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

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

"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?

"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 1962 to 1972? Defending your country or shooting off
your mouth like you are today?

Capt. Jeff

With respect Sir: I was here during those years and I heard all the
rhetoric and saw what was being done. The horrible waste of men who died
while the generals were forced to fight a war micromanaged by President
Johnson. I remember when President Nixon was elected, he mined the harbors
in N. Vietnam to keep arms from our allies (France, Germany, Russia and
England) from being delivered to Vietnam. This killed no one and saved our
soldiers lives. WHY didn't Johnson do that???????

He didn't have the guts to stand up and defend our guys, they were cannon
fodder to him. He was more concerned with world opinion. A Kerry, Clinton
or liberal viewpoint. There are Democrats, many of them who are NOT of this
mind set but they would never get the nomination in the current Democrat
party.

It is not healthy for our country for one party to hold the reigns of power
for too long. We, all of us need to do something to change the leadership
of the Democrat party or this will become a one party country and we are
headed down the tubes. Belittling the Republicans won't do it, changing the
democrat party to reflect the values of the red states (who are mainly
democrat anyway) is the way to go.

In article ,
says...

"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 1962 to 1972? Defending your country or shooting off
your mouth like you are today?

Capt. Jeff

With respect Sir: I was here during those years and I heard all the
rhetoric and saw what was being done. The horrible waste of men who died
while the generals were forced to fight a war micromanaged by President
Johnson. I remember when President Nixon was elected, he mined the harbors
in N. Vietnam to keep arms from our allies (France, Germany, Russia and
England) from being delivered to Vietnam. This killed no one and saved our
soldiers lives. WHY didn't Johnson do that???????

He didn't have the guts to stand up and defend our guys, they were cannon
fodder to him. He was more concerned with world opinion. A Kerry, Clinton
or liberal viewpoint. There are Democrats, many of them who are NOT of this
mind set but they would never get the nomination in the current Democrat
party.

It is not healthy for our country for one party to hold the reigns of power
for too long. We, all of us need to do something to change the leadership
of the Democrat party or this will become a one party country and we are
headed down the tubes. Belittling the Republicans won't do it, changing the
democrat party to reflect the values of the red states (who are mainly
democrat anyway) is the way to go.

Well said.

Like Vietnam, we're bogged down in a war without reason.

Unfortunately, the present administration doesn't share Nixon's resolve
to properly protect our troops. Inferior vests, unarmored humvees and a
calloused approach has cost many of our citizens their lives or their
sound bodies. It's an u necessary risk that could have been solved with
a bit more money. Our men and women are again cannon fodder.

jps

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

"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 1962 to 1972? Defending your country or shooting
off
your mouth like you are today?

Capt. Jeff

With respect Sir: I was here during those years and I heard all the
rhetoric and saw what was being done. The horrible waste of men who died
while the generals were forced to fight a war micromanaged by President
Johnson. I remember when President Nixon was elected, he mined the
harbors
in N. Vietnam to keep arms from our allies (France, Germany, Russia and
England) from being delivered to Vietnam. This killed no one and saved
our
soldiers lives. WHY didn't Johnson do that???????

He didn't have the guts to stand up and defend our guys, they were cannon
fodder to him. He was more concerned with world opinion. A Kerry,
Clinton
or liberal viewpoint. There are Democrats, many of them who are NOT of
this
mind set but they would never get the nomination in the current Democrat
party.

It is not healthy for our country for one party to hold the reigns of
power
for too long. We, all of us need to do something to change the
leadership
of the Democrat party or this will become a one party country and we are
headed down the tubes. Belittling the Republicans won't do it, changing
the
democrat party to reflect the values of the red states (who are mainly
democrat anyway) is the way to go.

Well said.

Like Vietnam, we're bogged down in a war without reason.

We are in a war for the survival of the western culture. If you can't see
that then you are part of the problem. Islam is like communisim in its goal
which is that utopia will only be available when the whole world is Islamic
or communist.

Unfortunately, the present administration doesn't share Nixon's resolve
to properly protect our troops. Inferior vests, unarmored humvees and a
calloused approach has cost many of our citizens their lives or their
sound bodies. It's an u necessary risk that could have been solved with
a bit more money. Our men and women are again cannon fodder.

Congress, the House and the Senate, are the ones that control how much money
is appropriated. And, Bush hasn't vetoed a single spending bill. Call your
Representative or Senator and complain to them.

In article , says...

"jps" wrote in message

Like Vietnam, we're bogged down in a war without reason.

We are in a war for the survival of the western culture. If you can't see
that then you are part of the problem. Islam is like communisim in its goal
which is that utopia will only be available when the whole world is Islamic
or communist.

We did not actively try to destroy communism through wars of aggression.
We matched resource for resource and they spent themselves into
bankruptcy, just as we're doing now.

This is a war of oil. Kissinger pointed out in the 1970s that, given
the waning power of the Soviets, a lack of our presence in the mid east
would leave that big pool of oil to be controlled by China or India. The
Neocons have kept that in mind for the past several decades and couldn't
wait to push King George into taking over.a

Unfortunately, the present administration doesn't share Nixon's resolve
to properly protect our troops. Inferior vests, unarmored humvees and a
calloused approach has cost many of our citizens their lives or their
sound bodies. It's an u necessary risk that could have been solved with
a bit more money. Our men and women are again cannon fodder.

Congress, the House and the Senate, are the ones that control how much money
is appropriated. And, Bush hasn't vetoed a single spending bill. Call your
Representative or Senator and complain to them.

Ever hear of a little place called the Pentagon? They and Don Rumsfeld
determine the resources necessary for managing and maintaining our
fighting forces. The real military minds thought we underestimated our
needs but Rumsfeld things we can get by with a smaller fighting force
and fewer resources.

They make recommendations to congress, not the other way around.

jps

jps wrote:
In article ,

says...

"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 1962 to 1972? Defending your country or
shooting off
your mouth like you are today?

Capt. Jeff

With respect Sir: I was here during those years and I heard all
the
rhetoric and saw what was being done. The horrible waste of men
who died
while the generals were forced to fight a war micromanaged by
President
Johnson. I remember when President Nixon was elected, he mined the
harbors
in N. Vietnam to keep arms from our allies (France, Germany, Russia
and
England) from being delivered to Vietnam. This killed no one and
saved our
soldiers lives. WHY didn't Johnson do that???????

He didn't have the guts to stand up and defend our guys, they were
cannon
fodder to him. He was more concerned with world opinion. A Kerry,
Clinton
or liberal viewpoint. There are Democrats, many of them who are
NOT of this
mind set but they would never get the nomination in the current
Democrat
party.

It is not healthy for our country for one party to hold the reigns
of power
for too long. We, all of us need to do something to change the
leadership
of the Democrat party or this will become a one party country and
we are
headed down the tubes. Belittling the Republicans won't do it,
changing the
democrat party to reflect the values of the red states (who are
mainly
democrat anyway) is the way to go.

Well said.

Like Vietnam, we're bogged down in a war without reason.

Unfortunately, the present administration doesn't share Nixon's
resolve
to properly protect our troops. Inferior vests, unarmored humvees
and a
calloused approach has cost many of our citizens their lives or their

sound bodies. It's an u necessary risk that could have been solved
with
a bit more money. Our men and women are again cannon fodder.

jps

Ah, some people would rather goose-step to the party, than think for
themselves. This type of fool takes anything, and everything that
BushCo says as absolute truth, and does exactly as they are told.
That's exactly the way the Nazi's gained so much power, by persuading
people that they were right.

Jeff Rigby wrote:
With respect Sir:

Lie #1

... I was here during those years and I heard all the
rhetoric and saw what was being done. The horrible waste of men who died
while the generals were forced to fight a war micromanaged by President
Johnson. I remember when President Nixon was elected, he mined the harbors
in N. Vietnam to keep arms from our allies (France, Germany, Russia and
England) from being delivered to Vietnam.

Lie #2

And you seem to have a very poor grasp on reality.

WTF would France send arms to communist Vietnam when they had just
finished losing a war against them?



He didn't have the guts to stand up and defend our guys

OTOH he did't slash military & veteran's benefits the way Bush & Cheney
have done.

Now who really supports our troops?

BTW before you start spitting out the standard insults, you should know
that I am a veteran myself and am proud to have served my country.



It is not healthy for our country for one party to hold the reigns of power
for too long.

It has not been healthy for our country for the current wing of one
party (not all Republicans are draft-dodging Jesus-spouting ex-druggy
war profiteers). Everything Bush & Cheney have touched have been
profitable for their small group of buddies, and a train wreck for
everybody else.

OTOH it's seems pretty easy to convince everybody (or at least a slim
majority) that the economy is great and we're winning the war, and we
didn't really like all those constitutional rights we citizens used to have.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..

Jeff Rigby wrote:
With respect Sir:

Lie #1

... I was here during those years and I heard all the rhetoric and saw
what was being done. The horrible waste of men who died while the
generals were forced to fight a war micromanaged by President Johnson. I
remember when President Nixon was elected, he mined the harbors in N.
Vietnam to keep arms from our allies (France, Germany, Russia and
England) from being delivered to Vietnam.

Not a lie, look it up
http://www.afa.org/magazine/perspect...383vietnam.asp

"The Christmas bombings of 1972 should have taken place in 1965, before we
had filled the Hanoi Hilton with aviators shot down while carrying out the
absurd strategy of giving signals,"

" Haiphong Harbor was Hanoi's logistical lifeline for military supplies
coming into the country by sea. The mining of the harbor drastically reduced
military equipment destined for North Vietnam to be docked and unloaded."

Lie #2
And you seem to have a very poor grasp on reality.

WTF would France send arms to communist Vietnam when they had just
finished losing a war against them?

For the same reason they sold nuclear materals to Iraq and Iran, Money. You
should know that.


He didn't have the guts to stand up and defend our guys

OTOH he did't slash military & veteran's benefits the way Bush & Cheney
have done.

Bush increased benefits to Vets untill last year.


BTW before you start spitting out the standard insults, you should know
that I am a veteran myself and am proud to have served my country.



It is not healthy for our country for one party to hold the reigns of
power for too long.

Lie #1
Everything Bush & Cheney have touched have been profitable for their small
group of buddies, and a train wreck for everybody else.