Question the Commander-In-Chief?

[Barndog]

Before I quote the article, I want to quote this first:

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and serville, but is morally treasonable to the American public" - Teddy Roosevelt

published in http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0930-04.htm 30 Sept 02

Who Am I to Question the Commander-in-Chief?
by Charles Sheehan-Miles

It was early in the morning, even for me, and I stared astonished at my inbox, replete with some pretty strong hate mail, with three general themes: "Shut up and toe the line," "Nuke Iraq," and worst of all, "Who are you to question the President."

What did I do to warrant this flood of not-so-nice mail, which included threats of bodily harm, as well as some biologically implausible suggestions?

Last week a group of Gulf War veterans formed a team to raise questions about our impending invasion of Iraq. Together, we agreed on some basic principles, none of which were "anti-war." Rather, our goal is to ensure before we commit our forces to war, we consider all the key issues.

Those issues are simple: whether or not the invasion will destabilize the region; full medical care for returning soldiers (which never happened in 1991); the Administration should release any information justifying an attack; Congress is the body which should approve any war and should ensure adequate oversight; we should meet our international obligations, including working through the UN Security Council, and a full accounting must be made for those who are missing-in-action. Our full statement can be found at http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org

In the first twenty-four hours after we announced our site, quite a few veterans signed on to the statement. But a small minority sent hate-mail. To give you a picture of the tone, I'll quote three of them:

"Get over your-stupid-selves. Dumbass Liberal pussies."

"I say turn the place into glass!"

"Where in God's name did you ever get the idea to countermand the commander in chief of our nation?"

Ok. I have to take exception to this. Let's make one thing clear - George W. Bush is indeed the commander-in-chief of the military, but last I heard, the President works for the people, not the other way around - even if they didn't vote for him.

Since when did patriotism equal silence? Did that happen about the same time peace activists were added to the "no-fly" list? Will we let the terror war, or the Iraq war, or the oil war, or whoever it is we're fighting this week destroy the very foundations of our democracy?

It's time for people to sit up and pay attention. We've reached a turning point in history, where Americans say they'll cash in their freedom and liberty for security. We defeated communism and dictatorship, so now we'll try capitalism and dictatorship?

Unless we all speak out, we just might. Because the tenor of the debate is exactly what President Bush said: if you're not with us, you are against us. If you don't support war on Iraq, you must be Saddam's best friend. If you don't support "turning the place into glass," you must be anti-American. If you don't support slaughtering innocent civilians abroad, you must support terror against Americans at home.

I'm a combat veteran, and I reject that argument. If we give up the civil liberties on which our society was founded, then what are we fighting for? If we trade in our brains for the spin of the oil-company-controlled White House, we're in trouble.

But then again, if I believe what I read in my inbox, I'm just a radical with a liberal left-wing nut, anti-everything agenda.

Charles Sheehan-Miles, a decorated Gulf War combat veteran, is the author of "Prayer at Rumayla" (XLibris, 2001) and is a former President of the National Gulf War Resource Center. He can be contacted at http://www.sheehanmiles.com. The Veterans for Common Sense statement can be read at http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org

You bet I question them, every chance I get.

Semper FI

Barndog

[Sparrowhawk]

Charles Sheehan-Miles, is a gulf war tanker that regrets having fought in war. Screw Him, if he regrets what he did, I wonder what a just war is to him? <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
A recap of comments about his book <br />
...

[Sparrowhawk]

I have no problem with that,


To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and serville, but is morally treasonable to the American public" - Teddy Roosevelt


But Charles Sheehan-Miles takes that to a new anti-war level, yep, its all anti-war misguiding, half truths. He twists his words, like the best of left wing liberal out there, double speaking with the best of politicians.

Oh, it’s not anti-war, he says, but look at his page links and its an all out join us in our anti-war effort.

Saddam has killed more civilains and children since the gulf war then we can imagine and where have they been?

Maybe they are criticising the wrong president!


http://www.commondreams.org/orderstickers.htm

[Barndog]

First I say to you: were you in that particular war? (I wasn't, although I showed up)

Secondly I say to you: Doesn't history prove that generational differences in opinion exist? (my studies do)

Thirdly: Since when did our country become so mean spirited and unsensitive to the opinions of others? Used to be a time in this country if someone 'screwed up', people forgave them.

Nowadays, they crucify you. What happened? And, when?

Guess it's the ' either you are with us, or your against us' Bush doctrine.

All hail to the chief who went AWOL for a year & 1/2 from National Guard duty. And never paid for it.

Amen


Barndog

[NamGrunt68]

In my opinion the bottom line is, when a Marine takes the oath, he basically gives up HIS Constitutional rights because his azz belongs to the Corps and to the Commander in Chief.....if you read the Oath slowly you will realize this !!!! The only right you have while in the Military is to follow orders, period. No questions allowed !! Now granted, if some azzhole is drunk, or out of his mind on drugs or has gone off the deep end, then you should probably approach another Marine of equal and higher rank !!

But in my mind, these Gulf War Vets that are starting this Vets for Common sense bullsh!t ain't no better than them azzhole war protestors in the 60's !!! They gonna end up causing some bro's that do go and serve to start questioning sh!t and the end result is they gonna get some Marines hurt or killed over there, cuz there minds and hearts ain't gonna be in the right place !!!
I probably ain't makin much sense here, but I tried to git my opine across best I could......

These Vets should be standing behind the Pres and the bro's that are gonna have to go and lay their lives on the line !! Instead of trying to undermine the mission at hand !!!

Thats all fer now !!

[NamNuts]

Semper Fidelis my Brother!

Chesty be proud you one fine Marine!

[CAS3]

These supposed Vets are the ones that joined the military to go to school for free....

F**k em...

I was in during Desert Storm. I firmly believe we should have taken that raghead out then.
For these Judas' to speak out against the Presidents decision to go back into Iraq, what nerve. The President did not come up with this plan alone. It took a lot of balls to go in front of the UN and ask for support. After all, WE Are the F**KING United States of America. Who do we have to answer to? We are the greatest nation and should not need approval. If we are going to fight the war against terrorism doesn't that include Saddam Insane?

Just my humble opinion but I am really ****ed off at these granola lovin, Burkenstock wearing, tye dyed freaks....

Thanks for letting me vent my opinion!!

[badbob]

It’s very clear to me that Charles Sheehan-Miles is suffering from PTSD.

If you’ve never been in mortal combat, ya have no clue what PTSD is, but all combat veterans are affected to one degree or an anther. Even Cops and Fireman are affected by PTSD “Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome”.

Charles Sheehan-Miles is clearly affected, the symptoms appear throughout his writing and He’s very bitter at the government for forcing him to be a witness to the unfortunate reality of WAR, plain and simple.

Many Vietnam Vets, HELL most Vietnam Vets suffered from one form of PTSD, many still are suffering, but most have gotten over hating our present government for mistakes made by a previous administration.

If any war Vet has good reason not to trust government or the politicians running the show, it’s the Nam Vets not the Gulf War Vets.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – War is ugly – and some of us just can’t handle it. But just because it’s ugly and some don’t have the stomach for it, doesn’t change the fact that sometimes WAR can’t or shouldn’t be avoided.

The Gulf war was one of those wars that not only couldn’t be avoided, it was also a war that had to be fought. And the only political error in what was otherwise one of our Military’s finest hours, was that we haven’t yet finished it.

Semper Fi,
Bob Neener

[NamGrunt68]

Originally posted by badbob
It’s very clear to me that Charles Sheehan-Miles is suffering from PTSD.

If you’ve never been in mortal combat, ya have no clue what PTSD is, but all combat veterans are affected to one degree or an anther. Even Cops and Fireman are affected by PTSD “Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome”.

Charles Sheehan-Miles is clearly affected, the symptoms appear throughout his writing and He’s very bitter at the government for forcing him to be a witness to the unfortunate reality of WAR, plain and simple.

Many Vietnam Vets, HELL most Vietnam Vets suffered from one form of PTSD, many still are suffering, but most have gotten over hating our present government for mistakes made by a previous administration.

If any war Vet has good reason not to trust government or the politicians running the show, it’s the Nam Vets not the Gulf War Vets.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – War is ugly – and some of us just can’t handle it. But just because it’s ugly and some don’t have the stomach for it, doesn’t change the fact that sometimes WAR can’t or shouldn’t be avoided.

The Gulf war was one of those wars that not only couldn’t be avoided, it was also a war that had to be fought. And the only political error in what was otherwise one of our Military’s finest hours, was that we haven’t yet finished it.

Semper Fi,
Bob Neener

Damn right bro...we need to finish it and we need to finish it in a BIG BIG WAY !!!!!!!!!!!!!! GIT SOME DUBYA !!!!

Cas......I enjoyed yer rant !!! Damn good un !!![/b]

[Norton1]

All of the following is being said in a calm voice - attempting to inject another point of view into a potentially divisive argument. I would do, and ahve done, much for my fellow veterans - and will continue to do so. I also intend no disrespect for those of this forum who read my post - That said:

I believe these vets are standing behind their "Bros." Why is it that the Gulf War vets are suddenly bad and Viet Nam Vets are good? Where were you all in the 60s and 70s when the Viet Nam Veterans Against The War were helping those that protested against that war?

I believed that as veterans of that war we were the only ones with a credible argument against it. And I think these guys have earned the right to state their views. It isn't subversive - it's what this country was founded on. The right to dissent. You all really want our troops going in to a fight for their lives with only half the population supporting it before it starts? Doesn't anyone remember Viet Nam?

Starting to sound like the argument the old WW-II folks used to dismiss us Viet Nam veterans with during our little scrap. And I'm a tad resentful of these vets being called the names they are by fellow veterans. I may be a liberal - but I'm a vet - and a former Marine. And during Viet Nam I believed, and still do believe, that I was helping my "Bros" by trying to end the war as early as possible to get them out of the killing zone. If I believe that this is occurring again - I'll join those on the streets aginst this one also.

I think it takes a lot fo courage to go against the popular line of thought. And if that makes me a whatever name you choose to put on it - then so be it - but it doesn't change the fact that I have served my country honorably both in and out of uniform. And I have my conscience to follow as well as those with a different perspective. Simplistic solutions are not abundant in this world today - but I would certainly argue for a gentler hand on each other in these times of struggle -

[NamGrunt68]

===========================================
quote
I believe these vets are standing behind their "Bros." Why is it that the Gulf War vets are suddenly bad and Viet Nam Vets are good? Where were you all in the 60s and 70s when the Viet Nam Veterans Against The War were helping those that protested against that war?
=============================================
Bro, I can't speak for nobody else here, but I was mostly hunkered down back in the boonies which is where I stayed for alot o years. However, if I would a been livin in a big city or a place near Berkeley or somewhere on the Left Coast where all the Anti war sh!t was goin on, and I ran into some Nam Bro's protesting and burnin flags and such, why I'd tried to stomp a mud hole in their azzes just like the other protestors......I ain't saying that the war was right....what I am saying is that those protestors are and were demoralizing as hell to the bro's in Nam..
And when we were in Nam we need support....we didn't need to know about a bunch o azzholes protestin the war !! Even if they weren't actually against us and only against the War, ya still felt like they were against you...!!
Now to carry this a step further, in order to be fair in my opinion, there is no comparison in these wars.....The North Vietnamese didn't attack the USA......this Iraq sh!t and Middle East sh!t needs to go down, because they ATTACKED THE USA.....OUR OWN SOIL...so it is very very different !!!! I think it's worse than Pearl Harbor...hell Hawaii wasn't a state then !!! These azzholes hit us in our own Country !!! We are at WAR right now with them in our own Country !! So I don't see how you can compare protesting Vietnam and these protests now !!! Just a guess, but I would venture to say that if it were 1941 or 1950 now, we would of already gone over there and cleaned up some Raghead ass.....unfortunately, our great Country has so many leaders that have swung so far to the left that their in the middle of the Pacific Ocean now !!!
And getting back to the main point of this thread, I again state that when anyone joins the Military Service, you basically give up your own Constituional rights......read the oath......you are obligated to FOLLOW ALL ORDERS OF THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF !!.....No questions allowed !!! Just a few more centavo's !!

[arzach]

Originally posted by NamGrunt68
===========================================
quote
I believe these vets are standing behind their "Bros." Why is it that the Gulf War vets are suddenly bad and Viet Nam Vets are good? Where were you all in the 60s and 70s when the Viet Nam Veterans Against The War were helping those that protested against that war?
=============================================
Bro, I can't speak for nobody else here, but I was mostly hunkered down back in the boonies which is where I stayed for alot o years. However, if I would a been livin in a big city or a place near Berkeley or somewhere on the Left Coast where all the Anti war sh!t was goin on, and I ran into some Nam Bro's protesting and burnin flags and such, why I'd tried to stomp a mud hole in their azzes just like the other protestors......I ain't saying that the war was right....what I am saying is that those protestors are and were demoralizing as hell to the bro's in Nam..
And when we were in Nam we need support....we didn't need to know about a bunch o azzholes protestin the war !! Even if they weren't actually against us and only against the War, ya still felt like they were against you...!!
Now to carry this a step further, in order to be fair in my opinion, there is no comparison in these wars.....The North Vietnamese didn't attack the USA......this Iraq sh!t and Middle East sh!t needs to go down, because they ATTACKED THE USA.....OUR OWN SOIL...so it is very very different !!!! I think it's worse than Pearl Harbor...hell Hawaii wasn't a state then !!! These azzholes hit us in our own Country !!! We are at WAR right now with them in our own Country !! So I don't see how you can compare protesting Vietnam and these protests now !!! Just a guess, but I would venture to say that if it were 1941 or 1950 now, we would of already gone over there and cleaned up some Raghead ass.....unfortunately, our great Country has so many leaders that have swung so far to the left that their in the middle of the Pacific Ocean now !!!
And getting back to the main point of this thread, I again state that when anyone joins the Military Service, you basically give up your own Constituional rights......read the oath......you are obligated to FOLLOW ALL ORDERS OF THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF !!.....No questions allowed !!! Just a few more centavo's !!
_____________________
OK stevie---Read it again and again---still says the same damn thing---SUPPORT OUR TROOPS--- is the best and only way to end any phukin war---Dissent,Demonstrations, and Anti-War activisim only prolong the fighting, and killing---not to mention DESTROYING the morale of our Bros doin the fightin' and dyin'---So read NamGrunt's Post again--Memorize it. Got any 'issues' with this--PM me
GIT SUUMMM Daner---:evilgrin: :evilgrin:

[wrbones]

But I'll say it here again. I normally consider my self to a bit right of center with my politics, but on this issue, I'm a right winger.

Some punk walks up to you onna street and ***** slaps you, you don't negotiate, you don't ask him why or nothin'. You hit him with everything ya got, hit him harder and faster than he can hit you. If you don't. Yer screwed. Saddam IS such a punk. Forget about the World Trade Center if you can for a moment. That is not the isue with Iraq. Saddam, and an ON-GOING war there is. It is not a first strike, it is an on- going war in which he drew first blood in 1991. Period.

You took the oath, unless the CNC is certified as nuts, you jump when he says boo. Period. Anything else is unthinkable to me.

Some of you folks seem to think that the WTC can't or won't happen to you. Think again. Life is.

[Barndog]

Guilt vs. Responsibility

Looking to make the case for Operation Desert Shield in 1991, the administration of Bush No. 41 claimed that classified satellite images showed that up to 250,000 Iraqi troops and 1,500 tanks had amassed on the border of Saudi Arabia, threatening a key U.S. oil supplier.

St. Petersburg Times reporter Jean Heller obtained two commercial satellite images of the same area, taken at the same time, and guess what it showed? Empty desert.

"It was a pretty serious fib," Heller told the Christian Science Monitor last month.

When Heller called then Defense Secretary Dick Cheney's office three times asking for refuting evidence, the offer was made to hold the story to allow enough time to prove it all wrong. The official response: "Trust us."

But as is the case with infidelity in marriage, when the trust has been broken it is not enough for the former conniver to say: "take my word for it." Remember the Tonkin Gulf Resolution?

The debate in Congress is not whether we should invade Iraq, but whether Bush will be authorized to invade Iraq only, or invade Iraq plus whatever other Middle Eastern nation he damn well pleases. And this despite numerous important questions yet to be asked of King George.

For example, we didn't invade the Soviet Union during the Cold War because we knew they could retaliate. So, according to the logic of deterrence, isn't it the case that we are ready, willing and able to attack Iraq because we know that Iraq cannot retaliate in kind, which means Iraq really isn't the threat the hawks assert it to be?

Some argue that even with inspections we can't be sure if Saddam is hiding weapons of mass destruction. So that means we can be more sure of Saddam's military capabilities in the absence of inspections? Orwell would be impressed.

And now the Bush administration is playing the al-Qaida-terrorists-are-in-Iraq card. But where? Northern Iraq? Isn't that the part of Iraq controlled by our Kurdish allies under the cover of the northern no-fly zone?

In the meantime, while the nation is focused on war planners dancing the jingoistic jig, other important issues like the present economic crisis don't get the attention they deserve.

Civil liberties? Lewis Lapham, longtime editor of Harper's Magazine, was recently added to the list of "internal threats" being compiled by Richard Bennett's McCarthyite group called Americans for Victory Over Terrorism.

Lapham's sin, like others on the list, which includes former President Jimmy Carter, is they have a "blame America first" agenda, which is a code word for those whose agenda isn't uncritically swallowing everything that comes out of the White House.

Unfortunately, Bennett's narrow siege mentality has support even outside the neocon egghead establishment. A reader wrote me last week, disparaging "peaceniks," globalization protesters and other assorted leftists, arguing that even "after all the mistakes and crimes are acknowledged, the matter on the international table is what to do now?"

But you see, the global peace and economic justice movement isn't just talking about past "mistakes." Activists are talking about present calculated policies and the need to change many of them for justice sake; without which there will be no peace.

Like what? According to Amenga-Etego of the Ghana National Coalition Against the Privatization of Water: "The 'cost recovery' policies of the (U.S.-dominated) World Bank in Ghana led to a 95 percent increase in water rates in 2001. Poor people have lost access and now Ghana is second only to Sudan in the incidence of guinea worm, thanks to the privatization policies of the World Bank."

Like what? Jim Vallette, research director for the Sustainable Energy and Economy Network and the author of "Transnational Corporate Beneficiaries of World Bank Group Fossil Fuel Projects, 1992-2002," points to a new study.

"Our new study shows that many energy corporations facing government investigation here and abroad for alleged accounting irregularities, energy market manipulation, fraud, bribery and human rights abuses have leveraged billions of dollars in World Bank Group financing over the past decade.

"These include Halliburton (the No. 2 beneficiary of WBG fossil fuel financing at $1.97 billion), Enron (No. 11 with $967 million), El Paso Corp. (No. 5 with $1.5 billion), which has been found to have illegally manipulated the energy markets in California...as well as Harken Energy (George W. Bush's old company) and UNOCAL, which a federal court this month ruled could be liable for human rights abuses associated with its Burma gas venture."

This is not about guilt or "blame America first." It's about the fundamental moral imperative to be responsible for our own actions. As the sage Rabbi Heschel used to say: "We are not all guilty. But we are all responsible."

Thats 1........... (hey, wake up - it's called FOREIGN POLICY of this country)

more on the way.......

Semper FI

Barndog

[Barndog]

The White House On Iraq:
We Don't Need No Stinkin' Proof!

We all know who attacked us on Sept. 11, 2001, don't we?

No, not Osama bin Laden. God, that is so last year. It never turns out to be the person you first suspect. It was Saddam Hussein. For some reason we couldn't find him when we went after him in Afghanistan, bringing that magic elixir of regime change along with us. But now we've got a better idea: track him down where he actually lives, in Baghdad, and punish him right in his own backyard. It's the only way to obtain justice for the thousands he killed on 9/11.

At least that's the way the White House is now pitching the story.

In this latest rewrite of history, Osama has suddenly lost his beard and grown a mustache, morphing into the Butcher of Baghdad -- or one of the look-alike stand-ins Saddam has been using for public appearances since 1998.

"You can't distinguish between Al-Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror," said President Bush in the Oval Office last week.

Really? He can't differentiate between a group of evil ultra-radical Islamic fundamentalists that carried out the Sept. 11 attacks and an evil secular nationalist who, despite the frantic efforts of the Bush administration, has not been directly linked to 9/11? He'd better start making such distinctions -- and fast. When every expert who knows anything about the Mideast can distinguish between the two, is it too much to ask that a President who’s ready to go to war look a bit more closely?

People under stress often regress to earlier stages of development. It appears that Bush is so intent on getting Saddam, so obsessively tightly gripped by a need to succeed where his war hero dad failed, so obsessively determined to lay the murderous 9/11 assault at Baghdad's door, that he's regressed to that level of childhood development where fantasy, reality and wish fulfillment are all mixed up. Except that this time, things like nuclear weapons and the safety of the world for the next few decades are involved.

Now, I'm no psychologist, but I believe there is a clinical term for this condition: going off the deep end.

How else to explain the president's bizarre response to a reporter's straightforward query last week about who poses a bigger threat to America, Saddam or Al-Qaeda?

"That's an interesting question," he replied. "I'm trying to think of something humorous to say but I can't when I think about Al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein."

When did the president take over the "Tonight Show?" Why would the idea that he should make a joke about such a deadly serious subject even cross his mind? It would be like asking Danielle van Dam's parents about the trial of their daughter's murderer and having them apologize for not being ready with a humorous quip.

No, Mr. President, you needn’t apologize -- your inability to treat serious subjects lightly is not one of your deficiencies. So rather than struggling to come up with a wan witticism, why don't you just answer the question? Especially since it appears by your actions that you’ve already come up with one.

Instead of bothering to give the least defense of his sudden fusion of Saddam and Osama, Bush launched into a fantasy-fueled diatribe: "The danger is, is that they work in concert. The danger is, is that Al-Qaeda becomes an extension of Saddam's madness and his hatred and his capacity to extend weapons of mass destruction around the world."

The president's regressed condition is spreading like the West Nile virus throughout the West Wing and beyond.

Witness the symptomatic blurring of fact and fantasy exhibited by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. When asked at an Armed Services Committee hearing about what is now compelling us to "take precipitous actions" against Iraq, Rumsfeld barked: "What's different? What's different is 3,000 people were killed." Yeah, by Mohammed Atta and company -- not Saddam Hussein. But why quibble over details when there is a propaganda war to be won?

National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice continued the assault on reality when she vaguely yet ominously claimed: "There clearly are contacts between Al-Qaeda and Iraq that can be documented." Well, then why not document them? We've documented contacts between Al-Qaeda and our oil dealers in Saudi Arabia and Al-Qaeda and our new best friends in Pakistan. But I don't see any B-2s powering up for raids over Riyadh or Karachi.

As is the White House custom, Rice simply refused to back up her claims. So did Rumsfeld, who memorably rebuffed a reporter late last week by saying, "That happens to be a piece of intelligence that either we don't have or we don't want to talk about." In other words: Proof? We don't need no stinking proof! And just because I’m asking your sons and daughters to possibly sacrifice their lives for it doesn’t mean you deserve to know whether it even exits.

It would be nice if we could just take them all at their word and let the bombs fall where they may. But Sen. Bob Graham, who, as chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee is privy to the inside scoop, says he's seen no evidence of any link between Al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein

So we're left with the fevered, infantile imaginings of the president and his pals. "We had dots before," said Anna Perez, Rice's spokeswoman. "Now we have a higher density of dots. Have we connected those dots? No."

Perhaps the president should put down his saber-rattle, pick up his crayons and connect them before drawing us into a bloody war.

That's #2

Barndog

[Barndog]

*Note* My only hope is that someone will see through education that there's alot more at stake here. It's alot more than 'nuke'em until they glow. It's MONEY - the same thing I've been saying the whole time this debate has been going on.

Barndog

The Sun Can't Set on This Empire Too Soon
The U.S. has no right to indulge in imperialism

It sure smells like imperialism. That's the word historians use when powerful nations grab control of desired resources, be it the gold of the New World or the oil of the Middle East.

Imperialist greed is what "regime change" in Iraq and "anticipatory self-defense" are all about, and all of the rest of the Bush administration's talk about security and democracy is a bunch of malarkey.

In the laundry list of reasons the Bush team has been trotting out in defense of a unilateral invasion of Iraq, oil is never mentioned. Is the fact that Iraq holds a huge pool of oil a piddling footnote to this debate? Is that Gulf War protest sign, "No Blood for Oil," too cynical, even passe? Perhaps we should ask National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, who served as a Chevron director and had an oil tanker named after her.

Despite her corporate connections, Rice is a scholar, and she should know her history: For 50 years, we and the British before us have assumed the same neocolonial posture vis-a-vis Iraq as we do with Saudi Arabia and its surrounding sheikdoms and Iran. The Gulf War, fought to save U.S. corporate interests in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, was only the latest example of this heavy-handed policy. Think Halliburton and Vice President Dick Cheney.

The strategy is pretty much the same as that drawn up by the Romans: Find and support local strongmen who can deliver the goods to the imperial capital, come hell or high water. How they treat their own people is not our business; we have never cared about democracy in the Mideast unless one of its dictators happened to fail to toe our line.

That is why our CIA facilitated the rise to power of Iraq's Baath party and ultimately the succession of Saddam Hussein as its current leader. The first Bush administration supported Hussein, providing him with the means to wage chemical and biological war, up to the day he invaded Kuwait, another of our client states. After his defeat, we became totally disinterested in the freedom of the people of the countries we had rescued. So much so, in fact, that Saudi Arabia was allowed to thrive as the world capital of religious hatred and the major sponsor of terrorists, producing Osama bin Laden and 15 of the 19 hijackers who gave us the Sept. 11 tragedy.

The same contempt for democracy has marked our policy toward Iran, that other member of the "axis of evil" we helped create. When Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh moved to eliminate foreign control over Iran's oil, the CIA and its British counterpart overthrew him in 1953. Despite our babbling about democracy, we had no compunction about replacing the elected Mossadegh with a guy who claimed the hereditary right to the throne as shah of all shahs.

When the shah dared to act in the interest of his people--and his own bank account--by bolstering the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries in the push for higher oil prices, we came to regard him, too, as expendable.

Even our support of Israel had less to do with the struggle of a brave people for a deserved homeland and more with the usefulness of that country as an agent of our Mideast ambitions and a reliable ally in offsetting expanding Soviet influence in the region.

With the end of the Cold War, we were at a loss for a noble rationale to justify our heavy Mideast presence, which has been enormously profitable to some American corporations and industries that are well represented in this administration. Support democracy? We do subsidize Israel, the region's only functioning democracy, but our motives look less than pure when we fawn over cooperative dictatorships such as the regime in the United Arab Emirates, which forked over $6.4 billion to Lockheed Martin for fighter jets and gives us access to its oil.

Having just fought to free themselves from one of history's great empires, this nation's founding founders fiercely and repeatedly warned of the risks of imperial ambitions. Because of this, most Americans, whether liberal or conservative, grasp the fundamental truth that foreign entanglements destabilize, backfire and cost too much in lives and dollars.

Instead of exploiting our natural patriotism to fight a nonsensical war, our government should forgo the temptations of empire


And, there you have it. Take some time to understand the historical and contextual implications of these articles. And, once you get through, ask yourself this: if you feel as strongly now - as you did previously....... then WHY - do the Korean vets like my Father, like Ken MacDonald, like so many other Korean war vets...... if the 'Greatest Generation' thinks this war is nothing more than a reason to 'steal oil', and 'exploit our interests' - after WE provided Saddam the means to build the weapons we now claim he has, WHY does the Greatest Generation-.....
feel the same way as I do? Where did it all change? I think I know:

GREED - and that's a character trait which I do not possess.

Semper FI

Barndog

[arzach]

You are marking time here--Go to washington, get yer soap box 'Stand and Deliver'---mebbe then you can get a ride with whatever democratic congressman or senator going to baghdad--do yer spiel there-(take baghdad barbara with ya)---As former Military yoy know 'full disclousre' cannot happen, in cases of military intel.---tip yer hand and sources dry up--I believe after 9/11 Pres. Bush declared war on ALL terrorism, aid em--take a round, train em--take a round, ETC,ETC----If there is a mistake made here, I'd rather it be made by "Our Side"-(eliminating a threat)-than by their side-(Nuclear/Bio/Chem weapons used on the Region and the rest of the world)---
Try this---Prove to ALL of us, that sadman DOESN'T have these capabilities---then your other arguments will carry more 'weight' than 'smoke'-----

[NamGrunt68]

1. Undoubtedly, demographics must play into how our Greatest Generation Vets feel, because for every one that you get me in touch with that feels the way you stated they feel up there, I'll get you ten of em that feel we should go over to the middle east and kick sum serious azz !!

2. Touching again on the subject matter of this thread, "Question the Commander in Chief"......I still submit that if your in the Corps or any other branch of the Military Service, you have NO RIGHT, constitutional or otherwise to question his orders. They are only to be followed. A person in the military is teetering on "treason" if he questions them and possibly could end up in the slammer or worse, as he or she should.

3. I'm not greedy either until it comes to the possibility of some azzhole endangering the lives of my family, or bro's. Then I'm greedy as hell in the fact that I want to take ALL them azzhole's lives and snuff em out. Again, not to beat a dead horse. We were attacked here on our own soil. We lost thousands of American lives. We need to wipe the enemy out, completely. Whoever it was, or whoever it "might" have been. Period.

And I for one, think we should stand fully and totally behind our troops and President. I'm not blind to the corruption of politicians and all the crap that goes on in DC and other parts of the Country. But when we're at war here on our own soil, and fixing to send our bro's and bro'ettes into harms way, then I get a real bad case of "tunnel vision"....and right now that vision is to kill and maim as many of the enemy or possible enemy that it might have been to cause this attack and change the American way of life so drastically......whether that way of life is "greed" or something else don't matter to me. What does matter is my Freedom, (what little bit I have left), my family and bro's, and in general not having to worry about some arab lookin mofo sneaking into America's wire and harming it's citizens......

Not much of a rant, but over and out !!!!

[Barndog]

Well..... just witnessed an interview on TV (won't say where, cuz I always question the credibility of networks) - with a woman - who spent 4 years interviewing defectors from Iraq. Scientists, chemical experts, weapons tech's, and the like........
Now, her story WAS, based upon her interviews with these defectors is:

Saddam HAS : 8 Palaces - each Palace has up to 100 buildings EACH - huge complexes - none of which were allowed to be inspected during the UN weapons inspections up to 1998.

Now, she states in her book 'GERMS' (remainder of title unknown) - that he has over 2400 galllons of liquid anthrax, the usual chemical and nerve agents Serin, mustard gas, BX etc etc.

She has factual evidence that he has been actively seeking out technology and materials to build nuclear weapons. Beyond that point, it is unclear.

So, in my mind, if this is the case, and I do have to question the validity of this information ( I just don't 'buy information wholesale' - as it were)

Why can't the administration come out and define it as she did?

Oh, and to preclude further confusion: I'll always stand behind my Marine Corps 110% - regardless of whether or not I agree or disagree with the President or the reasons.

And, that is my right as an American citizen, and as Bones stated my Honor as a United States Marine - (and I quote) "to hold those in power accountable for their actions - that is my Honor" (end quote).

Semper FI

Barndog

[lakers]

D*MN IMPRESSIVE STATEMENT DANE, I LIKE YOUR ATTITUDE :yes:

[Sparrowhawk]

Several defectors from different parts of Iraq saying the same thing, one needs to pay attention to that even when we don’t have any more information.

It wasn’t until we went into Iraq after the war that we found the biological weapons as well as the nuclear plans Saddam was putting in place.

All she did was put it all together, but the sources are there. All one ahs to do is click click click on middle east news services as well as those news services in Europe and you'll get the overall position, plans and what is going on in the middle East and we still are debating certain issues that only delay and will cost us greatly in the months ahead.

How often did we wait in Afghanistan and because of that terrorist got away.

They don’t wait for us, they have their plans all laid out that calls for the destruction of Israel as well as the United States. The force acceptance of Islam as America's only religion. That is their goal that is what their religious leaders teach their youth.


You can not make any deals with Arabs, haven't we seen that from history.

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/comics/updating/varvel.gif

[Sparrowhawk]

best way to look at things is to look at what the news are reporting, then figure the opposite is true.




http://www.cagle.com/comics/updating/arial.gif

[Sparrowhawk]

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/Inspections/BESTinspections/wolverton.gif

[Sparrowhawk]

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/Inspections/BESTinspections/trever.gif

[Sparrowhawk]

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/Inspections/BESTinspections/corkjkhy.jpg

[lakers]

YOU GOT IT GOING ON THIS MORNING COOK :yes: , D*MN FINE POST YOU BE PUTTING UP TODAY :D

[Norton1]

I think I can address some of the critisism about what I did and why I did it.

First off - we did not burn the flag. Anyone that would have tried that would have got a tune-up - just as one of you stated earlier. I wasn't about that. But I believed that the protesters had a right to their opinion and was willing to provide security for them. I'd do it again.

Second - we had former medics doing training with medics getting ready to go overseas in running rap groups so that the combat troops could at least begin to process the insanity they were encountering. We were not trying to get them to desert, shirk their duty, or anything but do their job and have some form of care by trained folks they trusted. If any of you have been involved with combat groups at the outreach centers, or the VA, then you are the recipients of this early pioneer work. We worked hand in hand with the DAV as they took over the work the Vietnam Veterans Against the War had been doing on an informal basis trying to assist combat vets reintegrate after their tour in the war. From this DAV outreach work came the VA's recognition that Vietnam Veterans needed a community place to begin the process of coming home. It is now the Veteran's Outreach Center program.

Third - we advocated hard for proper VA health care in the matter of Agent Orange. We collected thousands of pages of evidence that was presented to the CDC and to the attorneys that prosecuted Dow for the Agent Orange Class action lawsuit that gained the presumptive service connection for the cancers associated with it - and did you know that specifically any Marine with cancer is presumed to have received it as a result of when he was in country? Do you think that came about from hunkering down somewhere? No it came from standing up and fighting for what I, and thousands of others, believed needed to be done. We knew that many of our Brothers were killing themselves, losing their families, and not being taken care of. So we advocated for them - for you. I regret none of it.

Fourth - I do not have access to it but I researched this in University - the Vietnam Vets Against the War had a dramatic impact on the ending of that war. Maybe you felt bad over there about it - but you must have been listening to the media and not your Brothers and Sisters that were fighting to get you home after we'd already been there. I have no idea how many lives were spared as a result of our involvement in the anti-war movement.

And lastly - PM you if I have issue with this? Why? I have issue with my freedom of speech and any impairment thereof and nothing else. Let's clarify this - is this an attempt at a private conversation regarding my position or is it an attempt to intimidate me in some way? The written word is a difficult means of communication at best so I'd appreciate clarification. I mean this sincerely. I'm not trying to denigrate anyone's service or opinion on the above subject matter. I'm not delusional enough to believe that you all are going to back off on how you perceive what I did or my position on this matter. I was, and am, sincerely trying to give you another perspective to look at. But if you don't respect what others are doing, and have done, to help vets then perhaps it is because you are misinformed or don't know the history.

After the Marines in this area came home from Desert Storm it was myself and another former Marine that went out to the unit and talked about some of the problems they might encounter as a result of their involvement. Know what? Out of 112 Marines over 80 came into the Vet Center for assistance. I think that was a great thing after our long fight in the 60s and 70s for that level of care. Our time in Viet Nam - and the fighting at home after - provided something for the future troops to come home to.

I have no idea how many combat veterans I have worked with over the last twenty or so years. But I do not need any more clients. I've seen it myself and heard it so much it leaves me sagging at the end of the day. So if we are going to go into Iraq I would just love to see us have all of our little duckies in a row first. And I do that by questioning the group think currently in effect.

So that's part of who I am and why I am. Now you get to decide if you care to continue to discourse with me about it or not. Whether you like it or not - I am your Brother. I am a Liberal in some senses. If you think I am a limp wrist that's too bad. You don't know me and that may not be an accurate statement. If you think that I am being PC and don't care for the troops - that is really sad. I'm the guy you go to the VA to see for your problems. I'm the guy who is internationally published on the subject of PTSD (small publication but internationally presented), I'm the guy who tuned up the VA about what goes on with those of us who were damaged psychologically by the war, I'm the Comp and Pen examiner that assisted you in getting your claims adjudicated fairly and in your favor, I'm the guy who went native and worked on an Indian Reservation for five years when no one else would. I'm an adopted Shoshone/Paiute Warrior of the Duck Valley Indian Reservation.

Well enough - I have nothing more to say to you about who I am. I shouldn't have to. Being a former Marine should be enough. Now you all have a superb day -

[Norton1]

My name is Steve - not stevie.

[NamGrunt68]

I ain't gonna get into the Nam thing with ya bro cause Like I said, in my opine, comparing Nam Vets and the effects on Nam Vets from serving in Nam ain't got a damn thing to do with whats going on with the deal in the Middle East and Saddam ........
Two totally different scenario's that cannot be compared, either by how the wars came about or how they ended, or how the Vets were effected by them.

North Vietnam DID NOT ATTACK the USA !!!!

The RAGHEADS DID !!!!

Nuff said on that !!

I hope that the VA you work with treats their PTSD Nammer's better than the one here in Hampton Virginia...Its a fvcking joke....
They got more damn wannabes runnin round this place than anywhur in the Country !!!! Thanks for helping the bro's so much though....we could use a few like you back here in regards to helping PTSD Vets !!!!!

[arzach]

_____________________
OK stevie---Read it again and again---still says the same damn thing---SUPPORT OUR TROOPS--- is the best and only way to end any phukin war---Dissent,Demonstrations, and Anti-War activisim only prolong the fighting, and killing---not to mention DESTROYING the morale of our Bros doin the fightin' and dyin'---So read NamGrunt's Post again--Memorize it. Got any 'issues' with this--PM me
GIT SUUMMM Daner---
_______________________________
Allrite Steve--Just read yer post, lots of good stuff in it---Wasn't tryin no intimidation BS, just an 'open line' of communication---
Gonna stand by my previous post-re-posted here---no changes---And clue you to something else--My eldest Son is a Gulf War Vet--I'm not oblivious to what they also, had to deal with--only makes my 'venom' stronger---
Any open demonstration only aids and abetts an enemy, gives him strength, when he's weak---North Vietnamese Leadership affirmed this fact-----:emark: :emark:

[Norton1]

You are correct about us getting wacked. Nice to be referred to as "bro" by you instead of some of the other things I probably could be :)

And Brothers - I want whoever planned that attack on us turned loose in the middle of the crankiest family members of folks who died in the Trade Center attack.

My deep set dissatisfaction with going after Saddam is that we had him - 10 years ago we had him. And we let him go. Everything in our favor and we let him go. I was furious. I'm still not a happy camper about it. Political intervention from somewhere stopped our Generals from finishing the job. And I'm not at all convinced that they would actually finish it this time.

I just want this to be all to our advantage - I learned that to attack in anger is to lose. Like laying out an L-shaped ambush. You set in, lay your mines, and when the bad guys walk in - you kill him. And I cannot ever recall being angry at those times - just determined and having everything on my end as tidy as I could make it.

You be cool Brothers - and Thanks for the clarification - you have no idea how much I appreciate that.

[NamGrunt68]

Originally posted by arzach
_____________________
OK stevie---Read it again and again---still says the same damn thing---SUPPORT OUR TROOPS--- is the best and only way to end any phukin war---Dissent,Demonstrations, and Anti-War activisim only prolong the fighting, and killing---not to mention DESTROYING the morale of our Bros doin the fightin' and dyin'---So read NamGrunt's Post again--Memorize it. Got any 'issues' with this--PM me
GIT SUUMMM Daner---
_______________________________
Allrite Steve--Just read yer post, lots of good stuff in it---Wasn't tryin no intimidation BS, just an 'open line' of communication---
Gonna stand by my previous post-re-posted here---no changes---And clue you to something else--My eldest Son is a Gulf War Vet--I'm not oblivious to what they also, had to deal with--only makes my 'venom' stronger---
Any open demonstration only aids and abetts an enemy, gives him strength, when he's weak---North Vietnamese Leadership affirmed this fact-----:emark: :emark:

Give your son a big ole fat sloppy "Semper Fi" and hand salute fer me would ya !!! and as usual, yer right on da money......why, your almost as much of a scholar as "Ding Dong" !!!! And I agree 110% about protest aiding and abetting the the enemy !! Yeah, what these bro's needs is somemore, Jane Fonda's, Jerry Rubins, Tom Haydens, and Chicago 7's.......them sum*****es should a been lined up against a wall and shot !! Between them, the probably caused the deaths of about 20,000 bro's at least !! Fvck them....they AIN"T got no constitutional right to do what they done and if they do, then the Constitution needs some serious tweeking !!!!!!!!!!

[arzach]

Originally posted by NamGrunt68


Give your son a big ole fat sloppy "Semper Fi" and hand salute fer me would ya !!! and as usual, yer right on da money......why, your almost as much of a scholar as "Ding Dong" !!!! And I agree 110% about protest aiding and abetting the the enemy !! Yeah, what these bro's needs is somemore, Jane Fonda's, Jerry Rubins, Tom Haydens, and Chicago 7's.......them sum*****es should a been lined up against a wall and shot !! Between them, the probably caused the deaths of about 20,000 bro's at least !! Fvck them....they AIN"T got no constitutional right to do what they done and if they do, then the Constitution needs some serious tweeking !!!!!!!!!!
_______________________
Bro, We gotta git ta Vegas--You say I'm onna money--I say you be on da money---We'll kick sum serious azz on da Roulette Wheel-:D :D ----Bro, I can not think of anyone who comes close to Da Dinger---even C-Doc gits a back seat in dat 'War-Wagon---
Semper Fi to ALL muh Bros !!!! Esp. muh Nammie Bros---

[NamGrunt68]

Originally posted by Norton1
You are correct about us getting wacked. Nice to be referred to as "bro" by you instead of some of the other things I probably could be :)

And Brothers - I want whoever planned that attack on us turned loose in the middle of the crankiest family members of folks who died in the Trade Center attack.

My deep set dissatisfaction with going after Saddam is that we had him - 10 years ago we had him. And we let him go. Everything in our favor and we let him go. I was furious. I'm still not a happy camper about it. Political intervention from somewhere stopped our Generals from finishing the job. And I'm not at all convinced that they would actually finish it this time.

I just want this to be all to our advantage - I learned that to attack in anger is to lose. Like laying out an L-shaped ambush. You set in, lay your mines, and when the bad guys walk in - you kill him. And I cannot ever recall being angry at those times - just determined and having everything on my end as tidy as I could make it.

You be cool Brothers - and Thanks for the clarification - you have no idea how much I appreciate that.

Aint no thang Steve......we be aok and keep on helping them Vets cause there ain't enuff workers in the VA's like your self that seem to be hell bent on helping them !!! I was in a group session for about 12 weeks at the VA but was brought in by my shrink for a one to one session, and she informed me that she didn't want me coming to the sessions anymore and I was going to start one on one sessions with a new shrink.....she said that
"I was to dissruptive"............ Well the only thing I was dissruptive about was that there were about 25 Vets in there, and about 20 of em was "wannabe''s", and I proved it to her by callin them out in front of everybody and it got real real ugly alot o times......but I'm the one that got yanked....not them....as it turns out, it was probably for the best !!! My point being, the VA is wasting good money on useless pieces of sh!t, when they could be spending it on more deserving vets.....Anyway, don't know why I went there with this post.......it's off the subj.....l
we're cool and Welcome Home Bro.......

[USMC0311]

Originally posted by NamGrunt68


Aint no thang Steve......we be aok and keep on helping them Vets cause there ain't enuff workers in the VA's like your self that seem to be hell bent on helping them !!! I was in a group session for about 12 weeks at the VA but was brought in by my shrink for a one to one session, and she informed me that she didn't want me coming to the sessions anymore and I was going to start one on one sessions with a new shrink.....she said that
"I was to dissruptive"............ Well the only thing I was dissruptive about was that there were about 25 Vets in there, and about 20 of em was "wannabe''s", and I proved it to her by callin them out in front of everybody and it got real real ugly alot o times......but I'm the one that got yanked....not them....as it turns out, it was probably for the best !!! My point being, the VA is wasting good money on useless pieces of sh!t, when they could be spending it on more deserving vets.....Anyway, don't know why I went there with this post.......it's off the subj.....l
we're cool and Welcome Home Bro.......

:yes:

A woman shrink..wtf she know bout Nam :no:

sombody gotta put the "straight-up" on them wanna B's Bro..TY NamGrunt :yes:

Truth iz sumtimes UGLY but Truth is REAL

Semper Fidelis, Nam Bro

[NamGrunt68]

Originally posted by USMC0311


:yes:

A woman shrink..wtf she know bout Nam :no:

sombody gotta put the "straight-up" on them wanna B's Bro..TY NamGrunt :yes:

Truth iz sumtimes UGLY but Truth is REAL

Semper Fidelis, Nam Bro

Bro, I feel the same way, but there are about 8 shrinks in the VAMC at Hampton Virginny....ALL OF THEM IS WIMMENZ.....ALL OF THEM !!!! Aint' got no other choices there !!!! They are MORE interested in takin care of PTSD patients that have been sexually traumatized than Combat Vets....that ain't no sh!t !!!! So, I changed mah story on em and told em that the bro's in "CorpsGrunts" has been sexually abusin me fer a couple o years....now I gottem on mah side !!!!!!

[USMC0311]

Originally posted by NamGrunt68


Bro, I feel the same way, but there are about 8 shrinks in the VAMC at Hampton Virginny....ALL OF THEM IS WIMMENZ.....ALL OF THEM !!!! Aint' got no other choices there !!!! They are MORE interested in takin care of PTSD patients that have been sexually traumatized than Combat Vets....that ain't no sh!t !!!! So, I changed mah story on em and told em that the bro's in "CorpsGrunts" has been sexually abusin me fer a couple o years....now I gottem on mah side !!!!!!

:D boom boom..cum sum GI. my shrink was from India.. the dude was pushin pills on me till I told him.......well...I'm sure the post would be deleted..so I'll just say..the shrink told me .."I don't think there is any thing I can do to help you"...I said "you got that right" now I'm drug and shrink free...I delt with Vietnam for 31 years before his bullshlt 5 years ago
10-4 on the CorpsGrunts.they be sum straight-up Marines.Thank You and God for hookin me up with the Site

[SGTBLASTER]

WE DID HAVE OUR TIME IN THE GULF AND I LIVE WITH IT !

I AM PROUD TO HAD SERVED AS A US MARINE AND I WOULD DO IT AGAIN. THOSE PEOPLE OVER THERE ARE A BREED THAT PRAYS UPON THE INNOCENT WITH TERROR TACTICS.

THEY KILLED OUR BROTHERS IN BEIRUT 10-1983 and I HAVENT FORGOTTEN THAT.

I LOVE THIS COUNTRY AND AINT NO RAG HEAD GOING TO TAKE HER FROM US BROs.......:devious:


SEMPER FI

[arzach]

Originally posted by SGTBLASTER
WE DID HAVE OUR TIME IN THE GULF AND I LIVE WITH IT !

I AM PROUD TO HAD SERVED AS A US MARINE AND I WOULD DO IT AGAIN. THOSE PEOPLE OVER THERE ARE A BREED THAT PRAYS UPON THE INNOCENT WITH TERROR TACTICS.

THEY KILLED OUR BROTHERS IN BEIRUT 10-1983 and I HAVENT FORGOTTEN THAT.

I LOVE THIS COUNTRY AND AINT NO RAG HEAD GOING TO TAKE HER FROM US BROs.......:devious:


SEMPER FI
______________________[SIZE=3]
Can't be enough Payback fer whut da lo-life pukes did to our Bros in beirut--"Only with every little rag(head) I whack"--"Every little beat of my heart"--"Every little breath I take"---CAN'T/WON'T/NEVER FORGET----:evilgrin: :evilgrin:

[NamGrunt68]

You bro's are right on da money about the 242 Marines that died in Beirut !!! I see alot o posts in these clubs from people saying that Bush Sr could o stopped this sh!t with the Ragheads in 91, but I maintain that Reagan could o prevented all this stuff when he was in.....when them bro's was killed in Beirut he should o leveled that fvcking Country and went ahead and took out Libya, Iraq and Iran all at the same time.........we'd probably never had sh!t to worry about now !! I think "Remember Beirut" is a damn fine battle cry for the bro's to go in their with this time !!
Only thing them Beirut bro's got was sh!t on just like the Nammer's !! Fvck them Raghead mutha's wipe their azzes out fer good !!!

[Barndog]

I was in Iwakuni when this happened. We were embarking for the States, and our replacement squadron was already on it's way there. When we got back to Cherry Point, I was short. I had the 'usual'...

[firstsgtmike]

I have a simple question for Bin Laden and all of his cohorts and supporters.

IF BIN LADEN IS DOING GOD'S WORK, WHY IS HE HIDING?

Semper Fi C:\My Documents\My Pictures\I'll take it..bmp

[Barndog]

Top, I asked that question from the first videotape they showed after 9/11 - that solidified and confirmed that his boys did it, and he was behind it.

To 'forward think' upon the subject of Bin Laden and Afghanistan a bit...... I think we all know or should by now, Russia got their azzes kicked for 10 years there, before we even thought about it. Well, we kinda supported the Muhjadin (sp) ie: Bin Raghead and (now al-Quada) or Bush1/CIA etc, did for quite some time. Regardless....

We have 7500 troops in Afghanistan right now. With a large committment in Iraq (and it better damm well be large), who is to say that Al-Ragheads, and the tribals wouldn't mount a massive offensive, ala TET, and send all of them over there home in body bags? My god - with the amount of weapons they keep finding, wouldn't ya think, it's like a needle in a haystack over there?

Yes, unpleasant a thought as it may be, I find it necessary to think in this manner occasionally. It helps me to better understand the 'why' question I keep having, caused from lack of hard facts.

Semper FI

[Barrio_rat]

Originally posted by Barndog

An A-6 squadron wouldn't have gotten me the payback I wanted. My Huey with a GAU-2B and a couple of pods of Zuni's really woulda.

Semper FI

I hear ya there Barndog! Nothin' says "mornin'" like the drone from a GAU-26! Not to mention the chang of an M-60 or the thud from a 50... Zunie's pack a punch too. Throw on some Willie Pete warheads and yer talking about a PARTY! Side bar, take a 19 shot Mighty Mouse and put 'er on ripple. LOL

Semper Fi