Outrage

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
MikeWM:
Not to mention that, while there may have been terrorists that did like the idea of a caliphate, Saddam Hussein didn’t want a caliphate in America - he didn’t even want or have a caliphate in Iraq, never mind America!
Don’t confuse us with the facts!
Living in a state of constant fear isn’t for me, thanks.
Me neither, but there are always those who find it profitable to exploit such a state to their own ends.
And, incidentally, nice to see you again 🙂
Thank you so very much. 🙂
 
Ani Ibi:
It’s the Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
Though that was twice true South of the 49th, I’d note that brave Canadians didn’t have to fight the British to become free, nor did brave Canadians have to fight a civil war to allow freedom for all men. What was true in a past century doesn’t have to be true in this century.
 
Ani Ibi:
Don’t let evidence dissuade you then.
Just as no evidence of WMDs were found, neither was evidence of amphibious landing craft to be used against American beaches found. I can’t believe that anyone actually believes that Saddam was planning an invasion of North America.
 
40.png
Richardols:
All this “we’ve got to stop them in Iraq before the mujahadeen are landing on our beaches” panic talk reminds me of the Red Scare of the early 1920s. Read about it.
First of all, I’d be obliged if you’d tell mewho said “we’ve got to stop them in Iraq before the mujahadeen are landing on our beaches,” since I don’t believe you’d make that up.http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif

Second, you are aware that we have been attacked by terrorists repeatedly – and some of those attacks took place on US soil?

Third, do you now, in retrospect claim there was no danger from Communism?
 
Elaine's Cross:
The ‘evidence’ you have presented is an editorial which mentions WMD and the Al Queda connection and thereby strives for credibility. That’s where credibility stops.

Rather than addressing the actual points made for WMD and the Al Queda connection, the editorial merely places its opinion in the public forum, arbitrarily dismissing the claims for WMD and the Al Queda connection without cause.

It’s heavy on style, light on substance.
 
Don’t confuse us with the facts!
Facts like military families don’t want or need the “support” of anti-war activists. Which, by the way is the point of the OP.
 
40.png
marvin:
Facts like military families don’t want or need the “support” of anti-war activists. Which, by the way is the point of the OP.
Facts like anti-war activists encourate the enemy to believe if he just hangs on long enough, the United States will collapse internally.
 
vern humphrey:
Second, you are aware that we have been attacked by terrorists repeatedly – and some of those attacks took place on US soil?
Timothy McVeigh and the 9/11 Arabs and the arrests of some folks in Michigan and Virginia? Yes, I’m aware of them. BTW, I was referring to the notion that Iraq was going to invade us somehow.
Third, do you now, in retrospect claim there was no danger from Communism?
We had a danger from Communism for a long time. So, what? Did that justify the tactics of the Red Scare? I think not.
 
40.png
marvin:
Facts like military families don’t want or need the “support” of anti-war activists. Which, by the way is the point of the OP.
Wow. That’s a shameless distortion if ever I heard one.
 
40.png
Richardols:
Timothy McVeigh and the 9/11 Arabs and the arrests of some folks in Michigan and Virginia? Yes, I’m aware of them. BTW, I was referring to the notion that Iraq was going to invade us somehow.
And who in this thread advanced that notion?
40.png
Richardols:
We had a danger from Communism for a long time. So, what? Did that justify the tactics of the Red Scare? I think not.
We should not violate anyone’s constitutional rights – but there was a real danger. Given that some American supporters of Communism later did things like provide Stalin with vital information on the atomic bomb, it may be that the danger was under-stated rather than over-stated.
 
Nowhere have I seen it suggested that Iraq was planning a full scale military invasion of the US. Even though Osama and Saddam didn’t have much use for each other, they did share some common enemies and were willing to cooperate in causing harm to them.
 
vern humphrey:
We should not violate anyone’s constitutional rights
But the government did just that, with abandon, and deported the innocent along with the guilty, and prosecuted Americans on frivolous charges, even such as saying no more than they expressed the opinion that Marx had some good ideas. To give an example of the spirit of the times, during WWI, a school teacher was jailed for 90 days for telling her class about the Revolutionary War (spreading negative statements about our ally).
but there was a real danger.
A matter of degree, I think. Even one terrorist in the entire United States is a real danger, but what should be done about him isn’t the same as what should be done about ten thousand anarchists/communists abroad in our land.
Given that some American supporters of Communism later did things like provide Stalin with vital information on the atomic bomb
One can read about the Rosenberg trials to see that the traitors were Mrs. Rosenberg’s brother-in-law, a few accomplices, and some accomplices known, but unprosecuted even up to today. Julius Rosenberg was part of it, but Ethel wasn’t guilty of anything that deserved death. The trial was very nearly a farce, with the FBI lying on the stand to protect sources, and the trial judge virtually with a hanging rope over his shoulder. Not a golden page in American Justice Chronicles.
it may be that the danger was under-stated rather than over-stated.
Though I disagree, I understand how one might feel that way.
 
40.png
Richardols:
But the government did just that, with abandon, and deported the innocent along with the guilty, and prosecuted Americans on frivolous charges, even such as saying no more than they expressed the opinion that Marx had some good ideas. To give an example of the spirit of the times, during WWI, a school teacher was jailed for 90 days for telling her class about the Revolutionary War (spreading negative statements about our ally).
And during WWI, people of German ancestry were discriminated against. There are even published reports of people killing dachshunds!!
40.png
Richardols:
A matter of degree, I think. Even one terrorist in the entire United States is a real danger, but what should be done about him isn’t the same as what should be done about ten thousand anarchists/communists abroad in our land.
Even if they are providing top secret information to a foreign government?
40.png
Richardols:
One can read about the Rosenberg trials to see that the traitors were Mrs. Rosenberg’s brother-in-law, a few accomplices, and some accomplices known, but unprosecuted even up to today. Julius Rosenberg was part of it, but Ethel wasn’t guilty of anything that deserved death. The trial was very nearly a farce, with the FBI lying on the stand to protect sources, and the trial judge virtually with a hanging rope over his shoulder. Not a golden page in American Justice Chronicles.
The Soviet archives are now open, and no one denies her guilt any more.
 
Ani Ibi:
Wow. That’s a shameless distortion if ever I heard one.
I think you misunderstand my meaning. Either that or I didn’t make myself clear ( which is entirely possible).

What I mean is that military families don’t want to hear anti-war diatribes disguised as “support”. That was one of the points of the original article: a military wife who got fed up with hearing that kind of stuff directed at her and her family.
 
40.png
marvin:
I think you misunderstand my meaning. Either that or I didn’t make myself clear ( which is entirely possible).

What I mean is that military families don’t want to hear anti-war diatribes disguised as “support”. That was one of the points of the original article: a military wife who got fed up with hearing that kind of stuff directed at her and her family.
To a certain extent they (the anti-war protestors) remind me of those disgusting people who claim to defend the “right” of children to have sex with adults.
 
Back to the main topic… Warning… I am about to rant… :mad:

I am a Proud Army Wife of a deployed soldier in Iraq. I understand how this SGTs wife feels. Actually there aren’t enough words to explain how this SGTs wife and I feel when we encounter such hate.

Basically, anti-war protesters make my head spin. I see them as haters of my husband. Why? My husband could die and all they can say is “I told you so?”. This is what most of the current anti-war protest is all about. Pulling troops out now would surely be a disrespect to all the men and women who died fighting for the cause of freedom - let alone a huge security risk. When was the last time any of us risked our lives to go and vote? Half of the USA just sit down in front of their cable tv and complain about America but never even vote. Iraqis care enough to die for freedom to vote - and we are there to help them gain that independence.

By the way, aren’t many of these same so-called people who are out to ‘save my husband’s life’ from the so-called “un-just war” supporting abortion rights- killing of truly innocent life? We are a volunteer Army/Navy/AirForce/Marine. They know what they are getting into when they sign the dotted line. Do innocent children have a choice?

Best quote of the article…
We need to make it our jobs to defend them here as they defend us there. Help people, like these I met this morning, understand that “Freedom Isn’t Free” and most important “It’s the Land of the Free, Because of the Brave”

Sorry about my personal rant. I needed to let that out.
 
40.png
ProudArmyWife:
Basically, anti-war protesters make my head spin. I see them as haters of my husband. Why? My husband could die and all they can say is “I told you so?”
Actually, they wouldn’t say that until they finished gloating over his death – as they gloated over the deaths of those killed in Viet Nam.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top