As Casualties Mount, Bush Ignores Reality

[vern_humphrey]

Celia:

Know what? This isn’t Vietnam.

If you and others like you had your way, it would be exactly like Viet Nam.

I was there – I remember when people were saying exactly what you are saying. And I remember the cost in blood and suffering.

Celia:

It’s a different generation and a different attitude. I don’t have the same attitude as the anti war protesters in the 60’s.

Yes, you do. I was there – I remember when people were saying exactly what you are saying. And I remember the cost in blood and suffering.

Celia:

And you have no right to say I do from what you’ve gathered from a few comments (that you obviously misunderstood) on a message board.

It’s your responsibility to articulate your position. You have no grounds for complaint when others point out your flawed thinking and prejudices.

Celia:

You were the one that started the whole civil war deal. It wasn’t a bogus parallel.

Show me a quote where I started the Civil War “deal.”

It was bogus, and you even came as close to admitting it as you have ever come to admitting error.

Celia:

It seemed pretty clear to me. And, it wasn’t meant to be for or against Bush. It was just a thought. As for the tax thing, refer to above post.

Your words express your thoughts – unless you claim that you speak and write without thinking.

Celia:

I doubt my “declarative statements” have endangered any troops. From now on, I’ll put them in question form though, just in case.

When you bolster the enemy’s morale, and give him leave to hope that there will be another “anti-war” movement in this country, you endanger troops – some 55,000 of my generation died just that way.

Celia:

I think I’m done with this conversation with you. I think I’ve said everything I want to with you and I need to bow out before it starts getting more uncharitable. Have a good day.

Exercise caution upon departure to avoid being posteriorly impacted by the protuberance on the portal.

 

[mike182d]

Celia:

IF the latter were true, then I wouldn’t want to be lied to and told the former. I’m not trying to expose any lies. I’m trying to understand.
Based on the fact that I love my country and I don’t like seeing her dragged through the mud. When other countries or people in general insult us, I want to be ready with proof that we’re doing the right thing.
I don’t like Bush. That’s my right. You’re probably not in love with Clinton. Until I have a reason to like him, I’ll keep my opinions.

Did you ever “try to understand” why Clinton sent our troops to Kosovo?

Where were the anti-war oppenents then?

I guess we were supposed to just trust Clinton, but not Bush because Bush is pure evil.

The whole problem with this anti-war propoganda is that they’re not logically consistent in their beliefs. They pick and choose which wars to over-scrutinize - and they happen to be only the wars Republicans get involved in (all 2 of them!). There is hardly any intellectual honesty or charity from the leaders on the anti-war side.

 

[mike182d]

oat soda:

our country doesn’t protect life. the death penalty, contraception, euthanasia, abortion (46,023,191 babies killed since 1973), hiroshima… are all a result of our government decisions.

Actually, the majority of those are Democrat’santi-life decisions, not America’s: contraception, euthanasia, abortion, hiroshima and nagasaki…

I mean, let’s be consistent. If you’re going to claim that Iraq is “Bush’s War,” then Hiroshima and Nagasaki were “Truman’s blunders,” Vietnam is “Johnson’s War” and abortion is the Democrat’s social “quagmire.”

When Democrats do wrong, it is America’s blunder. When Republicans do wrong, it’s not America as a whole but evil individuals…

Once again, no logical consistency.

 

[vern_humphrey]

mike182d:

Did you ever “try to understand” why Clinton sent our troops to Kosovo?

Where were the anti-war oppenents then?

I guess we were supposed to just trust Clinton, but not Bush because Bush is pure evil.

That pretty much sums it up.

As I said, I don’t like broccoli – but rarely do I feel a need to inject that into a debate. So when someone says, “I don’t like so-and-so” it’s fair to interpret their positions as being based on dislike for “so-and-so” and not on objectivity.

 

[Thekla]

vern humphrey:

So your tactic when proven wrong is to call the Navy liars?

Actually, I’ve been consistently correct.

And the fact that I have to give people the facts because they are either too lazy or indifferent to look them up is quite bothersome.

The level of naivete shown about the government’s willingness to manipulate gatherings is obviously fake; all thinking adults understand the “staged” quality of public events. Therefore, that leaves us with the cheerleaders who believe it is their duty to support any lie, deceit, or bit of stagecraft employed. Whether it’s who made the “Mission Accomplished” banner or real lies about Iraq and 9/11, we can always count on the cheerleaders to assume the appropriate position.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Thekla:

Actually, I’ve been consistently correct.

You’ve been consistenly wrong on this one – your position is the “Mission Accomplished” banner was ordered by the Bush White House and referred to the entire war.

Thekla:

And the fact that I have to give people the facts because they are either too lazy or indifferent to look them up is quite bothersome.

I admit that after shooting yourself in the foot, you did a rather energitic tap dance to “prove” that the “Mission Accomplished” banner was ordered by the Bush White House and referred to the entire war.

Thekla:

The level of naivete shown about the government’s willingness to manipulate gatherings is obviously fake; all thinking adults understand the “staged” quality of public events.

You work pretty hard to maintain your level of naivete.

Thekla:

Therefore, that leaves us with the cheerleaders who believe it is their duty to support any lie, deceit, or bit of stagecraft employed. Whether it’s who made the “Mission Accomplished” banner or real lies about Iraq and 9/11, we can always count on the cheerleaders to assume the appropriate position.

Actually, it leaves us with the spinmiesters who believe it is their duty to support any lie, deceit, or bit of stagecraft employed to attack the administration. Whether it’s who made the “Mission Accomplished” banner or real lies about Iraq and 9/11, we can always count on the spinimiesters to assume the appropriate position, no matter how much aid and comfort it gives to the enemy.

 

[Thekla]

If you are going to essentially plagiarize my words, then at least get them right. I wrote…

"Therefore, that leaves us with the cheerleaders who believe it is their duty to support any lie, deceit, or bit of stagecraft employed. Whether it’s who made the “Mission Accomplished” banner or real lies about Iraq and 9/11, we can always count on the cheerleaders to assume the appropriate position.

While some might find it flattering to be copied, I tend to find it deceitful.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Thekla:

If you are going to essentially plagiarize my words, then at least get them right. I wrote…

"Therefore, that leaves us with the cheerleaders who believe it is their duty to support any lie, deceit, or bit of stagecraft employed. Whether it’s who made the “Mission Accomplished” banner or real lies about Iraq and 9/11, we can always count on the cheerleaders to assume the appropriate position.

And I wrote;

“Actually, it leaves us with the spinmiesters who believe it is their duty to support any lie, deceit, or bit of stagecraft employed to attack the administration. Whether it’s who made the “Mission Accomplished” banner or real lies about Iraq and 9/11, we can always count on the spinimiesters to assume the appropriate position, no matter how much aid and comfort it gives to the enemy.”

I didn’t notice a copyright on your words – they’re therefore in the public domain, and freely usable by anyone.

Thekla:

While some might find it flattering to be copied, I tend to find it deceitful.

And I note how you have switched from trying to defend your spurious positon on the “Mission Accomplished” banner to calling names.

You might want to look up “deceitful” in the dictionary – it applies to your position on this issue, not to my paraphrasing your rant.http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif

 

[Thekla]

vern humphrey:

I didn’t notice a copyright on your words – they’re therefore in the public domain, and freely usable by anyone…http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif

The crafting of my words is important to me; I want them to say what I mean. The fact that I don’t copyright my words should not encourage you to take them for your own.

As for “Mission Accomplished,” please go back and find where I referenced my president and Scott McClellan. They are the ones who said it, I just quoted them.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Thekla:

The crafting of my words is important to me; I want them to say what I mean. The fact that I don’t copyright my words should not encourage you to take them for your own.

You don’t own the English language, and when you make statements like that, you should expect to have them reflected back at you.

Thekla:

As for “Mission Accomplished,” please go back and find where I referenced my president and Scott McClellan. They are the ones who said it, I just quoted them.

First you said;

Thekla:

The spin is that he was referring to the mission of the Lincoln; his words say otherwise. And of course, we have the necessary 9/11 reference to reinforce the connection.

“The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11, 2001 – and still goes on.”

Sure sounds like “Mission Accomplished.” Otherwise, what is victory?

Then you said;

Thekla:

10/29/03
"White House spokesman Scott McClellan told CNN that in preparing for the speech, Navy officials on the carrier told Bush aides they wanted a “Mission Accomplished” banner, and the White House agreed to create it.

“We took care of the production of it,” McClellan said."

You’ve consistently claimed that the “Mission Accomplished” banner was there by order of the President.

QED

 

[mike182d]

vern humphrey:

That pretty much sums it up.

As I said, I don’t like broccoli – but rarely do I feel a need to inject that into a debate. So when someone says, “I don’t like so-and-so” it’s fair to interpret their positions as being based on dislike for “so-and-so” and not on objectivity.

The irony is that Clinton lied under oath and we would have had every reason to suspect he was lying, while no one has found that Bush lied about anything.

 

[Stu]

Thekla:

Actually, I’ve been consistently correct.

And the fact that I have to give people the facts because they are either too lazy or indifferent to look them up is quite bothersome.

The level of naivete shown about the government’s willingness to manipulate gatherings is obviously fake; all thinking adults understand the “staged” quality of public events. Therefore, that leaves us with the cheerleaders who believe it is their duty to support any lie, deceit, or bit of stagecraft employed. Whether it’s who made the “Mission Accomplished” banner or real lies about Iraq and 9/11, we can always count on the cheerleaders to assume the appropriate position.

I will happily admit that the President’s visit had PR value. So what? It goes with the office and always will. But I will stand by the assertion that the “Mission Accomplished” referred to the crew. Anyone who has been to such a homecoming would not find such pomp and circumstance that out of the ordinairy (replete with banners and sign all over the place with all sorts of sayings). In my case, the carrier I was on had such a visit by a “4-Star” to give the crew a very visible “atta-boy”. In LINCOLN’s case given the nature of their extended deployment (one in which they were turned around on their way home) theirs was a visit by the Commander-in-Chief…

I stand by the story from my friends who served aboard LINCOLN in their belief that the sign was made there. Could they have been mistaken? Of course. Could there be a likely explanation given the conflict between their recollection and that of the press account that you found? Absolutely. I have already suggested that the ship may have made a backup sign in the event that the one being printed by the White House did not come through. (You know we people in the military love preparing for contingencies.) What is not in conflict between their account and that of the press account you forwarded was the fact that the “Mission Accomplished” referred to the crew. And while I will be happy to admit I may be incorrect (wouldn’t be the first time) in who made the sign I see no such humility in you in admitting your error or even hinting that you may be fallible.

I don’t know if you ever served in the military (If you have, then you seemed to have forgotten your roots). And while I don’t think that military service is necessary for you to comment on military affairs a better understanding of the men and women of our military for you is in order given your somewhat smug and self-righteous assertions of lying and blind loyalty by those of us who do serve. Similar types of assertions that more and more seem to be the tactics of the elitist left who look down upon those who do serve, utilize tactics of namecalling and wrongful allegations of lying all the time justifying their malevolent actions because theirs is a greater “good”.

I always am pleased to tone down rhetoric and have good discussions (debate) with those that I disagree. In fact, I usually enjoy it and consider it a source of learning. Unfortunately in this day and age that has become increasingly difficult with those on the left as your tone and comments demonstrate. So if you want to call me a “cheerleader” then have at it. But keep in mind you certainly seem to have some poms-poms in your hands from my point of view.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Stu:

I don’t know if you ever served in the military (If you have, then you seemed to have forgotten your roots). And while I don’t think that military service is necessary for you to comment on military affairs a better understanding of the men and women of our military for you is in order given your somewhat smug and self-righteous assertions of lying and blind loyalty by those of us who do serve. Similar types of assertions that more and more seem to be the tactics of the elitist left who look down upon those who do serve, utilize tactics of namecalling and wrongful allegations of lying all the time justifying their malevolent actions because theirs is a greater “good”.

This is looking more and more like the Viet Nam era anti-war movement. It’s as if they dusted off the old playbooks and re-issued them.

That nonsense killed tens of thousands of my generation – and if it takes hold again, it will kill tens of thousands of this generation.

 

[Thekla]

Reflect away. But try and be cute and clever in your own words.
vern humphrey:

You don’t own the English language, and when you make statements like that, you should expect to have them reflected back at you.

You’ve consistently claimed that the “Mission Accomplished” banner was there by order of the President.QED

“America sent you on a mission and that mission has been accomplished.” Doha, Qatar 6/5/03 (Guess who)

The flap over thet sign didn’t rev up until 10/03.

I’ve definitely referenced the WH public relations liaison to the Lincoln and their creation of the “set.” I’ve also referenced their admission that the WH had the banner made. I’ve never claimed that the “banner was there by order of the President.” Hopefully, presidential orders are for more important things than banner production.

But more important, why do you care so much? People in the government use the military for photo opportunities. This is some sort of revelation? This is new to you?

 

[Celia]

vern humphrey:

If you and others like you had your way, it would be exactly like Viet Nam.

I was there – I remember when people were saying exactly what you are saying. And I remember the cost in blood and suffering.

Yes, you do. I was there – I remember when people were saying exactly what you are saying. And I remember the cost in blood and suffering.

It’s your responsibility to articulate your position. You have no grounds for complaint when others point out your flawed thinking and prejudices.

Show me a quote where I started the Civil War “deal.”

It was bogus, and you even came as close to admitting it as you have ever come to admitting error.

Your words express your thoughts – unless you claim that you speak and write without thinking.

When you bolster the enemy’s morale, and give him leave to hope that there will be another “anti-war” movement in this country, you endanger troops – some 55,000 of my generation died just that way.

Exercise caution upon departure to avoid being posteriorly impacted by the protuberance on the portal.

Gosh. I keep trying to leave and something keeps pulling me back here…
Oh well. You have formed an opinion of me that is not true. But whatever I say, you won’t believe me. I have formed an opinion of you too. I hope in the future, maybe it will be better.

I doubt I’m the only one on here with predjudices. We all have our opinions. And we’re entitled to 'em.

I made a comment on the civil war stuff that someone else posted and you started in on me with it. I’ve already admitted that I was wrong. You even said I did, too. Let’s leave it alone, for the hundredth time, please? We’re just bickering really now, anyway…

Sorry. Don’t buy it.

I was being polite to you. I don’t see why you feel the need to be so nasty to me.

(Ok, hopefully I’m really done now! Catch y’all later.)

 

[Celia]

mike182d:

Did you ever “try to understand” why Clinton sent our troops to Kosovo?

Where were the anti-war oppenents then?

I guess we were supposed to just trust Clinton, but not Bush because Bush is pure evil.

The whole problem with this anti-war propoganda is that they’re not logically consistent in their beliefs. They pick and choose which wars to over-scrutinize - and they happen to be only the wars Republicans get involved in (all 2 of them!). There is hardly any intellectual honesty or charity from the leaders on the anti-war side.

Yes, I had questions about Kosovo. I remember I think I was in early high school years, maybe a sophmore? When that happened. And I have questions about this now.

'nite…

 

[vern_humphrey]

Thekla:

The flap over thet sign didn’t rev up until 10/03.

I’ve definitely referenced the WH public relations liaison to the Lincoln and their creation of the “set.” I’ve also referenced their admission that the WH had the banner made. I’ve never claimed that the “banner was there by order of the President.” Hopefully, presidential orders are for more important things than banner production.

You have implied again and again that the sign was part of the White House plan. That it meant the whole mission of all our armed forces was accomplished.

If you deny that, answer this – why even discuss the incident?

Thekla:

But more important, why do you care so much? People in the government use the military for photo opportunities. This is some sort of revelation? This is new to you?

The issue is the propgandistic use of the incident, the deliberate casting of it in a false light.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Thekla:

The flap over thet sign didn’t rev up until 10/03.

I’ve definitely referenced the WH public relations liaison to the Lincoln and their creation of the “set.” I’ve also referenced their admission that the WH had the banner made. I’ve never claimed that the “banner was there by order of the President.” Hopefully, presidential orders are for more important things than banner production.

You have implied again and again that the sign was part of the White House plan. That it meant the whole mission of all our armed forces was accomplished.

If you deny that, answer this – why even discuss the incident?

Thekla:

But more important, why do you care so much? People in the government use the military for photo opportunities. This is some sort of revelation? This is new to you?

The issue is the propgandistic use of the incident, the deliberate casting of it in a false light.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I said:

When you bolster the enemy’s morale, and give him leave to hope that there will be another “anti-war” movement in this country, you endanger troops – some 55,000 of my generation died just that way.

And you said;

Celia:

Sorry. Don’t buy it.

What a cavalier way to dismiss the lives of American soldiers – especially after admitting that your own father was victimized that way.

Celia:

I was being polite to you. I don’t see why you feel the need to be so nasty to me.

Try being polite to the men and women who are in harm’s way for your sake.

 

[kp1]

This childish banter by some of the posters is driving me crazy!!!

You obviuosly had no one in the miltary and have no concept of how we do things. Try as you may, but until you have walked in our shoes you could not possibly understand. We are trying in as civilly speaking as possible reach you, but your absurdity or inabiblty to even consider the other side by definition makes you a finatic.

I know this may be usless, but I still have hope of trying to make you understand:
Who cares if the banner was ordered by the president or not. The “Mission Accomplished” was like getting the A on a report card if he did order it. If he did not order it, and it was from the ship (it is only a boat if it’s a sub) then it was to inform the American people they did thier task at hand. So no matter who ordered it, the banner was a morale booster for the troops who endured a lengthy deployment. Ten months from loved ones, fathers not seeing the birth of their child or seeing the first steps, missing funerals and graduations, birthdays and holidays…(I could go on), most depolyments are 5-7 months this one was extented when they thought they could come home. Do you like to work very long and hard on an important project, sacrifice precious time away from loved ones, wreck your body with no sleep and too much coffee, only to have soemone tell you we think you are worthless.
I don’t think so!

You should be gratful to them, if they did not do this day in and day out, the draft would be installed and you people who think we are “baby killers” would have to join our ranks. Not everyone can handle the scarifices, work ethic, and low pay becuase you are too self centered to see beyond your own 10 miles radius. They do it for their country, to protect a way of life, to enable our freedoms to be intack. If you looked at it from your standards, they would be crazy to pull those hours and in the case of the younger enlisted, still be on WIC and food stamps. Why not take those wonderful skills and do something for the country like work for Bill Gates, or Fly for Northwest. Because these men and women see there is something more than their own needs, to better humainty wither it be inside or outside our borders. Maybe there is a connection as to the higher % of people in the military who are following some sort of religion as opposed to the rest of the American society. They know that as much as they do not want to die, sometimes it maybe necessary for the greater good of humanity. We know sacrifice far beyond your capability. So give us some credit! Tell them that the sacrifices they endured were not in vain. Tell them they did the particular job we needed done! Tell them you admire their courage and selflessness. Tell them
Mission Accomplished!

As you can see I have become so over come by emotion that I must stay away from this board for awhile. I am trying to stay calm, but you are breaking my heart. Try to understand, try to see the other side. Agree to disagree, but have some respect for those who do what you can or will not do.
Remember to pray for our men and women in uniform! May God Bless!