Murtha is an idiot for all kinds of reasons, but here he is talking about the reprehensible actions of SPECIFIC marines. Guess what? Some Marines DO go over the line, exceed orders, are tried for murder, etc. One need only look at Abu Gharib, etc. as evidence that things CAN and DO get out of hand. As a congressperson, he has a responsibility to call it out. But don't characterize him as anti-Marines - it is a baseless accusation.
Of everything you posted, this was the only point where I had to correct the record on Jack Murtha. I can't watch Youtube from where I am at, but I am assuming that this is a specific incident where Murtha said a group of Marines murdered civilians in Hadita, Iraq. He said they killed in cold blood.
Six Marines in the case saw charges dismissed, one was found Not Guilty, and the last is set to face charges of manslaughter - not murder. Murtha jumped the gun and called every one of these men guilty of murder, and has yet to retract his statement.
Some do cross the line, but accusing specific Marines of murder, especially ones that are later found to be innocent, is pitiful.
I have nothing nice to say about Representative Jack Murtha at this time.
"Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most."
What I think is pretty sad here is that the right wing can call names all day long, even attack war heroes, call them traitors, call into question their war record, just so long as they're Democrats. They can call everyone Nazis (funniest: "femi-nazi," since we all know women who want equal pay and respect also gas babies) or anything else they want. But if anyone even questions them they start to cry crocodile tears. "Oh woah as me, you don't want to keep funding an unwinnable war and let us go into another depression? WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE POOR POOR SOLDIERS AND WHAT YOU'RE DOING TO THEM?!"
The truth is, pretty much EVERYONE who wants the war to end ARE thinking about the soldiers and keeping them safe. By bringing them home. I thought that was a no-brainer.
As far as the issue at hand with Obama, nothing has been proven. Obama and the DNC have filed motions to dismiss this lawsuit, and the motions are still pending as of October 22, according to Wikipedia.
Well, I noticed while writing this that somebody had brought up the same information on Murtha, sans one thing: several of those Marines are now bringing lawsuits against him for slander.
As for Reid, I believe his remark was actually quite wrong. After the surge, we've been handing back provinces one by one to allow the Iraqis total control. In many of the provinces Al Qaeda has been crushed, and forces that used to be against us have allied with us to drive them out. I believe we're currently in talks with the Iraqi government to have all provinces handed back by 2011. But stability hasn't been in that region since the Iranian Revolution and likely will not return until Iran returns to a democratic country. Hell, most of the 1980s Iraq and Iran spent at war with each other. 60 Minutes had an interview with George Piro, the FBI agent who interrogated Sadaam, and he had some interesting things to say.
Also, I've heard many of the same arguments coming out of the Middle East that I heard coming from the Clinton administration during the Bosnian genocide of the 1990s. Samantha Powers wrote an excellent book about genocide in the last century, and the chapter on Bosnia is very well written.
I could give you even more left-wing organizations as well. While talk-radio is widely known to be right-wing, it appears most newspapers and televised media beyond the local level lean to the left. We could also counter Liberty with Berkeley. The University of Colorado has even been considering making a Conservative studies wing after it was found out of 800 professors, only 32 were registered Republican.
Perhaps hyperbole doesn't make that statement true, but if enough people read the editorial page of the Kansas Star, they might agree with columnist Lewis Diuguid and begin saying it is.
It's also not simply secession, it's that they were planning on doing it based on a single presidential election. The Alaskan Independent Party has existed for a bit longer, existing since 1984. Vermont is considered a very left-wing state, and their views are evident in the way they vote. Disapproval and moving to impeach a President is one thing, but accusations of murder are entirely different. Should every President who has sent soldiers off to battle be condemned for murder? Every president who has taken part in a war?
On this next point, I'll admit, you're partly right, as Obama keeps not releasing his information. He doesn't really talk about his college days beyond what his GPA was. However, keep digging and you'll find questionable ties. One of his first interviews out of law school was with Tony Rezko, and while he never worked for the man and I don't believe his buying land was a fraudulent transaction, Obama still lied about their relationship. He's lied about his relationship with Ayers, with Wright, and with ACORN.
As for other Democrats and my view on the radicals taking over the party...Nancy Pelosi's from San Francisco, one of the most radical districts in the country. Code Pink has a perpetual protest going on outside her house until all the troops are home(potentially the argument that got her elected). I have never heard her or any other high-ranking Democrat declare that they were interested in even trying to win the war in Iraq. I noticed Sen. Biden never say the phrase "win the war" during the vice-presidential debates. In fact, I'd say they were much more interested in retreat almost from the get-go. Now I believe taking Sadaam out was an important thing to do, and I think it is our job to remain there and do our best to make Iraq a stable country again. At the time many of the Democrats agreed with me, or so their votes would point to. But by 2004, they had become defeatist, and even after they took power in Congress in 2006, this view has remained. And at no point have I seen them consider the options of what would have happened in Iraq afterward if we had simply packed our bags and left. Did we screw up in Iraq? Yes, our post-Sadaam plans were weak and slow, and our intelligence community has been dropping the ball periodically since Carter cut its budget back in the 1970s. But we must stay until Iraq is stable, if only by itself in a region with great hostility. Otherwise it's going to come back and bite us in ways that would probably shame Pearl Harbor and September 11.
Is some of our anger over race? Well yes. So is some of yours. Rev. Wright can attest to that.
And as for mobiusclimber, I understand you are thinking of the troops. But the right is also thinking of the troops five, ten, twenty years from now, when an Iraq overrun by Al Qaeda backed by a nuclear armed Iran, a puppet Syria, and the Hezbollah forces of Lebanon suddenly begin invading the few allies we really do have in the middle east. And who will those troops be? Depending on some interpretations of Obama's words concerning raising troops in the military, all of us.
Oh, and the statistic is currently...Obama pays women $.84 to every $1.00 he gives a man, McCain pays women $1.04 to every $1.00 he gives a man.
As for the economic crisis...you really want to get into that? Why not start by questioning why so many Democrats received money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac(Obama being one of the highest paid). Or why Sen. Barney Frank was in a sexual relationship with the CEO of one of the companies he was supposed to be providing congressional oversight for. Or why Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac execs are so high up in the Obama campaign. Or why you can look up the C-Span recordings from 2004 where the Republicans are arguing that the sub-prime mortgage crisis is a potential threat if those two continue offering loans in their current manner, and the Democrats continue to defend them.
As for your other campaign about calling names, why am I trashed as a racist redneck? Why did the more radical elements of the Democrats start calling soldiers names in response to Vietnam? Why do I hear so many people calling Bush Hitler and the Republicans Fascists? Why do I have to listen to folks bring up the Spirit of 1968? Why do you keep insulting my family members who have shed blood, both theirs and others, for this country? You're quite keen on the Nazi bit as well, it would seem.
Tell you what, you want civility in this election, start with yourself. I became uncivil and I apologized for it. I apologize for it again.
And for the record, Adam "Azzam the American" Gadahn is a traitor. He abandoned his home country to side with Al Qaeda and is the first American officially charged with treason since 1952.
Ack wrote:Oh, and the statistic is currently...Obama pays women $.84 to every $1.00 he gives a man, McCain pays women $1.04 to every $1.00 he gives a man.
Could I have more info on this? Now I've got to go back and finish reading what you've got down here...
"Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most."
I don't disagree with you about Democrats being corrupt. They're as corrupt as Republicans. There's only one party in the U.S. and it's the business party. The two worked hand in hand to dismantle regulations, pump out as much pork as possible and basically sell out America to the highest bidders. Democrats and Republicans.
As for your scare tactics about how horrible the future would be if there hadn't been a war in Iraq or if we don't "win" it, I think we've already seen how far from reality that really is. No WMDs, no ties to Al-Quada, no ties to terrorists, and frankly, bombing the crap out of a country tends to create terrorism, not destroy it.
Again, I mentioned that interview with George Piro. Look it up. Seriously. He goes in detail about how Sadaam had been faking reports on having chemical weapons to keep Iran at bay, because Iran knew he was willing to use them. Sadaam apparently thought the US response would be exactly like it was in the 1990s, an aerial bombing campaign. So he had his intelligence services putting out falsified information that he had WMDs. In actuality, the UN weapons inspectors had destroyed most of them in the mid 90s, and Iraq had followed protocol and destroyed the rest. But Sadaam had still retained all the people with the knowledge to manufacture them, and he admitted that he eventually planned to do it again.
As for other accusations, much of this was blamed on faulty intelligence. I mentioned Carter and his cuts earlier. Carter had wanted to rely too heavily on spy satellites and not on manpower, so he had cut intelligence budgets. This crippled our ability to understand the feeling of the people, and though we built it back up during the Reagan and Bush administrations, Clinton cut it again during the 1990s. So Bush started his presidency with a crippled intelligence service that had let a good bit fall through the cracks. Hence the failures in this area.
Ack wrote: But we must stay until Iraq is stable, if only by itself in a region with great hostility. Otherwise it's going to come back and bite us in ways that would probably shame Pearl Harbor and September 11.
The reason given for 9/11 by Al Qaeda was U.S. involvement in Middle Eastern countries - military bases, presence in holy lands, support of Israel, etc. I'm not sure having a larger/longer military presence will help us in the long run - I think we're repeating a dangerous post-Afghanistan/post-Gulf War cycle. Many other military and government officials agree and think that it is time for a different approach (e.g. diplomacy, trade, financial support, etc.).
As for the economic crisis...you really want to get into that?
No. There's a clear record of both sides royally fucking up for many years. Pointing fingers about the past does little good at this point. More productive would be debating how to come together and fix it - something we've brought up in a few threads below.
as for mobiusclimber...As for your other campaign about calling names...Tell you what, you want civility in this election, start with yourself.
I agree. One of the great things about this forum (all sections) is the general congeniality and rationality. Don't check that at the door when we move from discussing Wii to discussing politics.
