| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Dharmananda" |
| Date: |
21 Dec 2004 02:07:33 AM |
| Object: |
It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War |
Non-servers like Putsch and Rummy are just never going to get it.
_________________________________________________________
http://www.journalstar.com/articles/2004/12/21/local
doc41c79eaabbbb4005447499.txt
http://tinyurl.com/3proz
Hagel blasts civilian bosses in Pentagon
BY DON WALTON / Lincoln Journal Star
Deteriorating conditions in Iraq are a consequence of "the arrogance and
incompetency of the civilian leadership at the Pentagon," Sen. Chuck Hagel
said Monday.
Increasing violence and instability spring from "the accumulation of a
series of bad judgments," the Nebraska Republican said.
Pointing to decisions to disband the Iraqi army, dismantle the Baathist
government bureaucracy and attempt to secure the country with an inadequate
number of U.S. troops, Hagel suggested "the buck does stop somewhere."
Hagel's sharp words came in response to news media questioning after an
appearance before about 60 eighth-grade students at St. Joseph School.
"It's always the uniformed military that has to bear the brunt of bad
decisions," Hagel said. "They do the dying and the suffering," he said, and
their families sacrifice, too.
Never will he utter "a criticism of the warrior," Hagel said, but the
military's civilian leaders must be held accountable.
"I went through one of these wars," he said. As a member of the Senate, he
said, "I am not going to stand back and allow it to happen again."
Hagel was twice wounded as an Army sergeant in Vietnam.
"These men and women deserve leadership that is worthy of them," Hagel said.
When Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld "flippantly dismisses" a young
soldier's question about lack of protective armor on military vehicles in
Iraq, Hagel said, "that is not worthy."
When it was discovered Rumsfeld's signature on letters of condolence to
slain soldiers' families was signed by an auto-pen rather than by the
secretary himself, Hagel said, "that tells me an awful lot."
Rumsfeld has said the auto-pen was used to assure the promptest possible
communication with survivors, but he promised he would sign future letters
personally.
The secretary's response to the soldier's question in Iraq included the
statement: "You go to war with the army you have."
Rumsfeld won a vote of confidence Monday from President Bush, who said the
secretary has done "a really fine job."
As Hagel critiqued Iraqi policy decisions, Prime Minister Ayad Allawi warned
of the growing danger of sectarian civil war in the wake of Sunni insurgent
attacks in Shiite holy cities on Sunday.
Civil war and the possible establishment of a post-Saddam Iranian-style
theocracy are among the future consequences that may be faced, Hagel said.
The senator warned about such possibilities when he argued against a
precipitate U.S. military attack on Iraq without broad international
support and careful planning for the aftermath.
Responding to questions from students, Hagel said he believes the United
States needs to seek more international cooperation rather than simply
exercise its military might.
"I would put a whole new focus on diplomacy, building coalitions of common
interest," he said. "We have strayed from that very wise course."
Hagel told the students increasing deployment of a downsized military, with
heavy reliance on National Guard and Reserve troops, eventually may force
future consideration of a military draft.
"A moral societal concern" is also at issue, he said: "Is it fair to ask a
very few people to carry all the burden, do all the dying?"
Hopefully, he said, the nation can avoid reinstituting compulsory military
service.
--
Triratanam sharanam gaccami
Dharmananda
http://mysite.verizon.net/res6zeam/american-buddhist/news.html
.
|
|
| User: "Elmer Thud" |
|
| Title: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War |
23 Dec 2004 06:04:20 PM |
|
|
Dharmananda wrote:
Non-servers like Putsch and Rummy are just never going to get it.
Like Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, and Reagan.
Civilian control of the military is IMPORTANT.
"These men and women deserve leadership that is worthy of them," Hagel said.
When Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld "flippantly dismisses" a young
soldier's question about lack of protective armor on military vehicles in
Iraq, Hagel said, "that is not worthy."
Hegel is a lying hack. Rumsfeld did NOT "flippant dismiss" the
soldier... if you think he did, then you've only seen/read the one small
snip that has been taken out of context and reperated ad nauseam.
When it was discovered Rumsfeld's signature on letters of condolence to
slain soldiers' families was signed by an auto-pen rather than by the
secretary himself, Hagel said, "that tells me an awful lot."
The "autopen" controversy is complete weak *****.
The secretary's response to the soldier's question in Iraq included the
statement: "You go to war with the army you have."
n.b.: "included" means "in part."
Responding to questions from students, Hagel said he believes the United
States needs to seek more international cooperation[...]
Sounds familiar. The nationn said "no" to sucking Europe off in the
attempt to get them to do the right thing.
"A moral societal concern" is also at issue, he said: "Is it fair to ask a
very few people to carry all the burden, do all the dying?"
Hopefully, he said, the nation can avoid reinstituting compulsory military
service.
So, he answered his own question in the affirmative.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Puddy" |
|
| Title: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War |
23 Dec 2004 11:25:09 PM |
|
|
"Elmer Thud" <wabbit@wabbit.net> wrote in message
news:82Jyd.3116$3v5.1606@fe2.texas.rr.com...
Dharmananda wrote:
Non-servers like Putsch and Rummy are just never going to get it.
Like Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, and Reagan.
Civilian control of the military is IMPORTANT.
"These men and women deserve leadership that is worthy of them," Hagel
said.
When Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld "flippantly dismisses" a young
soldier's question about lack of protective armor on military vehicles
in
Iraq, Hagel said, "that is not worthy."
Hegel is a lying hack. Rumsfeld did NOT "flippant dismiss" the
soldier... if you think he did, then you've only seen/read the one small
snip that has been taken out of context and reperated >ad nauseam.
Right. He basically told the soldier, "tough *****, deal with it".
When a soldier asks why he isn't properly equipt, after it was obvious for a
year he deserves a better answer then, "just because".
When it was discovered Rumsfeld's signature on letters of condolence to
slain soldiers' families was signed by an auto-pen rather than by the
secretary himself, Hagel said, "that tells me an awful lot."
The "autopen" controversy is complete weak *****.
Hmm, it obviously wasn't to the families of the dead now was it?
The secretary's response to the soldier's question in Iraq included the
statement: "You go to war with the army you have."
n.b.: "included" means "in part."
As if the rest of it changes the tone any?
Responding to questions from students, Hagel said he believes the United
States needs to seek more international cooperation[...]
Sounds familiar. The nationn said "no" to sucking Europe off in the
attempt to get them to do the right thing.
Of course we now know that they were right, and we were wrong. Iraq
didn't have WMD, they didn't have links to terrorists, and they weren't a
threat to anyone. Doing the right thing doesn't involve attacking third
world countries who pose zero threat to anyone just because you don't like
the guy who runs it.
Jeremy Olson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War |
24 Dec 2004 08:38:38 AM |
|
|
"Puddy" <Faceplant_04@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cqg97l$ek6$1@nwnexus-news.nwnexus.com...
"Elmer Thud" <wabbit@wabbit.net> wrote in message
news:82Jyd.3116$3v5.1606@fe2.texas.rr.com...
Dharmananda wrote:
Non-servers like Putsch and Rummy are just never going to get it.
Like Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, and Reagan.
Civilian control of the military is IMPORTANT.
"These men and women deserve leadership that is worthy of them," Hagel
said.
When Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld "flippantly dismisses" a young
soldier's question about lack of protective armor on military vehicles
in
Iraq, Hagel said, "that is not worthy."
Hegel is a lying hack. Rumsfeld did NOT "flippant dismiss" the
soldier... if you think he did, then you've only seen/read the one small
snip that has been taken out of context and reperated >ad nauseam.
Right. He basically told the soldier, "tough *****, deal with it".
When a soldier asks why he isn't properly equipt, after it was obvious for a
year he deserves a better answer then, "just because".
Did you read or hear his entire answer, or
are you basing your opinion on just what
the leftists are feeding you?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Puddy" |
|
| Title: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War |
24 Dec 2004 07:39:46 PM |
|
|
"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:bOVyd.14419$lm.8473@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Puddy" <Faceplant_04@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cqg97l$ek6$1@nwnexus-news.nwnexus.com...
"Elmer Thud" <wabbit@wabbit.net> wrote in message
news:82Jyd.3116$3v5.1606@fe2.texas.rr.com...
Dharmananda wrote:
Non-servers like Putsch and Rummy are just never going to get it.
Like Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, and Reagan.
Civilian control of the military is IMPORTANT.
"These men and women deserve leadership that is worthy of them,"
Hagel
said.
When Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld "flippantly dismisses" a
young
soldier's question about lack of protective armor on military
vehicles
in
Iraq, Hagel said, "that is not worthy."
Hegel is a lying hack. Rumsfeld did NOT "flippant dismiss" the
soldier... if you think he did, then you've only seen/read the one
small
snip that has been taken out of context and reperated >ad nauseam.
Right. He basically told the soldier, "tough *****, deal with it".
When a soldier asks why he isn't properly equipt, after it was obvious
for a
year he deserves a better answer then, "just because".
Did you read or hear his entire answer, or
are you basing your opinion on just what
the leftists are feeding you?
I read the whole answer, and it wouldn't matter if he broke down and
started crying. That one part of the answer is something you never
should say.
Jeremy Olson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War |
24 Dec 2004 07:52:54 PM |
|
|
"Puddy" <Faceplant_04@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cqigd2$psa$1@nwnexus-news.nwnexus.com...
"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:bOVyd.14419$lm.8473@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Puddy" <Faceplant_04@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cqg97l$ek6$1@nwnexus-news.nwnexus.com...
"Elmer Thud" <wabbit@wabbit.net> wrote in message
news:82Jyd.3116$3v5.1606@fe2.texas.rr.com...
Dharmananda wrote:
Non-servers like Putsch and Rummy are just never going to get it.
Like Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, and Reagan.
Civilian control of the military is IMPORTANT.
"These men and women deserve leadership that is worthy of them,"
Hagel
said.
When Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld "flippantly dismisses" a
young
soldier's question about lack of protective armor on military
vehicles
in
Iraq, Hagel said, "that is not worthy."
Hegel is a lying hack. Rumsfeld did NOT "flippant dismiss" the
soldier... if you think he did, then you've only seen/read the one
small
snip that has been taken out of context and reperated >ad nauseam.
Right. He basically told the soldier, "tough *****, deal with it".
When a soldier asks why he isn't properly equipt, after it was obvious
for a
year he deserves a better answer then, "just because".
Did you read or hear his entire answer, or
are you basing your opinion on just what
the leftists are feeding you?
I read the whole answer, and it wouldn't matter if he broke down and
started crying. That one part of the answer is something you never
should say.
It is the truth. Real men can take the truth, which
is why he received a standing ovation at the end
of his remarks.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Puddy" |
|
| Title: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War |
07 Jan 2005 12:19:26 AM |
|
|
"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:iG3zd.181$Ov3.117@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Puddy" <Faceplant_04@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cqigd2$psa$1@nwnexus-news.nwnexus.com...
"Bob" <no@email.address> wrote in message
news:bOVyd.14419$lm.8473@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Puddy" <Faceplant_04@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cqg97l$ek6$1@nwnexus-news.nwnexus.com...
"Elmer Thud" <wabbit@wabbit.net> wrote in message
news:82Jyd.3116$3v5.1606@fe2.texas.rr.com...
Dharmananda wrote:
Non-servers like Putsch and Rummy are just never going to get it.
Like Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, and Reagan.
Civilian control of the military is IMPORTANT.
"These men and women deserve leadership that is worthy of them,"
Hagel
said.
When Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld "flippantly dismisses" a
young
soldier's question about lack of protective armor on military
vehicles
in
Iraq, Hagel said, "that is not worthy."
Hegel is a lying hack. Rumsfeld did NOT "flippant dismiss" the
soldier... if you think he did, then you've only seen/read the one
small
snip that has been taken out of context and reperated >ad nauseam.
Right. He basically told the soldier, "tough *****, deal with
it".
When a soldier asks why he isn't properly equipt, after it was
obvious
for a
year he deserves a better answer then, "just because".
Did you read or hear his entire answer, or
are you basing your opinion on just what
the leftists are feeding you?
I read the whole answer, and it wouldn't matter if he broke down and
started crying. That one part of the answer is something you never
should say.
It is the truth. Real men can take the truth, which
is why he received a standing ovation at the end
of his remarks.
So that soldier isn't a real man? Of course it isn't the truth as
this was a war of choice in which the US had three years to prepare for, and
up until that question was asked had NOT been making the armor as fast as
they could.
Jeremy Olson
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War |
26 Dec 2004 11:36:14 PM |
|
|
Bob wrote:
It is the truth. Real men can take the truth, which
is why he received a standing ovation at the end
of his remarks.
"Suck it up and drive on!" was the catch-all phrase I recall when I was
in the 82nd.
Bob, I've been watching this conversation with some interest and I'm
pretty much seeing a lot of B.S. from both sides. The original article
referenced is written by a veteran who seems to imply that only war
vet's have any legitimacy when it comes to making moral judgements on
war, which of course, is wrong. Following his assumption, World War I
German war hero Adolf Hitler would thus have had far better judgement
that FDR.
The question posed by the soldier was clearly fed to him by a reporter,
though I would not be surprised if the soldier strongly shared the
reporter's feelings, but (being an enlisted soldier) only had the
confidence to say it when put into words by someone skilled in words
(the reporter).
I do think it was revealing that the soldier was applauded by his
peers. I recall a visit by top brass in 1991, during my turn in Iraq,
and could never have imagined a soldier posing such a question being
greeted by anything but shocked silence by his peers.
Rumsfeld's response revealed at the very least an incredible sloppiness
in his behavior as of late (as does the blunder regarding not signing
the letters to the families of the deceased). With such a low relative
death toll, such a blunder is astonishing.
The contempt that seems to be focussed on Rumsfeld (and seems to be
gaining momentum) does have it's roots in one of the supreme ironies of
this administration though. Other than Powell (who has been all but
driven from his position by his more influential peers), I can think of
no Senior member of the Bush cabinet that has served in a war. Now,
going back to my criticism of the guy who implied only war vets should
have a say, I do have to note that FDR (and Wilson, and so many other
non war vet's who led wars) were often surrounded by war veterans who
could temper their idealism with some of the realism that comes from
experieance. To the best of my recollection, FDR's VP (Harry Truman)
had been an artilary officer in WWI, for example, while his counterpart
in the Bush administration got five draft deferments to keep himself
out of going to war.
I think it is this underlining sense of detachment from reality by this
administration that the American public is taking out on Rumsfeld.
He's just clumsily watzing himself into field of fire.
.
|
|
|
| User: "MANFRED the heat seeking OBOE" |
|
| Title: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War |
27 Dec 2004 01:30:26 AM |
|
|
In article tomaxo wrote:
Bob wrote:
It is the truth. Real men can take the truth, which
is why he received a standing ovation at the end
of his remarks.
"Suck it up and drive on!" was the catch-all phrase
I recall when I was in the 82nd.
From a Historiographic perspective,
it is the Power of Ideas which shapes History.
Succinct and correct responses to acts of Deliberate Evil
ALWAYS herald crucial turning points of History.
http://www.investors.com/editorial/issues.asp
On Dec. 22, 1944, almost 60 years ago to the day
22 people died in a mess tent in Mosul,
Brig. Gen. Anthony McAuliffe of the 101st Airborne,
surrounded in Bastogne, Belgium, by a German offensive
that was not expected, responded to a Nazi surrender
demand with the famous one word response: "Nuts!"
History is the mechanism that
Evolution uses to cull the venal the stupid
and the depraved, those who live with wistful hope
and among clouds of aspiration, those that shriek about
the Inconsequentiality of Consequence, that 'this' time is different.
The shrill cries of
anti-BOOOSH cadre let you
know the obviousness of the Truth;
they shriek NOT because they have Ideas,
Principles or Morals to defend, but precisely-BECAUSE they have NONE.
--- a requisite for the aspiring Moral Vandal.
http://www.strangecosmos.com/images/content/102272.jpg
They are consumed by the 'need' to advertise
their vocation as both MORON and COWARD.
Liberal Denial, of the precipitating Events
which has reduced the state of the world to
what it is today, is as limitless, as it is boundless...
Was their shot heard round the world not clear?
"to leave now we would send a message to terrorists
and other potential adversaries around the world that
they can change our policies by killing our people.
It would be open season on Americans."
-- Bill Clinton '93
just before he pulled out of Somalia.
Had Mogadishu been decisively handled,
as was Post-War Germany, and Future Iraq;
there would have been no 9/11.
As wave after wave of Terror appear over the Horizon
as did so many luftwaffe did during the Battle of Britain,
is it possible to imagine that there be a people who to this day
still doubt NOT-ONLY their point of origin, but their intentions as well?
This is Clinton's Bridge to the 21st Century.
As such, is the the choice not clear?
http://www.strangecosmos.com/images/content/101003.jpg
BOOOSH:: Savin' yo *****. Like it or not.
Thank YOU! Bill Clinton.
For BEING THERE at the
Pinnacle of our Civilization
to ***** IT ALL AWAY.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "InsuranceBroker" |
|
| Title: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War |
24 Dec 2004 08:49:39 AM |
|
|
Subject: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War
From: "Bob" no@email.address
Date: 12/24/2004 9:38 AM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id: <bOVyd.14419$lm.8473@bignews1.bellsouth.net>
"Puddy" <Faceplant_04@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cqg97l$ek6$1@nwnexus-news.nwnexus.com...
"Elmer Thud" <wabbit@wabbit.net> wrote in message
news:82Jyd.3116$3v5.1606@fe2.texas.rr.com...
Dharmananda wrote:
Non-servers like Putsch and Rummy are just never going to get it.
Like Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, and Reagan.
Civilian control of the military is IMPORTANT.
"These men and women deserve leadership that is worthy of them," Hagel
said.
When Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld "flippantly dismisses" a young
soldier's question about lack of protective armor on military vehicles
in
Iraq, Hagel said, "that is not worthy."
Hegel is a lying hack. Rumsfeld did NOT "flippant dismiss" the
soldier... if you think he did, then you've only seen/read the one small
snip that has been taken out of context and reperated >ad nauseam.
Right. He basically told the soldier, "tough *****, deal with it".
When a soldier asks why he isn't properly equipt, after it was obvious for
a
year he deserves a better answer then, "just because".
Did you read or hear his entire answer, or
are you basing your opinion on just what
the leftists are feeding you?
The simple truth is the troops have not been properly supplied with needed
equipment. All that crap that kerry voted agaisnt the 87 billion bill appears
a bit dishonest today when one looks and it is clear that with the bill the
troop are being killed and injuried. Were did all the money go, bob?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War |
24 Dec 2004 08:55:15 AM |
|
|
"InsuranceBroker" <insurancenj@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041224094939.07662.00002369@mb-m01.aol.com...
Subject: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War
From: "Bob" no@email.address
Date: 12/24/2004 9:38 AM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id: <bOVyd.14419$lm.8473@bignews1.bellsouth.net>
"Puddy" <Faceplant_04@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cqg97l$ek6$1@nwnexus-news.nwnexus.com...
"Elmer Thud" <wabbit@wabbit.net> wrote in message
news:82Jyd.3116$3v5.1606@fe2.texas.rr.com...
Dharmananda wrote:
Non-servers like Putsch and Rummy are just never going to get it.
Like Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, and Reagan.
Civilian control of the military is IMPORTANT.
"These men and women deserve leadership that is worthy of them," Hagel
said.
When Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld "flippantly dismisses" a young
soldier's question about lack of protective armor on military vehicles
in
Iraq, Hagel said, "that is not worthy."
Hegel is a lying hack. Rumsfeld did NOT "flippant dismiss" the
soldier... if you think he did, then you've only seen/read the one small
snip that has been taken out of context and reperated >ad nauseam.
Right. He basically told the soldier, "tough *****, deal with it".
When a soldier asks why he isn't properly equipt, after it was obvious for
a
year he deserves a better answer then, "just because".
Did you read or hear his entire answer, or
are you basing your opinion on just what
the leftists are feeding you?
The simple truth is the troops have not been properly supplied with needed
equipment. All that crap that kerry voted agaisnt the 87 billion bill appears
a bit dishonest today when one looks and it is clear that with the bill the
troop are being killed and injuried. Were did all the money go, bob?
Since you are a vet, and have been in
combat, you should know that troops
never have everything they need. Your
leftist blinders are showing.
.
|
|
|
| User: "InsuranceBroker" |
|
| Title: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War |
24 Dec 2004 10:14:40 AM |
|
|
Subject: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War
From: "Bob" no@email.address
Date: 12/24/2004 9:55 AM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id: <N1Wyd.14483$lm.7744@bignews1.bellsouth.net>
"InsuranceBroker" <insurancenj@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041224094939.07662.00002369@mb-m01.aol.com...
Subject: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War
From: "Bob" no@email.address
Date: 12/24/2004 9:38 AM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id: <bOVyd.14419$lm.8473@bignews1.bellsouth.net>
"Puddy" <Faceplant_04@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cqg97l$ek6$1@nwnexus-news.nwnexus.com...
"Elmer Thud" <wabbit@wabbit.net> wrote in message
news:82Jyd.3116$3v5.1606@fe2.texas.rr.com...
Dharmananda wrote:
Non-servers like Putsch and Rummy are just never going to get it.
Like Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, and Reagan.
Civilian control of the military is IMPORTANT.
"These men and women deserve leadership that is worthy of them," Hagel
said.
When Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld "flippantly dismisses" a
young
soldier's question about lack of protective armor on military vehicles
in
Iraq, Hagel said, "that is not worthy."
Hegel is a lying hack. Rumsfeld did NOT "flippant dismiss" the
soldier... if you think he did, then you've only seen/read the one small
snip that has been taken out of context and reperated >ad nauseam.
Right. He basically told the soldier, "tough *****, deal with it".
When a soldier asks why he isn't properly equipt, after it was obvious
for
a
year he deserves a better answer then, "just because".
Did you read or hear his entire answer, or
are you basing your opinion on just what
the leftists are feeding you?
The simple truth is the troops have not been properly supplied with needed
equipment. All that crap that kerry voted agaisnt the 87 billion bill
appears
a bit dishonest today when one looks and it is clear that with the bill the
troop are being killed and injuried. Were did all the money go, bob?
Since you are a vet, and have been in
combat, you should know that troops
never have everything they need. Your
leftist blinders are showing.
What *****. We had everything that we needed in my unit if Vietnam. We had
plenty.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "vonroach" |
|
| Title: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War |
24 Dec 2004 07:59:39 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 21:25:09 -0800, "Puddy" <Faceplant_04@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Right. He basically told the soldier, "tough *****, deal with it".
When a soldier asks why he isn't properly equipt, after it was obvious for a
year he deserves a better answer then, "just because".
You still don't get it. The whole episode was planted by a young
Chattanooga reporter hoping to gain fame for himself. There was no
basis in fact for the question. Refurbishing had already been
accomplished. Just an ambitious reporter from the sticks and a
disgruntled Tenn. national guardsman who brought dishonor on his unit
and his hometown in rural Tenn.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Puddy" |
|
| Title: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War |
24 Dec 2004 07:38:52 PM |
|
|
"vonroach" <hadrainc@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:hq7os0hf5i4kv74ebpr3j45divdtpihv5k@4ax.com...
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 21:25:09 -0800, "Puddy" <Faceplant_04@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Right. He basically told the soldier, "tough *****, deal with it".
When a soldier asks why he isn't properly equipt, after it was obvious
for a
year he deserves a better answer then, "just because".
You still don't get it. The whole episode was planted by a young
Chattanooga reporter hoping to gain fame for himself. There was no
basis in fact for the question.
That's why all the other soldiers cheered after he asked it? Why he
asked the question is completely irrelevant. He wouldn't have asked it if
we didn't want to know the answer.
Refurbishing had already been
accomplished.
Um, no it hadn't. Even official Army records show that they were
lagging way behind in armoring vehicles. You simply are making this up
as you go.
Just an ambitious reporter from the sticks and a
disgruntled Tenn. national guardsman who brought dishonor on his unit
and his hometown in rural Tenn.
You're a pathetic excuse for an American. He is risking his life for
the right to question his leaders. He earned that right. Of course
freedom to question ones leaders doesn't apply to people who dare to
question the Republican Gov't huh.
Jeremy Olson
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "InsuranceBroker" |
|
| Title: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War |
24 Dec 2004 08:47:43 AM |
|
|
Subject: Re: It Takes A War Vet To Understand A War
From: vonroach
Date: 12/24/2004 8:59 AM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id: <hq7os0hf5i4kv74ebpr
You still don't get it. The whole episode was planted by a young
Chattanooga reporter hoping to gain fame for himself.
Who cares. The fact is it was right on the mark. You guys like to cry like
babies when you cannot control everything.
There was no
basis in fact for the question.
The bush administration just put an honorable leader in jail when her unit took
equipment needed for the safety of her troops. The troops have been screwed
because of lack of equipment and at least a few of them are in jail now over
the ***** poor preformace of this administration.
Refurbishing had already been
accomplished
*****. Only for the combat units. The people most at risk are the people
driving the supply trucks. It is geting more and more clear that all you guys
have are lies.
Just an ambitious reporter from the sticks and a
disgruntled Tenn. national guardsman who brought dishonor on his unit
and his hometown in rural Tenn.
Yeah, I know the swift boat liars were so upset with kerry in 1972 that hey
attacked him in 2004. BTW were was that hero of the rabid right ollie north?
Were was that loud mouth jerk John O'Niel? Both of the hero's of the right
were in Iraq on several trips. Not one peek from those guys. Why was that?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
