My reply is mainly for Hood-12. You make an assumption that you're (civilians) are better educated than the military. That's a crock. Most military personnel attend college while serving. Most military personnel hold some sort of college degree or have started working on one. Also, all officers have a college education....a degree. We're just as smart and just as educated as the civilian world. However, our lifestyle instills in us that we have to see the world with our eyes open and not with blinders on. We can't believe in propaganda. We have to be informed or know what's going on. Otherwise, what are we fighting for.
In answer to the question, I have no party favoritism. I believe myself to be someplace in the middle. However, because of Liberalism views and politics lately, that's changing. Especially the Libs on here. Nothing is ever based on fact. It's repeating old tales and going with what's popular at the time. I'll vote any day for a Conservative that's willing to stand his ground and not do something just because it's popular. Personally, I'm fed up with the Libs on here and they're going to have to do an awful lot to change my point of view by the election because right now, no Democrat will get my vote.
2006-10-05 07:00:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by HEartstrinGs 6
·
3⤊
2⤋
Well, what liberals are you talking about? Sure some liberals have factual basis for criticism of our military actions - which are controlled by the commander-in-chief, i.e. Bush and his administration.
Others I'm sure fit your description of people who are "bashing" the military. But just like all extremists, pundits, or commentators they are trying to piss you off. They want to be on the fringes and get people going. Why? Because it generates ratings. Don't take these people you hear seriously - actually extend that to most news in general.
Secondly, I believe you don't realize how invaluable criticism of government and our military is. If no one questioned the people in charge and the people with the guns - where would we be? I think we'd be in that war at home you speak of - a civil one as we fight against an American dictator.
I don't think there's enough out cry against this administration and there apparent incompetence. Every thing that comes out about the war points to them having screwed up or trying to cover things up. It’s starting to become obvious that Iraq has worsened the world terrorism situation and made it more likely that we'll be hit again.
These are facts:
1. What ever Saddam had done or would do they rushed in ill prepared and without enough input from the critical people in the military.
2. They are spending billions of our (future) tax dollars driving this country into a spiral of debt that will hurt our economy and most likely cause hard times for everyone.
3. Because of all that money spent on Iraq we have less money to fix our problems at home - which are a plenty.
4. The war has made Terrorism stronger and an attack on U.S. soil more likely.
5. The administration stated before that they wanted a war in Iraq.
What do they add up to? At the very least they are totally incompetent and went blindly into a war that is costing U.S. troops lives, Iraqi lives, and billions in US tax payers money. They weren't ready - if they were they would have seen this and found another way to get rid of Saddam.
2006-10-05 08:59:38
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
I think everyone would take action if it was in their neighborhoods and this is alot of your issue, it is an abstract senseless concept, and a reality in some place we could not point out on an unlabelled map or globe, we see no accurate depiction of what war is like in mainstream media and just see our loved ones coming home dead,injured or pschologically scarred and alienated or sick from the uranium poisoninig and having kids with more birth defects than the rest of the population and if this war was so damned important to govermnet officials then they would be fighting and their sons or nephews or cousins would be fighting for what they believe in and the fact that none of them are destroys credibility and makes it seem as though it is not necessary, past presidents stepped up to the plate and fought as the commander in chief and led his battles, and their sons fought to, also if our country has maintained its dominant position while not violating the geneva conventions in the past then there is no reason why we have to start violating it in the present or condemning other countires for commiting the same acts we do, this also destroys crediblity of the powers that be in both the domestic and international community
2006-10-05 06:03:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
Emotions are running wild at the present. It's easy for the politicians,news people and dissenters to make rash statements and point the finger and place blame. They aren't helping the situation. Hang in there. If the Muslims were to succeed and come knocking on their door,they would quickly change their minds. They don't seem to understand the Muslims have said they want to kill us all and are trying their best! Simper Fie, fellow Marine (Grunt Vietnam).
2006-10-06 17:47:07
·
answer #4
·
answered by blindogben 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Amen! I alternately laugh and simmer at the rhetoric babble these twits spout. things like "NO WAR" and "NO WAR IN IRAQ" are frequent slogans on bumper stickers, but are absolutely empty of meaning. We should start making counter-slogans like "WHY NOT?" you'll get a whole lot of silence from the same people. Or take the slogan "no blood for oil!"....... Uh, without oil people in the U.S. will begin to starve, and die from lack of supplies alone within days. In the middle east, he who controls the oil, controls the very lives of every man, woman, and child in their nation. And has a major effect on us. THAT'S a dammed GOOD reason to go to war.
2006-10-08 15:57:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe myself to be a conservative. I admire the military and support their mission. I have had many debates with liberals about this war and our actions around the world. I agree with most of your comments. However, you should not generalize all liberals into the same category. I have not seen liberals "bashing the military". As a matter of fact, I have seen liberals going out of their way, taking what must be very painful steps to not repeat the mistakes of the Vietnam War.
In my openion, civilian liberals are pacifists, who would prefer to sacrafice freedoms and "wheel and deal" instead of standing at post and defending our freedoms and the freedoms of our allies. Liberal politicians are opportunists who are just out to benefit themselves. They only think of one thing, and that's getting the votes in the next election to save their jobs. They have proved time and time again that they will flip flop and say anything to win the votes. They lost congress in the 90's because america finally saw through their antics.
Civilian conservatives are mostly religious people, who value our freedoms and the freedoms of our allies. They believe that we should and will fight if we think it is necessary. They believe in personal responsability, less government and hard work. Conservative politicians are also opportunists who are, like liberal politicians, out for their own benefits. However, they do differ with liberals in a few ways. Most notably at this point in history, conservatives see the islamo-facists as an evil that must be stood up to.
Fact of the matter is, wether we were justified in invading Iraq or not, we are there and it would be a disservice to the Iraqi people as well as America if we pulled out before the job is done and Iraq is stable. Wether you agree with the War in Iraq or not, we started this mess there and we need to finish it. If we pull out early, that will be a sign of weakness to a people who value and respect strength. Islamo-facists may not like us, but if we finish the job, they will respect us. We cannot show weakness or sooner or later the images we see out of Baghdad will be repeated down Main Street USA. I would much rather fight them there than here. Trust me, if we didn't bring the fight to them, they would have brought it to us.
The media is a whole other subject!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
God bless you and thank you for your service
2006-10-05 10:05:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by holdemfoldem911 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
Not all people who are not conservative or republican are against the military or especially the people who serve in it. Just because someone opposes a war, doesn't make them anti-military or hateful of veterans. People who mistreat veterans (of any war) are way out of line. You should know though, many veterans of war sometimes oppose the very same war they were part of (like Vietnam vets who opposed the war). The worst thing you said that took away some of the validity of your question was that you'd like to wage war on the people who disagree with you.That they have a right to disagree is the very thing you were sworn to defend (IE democracy and freedom).
2006-10-05 07:02:29
·
answer #7
·
answered by red7 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
Proud American Liberals fully support the men and women of the United States Armed Forces. Liberals recognize that they are committed unto their deaths, if necessary, to protect and defend the United States. They are trained to carry out their orders, not to question them. They are the finest soldiers on the face of the Earth, and they deserve our respect and support.
The fact that they are commanded by a self-serving imbecile who would spill their blood recklessly to invade a nation that never attacked us on the other side of the planet isn't their fault.
Real patriots oppose this senseless war. Our brave men and women in our armed forces deserve a real commander who would never use them to further his own personal and political agenda. Bush has used the blood of our servicemen and women to ensure Republican control of the legislature. He ought to be impeached.
The best and most meaningful way to support the troops is not to use them in this way.
2006-10-05 09:34:03
·
answer #8
·
answered by kurtrisser 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
I was a Marine during the Vietnam War. I enlisted to serve America and her freedoms. I did not enlist to see Americans die for practicing their freedoms. As a former Marine I am ashamed to read your of your wish for a homeland war. Rethink your position and your reason for service.
2006-10-05 08:07:57
·
answer #9
·
answered by Thomas L 1
·
3⤊
0⤋
I don't insult the military.
I insult idiots, and people who generalize like you. I respect you for being in the military, I do, but that's not a free pass on being a stupid person. Not all liberals bash all military and all military actions. I love the military, I'm planning on joining up. And I'm not against some wars, I am against others. Excuse me for having an opinion on war. You know, an opinion... like the one that you went to fight to protect. So you come back and bash-back about me having an opinion? Make up your damned mind. Of course I hate terrorists. That should be understood. I'm almost insulted that an American in the military could be so biased and so hateful towards an opinionated group.
I'm happy that you fought for my freedoms, now let me use them.
{edit}
"liberals live in a dream world where they think everybody can just get along, well that will never happen, especially with terrorists groups, they want to kill us whether we are liberal or not, but they don't seem to understand that, i don't think they have been around of patriotic people most of there lives or understand how great our military is in what they do, i think they live in a bubble, i mean they have to, to think like they do"
Wow, how ignorant. So you're always right then? Conservatism is the 100% always answer? I think YOU live in a bubble. The country was founded on 2 parties and 2 sides of a spectrum, get used to it or shut up.
2006-10-05 05:57:33
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 5
·
5⤊
4⤋