View Full Version : De-legitimizing the Troops

02-15-07, 08:06 AM
De-legitimizing the Troops
By Ray Robison

The claim of the anti-war left that they "support the troops" is getting threadbare. The next phase of anti-war playbook: De-legitimize the soldiers.

It is no coincidence that NBC reporter Richard Engle, who has long offered slanted reporting from Iraq to portray American actions in the worst possible way, and Bill Arkin of NBC and the Washington Post have made recent ‘gaffs' in their reporting. It should have been expected as part of the anti-war coalition information offensive. It is easy to recognize this progression when put into context.

Whereas Colin Powell gave us the doctrine for winning wars, the left has created and enacted a doctrine for losing wars. I think that since it was instantiated during the Vietnam War by John Kerry during his congressional testimony and was more recently revitalized for a new generation during his presidential candidacy, it is more than fair to call this policy, the Kerry Doctrine.

Let's take a look at what it takes to loose a war. The best way to examine the Kerry Doctrine is to compare it to its inverse, the Powell Doctrine:

First General Powell asked ‘is vital national security interest threatened'? The weakness of the Powell Doctrine is that it is posed in the context of an innocuous political scheme. The answer to the national security question is ultimately subjective to political posturing. Or as Carl von Clausewitz put it "for the political view is the object, war is the means, and the means must always include the object in our conception."

So the first item of the Kerry Doctrine can be stated as ‘can it [the conflict] be made to appear non-vital to national security'? When you have Democratic leadership reading their own reports which are misquoted in the Washington Post as coming from independent government findings, then the answer is obviously, yes it can. When the Senate Intelligence Committee finds none of the voluminous documents that show Saddam supporting Islamic terrorists within-the-scope for its reports, yes it can. When the same media outlets and pundits that alerted the US to Saddam-al Qaeda cooperation even before 9/11 write articles that complain about how the public was mislead on the issue by the Bush Administration, yes you can certainly take the national security interest out of the equation, satisfying criteria one of the Kerry Doctrine. It was a crucial first step for the anti-war movement.

General Powell then asked "do we have a clear attainable objective?" Of course, we have all heard for years how the left has complained that there is no ‘exit strategy' from Iraq. President Bush has only "stayed-the-course" according to the Democrats. We were told that this excursion would last weeks, not years according to the liberal media myth purveyors. The truth is that the Bush Administration first informally defined its policy publicly via Colin Powell. Back in 2002 this policy invaded the popular lexicon as the "Pottery Barn Rule" or "you break it you fix it". With that we were told from the beginning by President Bush that this nation would commit to and see through to the end the creation and stabilization of a democratic government in Iraq. While the effort is still underway and woefully over-schedule, over-budget, and over-bloody it is disingenuous to suggest we didn't know the objectives from the beginning. It is reasonable to argue the level of success, but not to say no plan has been in place since the early days of the war. But how else can the anti-war left implement criteria number two of the Kerry doctrine to ‘show there is no clear attainable objective'?

And in kind, the remaining criterion of the Kerry Doctrine have been addressed:

Powell Doctrine: Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed? (Kerry Doctrine: can we make the public believe that any unexpected risk or cost is an indicator of defeat?)

Powell Doctrine: Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted? (Kerry Doctrine: can we make the public believe the US acted unilaterally and without 12 years of diplomatic efforts thus waging an illegal war?)

Powell Doctrine: Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement? (Kerry Doctrine: can we make the public believe there is no way to win or we have already lost by making them believe Iraq is just like Vietnam?)

Powell Doctrine: Have the consequences of our action been fully considered? (Kerry Doctrine: can we demonize the decision makers by finding liberal bureaucrats to complain that their dissenting work was ignored?)

Powell Doctrine: Do we have genuine broad international support? (Kerry Doctrine: Can we keep the public from learning that the same countries that opposed the US at the UN were being paid to do so by Saddam?)

General Powell defined probably the most famous of these tenets as "is the action supported by the American people?" It is here that the Kerry Doctrine has stalled. While the public has lost enthusiasm for the war due to the Democratic leadership implementation of the Kerry Doctrine (and due to valid concerns such as the commitment by the Bush Administration to do what it takes to win the war) there is one segment of the population that has not: the implementers, our servicemen and servicewomen. They have kept their resolve.

Most of us have the respect enough for our troops to realize that if they - who are dying, suffering, departing, losing their limbs - believe in this mission, they must be on to something. While most of the American public is willing to give up a little more of our time we would rather spend watching American Idol to the mental perturbations of being in a war, the well is not inexhaustible. We can only take the concern for so long.

This is where Arkin and Engle, et al. enter the story. Since Americans are willing to ‘take the soldiers word' for it, the troops must be discredited to advance the Kerry doctrine. This is not my cynicism. It is born out by observation. Just as Arkin has called our soldiers "mercenaries" and Engle claims every soldier he talks to has decided we have lost in Iraq, there other indications of the Kerry Doctrine in the writings and sayings of Democratic leadership and their liberal media accomplices.

During this phase (which has gone on in a low-level fashion for some time in the extreme leftist media but is now becoming main stream liberal media fodder) we will see (and are seeing) these basic stories:

Efforts to discredit the soldiers' public opinions:
The soldiers don't understand why they are there. (ala Kerry's trapped in Iraq remark)
The soldiers have lost hope.
The soldiers can't speak out because of military protocol.
The soldiers in Iraq are confused, misguided, misled, bamboozled, uneducated, and the victims of societies failings. Their lives are wasted.

Efforts to misrepresent the soldiers' opinions:
One or two guys who express a desire to go home in a moment of weakness (which is really just about every soldier that ever served) will be portrayed as "losing hope" or "realizing we just can't win".

If a soldier admits he does not have a complete grasp of every conceivable factoid about the war then it will be reported as "he/she doesn't even know why he/she is here in Iraq".

And the most insidious effort - as Arkin has so graciously volunteered to bear the brunt of as the first purveyor for the mainstream liberal media - is the direct degradation of the soldiers in order to discredit and silence them.

Those soldiers that deny they fall into any of the above categories have ulterior motives for being there such as money, excessive amenities, and to persecute their own religious war (I haven't seen this one yet, but just wait; some enterprising liberal writer will turn this into the personal crusade of Christian soldiers.)

The soldiers are ungrateful that we took time away from our busy lives to give them as much support as we already have.

Of course, this is not a complete list, but it is about all I can take without getting physically ill. The thing to take away is that this recent spate of media coverage that has misstated and misrepresented the view of the vast majority of our troops is no accident. It is merely the next page of a dog eared policy document. And there is a reason why it is happening now; to give the Democrat leadership political coverage for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. Make no mistake: these things are not gaffs, misstatements or editing errors. The specific design is to desensitize the half-awake portion of the American public to the sound of criticism of the troops just as they did during Vietnam. The Kerry Doctrine has moved beyond attacking the Bush Administration and Republicans. It has now set its sites on American patriotism and nationalism, the bastion of the American military. Sorry to tell you, but you soldiers are now in a two front war with Islamic extremism and Liberal extremism. But you are not alone. Some of us understand what is happening and will at least promote your voices, no matter what your message, in order to make sure the media doesn't speak for you.


02-15-07, 09:16 AM
to go to war,looking for a way outis cockeyed.when you go to war the exit stragety is simple;when we win then its time to go home!once the enemyrealizes their butts have been soundly kicked,they then realize,'they better behave'.witness the japanese after ww2.forget the lefts roe,go in do the job.i support the troops,their mission,and all that goes with it.most of the people i know feel the same.the media and the politicians,lost the war in vietnam.they are determined that we will lose this one also.shame on them all!:usmc:

David Jameson
02-15-07, 01:42 PM
I think you took the words out of me Rocky.I realy can not understand whats going on with the so called leader ship of this country.It would seem that they think its alright to vote to send our people off to fight and when things don't go just peachy they Give up.This is not the same kind of people who won the big one .With the exception of the people who are now and have served I am very worried about how this will play out.We can win this if we let our people do the job.

02-15-07, 02:33 PM
david,the so called leaders are a disgrace wants to cut off funding to the troops.they tell me he is adecorated marine.i think he is phoney like kerry.i dont know of any marine who wants to cut and run.killem all let God sort them out.

02-15-07, 02:34 PM
the above was about murtha.sorry!

02-15-07, 03:17 PM

02-15-07, 03:46 PM
The way I look at it now is the United States of America will never be able to win another war. It is not because of the American fighiting man, or woman in our great military, or the numerous patriotic American citizens willing to do what ever it takes. Back in the old days WW1, WW2, our grandfathers, and grandmothers knew what it ment to loose the war. They knew that to loose the war it would jeoperdize future lives of there children, and childrens, children here at home. When they went to war it was all or nothing, no in-betweens. They took care of business against a ruthless enemy, the rest is history. What has happend to our generation? Don't our politicions, the liberls, anti-war activist understand the we are, right now fighting a just as ruthless enemy as our grandfathers, and grandmothers were back then and the future of our childrens is a stake? They will stop at nothing to wipe the United States of America of the face of the earth. We owe it to our children
to do for them!!!, what was done for us!!. But with the way the media, the libe's, politics interfering with what must be done. Not letting our men and women in uniform do what must be done. I do not know how we will ever be able to win, anything? GOD SAVE US ALL.

02-15-07, 03:53 PM
roho-lets go gettem.oorah!

02-15-07, 03:56 PM
is ther any way we can take murthas title of marine away?he is insisting on cutting funding for the troops.in my opinion he is am****&%#@***&^R

02-15-07, 08:10 PM
Rocky, I second your comments about fatass, do-nothing, bucket-mouthed, cockeyed looking MF, who wouldn't make a pimple on a REAL MARINE'S AAASSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That would be ms murtha!!!!!!!!!


Sgt Leprechaun
02-15-07, 08:44 PM
The way things are currently going, I am seriously re-evaluating if I want to re-enlist into the USMCR. Putting it simply, I love my fellow Marines, and miss, every single day, the fellowship and camraderie of being with Marines.

However, I am quickly reaching the conclusion that "the Amurkan people" really aren't worth anymore of my blood, sweat, and families tears. I'm thinking I'll be better off staying at home, doing what I can, and building the basement bunker and stockpiling supplies when the left wing idiots take over.

I dunno, maybe I'm just a paranoid old fart (no, I don't see the black helicopters yet.....but I sure think I hear 'em sometimes), but the way things are going, I have to ask myself, do I want to give 100 percent to these worthless SOB's who'd rather let their brains turn to mush watching "Idol" and the national spasm over "Anna Nicole"???

I'm thinkin.....NOT.

Am I wrong here? A coward? Lazy?

02-16-07, 06:19 AM
sgt.leprechan.i know what you are saying.no one but you can decide to go or stay.i honestly think sometimes we should all just quit.but thats what those sob's want.then they can boast that they won.but i say f***'em all.im older now but ican still fire a weapon.ill stay and fight,til they take my weapons from my dead hands.the left may win but by GOD they will know they were in a fight!dont quit sarge!:usmc:

02-16-07, 06:47 AM
The American education system has done it's job well! Starting in the late 60s the liberals started taking over the system and have been pushing globalism or internationalism every since. According to their way of thinking, America is no better than any other country, our system of government is not only NOT superior, but through our "arrogance", is actually worse than the peaceful socialism of europe. By instituting our value system we become aggressors and intrude on the rest of the world. It doesn't matter that we don't, and never have, practiced the colonialism of old europe; in their twisted logic we are just the same as the old colonial powers exploiting the downtrodden of the world. Europe burned itself out trying to conquer the world and is now jealous of the prosperity and military might of the USA. Now they want everyone to share and share alike, since they are bankrupt through their own foolish socialist policies. Our press (educated by the libs raised on Viet Nam and Watergate). our educators and our politicians, all push a globalist, corporation approach. Even Bush said "money trumps peace". WTF!! We either take our country back, which it may be too late, or get used to wars that we will never be allowed to win. There is no one running for office clamoring for victory in the middle east. Can we dig Ronald Reagan up and run him for Pres? That is exactly who we need, or someone with backbone that will say "America is my first and only concern; we will protect her irregardless of world opinion!" I'll vote for someone like that.
Other than that, Marines can only do what thay have always done; follow orders and do the best job allowable!

:usmc: :evilgrin:

02-16-07, 07:17 AM
d.w. where is another like harry truman?when he said the buck stops here,he meant it!if he called someone an sob[which he did],he never retracted it or said i misspoke.he threathned a reporter one time,said he would punch him in the nose.to day we have wimps trying to lead this country.they want us to be like the rest of the world.

02-16-07, 08:28 AM
d.w. where is another like harry truman?when he said the buck stops here,he meant it!if he called someone an sob[which he did],he never retracted it or said i misspoke.he threathned a reporter one time,said he would punch him in the nose.to day we have wimps trying to lead this country.they want us to be like the rest of the world.

I don't think Harry asked for the consent of our allies went he decided to drop the bomb, either! Only question was "will it get the job done and end the war?" No telling how many American (and Jap) lives were eventually saved by that decision! The last "good" democrat! All we have now are "globalists" and euroweenie wannabees!:mad:

02-16-07, 09:31 AM
harry had abig pair!he took no c**p.to my eyes, he was what a pesident should be.today we have politicians making believe they are he-men.they are not fit to shine harrys shoes.the media is also to blame.there idea of world shaking news is anna nichole.too bad she died.but this week long frenzy?who cares who the father of the baby is?there is along line of possibilities.we know what she was.tell us about our true heroes who stand in harms way.i hope and pray we get someone to run for the presidency,who has a really big pair,and gets the respect back for theU>S>A>::mad: :usmc: this above all,to thine ownself be true

David Jameson
02-16-07, 09:50 AM
What the **** does it take to be tried for treason in the U.S theses days?
You have the head of the A.S.C tell a left wing group that he is going to "SLOW Bleed" the effort to reinforce our people in the field (or words to that effect) and there is not a hole hell of a lot of outrage.Call me ****ing crazy
( I"ll bite ) but that seems to me like calling off the 2nd wave at Normandy or Siapan. I think these people have lost thier ****ing minds.They all vote for the war and then make every effort from day one to **** over our people.If they"the civies " mess this up there won't be any boat people or re-ed. camps this time.---This is not the good old USA I grew up to love .I feel real bad for the troops. These ****s over here send them off and pull all this ****,.and for what ? They don't like Bush? UN-FRIGIN REAL.

Sgt Leprechaun
02-19-07, 11:21 AM
Thanks, Rocky. I'm just so damn disgusted with the vast majority of idiots in this country anymore. I've got a wife, 4 kids, and have done my time.

Of course, if my slow *ssed Prior Service Recruiter had gotten off his 4th point of contact, I would have been re-enlisted back in December and I wouldn't have much to *itch about LOL. Shame on him for not even submitting the damn paperwork yet.

I guess that's the other reason I'm disgusted. :)

02-19-07, 03:41 PM
sgt, god bless you and allthose like you.thepoliticians all suck.turn the troops loose,and forget thedumb ROE.

02-19-07, 06:50 PM

02-20-07, 03:15 PM

Lets help them bleed out in 2008!


02-23-07, 08:33 PM


Democrats Move to Limit Bush's Authority

Feb 23, 6:32 AM (ET)


WASHINGTON (AP) - Four years ago, Congress passed legislation authorizing President Bush to go to war in Iraq. Now Senate Democrats want to take it back.

Key lawmakers, backed by party leaders, are drafting legislation that would effectively revoke the broad authority granted to the president in the days Saddam Hussein was in power, and leave U.S. troops with a limited mission as they prepare to withdraw.

Officials said Thursday the precise wording of the measure remains unsettled. One version would restrict American troops in Iraq to fighting al-Qaida, training Iraqi army and police forces, maintaining Iraq's territorial integrity and otherwise proceeding with the withdrawal of combat forces.

Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., intends to present the proposal to fellow Democrats next week, and he is expected to try to add the measure to anti-terrorism legislation scheduled to be debated later this month. Officials who described the strategy spoke only on condition of anonymity, noting that rank-and-file senators had not yet been briefed on the details.

Republicans recently thwarted two Democratic attempts to pass a nonbinding measure through the Senate that was critical of Bush's decision to deploy an additional 21,500 combat troops.

After failing on his second attempt last Saturday, Reid said he would turn his attention to passing binding legislation.

Jim Manley, a spokesman for Reid, declined to discuss the deliberations, saying only, "No final decisions have been made on how to proceed."

Any attempt to limit Bush's powers as commander in chief would likely face strong opposition from Republican allies of the administration in the Senate. Additionally, unlike earlier, nonbinding measures, the legislation now under consideration could also face a veto threat.

Still, it marks a quickening of the challenge Democrats are mounting to Bush's war policies following midterm elections in which war-weary voters swept Republicans from power in both the House and Senate.

The emerging Senate plan differs markedly from an approach favored by critics of the war in the House, where a nonbinding measure passed last week.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said she expects the next challenge to Bush's war policies to come in the form of legislation requiring the Pentagon to adhere to strict training and readiness standards in the case of troops ticketed for the war zone.

Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., the leading advocate of that approach, has said it would effectively deny Bush the ability to proceed with the troop buildup that has been partially implemented since he announced it in January.

Some Senate Democrats have been privately critical of that approach, saying it would have virtually no chance of passing and could easily backfire politically in the face of Republican arguments that it would deny reinforcements to troops already in the war zone.

Several Senate Democrats have called in recent days for revoking the original authorization that Bush sought and won from Congress in the months before the U.S.-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein.

That measure authorized the president to use the armed forces "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate ... to defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq" and to enforce relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions.

At the time the world body had passed resolutions regarding Iraq's presumed effort to develop weapons of mass destruction.

In a speech last week, Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said, "I am working on legislation to repeal that authorization and replace it with a much narrower mission statement for our troops in Iraq."

Biden added that Congress should make clear what the mission of U.S. troops is: to responsibly draw down, while continuing to combat terrorists, train Iraqis and respond to emergencies.

Along with Biden, officials said Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and a small group of key Democrats were involved in the effort to draft legislation. Leadership aides are also playing a role.

It was not clear whether the measure would explicitly state that the 2002 authorization for the use of military force was being revoked. One proposal that had been circulated would declare that Bush was not authorized to involve U.S. armed forces in an Iraqi civil war, but it appeared that prohibition had been dropped as part of the discussions.

At the same time, several officials noted that any explicit authority for U.S. troops to confront al-Qaida would effectively bless Bush's decision to dispatch about 3,500 additional troops to the volatile Anbar Province in the western part of Iraq.

Under the president's recent announcement, the balance of the 21,500 additional troops would go to Baghdad, where the administration hopes they can help quell sectarian violence.

02-23-07, 09:42 PM
Don't they read any FRIGN histroy books in school these days???? WHAT THE EFF IS WRONG WITH THE EFFING PEOPLE.

1937 a gallop pole said that the American people should stay out of all foriegn wars ANYBODY WANT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENED in 1938

A FRIGN history lesson..... that is all.... guess its to much

PTSD doesn't stand for post Tramautic stress disorder

it stands for

P issed off at
T he
S tupid
D emocrats

Sgt Leprechaun
02-24-07, 06:15 PM
THAT is one great poster!!!

02-24-07, 06:36 PM
Some great examples of politicians like dirty ****ing harry, that crooked bastard should be in prison for his shifty land deals he's made in his home state!!!!!!!!! ms biden is a dumb**** too!!!!!! I have a BAD CASE OF PTSD ****ed off at The Stupid Democrats!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I keep expecting ms jefferson (you know the rep who keeps $90,000 in his freezer and takes bribes on videotape with the FBI) WHO HAS NOT BEEN PROSECUTED YYYYEEEETTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - HE IS A ****ING CROOK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AS PER MS MURTHA!!!!!!!!!!


02-24-07, 06:48 PM
I agree with you Rocky.
I mean there is no second best in WAR! Either you win or get your ass handed to you.
We have to start being so PC and start pulling the real weapons out of the shed and let's do the damn thing!