How can the Republican Party view itself as the patriotic, troop supporting party?

Question

Let's review the facts.

Republican political campaigns have compared war veteran Max Cleland to Osama bin Laden and Sadaam Hussein, and dragged war veteran John Kerry's name through the mud. These Republicans were both elected.

Republican Senators killed a Democratic bill to give our troops more time at home after serving overseas. Twice. Also bills attempting to bring troops home.

The Republican president sent our troops into the Iraq War based on falsified evidence.

The Republican president had no post-war plan, and subsequently our troops are stuck in the middle of a civil war.

Republicans questioned General Shinseki's assessment that several hundred thousand troops would be needed to stabilize post-war Iraq.

Democrats questioned General Patreaus' assessment that things are going pretty well in Iraq.

Republicans probably put more "support our troops" stickers on their car bumpers.

Which seems like the more patriotic, troop supporting party to you?

Answer 1

amazing how the Republicans can't see the facts even when they're presented right before their eyes.

I really do think at times that they believe support of the troops simply involves putting a "support our troops" sticker on their bumpers and waving a flag.

Yup, that's really gonna bring our soldiers home... waving a flag.

Answer 2

Yes, let's review the facts:

John Kerry's comments threw himself in the mud.

Republican Senators killed a bad Democrat bill that would have depleted the number of soldiers that would have been able to be active. Once you sign up as a member of the US military, you are on the job 24 hours- 7 days a week for the duration of your voluntary contract with the United States government. Get over it- nobody forced you to sign...yet.

The United States president sent our troops into the Iraq War based on the "intelligence" given by the CIA and several other countries around the world. I put quotes around intelligence because it has jokingly long been said that there isnt any in the CIA, but seriously, if he cannot trust their word, we are in a far bigger pot of poo than just Iraq.

Republicans questioned everybody's assessment...and so did Democrats- but Democrats went so far as to smear an active general that they assisted in nominating and approved of to take over as the general in the field in Iraq before he ever said one word in his report...interesting.

Republicans and Democrats put "support our troops" stickers on their car bumpers- especially those that have family and/or friends serving. There is nothing political about that.

Republicans generally seem more patriotic to me, however, the more Republicans I see acting like Democrats, the less I feel that way.

Edit: I forgot to add that the group that appears at most of our fallen soldier's funerals on motorcycles carrying flags are probably Republicans.

Answer 3

Considering that Democrats in Congress have been voting to cut off funding - despite the consequences of what that would mean to the people there - I can't see how anyone could even begin to argue otherwise. The bill to give troops more time at home? That was just a shallow attempt to force the military to be unable to keep up with the operational tempo. Let the military decide that - perhaps if Congress really wanted to help address the problem of long deployments they could pass a bill offering more incentives for people to enlist and re-enlist and fund an increased number of personnel? Oh but wait - the Democrats have been voting to cut funding!

No hard evidence - what do you think all those bills the Democrats in Congress have been trying to pass mean? What do you think statements by the Democratic presidential hopefuls who say simply they want the troops out with no real plan or consideration of consequences? They need to at least be realistic about how they are going to bring the troops home...

None of that is good for the actual warfighters there. Anyone should be able to see the political games are taking precedence over the reality of being in a conflict.

Ridiculous question.

Answer 4

Republicans demand that moderate muslims take responsibility for extremist muslims. They demand that the left take responsibility for leftist extremists. But ask Republicans to take responsibility for those on the right who advocate and use violence - who only differ from the GOP in terms of actions, not in beliefs (show me any right wingers that do not agree with Rudolph that abortion should be banned, or with McVeigh that the Federal Government is too powerful, or with Fred Phelps that homosexuality is a perversion) - and they become irate.

Answer 5

Kerry dragged his own name through the mud with his 'medals' scam - he tossed them, he kept them, he tossed them, no, wait he still has them......

The bill that was written to give our troops more time here at home was a backhanded effort intended to limit the number of troops we had in Iraq at any one time, which would have meant those in Iraq would have been less secure and largely ineffective.

If Bush lied, Clinton was the first to utter those same 'lies.'

Anyone who assumed that we would be coming home from Iraq obviously knows very little about history, foreign policy and the true benefits of our staying there. If people thought we would be 'exiting,' they have only themselves to blame for being naive.

Libs have fought our manning of troops in Iraq from day one as evidenced by your #2 and you're blaming us for not approving #5? Plus, Shineski's assessment was unrealistic. We would have had to instigate a draft to fulfill that 'requirement' and that would have certainly led to libs marching in the streets.

So, democrats questioned Patreaus so ????

Republicans put the stickers on their vehicles, yes, to show support of those troops who were home on leave and their families when they were deployed AND liberals stole those stickers right off many of our cars.

The answer to #8 is and can only be the Republicans.

Perhaps, you should look at the slow and stalled funding for our troops that has been coming out of this congress for further clarity on which party is TRULY more patriotic and troop supporting.

Answer 6

"The Republican president sent our troops into the Iraq War based on falsified evidence."

Stop right there, Sparky.
His evidence if falsified? Then what is this? Sounds like more an opinion (and possibly a false one) than a "fact".

Each of your little reasons are all a matter of opinion and not fact. No one has proven any of this, and with the way things are, they may never be proven. But since you asked, the Republican Party seems like the more patriotic one to me, seeing as how they actually bother to support what the military is fighting for. Do realize that Hillary, Obama and all of the other Democratic candidates aren't doing squat for the troops when they merely claim that they'll pull them out of Iraq sometime next year. Is that really what support is to you?

Answer 7

Well

1.) They're not Republicans but I will add that Kerry dragged his own name through the mud by falsifying reports about hos own service, openly consorting with the enemy during time of war, giving false testimony in front of Congress, accusing the men he served with of all sorts of atricities that they did not commit and refusing to release his service record while running on its merits. I don't know about Max Cleland.

2.) Whether you and the other libs like it or not, the President is the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, and that bill was political bovine excrement. President Bush was right to veto it.

3.) Who falsified the evidence? Was it Jow Wilson, Richard Clarke, Who? Do you deny that Saddam had WMDs after he gassed all thos kurds?

4.) The posy war plans went bad. Do you suppose that's the first time that happened? How many times do Presidents change commanders during times of War? Read your history books, this is not new and not unique.

5.) So, you're saying that it's not OK to question General Shinseki but it's just ducky to question General Petraeus? How very liberal of you.

6.) I seriously doubt you can show me one instance of a Republican spitting at an American Serviceman. can you say that about democrats or do i have to remind you of hanoi Jane and her crew of upstanding democrats? And that's not even mentioning the things the Clintons did to the military during their reign of terror

7.) Hands down Republicans.

Answer 8

Your Logic Flawed, see the Republicans don't have senators like Harry Reid saying we already lost the war, while Troops are fighting there a@@ off in the Field, Also all Republican Candidates for Commander and Chief back a Medal of Valor recipient, and the U.S. Ground Forces Commander in a time of war denounce ads that smear such a man for a left wing nut organization, Facts are Facts, you just seem to put Blinders on and call out what you see, being a Hypocrite

Answer 9

Exactly. And if there is a vote to give no further funding for the war, there would still be enough money to bring the troops home. They would not be stuck there, anyone who believes that doesn't understand how the funding works.

Answer 10

Both sides support the troops, but they rarely put their money where their mouths are. Neither party has taken care of our returning vets particularly well. The Bush administration has taken that aspect of care to an all time low however, by not allowing many returning vets to have access to the care they have earned.

Answer 11

They do not support the troops. They are sending them to their deaths so they can get richer and richer, and people like 'Mel' seem to be proud of the fact that her son is on his fourth tour in an illegal war. No doubt your son is brave and courageous, but come on, we need to get him out of there.