Snipers aim for a soldier's heart; congressional leaders aim for the heart of why he serves: Honor, Country, Duty to both. But to congressional leaders, there's no honor in Iraq. There can't be: it's immoral. Illegal. And it's not even their country's war: it's Bush's.
Telling parents their child died for George Bush is telling Christa McAuliffe's folks she died for Ronald Reagan.
JFK committed the US to space, but it wasn't his race -- it was America's. Astronauts knew the risks, the myriad of things that could go wrong, yet signed on, boosted by their countrymen as much as by rockets. There's no such lift for soldiers today; they're stranded, ignored unless exploited, gains unseen, achievements unheard. The Tomb of the Unknowns isn't only in Arlington.
It's one thing for leaders to oppose a mission, another to undermine it; one thing to make course corrections, another to sabotage the ship, one thing to overhaul an engine, another to wreck it in flight.
2007-10-25 05:05:15 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Because it counters their socialist ideology. They are not for a free America, it is control at all costs. Regardless of who it hurts.
It is interesting isn't it. That Liberal Democrats vote to fund the war, yet talk about how it is Bush's war. Hmmmm...... Double-speak?
2007-10-25 05:08:28 · answer #1 · answered by Gef J 3 · 2⤊ 5⤋
Most of the general public who votes Democrat are not haters of the military, but the ones in office are undermining our efforts in Iraq with the help of their liberal friends in the media. Power in office and staying elected is all they are interested in. Office holders, such as Hillary, Kennedy, Reid, Palosi and others would do anything to undermine the policy's of the Republicans know matter who it hurts.
Solders report that media will come up to them and ask them where the action is, and run to it, avoiding solders helping rebuild a hospital or feeding children. The liberal Democratic leaders and their cohorts the media are in lockstep together destroying everything that's good for their own ends. As far as this war is going. I feel that compared to other wars where we lost thousands in one day as compared to 3 plus thousands in 5 years is pretty good going.
2007-10-25 05:47:05 · answer #2 · answered by Dutch 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
large question! some (an extremely few) do no longer like the idea of u.s. projecting its skill in any respect. some, like Chrissie Hynde, brazenly stated that she hopes u.s. loses. a school professor stated he hopes for "1000" Blackhawk Down incidents. they're movitated by a hostility to u.s. yet for sure our troops ought to die in the experience that they'd their want. far more suitable, for sure, suppoort our infantrymen yet imagine the conflict is incorrect. they're in a tricky spot. on the single hand, they have the right and the pastime in our republic to communicate out - citizen involvement keeps our authorities heading in the right direction. we are the authorities! on the different hand, noticeably in a conflict the position the enemy can't defeat our protection stress and relies upon in part on asymmetrical conflict and "demoralizing" the troops and the civilian inhabitants contained in the U. S., dissent is taken into consideration as an encouraging signal to our enemies. there is not any way round it. seem up familiar Giap and what he stated about how conflict protesters were needed to North VietNam's eventual triumph. it really is not any longer the guy who can inflict the most casualties who wins, it really is the guy who can upward thrust up to the most casualties in the previous throwing contained in the towel that wins. even if it really is meant to or no longer (and contained in the overpowering circumstances it really is not any longer so meant), information of dissention has the outcome of encouraging the enemy to maintain attempting. i ought to imagine American infantrymen should be happier in the experience that they knew they'd more suitable help at homestead. yet that begs the question - "why are we there contained in the first position?" i keep in mind that. per chance the troops should be happiest in the experience that they were again homestead themselves! i guess it relies upon on even if you imagine protests quit the conflict or lose the conflict. definite, I honestly have lengthy gone in circles and in no way given an answer. it really is what regularly takes position once you attempt to imagine about a situation, fairly than hurl insults - which i'm effective others are doing. playstation GOD BLESS your Dad and each and every of the troops. they're u.s.'s spectacular! I paintings to help them and pray for them on a daily basis. there are a range of respected charities and different facilities the position you could nevertheless supply funds, deliver products, or in simple terms write letters to the troops. whatever one thinks about the conflict, it really is nevertheless fairly uncomplicated to get entangled.
2016-10-22 23:37:24 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The troops are doing a great job
they are doing exactly what the code of a soldier mandates them to do
the government has sent these troops into a situation that has done nothing but enable the enemy to build a consensus among themselves that we are the intruder. As you know, Al Queda is stronger today that it was before we sent our troops into a country that HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11
we don't hate the troops
WE HATE BUSH AND HIS WAR
also some of you idiots that seem to love to see the troops die for no good reason and are claiming to be patriots. The real patriots that believe this war is necessary, are THERE
WHY AREN'T YOU THERE ?
2007-10-25 05:12:57 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
70% of our troops in Iraq believe the U.S. should leave within the year.
It's you who does not support the troops.
JFK inspired the nation to go into space.
Bush could've used his term to inspire the nation to seek alternative fuels...he could've inspired students to go into fields like chemistry, engineering, science, mathmatics, all for the purpose of ending our dependence on foreign oil.
Instead Bush has only inspired fear.
Such will be his legacy...the worst prsident in U.S. history.
2007-10-25 05:34:40 · answer #5 · answered by Stan 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
My co-worker, who's from Israel, wonders what the US is doing in Iraq. He feels the mission was accomplished and it's time to leave. He has a different view of the war. I guess I tried to defend the US but what could I say to convince him way we are still there?
2007-10-25 05:24:34 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Why do Republicans post crap like this?
How anti-American does one party have to be to claim someone hates the troops if they try to protect the troops, give them necessary armor, competent leadership, proper healthcare and benifits, and make the government keep their promises to the soldiers?
Can you believe that after manufactoring intelligence to lie us into Iraq, refusing to give body armor to the troops even after Congress had aproved the money, forcing soldiers to dig through dumps to get armor for their canvas covered humvees, with 6 months waits for wounded soldiers to see doctors, with rats crawling around the leaky medical facilities that the White House forces the soldiers into, after all of the smearing of every war hero that the rightwing can find, after all that and more, some stinking Republican has the nerfve to accuse Democrats has hating the troops.
Come on you guys, have you no shame? No shame at all?
2007-10-25 05:13:26 · answer #7 · answered by buffytou 6 · 4⤊ 4⤋
THIS democrats supports and loves the soldiers especially since I have a family member serving, I support them so much that I will not stand for one more to lose their lives in a war that serves no purpose....you are confusing disdain for the foreign policy of this president with disdain for the troops...they are two completely different issuest
2007-10-25 05:11:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 3⤋
It's politics and $400+ billion a year that could be used to fund their pet projects.
2007-10-25 05:53:49 · answer #9 · answered by gregory_dittman 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think this is a very provocative question! and a good one!
Although as a strong support a GWB and the Republican Party, I have to say that I believe most Dems support our troops and only a few celebrities and loud outspoken peeps who get a lot of LIBERAL media attention and money support are this radical.
Thanks for pointing your finger at them.
Michael Moore is one and the money man behind them!
P.S. Many Thanks to ALL AMERICANS who have SERVED our Country!
2007-10-25 05:11:00 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 6⤋