Grumbling in the Ranks

[97silverlsc]

Grumbling in the Ranks
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2007/01/15/grumbling-in-the-ranks/
Vocal opposition to President’s Bush’s strategy of sending more than 20,000 additional troops to help secure Iraq has grown to include some of the troops themselves.

A group of more than 50 active-duty military officers will deliver a petition to Congress on Tuesday signed by about 1,000 troops calling for an end to the U.S. occupation of Iraq. “Any troop increase over here will just produce more sitting ducks, more targets,” said Sergeant Ronn Cantu, who is serving in Iraq.

Under the 1988 Military Whistleblower Protection Act, active duty military, National Guard, and Reservists may communicate with any member of Congress without fear of reprisal, even if copies of the communication are sent to others.

 

[formerknown]

Vocal opposition to President’s Bush’s strategy of sending more than 20,000 additional troops to help secure Iraq has grown to include some of the troops themselves.

Tough. You sign on that dotted line, your ass belongs to the military and you better be prepared for anything. Ask any real soldier- he'll tell you...

 

[fossten]

I agree - tough crap. Phil isn't the kind of guy who would ever have had the balls to serve his country in the military though.

 

[Calabrio]

How many hundreds of thousands of soldiers have cycled through Iraq?
And we're spotlighting 50? Or the up to a thousand, that may have signed a petition. Out of 2.5 million soldiers?

This is a story, why? Because it's another attempt to damage the Presidents credibility, with no regard to how it undermines the mission? These men are certainly entitled to express their opinion.. but why do I care?

If I have 1500 active duty military men sign a petition to the contrary, does the debate end?

 

[fossten]

How many hundreds of thousands of soldiers have cycled through Iraq?
And we're spotlighting 50? Or the up to a thousand, that may have signed a petition. Out of 2.5 million soldiers?

This is a story, why? Because it's another attempt to damage the Presidents credibility, with no regard to how it undermines the mission? These men are certainly entitled to express their opinion.. but why do I care?

If I have 1500 active duty military men sign a petition to the contrary, does the debate end?

But in Phil's twisted mind (which can only cut/paste articles), he has once again hit a home run and proven that the only person who agrees with George W. Bush about staying in Iraq is Bush and maybe Cheney, and even the military disagrees.

So, in true Algore fashion, he has shown that 50 people can make a consensus, and therefore the debate is over.

To your comment about an alternative petition, wouldn't thousands of reenlistment contracts signed every year be sufficient as a petition that they agree with Bush's decisions?

 

[97silverlsc]

Retired Generals Criticize Bush's Plan for Iraq
By John Holusha
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/18/w...=1169182800&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print
Thursday 18 January 2007

A panel of retired generals told a United States Senate committee today that sending 21,500 additional troops to Iraq will do little to solve the underlying political problems in the country.

"Too little and too late," is the way Gen. Joseph P. Hoar, a former chief of the Central Command, described the effort to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The additional troops are intended to help pacify Baghdad and a restive province, but General Hoar said American leaders had failed to understand the political forces at work in the country. "The solution is political, not military," he said.

"A fool's errand," was the judgment of Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey, who commanded troops in the first Gulf War. He said other countries had concluded that the effort in Iraq was not succeeding, noting that "our allies are leaving us and will be gone by summer."

Describing the situation in Iraq as "desperate but not terminal," he said Iraqis had to try to make political deals domestically and negotiate for stability with neighboring nations, particularly Syria and Iran.

The American effort in Iraq has gone badly because the United States did not understand the consequences of deposing Saddam Hussein, said Lt. Gen. William E. Odom, a former director of the National Security Agency. He said the principal beneficiary of the war was Iran and Al Qaeda, not the United States.

"There is no way to win a war that is not in your interests," he said.

In statements and in questioning, senators were skeptical about the increased commitment of troops and the likely outcome of the deployment. Senator Richard Lugar, a Republican from Indiana, noted that he had raised questions about the effort in Iraq as long ago as 2003, and said, "Today, I don't have an understanding about how it will work militarily."

One general warned that even a plan to start withdrawing American forces from the country carried the risk that the armed Iraqi population will step up the level of attacks. "We will be shot at as we are going out." said Gen. Jack Keane, a former vice chief of staff of the Army.

 

[97silverlsc]

Amen keith, Amen.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011207A.shtml

 

[fossten]

Civil War Times

11/7/1862

Failed Generals McClellan and Burnside were asked to comment on the state of the war.

McClellan: Well, I don't see the point in pursuing Lee's forces all the way back to Virginia. After all, every battle means more of my troops' lives lost, and besides, they are not pursuing me. I think it'd be better to redeploy my forces to Harper's Ferry, where the troops will be safe and out of harm's way.

Burnside: This failed war is the result of Lincoln's stubbornness. We're never going to win this war. It's too hard. We've had three years to try to win this war, and that's long enough. Why, World War II, which hasn't even happened yet, will only last FOUR!

General Grant could not be reached for comment, but his victories at Vicksburg and Port Hudson split the Confederate forces in two, giving a significant advantage to the Union army. Lincoln staffers issued a statement, saying that the President was confident of victory, and urged the Union to have patience.

 

[fossten]

Amen keith, Amen.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011207A.shtml

Keith Olbermann is one of the worst liars on TV today, and his lies are routinely chronicled on a weekly basis. He is a frothy-mouthed Bush-basher who gets his facts wrong on every single show he does. The fact that you worship him just shows what a sheep you are.