No, it appears that your talking points come from how Faux "News" characterizes the response because I have never once seen you actually quote a Democrat or use anything even remotely approaching evidence to support your claims. You just parrot the talking points you are given no matter how baseless they are. RAAAWK! Dubya found a weapon! RAAAWK!
Wow, I don't know about you but I'm intimidated. Tell him how it is Militia Boy. The only thing worse than someone that is in the military that acts like a bad ass is someone that pretends to be bad ass military but is too chicken **** to join. Why don't a few of you man up and go join the fight if the cause is so honorable? If you really feel that strong for the cause, how can your conscience let you just sit at home? Think about all of the men that signed up VOLUNTARILY for World War II. They did it because they felt obligated. I'm sure that your local recruiter would welcome you with open arms. I have no doubt that GWB will be estatic to send you over to the wonderfulness that is Iraq and when that happens, you can come back on Clutch and tell us how wrong and stupid we all were because it is just as fantastic and amazing as the White House has been telling us all along. You can really show us what a difference we (the US) is making in the Middle East. But we all know that won't happen because deep down underneath the facade of machoism and flag waving, you know that this "war" has been a bungled cluster**** from day one. You know damn well that it is a horrible state over there and you'd be so scared that you'd piss your pants. You wouldn't last one week over there. And most importantly, the fear that you won't let anyone see would be validated. The fear that we (the US) are wrong and are only making a ****ty situation even ****tier. That is the reason that you (the Bushies) and your fearful leaders sound so god damn stupid. You talk a lot of talk yet have ZERO follow through. If it comes down to you or someone else, it's going to be someone else. We all know that you don't support your "war" enough to actually fight for it. It is all a bunch of empty talk and it makes me absolutely sick.
Maestro de Baiter has posited another liberal tactic that operates jointly with the liberal infallibility concept. Here we are told that we cannot support the troops and their cause unless we are toting an M-16 in Fallujah. How quaint.
A list of things the Iraqi people have endured since we “saved” them from Saddam. Loss of a functioning education system. Brain drain as thousands of academics and other professionals have fled abroad to places like Syria, Jordan and Egypt. Loss of a functioning health care system. Malnutrion in children. Thousands of Iraqis have lost limbs from unexploded U.S. cluster bombs. Depleted uranium particles now float in the Iraqi air. Use of napalm and white phosphorous in Iraq. Iraq has had to submit to a degrading national strip search. Destruction and looting of the country’s ancient heritage. Iraq has become a nearly lawless society, the legal system is gone. Women’s rights have gone backwards. Men and children are now harassed if they wear shorts. Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims have lost much of the security they enjoyed under Saddam’s secular regime. Torture at the hands of the U.S. and their puppet government in a gulag of prisons. Unemployment estimated at 50%. Kurds are evicting Arabs from their homes, while Arabs evict Kurds from their homes. U.S. troops violating the Geneva Convention. Continual bombing assaults on neighborhoods and the destruction of modern infrastructure. Hafitha, Fallujah, Samarra, Ramadi. Lack of safe drinking water, effective sewage disposal and a lack of a functioning power grid. Civil war, death squads, car bombs, rape, each and every day. Oh but the Iraqis have had elections so I guess they should be grateful for all the other crap that U.S. has brought to their daily lives.
Ouch. Y'all got me good. Nope never tried to join. They wouldn't have wanted me. But I respect the hell out of those who did join and who are currently in Iraq. I'm a little mystified as to why I am not allowed to say that I support both them and their mission simply because I never joined. Does this mean that I can never voice my support for the troops and their mission from here on out regardless of where they might be deployed? Just curious.
Why are many others, including me, not allowed to say that they support the troops but think the war in Iraq is a huge mistake? I respect the troops, and I support them, but they are stuck in a no-win situation in Iraq, and I feel sorry for them.
You can say it, but you have to understand that you're helping the enemy. If you're Ok with that, so be it.
In other words, after all your crybaby stuff about Sam suggesting you regain your indisputably lost honor through seppuku, you wish he was dead. Hypocrite.
It isn't that you support the cause but the fervor in which you support it. You support everything about it even to the point of our president breaking the law. It is just insanity. Plus anyone that doesn't support this ridiculous war you call terrorist or some other dumbass response. It gets to the point where if you support it so unconditionally that I question why you haven't joined. Most people that have that much conviction for something, want to be apart of it. Hence the World War II example. I had such a conviction to serve my country that I enlisted. If you feel that strongly for the cause, why not go help out. They can sure use it.
Baloney. Please show me proof how my saying "I support the troops but oppose the war in Iraq" helps "the enemy". Also.....one more thing: This, to me, is an insult to our troops. You are a hypocrite, and you need to start showing a little more respect....for those who serve, for other human beings, and finally for yourself.
Gwayneco, you're country needs you. Army takes older recruits Wed Jun 21, 2006 11:09 PM ET By Will Dunham WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Army, aiming to make its recruiting goals amid the Iraq war, raised its maximum enlistment age by another two years on Wednesday, while the Army Reserve predicted it will miss its recruiting target for a second straight year. People can now volunteer to serve in the active-duty Army or the part-time Army Reserve and National Guard up to their 42nd birthday after the move aimed at increasing the number of people eligible to sign up, officials said. It marked the second time this year the Army has boosted the maximum age for new volunteers, raising the ceiling from age 35 to 40 in January before now adding two more years. More than three years into the war, the Army continues to provide the bulk of U.S. ground forces in Iraq. Army officials have acknowledged the war has made some recruits and their families wary about volunteering. The Army Reserve, along with the regular Army and Army National Guard, missed its fiscal 2005 recruiting goal, and it currently lags its fiscal 2006 year-to-date goal by 4 percent. Army Lt. Gen. Jack Stultz, the new Army Reserve chief, said he does not expect the Reserve to reach its goal of 36,000 recruits for fiscal 2006, which ends September 30. "We think we'll come in right around that 96 (percent), 97 percent range," Stultz told reporters. The Army Reserve is a part-time force of federal troops who can be summoned to active duty by the Pentagon in times of need. The Army National Guard is another part-time force whose soldiers are under the command of state governors for use in emergencies such as natural disasters, but also can be mobilized to active duty by the Pentagon. The Pentagon has made extensive use of these part-time soldiers in Iraq, although the number deployed has been cut significantly. Stultz said his recruiting numbers were hurt by regular Army personnel opting to stay on active duty and reservists moving from part-time service to active duty with the Army. 'EXCELLENT SOLDIERS' Julia Bobick, an Army Recruiting Command spokeswoman, said the decision to raise the maximum enlistment age "is not an act of desperation," but rather the latest prudent step intended to attract qualified recruits. These older recruits must pass the same physical standards and medical examination as younger ones, the Army said. However, those between 40 and 42 will face additional cardiovascular screening, Bobick said. "Of course, not everyone is going to be (physically able to serve). But those older recruits who can meet the physical demands of Army service make excellent soldiers because they bring with them a maturity and a skill level that some of our young recruits don't have yet," Bobick said. The Army has taken numerous steps to help recruiting, including offering various financial incentives, adding recruiters and hiring a new advertising agency. It even relaxed its ban on certain types of tattoos to attract recruits who otherwise would have been disqualified from serving. The U.S. military moved to an all-volunteer force in 1973, during the tumult of the Vietnam War era. Some analysts have said if the military cannot attract enough recruits, the United States might have to consider reinstating the draft. (Additional reporting by Kristin Roberts) http://today.reuters.com/news/newsa...345217_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAQ-USA-RECRUITING-1.xml
In your opinion they are helping the enemy. That isn't the truth of course in the eyes of many people who believe that by exercising free speech and talking out against the authority of the govt. we are doing that which the enemy hates most of all, and showing how strong our freedoms really are.
