I Support the Troops

[bones_IV]

GregoryPalamas:

I have no use for the liberal mantra that they “support the troops” but do everything possible to deny what they said only a few months ago in a transparent effort to undermine the commander in chief. Can anyone imagine what would have happened if FDR’s every move was undermined by small minded people who continually lied about their positions.

I was once a Democrat. The Democrats used to be an honorable party. No more. They need a radical overhaul but that will probably have to wait until the present leadership dies off. What a pitiful bunch they are.

Dan L

The republican party is no better than the Democrats are. As far as I’m concerned, the President is decieving the public, given that he’s pro-life with exceptions as is the Republican party. However, the media is treating the troops unfairly by doing a baised coverage of the Iraqi war. Find it funny how liberals can complain about the President putting troops in harms way. Where is their anger when 4000 babies are being murdered every day? But yet they don’t show anger towards abortion, yet they show their anger when troops get killed over in Iraq. Seems to me that people like Richardols are running a double standard.

 

[Philip_P]

bones_IV:

The republican party is no better than the Democrats are. As far as I’m concerned, the President is decieving the public, given that he’s pro-life with exceptions as is the Republican party. However, the media is treating the troops unfairly by doing a baised coverage of the Iraqi war. Find it funny how liberals can complain about the President putting troops in harms way. Where was their anger when 4000 babies are murdered every day. But yet they don’t show anger towards abortion, yet they show their anger when troops get killed over in Iraq. Seems to me that people like Richardols are running a double standard.

How many women have Democrats ordered to have an abortion?

I think you’ll find that virtually eveyone on these forums is opposed to abortion, even those who aren’t conservatives. Claiming that failing to criminalize abortion is the same as actively ordering American soliders into war is inaccurate and misleading, though.

 

[thestickman]

Philip P:

So you’re allowed to make up trick questions but those who respond to you aren’t allowed to rephrase it into a real question?

T’was an honest question you were avoiding. You validated Prager’s article each time you did.

Your current phrasing is, at least, slightly better. Do I want our troops to succeed militarily in Iraq? I assume you mean do I want the Iraqi insurgency to end?

There you go again. I never asked about any insurgency. Once more, you prove Prager correct.

Of course I do. Who thinks near daily car bombings are a good thing? No one I know.

While I commend you for feeling that way regarding the terrorism in Iraq it has zip to do with the question I asked. Again, you prove Prager’s point.

However, I don’t believe there is a military solution to this problem. Insurgencies are a political problem, and while they have a military component, they ultimately require a political solution. I do not believe the choices of the president (who, as CIC, has the ultimate decision-making responsibility) will provide this solution.

LOL!!! So far the President’s choices have led to 25 million people being freed from Saddam. They are also now free to participate in national elections, free to get a real education as opposed to baathist indoctrination, free to create their own constitution, free to start their own businesses, free to travel out of the country, free to start a newspaper, etc…

Looks to me like President’s decisions have borne some very wonderful fruit.

So yes, I want the troops to succeed.

Good for you.

Heck, I guess I do meet Prager’s absurd criteria for supporting the troops after all.

LOL!!! Sure ya do. That’s why you’ve avoided answering the simplest of questions, time and again.

And because I support the troops and want them to win, I oppose the decisions of President Bush.

A typical fallacious argument offered by the left. Reads like it’s right out of the MoveOn.org manifesto

 

[bones_IV]

Philip P:

How many women have Democrats ordered to have an abortion?

I think you’ll find that virtually eveyone on these forums is opposed to abortion, even those who aren’t conservatives. Claiming that failing to criminalize abortion is the same as actively ordering American soliders into war is inaccurate and misleading, though.

Phillip,
I’m saying this because, Democrats like Kerry, Ted Kennedy ect. have acted defiantly against church teaching and have publicly endorsed abortion. It is by their endorsement of abortion that many women have the impression that abortion is morally acceptable. Abortion in my opinion is the hidden holocaust and during Bush’s Presidency many more babies were murdered during his administration. He holds culpability for this and abortion is far worse than the Iraqi war.

 

[Philip_P]

bones_IV:

Phillip,
I’m saying this because, Democrats like Kerry, Ted Kennedy ect. have acted defiantly against church teaching and have publicly endorsed abortion. It is by their endorsement of abortion that many women have the impression that abortion is morally acceptable. Abortion in my opinion is the hidden holocaust and during Bush’s Presidency many more babies were murdered during his administration. He holds culpability for this and abortion is far worse than the Iraqi war.

Bones, I hear where you’re coming from, but really abortion and the Iraq war are not connected. It’s not even a matter of party here. If Al Gore had won the election and pursued the same course of action regarding Iraq that Bush did, I would still find it mistaken. And if any liberals accused conservatives of not supporting the troops in the Clinton admin because they disagreed with sending troops to Somalia or the Balkans, those liberals would be wrong just as Prager is in this case.

Stickman - there really is nothing more to say at this point. I’ve answered your question, repeatedly, and explained why I answered as I have. This thread seems to have reached the end of its usefulness.

 

[miguel]

HagiaSophia:

He is called upon because he is a well known radio host, (particularly with his Religion on the Line) weekly show featuring ministers of various faiths all discussing current moral perspectives for religious thinking people in modern life; writer and apologist for the Christian Judaic POV. It would be better if you don’t know anything about the person to limit youself to simply disagreeing with him rather than trying to talk about someone rather well known whose work you are totally unacquainted with apparently.

Anyone claiming that Prager is some slave to a single political party doesnt have a clue.

I listened to Dennis moderate Religion on the Line in LA during the 70’s and 80’s. It was on Sunday nights from 10 to midnight. I didn’t think it was syndicated. As far as I know, he hasn’t done that show for many years. He now has a nationally syndicated radio show. Personally, I think he’s a pretty decent guy. He has some blind spots though. For one thing, he’s pro-choice. As far as I know, he has not repudiated that position. This is not a small defect in my book. My understanding is he used to vote Dem until the party left him. But like Sean Hannity, if you’re against the war in Iraq, he considers you a member of the left. I’m a conservative and I think there are valid reasons to be against this war. JPII was also against the US going in there. What does that make him?

 

[HagiaSophia]

miguel:

I listened to Dennis moderate Religion on the Line in LA during the 70’s and 80’s. It was on Sunday nights from 10 to midnight. I didn’t think it was syndicated.

The show continues although not on the old radio station anymore.

miguel:

My understanding is he used to vote Dem until the party left him. .

He declared publicly on his program one evening that he was leaving the party and why.

miguel:

JPII was also against the US going in there. What does that make him?

It makes him JPII and as pope I would expect him to urge peace.

 

[miguel]

HagiaSophia:

It makes him JPII and as pope I would expect him to urge peace.

My point was that being against the war doesn’t necessarily make one a liberal (or an amoral libertarian), as Dennis Prager would have us believe.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Speaking and acting in such a way as to give the enemy leave to hope he can win on the streets of the United States what he cannot win on the battlefields overseas is not “supporting the troops.”

My generation got that kind of “support,” and 58,000 of us died. Let us resolve not to do to this generation what was done to my generation.

 

[Richardols]

vern humphrey:

Speaking and acting in such a way as to give the enemy leave to hope he can win on the streets of the United States what he cannot win on the battlefields overseas is not “supporting the troops.”

Which is to say that one can make no criticism of the Administration’s policies in Iraq?

Even conservatives have said that it was wrong to have disbanded the Iraqi Army immediately after hostilities were over. Are you going to accuse those conservatives of giving the insurgency hope of winning because of their criticism?

 

[Richardols]

vern humphrey:

My generation got that kind of “support,” and 58,000 of us died.

Perhaps even more would have died if Nixon had decided to keep the war dragging on, even with public support.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Richardols:

Perhaps even more would have died if Nixon had decided to keep the war dragging on, even with public support.

Pull the other one, Richard. It’s got bells on it.

With public support, we could have fought the war to victory in '66 or '67.

 

[Richardols]

vern humphrey:

With public support, we could have fought the war to victory in '66 or '67.

In '66 for sure, and in most of '67 there still was public support for the war. Unless I’m wrong, things went south only in late '67 and mostly from '68 on.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Richardols:

In '66 for sure, and in most of '67 there still was public support for the war. Unless I’m wrong, things went south only in late '67 and mostly from '68 on.

At that time we were winning the war, despite our tremendous handicap – after Tet of '68, I was finding nothing but NVA identification cards among the “VC” my company killed or captured.

But well before that the cry would go up, “You’re trying to impose a MILITARY solution!” We couldn’t seek a victory in '66 or '67, nor could we capitalize on our victory in Tet of '68.

The anti-war movement both painted us into a corner where we couldn’t seek a military victory and encouraged our enemies to hang on. And in the process killed thousands of American soldiers.

Let us not do to this generation what was done to ours.

 

[Richardols]

vern humphrey:

The anti-war movement both painted us into a corner where we couldn’t seek a military victory and encouraged our enemies to hang on.

You give too much credit to the left-wing. They alone couldn’t have forced Johnson to end the war. There were enough conservative and middle of the road voices who didn’t want us there, either.

 

[cove]

I just became aware of a new catch phrase coming from the left “Warmonger”. It is to define anyone who voted for Bush and those who have magnetic yellow ribbons on their cars stating “support our troops”.

I was shocked to learn this. I had no idea my yellow ribbon was so offensive to my way-to-the-left countrymen. Go figure.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Richardols:

You give too much credit to the left-wing. They alone couldn’t have forced Johnson to end the war. There were enough conservative and middle of the road voices who didn’t want us there, either.

And your point is?

Those who decried us pursuing a “military solution” and gave our enemies encouragement to hang on and kill more Americans caused the war to come out as it did – and I don’t care what they called themselves.

I will not do to this generation of American soldiers what was done to ours.

 

[Richardols]

vern humphrey:

And your point is?

You blamed the leftists. I said that the impetus to get us out of Vietnam came from a lot of people of varying political positions. The left just wasn’t that powerful.

 

[miguel]

vern humphrey:

Speaking and acting in such a way as to give the enemy leave to hope he can win on the streets of the United States what he cannot win on the battlefields overseas is not “supporting the troops.”

Putting them in harm’s way for reasons other than defensive necessity is not supporting them either. Saddam was under our thumb for 10 years after the Gulf War. How could he have been the imminent threat to this country that Bush made him out to be? The 1st Amendment gives Americans the right to criticize government policy.
vern humphrey:

My generation got that kind of “support,” and 58,000 of us died. Let us resolve not to do to this generation what was done to my generation.

So if Nixon hadn’t pulled the troops out when he did, are you saying fewer of our troops would have died? Don’t get me wrong. I think the idea of fighting the spread of Communism was good. But at some point, politicians have to face the reality of being in a no-win, guerilla-type situation and cut the losses. Like it or not, we’re in a guerilla situation in Iraq. We’re not going to kill them all before we leave. Bush’s hope is that we’ll be able to pass the security baton to the Iraqis as we make a graceful exit. It’s my hope too.

 

[gilliam]

miguel:

Putting them in harm’s way for reasons other than defensive necessity is not supporting them either. .

If we pull out of Iraq too soon, you will see a lot of bombers in the US in just a few years, financed by Iraqi oil.