Murtha says Army 'broken, worn out'

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gilliam

Guest
The U.S. Army is “broken, worn out” and “living hand-to-mouth” from fighting in Iraq and may not be able to meet future military threats to this country’s security, U.S. Rep. John Murtha said Wednesday.

“They’re barely getting by,” said Murtha, a ranking member of the powerful House Appropriations Committee and Subcommittee on Defense.
“They’re drawing back on equipment buys down the road,” said the Democrat, who was in Latrobe, Westmoreland County, yesterday to address an invited group of community and business leaders. “We are not able to buy the equipment because of the cost of the war.”

pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/trib/regional/s_399643.html

I’m sorry for someone in the US Congress to say this at a time of war is unforgivable. I better see an apology coming out of his mouth, and fast.
 
40.png
gilliam:
The U.S. Army is “broken, worn out” and “living hand-to-mouth” from fighting in Iraq and may not be able to meet future military threats to this country’s security, U.S. Rep. John Murtha said Wednesday.

“They’re barely getting by,” said Murtha, a ranking member of the powerful House Appropriations Committee and Subcommittee on Defense.
“They’re drawing back on equipment buys down the road,” said the Democrat, who was in Latrobe, Westmoreland County, yesterday to address an invited group of community and business leaders. “We are not able to buy the equipment because of the cost of the war.”

pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/trib/regional/s_399643.html

I’m sorry for someone in the US Congress to say this at a time of war is unforgivable. I better see an apology coming out of his mouth, and fast.
Click to expand...
If what he said is true, I can’t believe he would tell the world about it. INCONCEIVABLE!
 
40.png
gilliam:
It borders on treason IMHO.
Click to expand...
Oh, nonsense. We still live in a free country last I checked; accusing people of treason for exercising the first ammendment is ludicrous.

Especially in this case, since whether you agree with Murtha or not, he’s trying to help America. If, for the sake of argument, Murtha’s assessment actually is correct, then it is far more harmful to both the army and the nation to leave the situation as it stands than it is to reveal it and change course.
 
40.png
SamCA:
Oh, nonsense. We still live in a free country last I checked; accusing people of treason for exercising the first ammendment is ludicrous.

Especially in this case, since whether you agree with Murtha or not, he’s trying to help America. If, for the sake of argument, Murtha’s assessment actually is correct, then it is far more harmful to both the army and the nation to leave the situation as it stands than it is to reveal it and change course.
Click to expand...
Last time I looked, giving aid and comfort to the enemy is treason. A member of congress broadcasting to the world that the US Army is “broken, worn out” and “living hand-to-mouth” from fighting in Iraq is either (1) not true or (2) giving aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war. You choose.

Broadcasting weakness at a time of war is not helping America in the least. And most people wouldn’t think of doing it at a football or baseball game or if a Democrat were president. Why is it all of a sudden OK to do it because Bush is in office?
 
40.png
SamCA:
Oh, nonsense. We still live in a free country last I checked; accusing people of treason for exercising the first ammendment is ludicrous.

Especially in this case, since whether you agree with Murtha or not, he’s trying to help America. If, for the sake of argument, Murtha’s assessment actually is correct, then it is far more harmful to both the army and the nation to leave the situation as it stands than it is to reveal it and change course.
Click to expand...
I certainly support Murtha’s right to call for a withdrawal of troops, but the First Amendment does not give congressmen, especially a congressman on committees that review sensitive information, a right to share information about the state of readiness and/or state of operational effectiveness with the whole world. If it’s true that our Army is “broken, worn out”, it’s not something you share when they’re fighting overseas.

Now, if Michael Moore said the same thing, it would be a different story. He is not a congressman, so it would be his opinion without the use of any confidential information.

Robert
 
40.png
gilliam:
Last time I looked, giving aid and comfort to the enemy is treason. A member of congress broadcasting to the world that the US Army is “broken, worn out” and “living hand-to-mouth” from fighting in Iraq is either (1) not true or (2) giving aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war. You choose.
Click to expand...
Again: Nonsense. Saying bad things about the army does not equal giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Giving aid and comfort to the enemy is a specific criminal activity which requires rather more than just saying we might be losing.

More to the point, though – Again, let’s suppose Murtha were correct. I’m not saying he is, but for the sake of the conversation, what if what he’s saying is completely accurate? What if the way we’re fighting Iraq really is weakening our army in tangible and long lasting ways, ways which could seriously hurt our nation?

If that were correct, would it be better to (1) get that fact out there, and set about changing the strategy to one which will not hurt America in the long term, or (2) remain silent, stay the course, and let the army be weakened and damaged even further?

Now, Murtha may not be correct. But he clearly thinks he is. (And given Murtha’s rather extensive ties to the upper echelons of the military command structure, there’s a compelling argument to be made that he gets to hear the story from generals and other officers that they don’t send up to a White House notorious for rejecting bad news out of hand, so comments like this from Murtha carry rather more weight than they would from, say, Pelosi.) Given an honest belief that the course the nation is currently engaged on will be deeply harmful to our future military capability, it seems to me that it is far more patriotic to speak out than to remain silent out of some sort of misplaced, jingoistic idea that any detraction against the war is treasonous.
Broadcasting weakness at a time of war is not helping America in the least.
Click to expand...
Unless it is a weakness that is correctable, and that will continue to weaken us further if it is not corrected.
 
40.png
SamCA:
Unless it is a weakness that is correctable, and that will continue to weaken us further if it is not corrected.
Click to expand...
He is in a position to know the truth. He is telling the enemy, “just hang on, your devastating the US forces, they are already beaten”. I don’t know what you call that if it is not giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

Again, this borders on treason.
 
40.png
gilliam:
He is in a position to know the truth. He is telling the enemy, “just hang on, your devastating the US forces, they are already beaten”. I don’t know what you call that if it is not giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

Again, this borders on treason.
Click to expand...
I don’t even know why I bother talking to you. You cut almost my entire post, and didn’t respond to so much as a single one of my points.

To answer your question, though, “giving aid and comfort to the enemy” describes specific actions undertaken for the purpose of assisting the enemy in defeating our soldiers. Sending them weapons or supplies, specific and sensitive information on troop positions or deployments, or other tangible aids.

Saying that the way a war is being fought is resulting in harm to our army, or even saying that we’re losing, is not treason by the legal definition of the term.

Now, having at least addressed your point (even if you disagree with my response), could you at least make a casual effort to address mine, re: the actual harm or benefit to our troops of Murtha’s actions if, for the sake of argument, he is actually right about the conduct of the war’s long term effects on our armed forces?
 
40.png
gilliam:
I’m sorry for someone in the US Congress to say this at a time of war is unforgivable. I better see an apology coming out of his mouth, and fast.
Click to expand...
At least there is another brave soul in Washington besides Ron Paul.
 
40.png
gilliam:
Last time I looked, giving aid and comfort to the enemy is treason. A member of congress broadcasting to the world that the US Army is “broken, worn out” and “living hand-to-mouth” from fighting in Iraq is either (1) not true or (2) giving aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war. You choose.

Broadcasting weakness at a time of war is not helping America in the least. And most people wouldn’t think of doing it at a football or baseball game or if a Democrat were president. Why is it all of a sudden OK to do it because Bush is in office?
Click to expand...
Sieg Heil herr Commandant!
 
40.png
SamCA:
I don’t even know why I bother talking to you. You cut almost my entire post, and didn’t respond to so much as a single one of my points.

To answer your question, though, “giving aid and comfort to the enemy” describes specific actions undertaken for the purpose of assisting the enemy in defeating our soldiers. Sending them weapons or supplies, specific and sensitive information on troop positions or deployments, or other tangible aids.

Saying that the way a war is being fought is resulting in harm to our army, or even saying that we’re losing, is not treason by the legal definition of the term.
Click to expand...
Here you go: Political and propaganda aid an comfort is still aid and comfort. Lord Ha Ha was hung for it in England after WWII.

If you are privy to classified information and you divulge it to the enemy (which I guess is where he gets his info it it is true, which I don’t think it is), then he is also giving aid and comfort.

You don’t need to pass them bombs and guns to be giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
Now, having at least addressed your point (even if you disagree with my response), could you at least make a casual effort to address mine, re: the actual harm or benefit to our troops of Murtha’s actions if, for the sake of argument, he is actually right about the conduct of the war’s long term effects on our armed forces?
Click to expand...
I thought I did. If you let our enemy know our troops are about ready to fold, you are hurting the moral of our troops and giving the enemy valuable information to directly aid his tactical planning. If he is doing this, this is treason.
 
An e-mail from Fort Hood:As a Captain in the Army who served in Iraq for the entire 365 days of 2004 in Iraq, I can assure you that the Army is not broken, worn out, or living hand to mouth. I would like to elaborate and respond to Congressman Murtha’s comments but I doubt I could contain the 4 letter words that would flow from my fingers onto this computer. In a nutshell, these comments make me very very angry. Feel free to relay my frustration on the Corner.

PS, I looked on his website earlier today to respectfully disagree, but there was no good way to contact him via email. Figures; his inbox would be flooded by thousands of soldiers just like me.
corner.nationalreview.com/05_11_27_corner-archive.asp#083717

By the way, I saw my son off to Iraq a few days ago. They didn’t look broke either.
 
40.png
gilliam:
Again, this borders on treason.
Click to expand...
I can’t believe that you would insinuate that Rep. Jack Murtha, a 37-yr Marine veteran, retired colonel, and recipient of the Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts, is treasonous by his words. I feel that is rude and uncalled for, not to mention anti-American in propogating the restriction of free speech.
 
Derek Flint:
I can’t believe that you would insinuate that Rep. Jack Murtha, a 37-yr Marine veteran, retired colonel, and recipient of the Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts, is treasonous by his words. I feel that is rude and uncalled for, not to mention anti-American in propogating the restriction of free speech. I feel that Elaine’s Cross’s facetious admonition (“Sieg Heil, Herr Commandant”, since deleted by the moderator) of you was most apropo.
Click to expand...
I have no reason to doubt that Jack Murtha is a hero, although I don’t know the man. However, that does not give him some kind of right to give aid and comfort to the enemy, nor dies it make me Hitler for saying so. I stand by my admonition that if true, this borders on treason and I gave my reasons why I thought that way. If what he is saying is not true, then …
 
40.png
gilliam:
However, that does not give him some kind of right to give aid and comfort to the enemy, nor dies it make me Hitler for saying so. I stand by my admonition that if true, this borders on treason and I gave my reasons why I thought that way. If what he is saying is not true, then …
Click to expand...
Nor does GWB have the right to lead us into an unholy war. I submit IMHO that the real patriots are the anti-war folks and the traitors are Mr. Bush and his supporters, misguided though they are.
 
Derek Flint:
Nor does GWB have the right to lead us into an unholy war. I submit IMHO that the real patriots are the anti-war folks and the traitors are Mr. Bush and his supporters, misguided though they are.
Click to expand...
Even if your judgement of GWB is correct, and I don’t think it is, two wrongs don’t make a right and treason is treason.
 
40.png
gilliam:
Even if your judgement of GWB is correct, and I don’t think it is, two wrongs don’t make a right and treason is treason.
Click to expand...
Your point is well taken, but in this case, I don’t think there can be two wrongs. If the war was wrong, then GWB is either a war criminal, a traitor, an incompetent nincompoop or some combination thereof. If the war was right, then Murtha may be a traitor.

I side with Mr. Murtha and have been against the war since the day of the first attack.
 
Derek Flint:
I can’t believe that you would insinuate that Rep. Jack Murtha, a 37-yr Marine veteran, retired colonel, and recipient of the Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts, is treasonous by his words. I feel that is rude and uncalled for, not to mention anti-American in propogating the restriction of free speech.
Click to expand...
And your point is??? Benedict Arnold was one of the best generals in the Revolutionary War.

This has nothing to do with free speech. Murtha is privy to confidential information as a ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee and Subcommittee on Defense. He is not free to share some of this information with the public, especially while our military personnel are in harms way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top