
But most of the anti-war folks I talk with do not advocate doing nothing.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ah, but they definately are against the war, which I was referring to.

********
I'm just the mom.

Proud Member: Thoroughbred Clique, Danish Warmblood Clique, & Support Your Servicemen Clique

[Pixie Dust]

Anti-war folks are definitely against the war?

[dcm]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bgoosewood:
Anti-war folks are definitely against the war?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Huh? &lt;looks around, over shoulder&gt; Did I miss something?

Oh, just saw the typo!
********
I'm just the mom.

Proud Member: Thoroughbred Clique, Danish Warmblood Clique, & Support Your Servicemen Clique

[Anne FS]

CNN has these first person articles; here's one from the pilot of an Apache helicopter:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/...ode/index.html

and I have to say the phrase 'co-pilot and gunner Cindy Rosen and I..."

And I think of these women, wow, helicopter pilots, and gunners, and I think of Pfc Jessica Lynch, still shooting, still fighting until she ran out of ammunition and they had to run up and grab her, and I think how amazing, that women who want to be soldiers can now be soldiers. Look, I know it's 2003 but when I was a kid in the 1960s this was unthinkable To get the training and the knowledge to fly an Apache or ride a rocket ship was simply NOT POSSIBLE. There were NO sports for girls. You couldn't even play baseball or soccer, there was NOTHING.

Now if women want to help shoulder that burden that the men have, they can and they do. And for the vast majority who haven't ever gone to war they still get the training and the opportunity. Flying those helicopters and fighter planes has to be such a rush in peacetime (quite a different rush in battle). I've know a couple of pilots (one Navy and one Air Force, both men) and they LOVE LOVE LOVE it. So great that women now can do it, too.

I know you youngsters think of the 60s and 70s as a galaxy far, far away, but man, it was not so long ago to me.....

{edited to reflect clarified info}

[This message was edited by Anne FS on Apr. 04, 2003 at 08:33 AM.]

[dcm]

Hey, we can't let this leave page one.

Someone start a new argument, and hurry.

Glad to see our guys at the gates of Bagdad. Did anyone see the piece on Hannity and Colmes with the anti-war protester? And yes, I have been Hannitized.

********
I'm just the mom.

Proud Member: Thoroughbred Clique, Danish Warmblood Clique, & Support Your Servicemen Clique

[Snowbird]

There is victory in the air. We have taken part of Saddam Hussein airport and the people are relieved. A little concerned because they had to wait twelve years for us to come back. Nevertheless they seem pleased we finally got there.

The Russians said they have cooperated with us and will continue to cooperate. The Germans seem very contented as well. Only China and France are still silent, strange bedfellows?

Battle Scarred Veteran

[RAyers]

O.K., let’s discuss:

Do you really think "victory" has been had? It seems to me we are now the equivalent of the Russians in Groznyy (Chechen Republic). Hussein did the exact thing that any opponent should do in war when faced with overwhelming force, resort to guerilla tactics. The North Vietnamese did it to us, the Afganis and the Chechens did it to the Russians, the Palestinians do it to the Israelis, FARC does it Columbia, and so on and so forth. In this war there will be no "winner." Ask Israel, and Sharon is even MORE hawkish than GWB.

The wonderful thing about a guerilla war is that the “underdog” operates below the notice of the opponent. The key is to keep the body count increasing at a slow rate (1 soldier here, 10 there, 2 over there,…). After a while, the “victor’s” populace will no longer stomach the loss. When will that happen here? How long before the public gets sick of the deaths, for no reason given the fact we STILL haven’t found evidence of the weapons of mass destruction?

Another thing, our view of democracy is that the public elects a common leader and representative government, regardless of social, economic, or other stature (ideally), independent of religious following. We say we want to create this in Iraq. That seems a bit arrogant and myopic. The Shiite Muslims’ idea of democracy is that they are divinely ordained to rule the land. Hmmm, how are we going to resolve the idealogic nature that pervades in a culture that is 7,000 years older than the US?

[BelladonnaLily]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by dcm:
Hey, we can't let this leave page one.

Someone start a new argument, and hurry.

Glad to see our guys at the gates of Bagdad. Did anyone see the piece on Hannity and Colmes with the anti-war protester? And yes, I have been Hannitized. "

Congratulations! Like his show too...sometimes he does overdo the dems vs. rep. thing (and that criticism coming from ME??? ) but I really like him!

"The World is not dangerous because of those who do harm but because of those who look at it without doing anything." Albert Einstein