Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #2   Report Post  
jps
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
says...

When there's an election coming up, you hear a
lot of talk about how liberals "support the troops"
and in rare cases, it's true. There are certainly
liberals out there who respect the bravery, sacrifice,
and risks our troops take to keep this country
protected from its enemies.

However, the ugly truth is that there are a lot of
liberals in this country, a large majority of them,
who don't support the troops, who -- as one poster
on the Democratic Underground put it -- look at the
our troops as "Cannon fodder and killers doing what
they're told to do".


Can you please cite a single study which suggests a majority of liberals
in this country don't support our troops?

Where the **** do you get this information?

Generally speaking, liberals aren't in favor of their countrymen giving
up their lives to support our dependency on oil. Do you disagree? Do
you think it's a good use of our countrymen and our taxes to bomb and
kill innocent citizens in order to take over the second largest known
oil reserve in the world under the guise of dethroning a dictator (which
years earlier was our staunch ally and tool).

We'd rather spend money on developing new forms of energy.

Unplug your head from your ass and you'll see plainly that Saddam wasn't
a threat to our country.

The cocksuckers who hijacked our planes and killed our citizens were
provoked. We befriended them, gave them arms, money and training to
kill Soviet fighters in Afghanistan. Then we turned on them, just as we
did Saddam, Manuel Noriega, and a host of other assholes around the
globe.

Wake up and smell the coffee dickwad.

jps
  #3   Report Post  
Tamaroak
 
Posts: n/a
Default

And a very high percentage of these liberals, like me, are decorated
Vietnam era vets who really know what it was like to be in the service,
a concept lost to "leaders" like AWOL bush, "had-better-things-to-do"
Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the rest of these chickenhawks who think
nothing of sending our troops into battle to enrich themselves and their
friends.

Where were you from 1965 to 1972? Defending your country or shooting off
your mouth like you are today?

Capt. Jeff
  #4   Report Post  
Harold P Smithers
 
Posts: n/a
Default

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Fri, 20 May 2005, jps wrote:
In article ,
says...

When there's an election coming up, you hear a
lot of talk about how liberals "support the troops"
and in rare cases, it's true. There are certainly
liberals out there who respect the bravery, sacrifice,
and risks our troops take to keep this country
protected from its enemies.

However, the ugly truth is that there are a lot of
liberals in this country, a large majority of them,
who don't support the troops, who -- as one poster
on the Democratic Underground put it -- look at the
our troops as "Cannon fodder and killers doing what
they're told to do".


Can you please cite a single study which suggests a majority of liberals
in this country don't support our troops?

Where the **** do you get this information?

Generally speaking, liberals aren't in favor of their countrymen giving
up their lives to support our dependency on oil. Do you disagree? Do
you think it's a good use of our countrymen and our taxes to bomb and
kill innocent citizens in order to take over the second largest known
oil reserve in the world under the guise of dethroning a dictator (which
years earlier was our staunch ally and tool).

We'd rather spend money on developing new forms of energy.

Unplug your head from your ass and you'll see plainly that Saddam wasn't
a threat to our country.

The cocksuckers who hijacked our planes and killed our citizens were
provoked. We befriended them, gave them arms, money and training to
kill Soviet fighters in Afghanistan. Then we turned on them, just as we
did Saddam, Manuel Noriega, and a host of other assholes around the
globe.

Wake up and smell the coffee dickwad.

jps


Are you so stupid you don't look at headers?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.58ckt

iQA/AwUBQo6fKv5McEU5rTr2EQK8dwCaAjyeAPeYADs5YL7MdShqZM xa4WYAoMK2
OufumQrSDnMi65vZXZKsec8h
=UpZU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.dyndns.org
for abuse and hashcash info.



  #5   Report Post  
Falky foo
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I'm a liberal and I agree with the statements in your post. I'm
crossposting it to alt.politics and misc.legal because I don't think it
belongs in rec.boats. I believe, as you mention, that soldiers are merely
cannon fodder that have been brainwashed by their social groups (esp. the
church) or economically forced into the military. Once you've been handed a
gun and stuck on the battlefield to face death all you really have is your
God, and that means they're usually very religious and conservative and
breed more of themselves. And of course if you're hurt in the line of fire
you're going to rationalize that you were fighting a "just" and "necessary"
war, because it would be too painful to realize your life was ruined just to
feed the people in power.

I have to say you're right in general.


"Freddy Smithers" wrote in message
...

When there's an election coming up, you hear a
lot of talk about how liberals "support the troops"
and in rare cases, it's true. There are certainly
liberals out there who respect the bravery, sacrifice,
and risks our troops take to keep this country
protected from its enemies.

However, the ugly truth is that there are a lot of
liberals in this country, a large majority of them,
who don't support the troops, who -- as one poster
on the Democratic Underground put it -- look at the
our troops as "Cannon fodder and killers doing what
they're told to do".

Of course, since most Americans have a very high
opinion of our soldiers, liberals would face enormous
political ramifications if they were honest about what
they thought. So instead, we get surreptitious assaults
on our military.

For example, part of the reason Abu Ghraib has gotten
so much attention & the press keeps churning out 2 and
a 1/2 year old stories about soldiers teasing it to smear
the troops. "See? That's what they're all like behind
closed doors! Sadistic savages."

Here are some other examples that have come to light
over the last couple of days that might not seem to be
connected, but they're all products of the same liberal
mentality when it comes to the military:


Yesterday was the first day military recruiters have
been on campus since the Garfield High School PTSA
passed a resolution seeking to oust them from public-
school campuses. The resolution, first of its kind in
the state, passed May 9.

"Given the seriousness of what they are requesting people
to participate in, we'd just prefer they not be on school
grounds, which are supposed to be protected space for
students," said Hagopian.

...Other anti-recruiting movements are also picking up
steam.

In recent months, college students in California and New
York have forced recruiters off campus, and in Boston,
activists dumped 5 gallons of fake blood on the doorstep
of a recruiting center.

In the Puget Sound area, a group of students and parents
stopped a Blackhawk helicopter from landing on fields at
Bainbridge Island High School in April. The students
said the helicopter, used for Army National Guard
recruiting tours, was war propaganda.

Earlier this month, a student at Foss High School in
Tacoma sent e-mails to thousands of activists across the
country, urging them to call school officials after plans
for an anti-recruitment "teach-in" hit administrative
roadblocks.

Some students at Garfield are planning a walkout Monday
and a march on Army recruiting headquarters down the street.


Oh yeah, the liberals harassing military recruiters really
"support the troops." So much so that they don't believe the
military should even be able to recruit on their campuses.
Here's mo

NBC's "Today" show aired unsubstantiated claims on Tuesday
that U.S. troops had desecrated the Quran on at least two
occasions, in a report that echoed a now retracted Newsweek
story that has inflamed the Muslim world and led to deadly
riots.
...The NBC newsman then sourced an allegation by a female
terrorist suspect who had been detained at Abu Ghraib,
who aired her claim in an Iraqi newspaper.

"[She said] she was raped every night by six American
soldiers," Engel reported, before adding that U.S. officials
deny the claim.


Here's a question: you think the "Today" show would air
unsubstantiated allegations that the ACLU desecrated the
Bible at board meetings? If someone with the same level
of credibility as a "female terrorist suspect," like let's
say an escaped mental patient, claimed that she was gang
raped at DNC headquarters, you think the "Today" show would
report that? Not a chance in hell. But any old charge aimed
at the military, no matter what it is, just gets tossed out
there. Here's another story:

The president of a group representing reporters worldwide
is accusing U.S. soldiers of committing atrocities without
offering any evidence to back the charge up. Appearing in
St. Louis on Friday, Newspaper Guild President Linda Foley
complained:

"What outrages me as a representative of journalists is
that there’s not more outrage about the number, and the
brutality, and the cavalier nature of the U.S. military
toward the killing of journalists in Iraq."

In case anyone missed the point, Foley restated her
allegation:

"They target and kill journalists ... uh, from other
countries, particularly Arab countries like Al -, like
Arab news services like Al-Jazeera, for example. They
actually target them and blow up their studios with
impunity. ..."


To believe that the troops are deliberately murdering
journalists, you must have a very low opinion of them
and apparently this belief is quite widespread in the
media because we keep hearing it again & again. Does
anyone believe that the military is going to be treated
fairly by journalists who think the military has marked
them for death?

Sure, there are always going a few bad apples in the
bunch. But, the work our troops are doing in Iraq and
across the world is valiant, honorable, and should be
praised, not constantly derided and treated with suspicion.

Unfortunately, when we get to the point where ridiculous
& unsubstantiated allegations against our military are
constantly being hurled about and military recruiters
aren't even welcome in American high schools, then
liberal hostility to the military has gone too far and
it's time for more people to call it what it is and speak
up for the troops.








-=-
This message was sent via two or more anonymous remailing services.






  #6   Report Post  
Bert Robbins
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"jps" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

When there's an election coming up, you hear a
lot of talk about how liberals "support the troops"
and in rare cases, it's true. There are certainly
liberals out there who respect the bravery, sacrifice,
and risks our troops take to keep this country
protected from its enemies.

However, the ugly truth is that there are a lot of
liberals in this country, a large majority of them,
who don't support the troops, who -- as one poster
on the Democratic Underground put it -- look at the
our troops as "Cannon fodder and killers doing what
they're told to do".


Can you please cite a single study which suggests a majority of liberals
in this country don't support our troops?


Just watch your favorite news program. you will see plenty of liberals that
don't like the US military.

Where the **** do you get this information?


From the public airways and printed media.

Generally speaking, liberals aren't in favor of their countrymen giving
up their lives to support our dependency on oil. Do you disagree? Do
you think it's a good use of our countrymen and our taxes to bomb and
kill innocent citizens in order to take over the second largest known
oil reserve in the world under the guise of dethroning a dictator (which
years earlier was our staunch ally and tool).


Dependency on oil? We, all of us liberal and conservative, are dependent
upon energy. It just so happens that oil and natural gas are the most
abundant and economical sources of producing energy that theya are used the
most.

I guess that Sadam's killing fields should be over looked. Have you looked
at your heating bill lately or filled up your cars gas tank?

We'd rather spend money on developing new forms of energy.


Fine, spend your money on it!

Unplug your head from your ass and you'll see plainly that Saddam wasn't
a threat to our country.


You have a limited view of history and what is going on in the world.

The cocksuckers who hijacked our planes and killed our citizens were
provoked. We befriended them, gave them arms, money and training to
kill Soviet fighters in Afghanistan. Then we turned on them, just as we
did Saddam, Manuel Noriega, and a host of other assholes around the
globe.


Provoked? How? Our contry does what it believes to be the best course of
action at that time in order to ensure that our country survives. This
statement can be used by any country in the world.

Wake up and smell the coffee dickwad.


I'd rather have sugar in my coffee.


  #7   Report Post  
Bert Robbins
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Tamaroak" wrote in message
...
And a very high percentage of these liberals, like me, are decorated
Vietnam era vets who really know what it was like to be in the service, a
concept lost to "leaders" like AWOL bush, "had-better-things-to-do"
Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the rest of these chickenhawks who think
nothing of sending our troops into battle to enrich themselves and their
friends.

Where were you from 1965 to 1972? Defending your country or shooting off
your mouth like you are today?

Capt. Jeff


What decorations did you receive during your service to our country?


  #8   Report Post  
Don White
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Freddy Smithers wrote:
snip...
Unfortunately, when we get to the point where ridiculous
& unsubstantiated allegations against our military are
constantly being hurled about and military recruiters
aren't even welcome in American high schools, then
liberal hostility to the military has gone too far and
it's time for more people to call it what it is and speak
up for the troops.




I say let 'em back in when the recruiters start telling the truth about
the 'real world' the soldiers will soon discover.
  #9   Report Post  
Bert Robbins
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Don White" wrote in message
...
Freddy Smithers wrote:
snip...
Unfortunately, when we get to the point where ridiculous
& unsubstantiated allegations against our military are constantly being
hurled about and military recruiters aren't even welcome in American high
schools, then liberal hostility to the military has gone too far and it's
time for more people to call it what it is and speak up for the troops.



I say let 'em back in when the recruiters start telling the truth about
the 'real world' the soldiers will soon discover.


The truth is that if you join the military you might be put into a position
where you could die in both training and in actual war.

How many commercial fishermen die each year? That is a civilian occupation
where you are more likely to die catching a fish than being a bullet catcher
in the military.


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A Nation Founded by Liberals Volvette General 0 June 6th 04 05:10 PM
It's only the liberals hating. Simple Simon ASA 10 November 6th 03 02:23 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:40 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017