A Concerned American

[JASON6969]

I agree with windwalker we need to get out of the un.They are as useles as breast on a boarhog.All they do is write letters of protest and put 'THUGS" from around the world in charge of their programs.The U.S.A. pretty much carries the financail load for the UN.I believe we need out of the "ORGANAZATION". We need to kick them out of our country.It is nothing but an organazation to bring about one world goverment.It will destroy our national soveriegnty and make all of us slaves .

[firebird45331]

the ideology of our founding fathers is dead. They never intended the federal government to take on the role it has.

[ArkansasHunter]

Larry go for it if you can spare the money and the only advice i'll give you if you do get elected.
Never forget who put you there ( the voters) and do the will of the majority of the people, not yours.

[Windwalker]

Larry O you would have my vote. I am tired of seeing our fine young men and women in the Military killed and injured in undeclared wars that our politicians won't let us win. First there was Korea. When Gen. Mc Arthur told President Stevenson that we could not win the war by allowing the enemy to have safe zones {the 38th Parallel) he was reprimanded and when he ordered a large troop concentration the other side of the 38th Parallel bombed he was removed from Command. This was used as a staging area for enemy troop buildups and was China's route to Korea when they joined the North Koreas. Many Americans were killed and wounded because of this safe zone. The Korean War was a Politically Controlled Loss.The second undeclared war that was a Politically Controlled Loss was Viet Nam under President Lyndon Johnson. Now we have the undeclared war in Iraq and Afghanistan Under President Bush. Whether this will become the next Politically Controlled Loss is still undetermined.
In the future if our troops are to be put in harms way make it a Declared War so that the enemy will know it is a Total War and that our Military will do whatever is necessary to win no matter how many of the enemy are killed and unfortunately as in all wars there will be some civilians killed as well for this is War. Tell all Nations that the United States will not tolerate them telling us how to fight the war or interfering in any way. Any Country who does will be declared an Unfriendly Nation and sanctions will be placed against them. If OUR Politicians don't want to fight a war under these conditions then don't get the U.S. in it.

[citylivin]

If I remember correctly, Sadam did not have anything to do with 9/11, but he did pay rewards to families that commited suicide bombings.

If I remember correctly, Sadam did use chemicle weapons on the Kurds.

If I remember correctly, people often were exucuted for the pleasure of his sons.

If I remember correctly, when the Iraqi soccer team lost during the Olympics, they were executed (shredded if I'm not mistaken)..

I believe we should not be there, but don't act like life was better under Saddam.

[hamburgerhelper]

10-4 good smokey....+1 on that.....you know, you guys are missing the overall.....how about our MEDIA, with its doom and gloom, liberally driven machinations that continually undermine any semblance of objective reporting? Instead of building-up of morale they're hell-bent on tearing it down. All you hear and see are the negative anti-war aspects. We don't hear about the progress or the good because the press has too much power. Freedom of the press ? o.k. but at the risk of selling America out? How did th epress get so much power? this also happened during the vietnam war, but at least you heard the nightly body counts of the ENEMY. Today your hear about OUR body counts only. how many ENEMY body counts? C'mon media-get your hands out of the left's pockets...the whole world must be laughing at us....we got attacked on our own soil, and we can't even pull together as a nation, or agree as a nation to fight them. our patriotism lasted about 3 weeks and then it was back to business as usual. what about those poor souls who lost their lives on 9/11? are we going to forget them? isnt that the same as the attack on Pearl Harbor? what do you think iraq did w/ the wmd's while the evil U.N. were dragging their feet, taking months before finally going in for inspections? those wmd were shipped into syria, jordan, iran, etc.......no wonder there was nothing left to find, they had ample time to move or hide them. no-one ever brings this up-especially the media. it was proven that hussein used them on his own people.....WAKE UP.......we need media reform, and NOW. the media are soooo far left now that we can't get the straight scoop on anything anymore....this is the same media that works with the liberal party who want to rip your guns and ammo from you......WILL YOU LET THEM?

[Windwalker]

In WW2 the media got press releases from the Military after the engagement, not before so that it could be released and used by the enemy to endanger our troops. Any media people with our troops in a live engagement had to submit their stories to the Military for approval before they could be released. This was a much better system than what we have now. If I was a trooper it Iraq I would consider the media as much of an enemy as the people we are fighting because of the negative reporting and trying to cause trouble trouble for our Military and individual soldiers. The media screams about civilians being killed. Well, guess what. A War Zone is a dangerous place and yes, civilians in it will get killed or injured. To prevent this move out of the War Zone to one of the places set up to provide for displaced civilians. Make all media and video be submitted to the Military and approved before it can be released.

[LarryO1970]

Originally Posted by Windwalker

In WW2 the media got press releases from the Military after the engagement, not before so that it could be released and used by the enemy to endanger our troops. Any media people with our troops in a live engagement had to submit their stories to the Military for approval before they could be released. This was a much better system than what we have now. If I was a trooper it Iraq I would consider the media as much of an enemy as the people we are fighting because of the negative reporting and trying to cause trouble trouble for our Military and individual soldiers. The media screams about civilians being killed. Well, guess what. A War Zone is a dangerous place and yes, civilians in it will get killed or injured. To prevent this move out of the War Zone to one of the places set up to provide for displaced civilians. Make all media and video be submitted to the Military and approved before it can be released.

... or meet the Navy SEALS on the beaches in Panama. The media needs to check their fire... they are far too intrusive in actions they should know nothing about for OPSEC. Some senior military members are looking toward political office and put the lives of their man and women at risk for personal gain.

Let's take a look at Geraldo Rivera ...
War coverage controversies

In 2001, during the U.S. War in Afghanistan, Rivera was derided for a report in which he claimed to be at the scene of a friendly fire incident; it was later revealed he was actually 300 miles away. Rivera blamed a minor misunderstanding for the discrepancy.
Another controversy arose in early 2003, while Rivera was traveling with the 101st Airborne Division in Iraq. During a Fox News broadcast, Rivera began to disclose an upcoming operation, even going so far as to draw a map in the sand for his audience. The military immediately issued a firm denouncement of his actions, saying it put the operation at risk, and nearly expelled Rivera from Iraq. Two days later, he announced that he would be reporting on the Iraq conflict from Kuwait.[10][11]
The "map in the sand" incident inspired a 14th season episode of NBC's legal drama Law & Order, entitled "Embedded".[10] It was also spoofed on The Daily Show, in which correspondent Stephen Colbert drew a map in the sand of where Rivera's head had gone, finally concluding that his objective was "sticking his head up his own ass." Colbert ended the segment by saying that it was "impressive" and "pretty far up there."
A third controversy arose when he announced he was carrying a weapon while reporting in Afganistan. He said, "If they're going to get us, it's going to be in a gun fight. It's not going to be a murder. It's not going to be a crime. It's going to be a gun fight." Many were offended by the very fact that as a reporter he was carrying a weapon. The other aspect of the controversy, however, was due to the fact that he had often promoted civilian gun control prior to his time reporting in Afghanistan, such as when (after the Columbine High School massacre in Littleton, Colorado) Rivera asked, "How much longer are we gonna take it? How much longer are we gonna be wrapping in the flag of patriotism to justify 250 million guns out there? How much longer?" As an NRA magazine article pointed out, "Rivera, who has made plenty of noise in the past by promoting various anti-gun proposals, revealed recently that while covering the war in Afghanistan, where he doesn't feel quite so safe, he's conveniently jumped to the other side of the fence."[12]


Case in point.

[Deersniper]

Windwalker and LarryO I agree 100%.

[elmer fudd]

I think we should do the same to the Iraqs as we did to the Japs (Can't spell the whole word!) after they bombed us in Pearl Harbor and started WW2! and thats just my opinian so dont be mad at me sorry if this makes you mad.

[teenagegunwacho]

Originally Posted by elmer fudd

I think we should do the same to the Iraqs as we did to the Japs (Can't spell the whole word!) after they bombed us in Pearl Harbor and started WW2! and thats just my opinian so dont be mad at me sorry if this makes you mad.

Ive thougt that before to

[7mmremmag1995]

Originally Posted by elmer fudd

I think we should do the same to the Iraqs as we did to the Japs (Can't spell the whole word!) after they bombed us in Pearl Harbor and started WW2! and thats just my opinian so dont be mad at me sorry if this makes you mad.

+1

[elmer fudd]

I thought that would get people mad i guese i was wrong! wut not everybody has seen this yet.

[scmattern]

It's all about the oil baby, always has been.

[Inew2guns]

Originally Posted by CrazyIvan

If I remember correctly, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

If I remember correctly, Bush was told the evidence he put forth to our country about Iraq being an "imminent threat" was not fully understood or corraborated. Yet, he spoke it to the country anyway and moved forth with a charge into Iraq with no plan to finish.

If I remember correctly, we sent 16,000 troops into Afganistan to persue the person behind 9/11, Osama Bin Laden, while sending 160,000 troops into Iraq. More than 30% of those troops were to supply protection for government contractors to build an oil pipeline through Iraq. We were first told this war was to protect American's from a WMD. They didn't find any of the type they described. Then, we were told we were liberating the Iraqi people. When they began to reject that, then we were told we were spreading Democracy. Then we were told we are there while the (US appointed) government of Iraq strengthens itself and can protect itself. WHEN WILL THE LIES END? It is all for money, oil and power.

If I remember correctly, when Saddam was in power, people were not without electricity in the big Iraqi cities. People were not confined to their home at night. People were not worried about being caught up in a shootout. Saddam made it clear: "If you F*&K around, I will kill you, your family and your friends without question, without reason and without further purpose..." Now, hoodlums are mostly free to roam at will, kill, mame, rape, murder...etc...because we gave them that freedom. Saddam was not a nice guy, but he was able to keep that country in check better than we are.

As far as them all being the same....imagine this....the United States allows Mexicans to illegally enter our country without recourse. Let's say Mexico or some faction in Mexico attacked a foreign country, say Great Britain. Then, say Great Britain said that because the US allows Mexicans into our country, they consider the US as bad as Mexico and they see us as a threat. They take military action against the US...

You are probably thinking that this statement above is ludicrous. Well, it isn't any more ludicrous than you saying that the people of Iraq were the same as those in Iran, Afganistan, or any other middle-eastern country.



Besides all this...what context does this topic hold with wilderness survival/SHTF scenarios which this particular forum is about?

Wow you said all that was on my mind/ and the truth.

[Rambo]

Originally Posted by Inew2guns

Wow you said all that was on my mind/ and the truth.

Ditto!

[toolman]

Originally Posted by scmattern

It's all about the oil baby, always has been.

So where is it?

[Ruckus]

Originally Posted by Windwalker

I agree with Jason that prisoners taken during an armed conflict who are not American Citizens should be tried by Military Tribunal. As far as the war is concerned it seems to be turning into a political Viet Nam type of affair. We have Generals capable of running and wining the war. We have the necessary weapons to win the war. We have the Troops that can win the war. Now if we want to win this war get the politicians out of it and let the Military run it and give them the authority to do what ever is necessary to win it. If you are not willing to do this, then get our people out of harms way and bring them home. Remember in War if it saves one of ours and kills 1,000 of theirs the loss of life is acceptable because this is War.

I disagree. No country on the planet has the military capability to win this war. Even if we nuked the entire country there would still be terrorists and insurgents. Lots of the insurgents we are fighting in Iraq don't even come from Iraq, some are turkish, afgan, saudi, even chzechen and others. The way I see it, we as America did our job already. We got rid of the tyrranical leader, put some democratic politicians in power, and tried to get the Iraqi's prepared for defending their own country,,,,,,, however they don't seem to be putting forth much effort to do so. If they won't do their part, they lose not us. I am angered that our government will force our soldiers to help out a country that clearly does not want our help. BTW Iraq had zilch to do with 9/11. They are not the same people who attacked us at our homeland. Continuing this Iraqi occupation is far worse than futile, its flat out disrespectful to our troops, and treats them like they are expendible for the worst reasons.

[nathangdad]

If you go back to the 9-11 Bush speech to Congress he defined the enemy as the group under Osama bin Laden. He further loaded his policy with statements such as "either you are for us or against us" and so on . . . Now to the current problem. Osama and group, according to the international press, live a fairly good life in Pakistan yet Bush will not move our military beyond the Pakistan border. It weakens his policy even with conservatives.

If you go back to the runup to Iraq it was about weapons of mass destruction even though the press in nations with advanced intelligence gathering such as Israel, England, Germany, and Russia did not carry news confirming weapons of mass destruction in the time before America's move into Iraq. The failure of the weapons of mass destruction justification weakens Bush's policy even with conservatives.

I agree the liberals go beyond two-faced to multi-faced statements depending on causes and people they support. It is their nature and the America media plays to it. Yet we must realize the Bush administration
has damaged itself in ways from which it cannot recover. This is the 21st century and wars must be won on both the foreign battlefield and
the domestic support field. Bush has crushingly lost domestic support for his mid-East policies. For the American public the "right or wrong" no longer matters and the public just wants it to end.

[Seven©]

Originally Posted by LarryO1970

Last I checked, the Govt. was NOT of the people, was NOT for the people and surely is NOT by the people.

And that, friends; is the Irony of Democracy.