Hanoi John Kerry can clear a place for Mullah Murtha right next to him as one of America's greatest traitors to our men in uniform.
http://www.bootmurtha.com/EddyArt/ColdBlood.htm
2007-08-12 13:18:36 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
By fallling on his sword I do not mean literally...
2007-08-12 13:24:55 · update #1
Murtha is a disgrace to the Corps...Gen Chesty Puller rolls over in his grave everytime this moron opens his mouth to demoralize our brave troops. Benedict Arnold was a veteran also.
2007-08-12 13:26:07 · update #2
Indeed!...and Steve, being a veteran does in no way excuse a citizen of this country from treasonous exploits.
2007-08-12 13:27:13 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 6⤋
For the record, some Americans still regard Benedict Arnold as a hero, despite his support of King George III. His career is beyond question.
It was the stupidity of the colonial congress (sounds familiar, eh?) that drove him over the edge and back in to a British uniform.
His actions I can understand. And to compare him to Senator Kerry is a joke. Nothing John Kerry ever did could compare with General Arnold. Nothing.
But the immature behavior of the wannbe neo-con campers in this forum only proves we're no longer a civil nation. Name calling is the only pathetic game they have left.
2007-08-12 20:37:43 · answer #2 · answered by Floyd G 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
. . . and now for a dose of reality:
I ran for Congress in a distrtict adjacent to Murtha's a few years ago. Retired, decorated U.S. Marine John Murtha has been the most respected member of Congress regarding military matters throughout his entire Congressional career -- the "go to" guy whom young Congressmen sought out on military issues. Your problem is that he is telling the truth about our illegal, totally unjust invasion of Iraq -- a country that even Bush now admits had NOTHING to do with 9/11 -- and the destruction it's caused to Iraq and it's people and to America's reputation as leader of the free world. You are apparently among the 29% -- the treasonous, unpatriotic lot of Americans who still support Bush.
P.S. The "surge" is not working.
2007-08-12 20:37:54 · answer #3 · answered by worldinspector 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Wait, are you saying that the war is over? So, the troops are gonna come home? Cuz, if what you say is true, there's no reason for us to still be there, right?
Sorry if I'm a bit cynical, but we've heard all that before. Perhaps we have better generals in place now, but my suspicion is that the problem hasn't been a lack of leadership from the generals, nor a lack of courage from the troops. It's been a lack of direction from on high. Think with me here: it is utterly impossible to "win" a war when we've never defined what constitutes a win. I thought we won when we took Baghdad, because that was our mission, but then we had to get Saddam. Then we got him, so I thought we'd won again. But then we had to stay and see him tried. Then he was...then it was free elections....then it was stability. What next? Truth is, we're never leaving Iraq. This is a clear case of mission creep. As soon as we've accomplished "what we went for", we think of something else we need to do. This is why they aren't even looking for Osama anymore. If we catch him, a lot of people will think we won, and then we'd have to quit fighting. And we can't have that, can we?
This is the very definition of a never-ending war. Wake up!
2007-08-12 20:30:53 · answer #4 · answered by skip742 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
The surge is not really going to work long term. It might look like it is working, just like it looks like it is working when you spray for cockroaches. Either they run and hide in the walls or they go someplace else. So you do a so-called 'surge' in Baghdad and the problem just goes someplace else for a while. Remove your surge and it will be right back again, and you will have accomplished nothing.
No, the surge (what a stupid name for it, it's more like a little squirt) will never work in the long term finality. Not at all.
2007-08-12 20:26:52 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 9⤊ 2⤋
The surge is "working" because the US is cutting deals with the very groups that attack them giving them funds. Basically they're paying people off, they could have done that with 3 guys and an m-16 in Iraq.
2007-08-12 20:27:20 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Got proof the surge is working because all signs and pentagon officials and soldiers in the field aren't agreeing with that fairy tale.
http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-08-12-voa10.cfm
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070812/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_operation_parabellum;_ylt=Agl9R9OAQztHh8Ou0AdOolUDW7oF
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070812/wl_mideast_afp/iraq_070812193934
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070811/wl_mideast_afp/iraqunrestdiwaniyah_070811175704;_ylt=ArBluXzlLqQ8jEKhC72TQAiFOrgF
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070812/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq;_ylt=AtOSYjYEv7_R3bN297Xm8CV34T0D
2007-08-12 20:52:39 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
The "Splurge" is not working; American soldiers are still in Iraq getting killed.
The Bushwackers just don't get it; there is no winning this thing, if soldiers continue to die; there is only minimizing our losses.
2007-08-12 20:27:03 · answer #8 · answered by MenifeeManiac 7 · 6⤊ 2⤋
That is assuming that the surge is working, alas, it is not.
2007-08-12 20:42:56 · answer #9 · answered by ck4829 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes, he should be tried for treason, and made to serve the people he has misrepresented.
2007-08-12 21:03:15 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
no- they'll spin it into "we've told bush the surge would work 2 years ago. he was just too stupid to do it"
to which all the kool aid drinkers will say "ya ya he's an idiot, this is another reason why!"
kerry will spin it to "i was just saying this stuff to make of boys fighting mad, like i did in vietnam".
"i hoped someone would of done it for me when i was in combat. i would of been able to self inflict...er... been able to be a better leader"
2007-08-12 20:32:20 · answer #11 · answered by afratta437 5 · 1⤊ 5⤋