(PV) A new message: "We can win!"

[Devil Dawg]

Originally Posted by Powerman

I disagree with many things you have said. However, you and many troops like yourself has always been willing to see this through to the end. I would have no problem saying you were right and I was wrong. Stay safe.

Way bigger man than some on this board. Good On Ya

[justgotback]

Originally Posted by eric_t12

i'm not dismissing the surge, but listening to this guy say its working is like listening to Don King say one of his fighters is the best...

If someone is out there saying that his team "US Army" is the best team, then I say let him scream it from the rooftops!

[eric_t12]

Shouldn't have to cross fingers, just believe in our troops and let them do the job they volunteered for. Save all defeatist attitudes for politicians that lean to port.

believing in us doesn't change the fact we came over here for, at best, flimsy reasons.

defeatist attitudes? defeat from who? we wouldn't have been 'defeated' if we wouldn't have started the fight with iraq.

and we DID start the fight with iraq. and those politicians control the nations' foreign policy - which we enforce with the president's command. only fascist dictatorships allow the commander of the military to create and control foreign policy.

[justgotback]

Originally Posted by eric_t12

believing in us doesn't change the fact we came over here for, at best, flimsy reasons.

defeatist attitudes? defeat from who? we wouldn't have been 'defeated' if we wouldn't have started the fight with iraq.

and we DID start the fight with iraq. and those politicians control the nations' foreign policy - which we enforce with the president's command. only fascist dictatorships allow the commander of the military to create and control foreign policy.

Eric, I sure wish you were my soldier.

[eric_t12]

why's that chief?

[Devil Dawg]

Originally Posted by eric_t12

believing in us doesn't change the fact we came over here for, at best, flimsy reasons.

defeatist attitudes? defeat from who? we wouldn't have been 'defeated' if we wouldn't have started the fight with iraq.

and we DID start the fight with iraq. and those politicians control the nations' foreign policy - which we enforce with the president's command. only fascist dictatorships allow the commander of the military to create and control foreign policy.

You appear to me to be disenfranchised with your chosen profession. You will eventually be able to move into a civilian career with anyone of the grassroots organizations you chose. Portside for sure from this post.

Defeatist Attitude can easily be defined by looking at any quote from 90% of the candidates for higher office. They have already decided we lost, they have already admitted to ALL Terrorist factions that we are not as dedicated to our beliefs as they are. This makes us a bigger target.

As to being misled with flimsy reasons for starting a campaign in Iraq, I must have missed the part where you posted your credintials as the NSA to the President. I know there are many reasons Perceived for us being there, and some being proven wrong. None of which make the case for abandoning it.

Your last statement is a bit obscure. Are you trying to say that our House and Senate should set the FP, and our military enforces it by decree of the CinC? And that if we allow our CinC to set and enforce it we are a "Dictatorship"?

[justgotback]

Originally Posted by Powerman

Thanks. I have always said that I want this to succeed and our troops to come home. A healthy Iraq is what is best for the U.S. Period. I have never said otherwise.

What I take issue with is our leadership's ability to make this happen. You will never be able to convince me that our misteps and mistakes have not caused this to go on longer, and costed more than it should have. If we can't win, we need to cut our losses. I we can, we have an obligation to clean up our mess.

I really do hope this is a turrning point. Failure in Iraq would be disasterous for us. I feel our leadership has failed us. (Both sides) Success in Iraq will rest squarely on the shoulders of our troops. I disagree with many things you have said. However, you and many troops like yourself has always been willing to see this through to the end. I would have no problem saying you were right and I was wrong. Stay safe.

I appreciate your ideas Powerman, but more importantly I appreciate that you present them with an open mind. I always enjoy your posts.

[eric_t12]

i'm not disenfranchised with my chosen profession - i'm disenfranchised with the idea that the military is best used to fight pre-emptive wars with nations that had no reason for the upsurge in military activity. 9/11 started it all - we all know that - and iraq had little to nothing to do with 9/11.

saudi arabia had more to do with it than iraq. Osama was saudi royalty, and how many of the hijackers were saudi? read the 9/11 commission report sometime.

as for my 'credentials' - they're as good for saying we went in for the wrong reasons as yours are for saying 'we should stay'.

defending liberty abroad while its usurped at home is kind of a short-sighted way to 'defend' it, i would say. REAL ID, PATRIOT ACT, open borders with mexican truckers 'pre-checked' and driving around in the united states in any capacity, and (if bush would have gotten his way) ports controlled and outsourced to middle-eastern countries.

makes us a bigger target? we weren't big enough for 9/11?

no - we wouldn't be a dictatorship SIMPLY because of that - but it would be a step in that direction. do you disagree?

[Devil Dawg]

"we wouldn't be a dictatorship SIMPLY because of that - but it would be a step in that direction"
I would say the port leaning staesmen are gunning more for a Communist based version. Whose version of the 9/11 commision is more realistic? i have yet to read anything from that rag that is more than 20% accurate.

Big Corporations and Lobbyist are more to blame for all of our homeland issues than any one politician. To try to accuse a sitting President of being the root of all our evils, while using as an example issues that his opposition promotes is a bit backwards.

I will not even try to defend Saudi Arabi, they are truly one of the largest un-recognized terrorist organizations out there. Figure out how to make a car run on water and we will alleviate tha issue in an hour or less. They only have about 10years or so of oil left, andknow it. Why do you think they are building so many outrageous tourist attractions?

We have to ensure global stabilization in order to maintain our way of life here. Not seeing that big picture is short sighted. You may not like some or all of the ways we have to do this, but it is a sad fact of life. If we left the world up to it's own and went into an isolationist state again. How would that be better?

[nickb]

Originally Posted by justgotback

I guess many folks that are left leaning are saying "uh oh!" , when stories such as this one comes out.

It is pretty bad, when you hate the President so much you hope America fails in Iraq. Regardless of what political side you fall on, that is a sad position to be in. I am thrilled to read a story such as this:

The 'Surge' Is Succeeding




No one is asking American journalists to start emphasizing the "good" news. All they have to do is report what is occurring, though it may conflict with their previous judgments. Some are still selling books based on the premise that the war is lost, end of story. But what if there is a new chapter in the story?

JGB,

Thanks & keep up the good work!