|
Borge W Gush
|
According to bush's own stated goals, the surge is a failure. So, McCain can stop dancing, lying, and stating it was a "success". According to the Six Fundamental Elements, the surge was supposed to: 1. Let the Iraqis lead; 2. Help Iraqis protect the population; 3. Isolate extremists; 4. Create space for political progress; 5. Diversify political and economic efforts; and 6. Situate the strategy in a regional approach. It has done little, 100's of civilians are still being murdered every day. American troops are still being murdered and maimed. McCain is still dancing... ===== In July 2008, the audit arm of the U.S. Congress recommended that the U.S. Government should "develop an updated strategy for Iraq that defines U.S. goals and objectives after July 2008 and addresses the long-term goal of achieving an Iraq that can govern, defend, and sustain itself".Steven Simon, a Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, wrote in May 2008 that "the recent short-term gains" had "come at the expense of the long-term goal of a stable, unitary Iraq."
|
|
“VICTORY is Mine”
Joined: Sep 8, 2007
|
Borge W Gush wrote: According to bush's own stated goals, the surge is a failure. So, McCain can stop dancing, lying, and stating it was a "success". According to the Six Fundamental Elements, the surge was supposed to:
1. Let the Iraqis lead;
2. Help Iraqis protect the population;
3. Isolate extremists;
4. Create space for political progress;
5. Diversify political and economic efforts; and
6. Situate the strategy in a regional approach.
It has done little, 100's of civilians are still being murdered every day. American troops are still being murdered and maimed. McCain is still dancing...
=====
In July 2008, the audit arm of the U.S. Congress recommended that the U.S. Government should "develop an updated strategy for Iraq that defines U.S. goals and objectives after July 2008 and addresses the long-term goal of achieving an Iraq that can govern, defend, and sustain itself".Steven Simon, a Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, wrote in May 2008 that "the recent short-term gains" had "come at the expense of the long-term goal of a stable, unitary Iraq." Where in the hell did you get this crap? Sorry not true. Try again. We, the US ARMY, are doing great in Iraq. We have turned everything around. The Politcians in Iraq have cleared 16 of the 18 benchmarks set by the US Congress. And deaths are down 80%. Get a clue loser.
|
|
Borge W Gush
|
First of all, I wasn't commenting on the task the troops have at hand, they were given a bad policy to implement: not their fault. Secondly, the benchmarks were not the original intention of the surge: they were afterthoughts. The WH changed how bodies are counted: that's how the body count statistically "went down". Bush & McCain are running around as though Iraq is the safest place on the planet. It was rated as THE most dangerous place on the planet. the following numbers look only at civilian death up to May 08... Over 5,500 civilians have been reported killed in the first 5 months of 2008 and twice as many injured. More will be added to both lists –the dead and the wounded- tomorrow and the day after and every day: each death and each injury adding a little more to the suffering of a nation, a little more hurt to those already hurting. Also.. The original benchmark legislation required no reports beyond the September testimony. More recently, the White House has maintained that the benchmarks are no longer a useful measurement of Iraq's progress. But the embassy prepared the new assessment anyway. Since the September assessment, the report notes, the Iraqi parliament has passed legislation on de-Baathification reform, the division of powers between the central and provincial governments, and amnesty for former insurgents. It grades progress in all of those areas as newly "satisfactory" even as it acknowledges that the laws in most cases have been implemented slowly, if at all. Congress mandated that Iraq both "enact and implement" the benchmark laws.
|
|
“VICTORY is Mine”
Joined: Sep 8, 2007
|
Borge W Gush wrote: First of all, I wasn't commenting on the task the troops have at hand, they were given a bad policy to implement: not their fault. Secondly, the benchmarks were not the original intention of the surge: they were afterthoughts.
The WH changed how bodies are counted: that's how the body count statistically "went down". Bush & McCain are running around as though Iraq is the safest place on the planet. It was rated as THE most dangerous place on the planet. the following numbers look only at civilian death up to May 08...
Over 5,500 civilians have been reported killed in the first 5 months of 2008 and twice as many injured. More will be added to both lists –the dead and the wounded- tomorrow and the day after and every day: each death and each injury adding a little more to the suffering of a nation, a little more hurt to those already hurting.
Also.. The original benchmark legislation required no reports beyond the September testimony. More recently, the White House has maintained that the benchmarks are no longer a useful measurement of Iraq's progress. But the embassy prepared the new assessment anyway.
Since the September assessment, the report notes, the Iraqi parliament has passed legislation on de-Baathification reform, the division of powers between the central and provincial governments, and amnesty for former insurgents. It grades progress in all of those areas as newly "satisfactory" even as it acknowledges that the laws in most cases have been implemented slowly, if at all. Congress mandated that Iraq both "enact and implement" the benchmark laws. Whatever buddy. When trash the mission and the sucess of the mission you trash us. We bust our tail for the the media to report garbage and the American people to follow it like sheep. For example the 9 Soldiers that died when 500 enemy tried to over run the FOB. The headline said 9 Soldier die. The reality was that close to 300 enemy were killed and many more captured and we won. After reading what you wrote it is mainly true. But you rather see the glass half empty than half full.
|
|
Joined: Apr 19, 2007
|
The surge was a huge success. History will show that it "Changed the course of the war". Too bad Obama was too naive and ignorant of military strategies to understand it's need at that time. Now Obama has scrubbed his web site of anything showing that he was against the Surge. Sorry Obama. I heard you say it and have many web links to the infamous remarks. I see he scrubbed his "civil war" comments too. Guess he should have went over there and spoke to our generals before opening his mouth. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17624785 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080715/ap_on_el_... http://technorati.com/posts/o6HG7zQbTG5tTBK02...
|
|
Joined: Apr 19, 2007
|
Obama: Iraq Troop Surge Isn't Working Obama told the crowd of more than 500 people that nobody wants to get U.S. troops out of Iraq more than he does, but doing so will require voters to pressure Senate Republicans, including New Hampshire Senators Judd Gregg and John Sununu, to break with President Bush. Obama says there's no reason to give the president's troop surge more time. "Here's what we know. The surge has not worked. And they said today,'Well, even in September, we're going to need more time.' So we're going to kick this can all the way down to the next president, under the president's plan." Wow. Obama is proven to be an idiot...again!
|
|
Joined: Apr 19, 2007
|
Here's the Public Radio Surge quotes of idiot Obama in NH... http://www.nhpr.org/node/13507
|
|
Borge W Gush
|
Judged:
2
1
Pudintain wrote: <quoted text>
Whatever buddy. When trash the mission and the sucess of the mission you trash us. We bust our tail for the the media to report garbage and the American people to follow it like sheep. For example the 9 Soldiers that died when 500 enemy tried to over run the FOB. The headline said 9 Soldier die. The reality was that close to 300 enemy were killed and many more captured and we won.
After reading what you wrote it is mainly true. But you rather see the glass half empty than half full. Actually I'm a vet myself. I come from a long family of vets (2 out of 3 siblings, uncles in WWI & WWII, going right back to the Civil War {Lt. Stillman}). If my sons ever wanted to enlist, after what we saw in the past 8 years… Well, that wont happen. My family military lineage ends with my generation… Every time I hear a GI or an innocent Iraqi child dying, I think of the treasonous politicians (dem & rep alike) that are getting away with murder. It’s a sad fact that the troops have been reduced to indentured slavery: they can’t leave when their terms are up, they are doing 3 to 5 tours, they are exhausted. But I digress, your missing an important point of your own words: nine gi’s died in your example. ------ That’s nine sons, some were husbands some fathers. That’s more nine lives ended. Over 4000+ America solders were murdered to date in this pointless invasion. So you see, America is not angry at the GI’s, we are pissed beyond belief at the assholes who sent you guys into Iraq. We want to see the politicians tried for treason. But it gets worse, upon return, the Pentagon would have cremated the remains of those nine GI’s at an crematorium that also cremates animals. WTF!!@! http://www.google.com/search... The GI’s that return injured are mistreated by the VA in the most horrendous ways. I could go on and on… The point of the matter is, the surge has not “worked”, the invasion of Iraq is still an impossible situation, and we are still foked as a nation. The fact of the matter is, the surge was a political move to buy bush more time. He is not interested in lives lost, but in his “legacy” he is having written; it’s a fiction of course. He is attempting to leave the WH with something he can say he was a success at.
|
|
|
|
“VICTORY is Mine”
Joined: Sep 8, 2007
|
Borge W Gush wrote: <quoted text>
Actually I'm a vet myself. I come from a long family of vets (2 out of 3 siblings, uncles in WWI & WWII, going right back to the Civil War {Lt. Stillman}). If my sons ever wanted to enlist, after what we saw in the past 8 years… Well, that wont happen. My family military lineage ends with my generation…
Every time I hear a GI or an innocent Iraqi child dying, I think of the treasonous politicians (dem & rep alike) that are getting away with murder. It’s a sad fact that the troops have been reduced to indentured slavery: they can’t leave when their terms are up, they are doing 3 to 5 tours, they are exhausted. You are the most un-informed VET I have run into. With all do respect for my fellow VET, you are clueless. I am an Active Duty Soldier and have been in the US Army for 2 years. I have had one break in Service. I currently work at a Reserve Headquarters and for 2 years worked on the mobilization team sending Army Reservist to Iraq. I can tell you with confidence that 56% of the Army Reserve has never been to the Middle East. 33% Active Duty never been to the Middle East. Some Soldiers do get multiple tours but most do two. Anything after that is usually but not always their choice. You would be amazed how many want to go. Next not one military person was cremated with animals. Learn to read the whole story. Funny you bring this up because now my duty includes funeral honors for returning VETS. We contract Funeral homes to do services. Most if not all the times the family goes to their own funeral home. The one you are talking about was a contract one that was never used and no longer on the list. It had two crematories, one for people and one for animals, not uncommon. But regardless no Solders went to one. You sound like you just hate Bush by the end of this post. Since you are a VET then you know I am right when I say you trash our mission you trash our morale. We are doing nothing but winning now. The sh1t sucked 2 years ago but we are under new leadership any most of us are proud and motivated. The only thing I hear most from fellow Soldiers is that it would nice if we got the press to cover stories that go along with our success. You are a VET by title only. Real VETs would stick by their fellow VETs and believe in the mission at hand. It does not matter anymore if you like this war, we are in it and in it deep. We have no choice but to win. We capture them (now read them their rights) and but them in prison. We are capturing some big time guys. These are not local terrorist, they are global. They have tracks all over the globe. Osama made Iraq the battlefield not Bush. We are pulling out more combat brigades next month, not because we are losing though, it’s because we are winning and have trained the IAF to take over. So you would rather pull us out and tell me you did good but it is all pointless. We don’t need or want to win. If we do this we will be back there in a few years when Iran has control over the State. That should be fun.
|
|
“VICTORY is Mine”
Joined: Sep 8, 2007
|
Borge W Gush wrote: <quoted text> Actually I'm a vet myself. I come from a long family of vets (2 out of 3 siblings, uncles in WWI & WWII, going right back to the Civil War {Lt. Stillman}). If my sons ever wanted to enlist, after what we saw in the past 8 years… Well, that wont happen. My family military lineage ends with my generation… Every time I hear a GI or an innocent Iraqi child dying, I think of the treasonous politicians (dem & rep alike) that are getting away with murder. It’s a sad fact that the troops have been reduced to indentured slavery: they can’t leave when their terms are up, they are doing 3 to 5 tours, they are exhausted. But I digress, your missing an important point of your own words: nine gi’s died in your example. ------ That’s nine sons, some were husbands some fathers. That’s more nine lives ended. Over 4000+ America solders were murdered to date in this pointless invasion. So you see, America is not angry at the GI’s, we are pissed beyond belief at the assholes who sent you guys into Iraq. We want to see the politicians tried for treason. But it gets worse, upon return, the Pentagon would have cremated the remains of those nine GI’s at an crematorium that also cremates animals. WTF!!@! http://www.google.com/search... The GI’s that return injured are mistreated by the VA in the most horrendous ways. I could go on and on… The point of the matter is, the surge has not “worked”, the invasion of Iraq is still an impossible situation, and we are still foked as a nation. The fact of the matter is, the surge was a political move to buy bush more time. He is not interested in lives lost, but in his “legacy” he is having written; it’s a fiction of course. He is attempting to leave the WH with something he can say he was a success at. And the nine that died, you say screw the accomplishment of their sacrifice. What did they die for? They died to keep the FOB. They died to protect one another and they died to win. They didn't throw up their arms and say 'take it'. They fact that we are Soldiers and we fight to win. It sucks that they didn't make it but we won the battle. Does that not mean anything unless nobody is hurt? We were up against over 500 enemy and killed 300 of them. That is a hell of a victory.
|
|
Joined: Apr 1, 2008
knoxville
|
Borge W Gush wrote: According to bush's own stated goals, the surge is a failure. So, McCain can stop dancing, lying, and stating it was a "success". According to the Six Fundamental Elements, the surge was supposed to:
1. Let the Iraqis lead;
2. Help Iraqis protect the population;
3. Isolate extremists;
4. Create space for political progress;
5. Diversify political and economic efforts; and
6. Situate the strategy in a regional approach.
It has done little, 100's of civilians are still being murdered every day. American troops are still being murdered and maimed. McCain is still dancing...
=====
In July 2008, the audit arm of the U.S. Congress recommended that the U.S. Government should "develop an updated strategy for Iraq that defines U.S. goals and objectives after July 2008 and addresses the long-term goal of achieving an Iraq that can govern, defend, and sustain itself".Steven Simon, a Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, wrote in May 2008 that "the recent short-term gains" had "come at the expense of the long-term goal of a stable, unitary Iraq." blah-blah-blah-blah. this stuff from all you code pink wannabes has pretty much run it's course right into the gutter. for all the years of whining, what has it accomplished ?? other than a run on rolaids and tums. if i only had stock in those two companies and reynolds aluminum as well. because who knows how many tin foil hats you and your ilk have created.
|
|
Borge W Gush
|
Earl Keese wrote: <quoted text>
blah-blah-blah-blah.
this stuff from all you code pink wannabes has pretty much run it's course right into the gutter.
for all the years of whining, what has it accomplished ?? other than a run on rolaids and tums.
if i only had stock in those two companies and reynolds aluminum as well.
because who knows how many tin foil hats you and your ilk have created. If, when your receive inputs from your external world, all you hear is "blah-blah-blah-blah. ", your comments make clear your understanding and potential for clear thought.
|
|
Borge W Gush
|
Pudintain wrote: <quoted text>
And the nine that died, you say screw the accomplishment of their sacrifice. What did they die for? They died to keep the FOB.... I didn't say "say screw the accomplishment". I am interested in truth first. The W.H. keeps moving the goals as whatever is going good on any particular month. It still, to this day, has not come up with a reason for being in Iraq. The original mission was to remove the WMD's, remember that? Turns out to be a HUGE lie, and they new it. So, how do they save face now, while they continue to rape the treasury to the benefit of the war profiteers? Success now can be measured in less deaths; and, by all usual counts, Iraqi deaths have indeed been falling since the height of sectarian violence and ethnic cleansing in the early months of 2007. In part, this has occurred because millions of people have already been driven out of their homes and many neighborhoods, especially in the capital, "cleansed." At the same time, in Sunni areas, significant numbers of insurgents have joined the Awakening Movement. They have been paid off by the U.S. military to fight al-Qaeda in Iraq, while, assumedly, biding their time until the American presence ebbs to take on "the Persians" -- that is, the Shiite (and Kurdish) government embedded in Baghdad's fortified, American-controlled Green Zone. As a result, cratered Iraq -- a land with at least 50% unemployment, still lacking decent electricity, water, hospitals with drugs (or even doctors, so many having fled), or courts with judges (40 of them having been assassinated and many more injured since 2003) or lawyers, many of whom joined the more than two million Iraqis who have gone into exile -- is, today, modestly quieter. But don't be fooled. So many years later, Iraqis are still dying in prodigious numbers, and significant numbers of those dying are doing so at the hands of Americans.
|
|
Borge W Gush
|
Pudintain wrote: <quoted text>
...
Osama made Iraq the battlefield not Bush. We are pulling out more combat brigades next month, not because we are losing though, it’s because we are winning and have trained ... The reason troops are pulling is is because resources were diverted to Iraq in 2002. Thus, Afghanistan and Pakistan became breeding grounds for terrorist. That was after the A1+++ job done in Afghanistan in 2002. This can no longer be ignored and Afghanistan is going to be the new location for the fight. Troops will be sent there. Afghanistan is where they should have been all along. You mention Osama made Iraq the battlefield. That is not true. There were zero terrorist in Iraq before the invasion and certainly not any of Osama crew, Saddam would have beheaded them. The real mission from a patriotic standpoint would be to make the world safer by killing terrorist with the fewest possible casualties PERIOD. If you could agree with that, why hasn't Osama been caught and killed? Less then a few months after 911, bush made the statements he is NOT interested in finding Osama. In March 2002, bush is under the impression that Osama can not do harm. Here's an excerpt from that press conference: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/... Q Mr. President, in your speeches now you rarely talk or mention Osama bin Laden. Why is that? Also, can you tell the American people if you have any more information, if you know if he is dead or alive? Final part -- deep in your heart, don't you truly believe that until you find out if he is dead or alive, you won't really eliminate the threat of -- THE PRESIDENT: Deep in my heart I know the man is on the run, if he's alive at all. Who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not; we haven't heard from him in a long time. And the idea of focusing on one person is -- really indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the mission. Terror is bigger than one person. And he's just -- he's a person who's now been marginalized. His network, his host government has been destroyed. He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match. He is -- as I mentioned in my speech, I do mention the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to their death and he, himself, tries to hide -- if, in fact, he's hiding at all. So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him,... (4000 char limit reached, go to link to read all) PS: Most internet traffic is not allowed to reach the troops overseas. As you probably know, Iraq internet traffic is censored. Regardless, if you are serving overseas, you should not be reading blogs, mags, etc... You should have only one focus and purpose, keep yourself and your buddies alive while attempting to do what you do, PERIOD. Anything less could get you killed, which is bad.
|
|
“VICTORY is Mine”
Joined: Sep 8, 2007
|
Borge W Gush wrote: <quoted text>
I didn't say "say screw the accomplishment". I am interested in truth first. The W.H. keeps moving the goals as whatever is going good on any particular month. It still, to this day, has not come up with a reason for being in Iraq. The original mission was to remove the WMD's, remember that? Turns out to be a HUGE lie, and they new it. So, how do they save face now, while they continue to rape the treasury to the benefit of the war profiteers?
Success now can be measured in less deaths; and, by all usual counts, Iraqi deaths have indeed been falling since the height of sectarian violence and ethnic cleansing in the early months of 2007. In part, this has occurred because millions of people have already been driven out of their homes and many neighborhoods, especially in the capital, "cleansed."
At the same time, in Sunni areas, significant numbers of insurgents have joined the Awakening Movement. They have been paid off by the U.S. military to fight al-Qaeda in Iraq, while, assumedly, biding their time until the American presence ebbs to take on "the Persians" -- that is, the Shiite (and Kurdish) government embedded in Baghdad's fortified, American-controlled Green Zone.
As a result, cratered Iraq -- a land with at least 50% unemployment, still lacking decent electricity, water, hospitals with drugs (or even doctors, so many having fled), or courts with judges (40 of them having been assassinated and many more injured since 2003) or lawyers, many of whom joined the more than two million Iraqis who have gone into exile -- is, today, modestly quieter. But don't be fooled. So many years later, Iraqis are still dying in prodigious numbers, and significant numbers of those dying are doing so at the hands of Americans. I didn't even happen in Iraq you dope. And you not once mentioned the facts. The fact is we won the battle. We accomplished that mission to hold the fort. You know as much about this war as your average New York Times reader or MSNBC reader. http://a.abcnews.com/images/pdf/pentagon_repo... http://www.fas.org/irp/ Maybe that wll help you. By the way we just sent the WMDs to Canada from Iraq. Let me ask you this: Should we just pick up and leave? Do think if we did the Iraqis would be better off?
|
|
“VICTORY is Mine”
Joined: Sep 8, 2007
|
Borge W Gush wrote: <quoted text> The reason troops are pulling is is because resources were diverted to Iraq in 2002. Thus, Afghanistan and Pakistan became breeding grounds for terrorist. That was after the A1+++ job done in Afghanistan in 2002. This can no longer be ignored and Afghanistan is going to be the new location for the fight. Troops will be sent there. Afghanistan is where they should have been all along. You mention Osama made Iraq the battlefield. That is not true. There were zero terrorist in Iraq before the invasion and certainly not any of Osama crew, Saddam would have beheaded them. The real mission from a patriotic standpoint would be to make the world safer by killing terrorist with the fewest possible casualties PERIOD. If you could agree with that, why hasn't Osama been caught and killed? Less then a few months after 911, bush made the statements he is NOT interested in finding Osama. In March 2002, bush is under the impression that Osama can not do harm. Here's an excerpt from that press conference: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/... Q Mr. President, in your speeches now you rarely talk or mention Osama bin Laden. Why is that? Also, can you tell the American people if you have any more information, if you know if he is dead or alive? Final part -- deep in your heart, don't you truly believe that until you find out if he is dead or alive, you won't really eliminate the threat of -- THE PRESIDENT: Deep in my heart I know the man is on the run, if he's alive at all. Who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not; we haven't heard from him in a long time. And the idea of focusing on one person is -- really indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the mission. Terror is bigger than one person. And he's just -- he's a person who's now been marginalized. His network, his host government has been destroyed. He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match. He is -- as I mentioned in my speech, I do mention the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to their death and he, himself, tries to hide -- if, in fact, he's hiding at all. So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him,... (4000 char limit reached, go to link to read all) PS: Most internet traffic is not allowed to reach the troops overseas. As you probably know, Iraq internet traffic is censored. Regardless, if you are serving overseas, you should not be reading blogs, mags, etc... You should have only one focus and purpose, keep yourself and your buddies alive while attempting to do what you do, PERIOD. Anything less could get you killed, which is bad. You are so wrong sir. Listen I was there and can tell you first hand you are wrong. I study this for the Army and spent many hours reading reports. I am going to stick you with a ton of links you will not read or do not have access to. I will tell you that none of the troops that left Iraq are going anywhere but home. Not to another war. Iraq is now a success. Face it. You hate to say it but it is true. The second link I sent you above is where most declassified documents go after being through the chain. Search it and get up to speed. Believe in the troops and believe in our mission. The mission depends on the support of the American people and the troops want the American people to support not just them but them and their mission.
|
|
“VICTORY is Mine”
Joined: Sep 8, 2007
|
Borge W Gush wrote: <quoted text>
PS: Most internet traffic is not allowed to reach the troops overseas. As you probably know, Iraq internet traffic is censored. Regardless, if you are serving overseas, you should not be reading blogs, mags, etc... You should have only one focus and purpose, keep yourself and your buddies alive while attempting to do what you do, PERIOD. Anything less could get you killed, which is bad. Read where I am writing from; Mason, OH; Ambridge, PA or AZ. Not in theater sir. I am stationed in the US. Not at any of the place above either, those are just different servers we use. When I write on here it is during down time. My wife is also in the Army so we do not get that much time together all at once. I needed something to do and something I am interested in. I am always on point and I promise I will not get any of my Soldiers killed or injured.
|
|
“VICTORY is Mine”
Joined: Sep 8, 2007
|
Borge W Gush wrote: <quoted text>
The reason troops are pulling is is because Here i will help you finish this: http://www.topix.com/us/politics/2008/07/the-... WE ARE WINNING! You can say it too.
|
|
Borge W Gush
|
Pudintain wrote: <quoted text>
You are so wrong sir. Listen I was there and can tell you first hand you are wrong. I study this for the Army and spent many hours reading reports. I am going to stick you with a ton of links you will not read or do not have access to. I will tell you that none of the troops that left Iraq are going anywhere but home. Not to another war. Iraq is now a success. Face it. You hate to say it but it is true. First of all, God bless you and all who served... But the problem is not the Gi's, it is with treasonous politicians. A soldier should only be placed in harms way as the absolute last resort to defend the country. There was zero resistance when the you boys were sent to Iraq. The neocons were frothing at the mouth to do it since 1996. With 911, they had their token. Secondly, it's clear there are two viewpoints on the table. History will clear up which viewpoint leaned more in the correct direction. However, one thing is clear. In ten years, when you think back on this time in your life, you'll remember your buddies. You'll also have something you can be 100% proud of: you served your country and lived to remember it. And that's something no one can take from you regardless of popularity or opinion.
|
|
“VICTORY is Mine”
Joined: Sep 8, 2007
|
Borge W Gush wrote: <quoted text>
First of all, God bless you and all who served... But the problem is not the Gi's, it is with treasonous politicians. A soldier should only be placed in harms way as the absolute last resort to defend the country. There was zero resistance when the you boys were sent to Iraq. The neocons were frothing at the mouth to do it since 1996. With 911, they had their token.
Secondly, it's clear there are two viewpoints on the table. History will clear up which viewpoint leaned more in the correct direction. However, one thing is clear. In ten years, when you think back on this time in your life, you'll remember your buddies. You'll also have something you can be 100% proud of: you served your country and lived to remember it. And that's something no one can take from you regardless of popularity or opinion. Thank you Sir but I would much rather look back in ten years and see Iraq prosper and be a success. We gave so much to see it pissed away because the civilians in America think it is to tough.Victory is close, very close. Please visit the latest articles I posted today. Thing are a hell of a lot better. http://www.topix.com/iq/baghdad
|
Judge it!
Pisces
Most Popular