[mitch_mckee]

Quote:       Originally Posted by tlarkin

LOL Fine, no Hitler comment I'll just use someone else who has committed genocide Mengistu Haile Mariam

What? No mention of Saddam Hussein?

[tlarkin]

Quote:       Originally Posted by mitch_mckee

What? No mention of Saddam Hussein?

I gotta save some of them just in case you post more internet rules

[Windwalker]

Quote:       Originally Posted by mitch_mckee

I respect the attitude of the gentleman above but he is just one more guy with an opinion. It's not all that difficult to find soldiers against a war. Even General Patton hated the war, but he won it anyway. I suggest that the gentleman in Iraq adopt that attitude. I suspect that more disagree with him than not. We NEED to win that war. "That War" being the global war on terror. Iraq is a part. Always was. It is a strategically important location, dividing the Mid East in two and making the terrorist's job more difficult. As for you, Troy, likely you hated Bush from day one and there is nothing possible to have made you happy. Go ahead and blame the President for not making people that hated us for generations not like up. If you and your gang have any way to win the war besides giving up in disgrace, lets hear it. If not, quit your whining, griping and carping and get with the program.

Mitch, you invited comments from Liberal Democrats. I am a Conservative Democrat but I will comment. The reason that we haven't already won the war in Iraq is because our Government either doesn't want to win it or does not have the intestinal fortitude [guts] to do what is necessary to win. To win the politicians have to stop interfering, officially declare WAR, appoint a Commanding General who will do whatever is necessary to win and let him Unleash The Dogs of War. Let him remove the imbeded Liberal Media from the war zone and make all news releases be approved by the military before they can be released.Give the General the weapons troops and support he wants, then let him win the war. As in any war there will be civilian casualties. Regrettable but they will happen. Civilians, get out of the war zone.
Mitch, you might also read my post #28 concerning war in Iran.

[troy2000]

Quote:       Originally Posted by Windwalker

Mitch, you invited comments from Liberal Democrats. I am a Conservative Democrat but I will comment. The reason that we haven't already won the war in Iraq is because our Government either doesn't want to win it or does not have the intestinal fortitude [guts] to do what is necessary to win. To win the politicians have to stop interfering, officially declare WAR, appoint a Commanding General who will do whatever is necessary to win and let him Unleash The Dogs of War. Let him remove the imbeded Liberal Media from the war zone and make all news releases be approved by the military before they can be released.Give the General the weapons troops and support he wants, then let him win the war. As in any war there will be civilian casualties. Regrettable but they will happen. Civilians, get out of the war zone. Mitch, you might also read my post #28 concerning war in Iran.

Funny thing; we managed to win WWII with the civilian media going anywhere it wanted to. It isn't the military's job to censor the press, beyond not revealing military action helpful to the enemy. And if you think that anything about troop movements or upcoming operations is being revealed without the full knowledge of the military, I believe you're wrong. If our commanders in the field are letting that sort of information flow, they have their reasons.

To put it bluntly, I don't think we should run the press out of Iraq so no one know what we're doing, or what the results are. If the military or the government doesn't believe its actions will survive scrutiny by the public that's paying the bills, it has no business doing them, even if they think it's for our own good. Every time they hide something from the American people, or lie to them, in the name of protecting us or stopping public opinion from interfering, we move one more step away from being a democracy. Or a representative republic, for those who like to quibble...

The term "elitist" is getting thrown around on this forum a lot lately. Isn't an elitist someone who doesn't trust the judgment of the American people? Someone who believes we need to have those more intelligent, more capable, more knowledgable than ourselves make our decisions for us, for our own good and the good of the country?


I personally don't think the public or the media is the problem, though. The main thing hamstringing our actions in Iraq is that no one knows what the !@#$ they're supposed to be accomplishing. When there are no objectives more clearcut than, "keep fighting so we don't appear weak," it's a little hard to measure whether there's been any progress, wouldn't you say?

It's very easy to whip up support for starting a war, as this administration proved when it attacked Iraq in the middle of pacifying Afghanistan and hunting down Al Queda. But it isn't so easy to keep people supporting it. And I don't think Americans are dumb; if they stop supporting a war, they just might have valid reasons.

[mitch_mckee]

Quote:       Originally Posted by troy2000

Funny thing; we managed to win WWII with the civilian media going anywhere it wanted to. It isn't the military's job to censor the press, beyond not revealing military action helpful to the enemy. And if you think that anything about troop movements or upcoming operations is being revealed without the full knowledge of the military, I believe you're wrong. If our commanders in the field are letting that sort of information flow, they have their reasons. To put it bluntly, I don't think we should run the press out of Iraq so no one know what we're doing, or what the results are. If the military or the government doesn't believe its actions will survive scrutiny by the public that's paying the bills, it has no business doing them, even if they think it's for our own good. Every time they hide something from the American people, or lie to them, in the name of protecting us or stopping public opinion from interfering, we move one more step away from being a democracy. Or a representative republic, for those who like to quibble... The term "elitist" is getting thrown around on this forum a lot lately. Isn't an elitist someone who doesn't trust the judgment of the American people? Someone who believes we need to have those more intelligent, more capable, more knowledgable than ourselves make our decisions for us, for our own good and the good of the country? I personally don't think the public or the media is the problem, though. The main thing hamstringing our actions in Iraq is that no one knows what the !@#$ they're supposed to be accomplishing. When there are no objectives more clearcut than, "keep fighting so we don't appear weak," it's a little hard to measure whether there's been any progress, wouldn't you say? It's very easy to whip up support for starting a war, as this administration proved when it attacked Iraq in the middle of pacifying Afghanistan and hunting down Al Queda. But it isn't so easy to keep people supporting it. And I don't think Americans are dumb; if they stop supporting a war, they just might have valid reasons.

Silly Man, of course WWII reporters censored the news!

I suggest that you actually know what you are talking about before embarrassing yourself in public. Learning to use a web browser would help you:

Office of Censorship - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Brother Bob]

I try to find common ground with everyone on this forum, regardless of my personal, political, or religious beliefs. I consider everyone as an equal and though I may not agree with what they say or believe in, we usually find a common interest to chew the fat about in a friendly manner. These impassioned, contentious & vitreolic threads serve no purpose other than to breed ill-will and bad feelings amongst the forum members. If you must bash and hate on each other, PM your threads! Exchange your addresses and meet in an alley and settle your differences like real men! Like Midas says, Think before you post!

[TexasT]

Quote:       Originally Posted by Brother Bob

I try to find common ground with everyone on this forum, regardless of my personal, political, or religious beliefs. I consider everyone as an equal and though I may not agree with what they say or believe in, we usually find a common interest to chew the fat about in a friendly manner. These impassioned, contentious & vitreolic threads serve no purpose other than to breed ill-will and bad feelings amongst the forum members. If you must bash and hate on each other, PM your threads! Exchange your addresses and meet in an alley and settle your differences like real men! Like Midas says, Think before you post!

Sometimes you just make sense.

[mitch_mckee]

Quote:       Originally Posted by Brother Bob

I try to find common ground with everyone on this forum, regardless of my personal, political, or religious beliefs. I consider everyone as an equal and though I may not agree with what they say or believe in, we usually find a common interest to chew the fat about in a friendly manner. These impassioned, contentious & vitreolic threads serve no purpose other than to breed ill-will and bad feelings amongst the forum members. If you must bash and hate on each other, PM your threads! Exchange your addresses and meet in an alley and settle your differences like real men! Like Midas says, Think before you post!

I'd be happy to meet any liberal "out back" any time he can con someone into paying his way here.

I do, however, suggest that any such person ought to consider putting some form of ID in their boots, along with their desire as to the disposition of their body. Otherwise, they get buried down on the river the the others.

[troy2000]

Quote:       Originally Posted by Brother Bob

I try to find common ground with everyone on this forum, regardless of my personal, political, or religious beliefs. I consider everyone as an equal and though I may not agree with what they say or believe in, we usually find a common interest to chew the fat about in a friendly manner. These impassioned, contentious & vitreolic threads serve no purpose other than to breed ill-will and bad feelings amongst the forum members. If you must bash and hate on each other, PM your threads! Exchange your addresses and meet in an alley and settle your differences like real men! Like Midas says, Think before you post!

Do you think my last post was 'impassioned, contentious and vitriolic,' Bob? I honestly didn't think so when I wrote and posted it; I'm disappointed if it was received that way.

edit: ahh...never mind. I didn't see the little line between your post and mine stating, This message is hidden because mitch_mckee is on your ignore list. That explains a lot...