Will they start coming home from Iraq?
-
kgaddy wrote: Why do they not name the "generals"? THey just keep saying "The generals said". Beacuse anonymous sources are always the most reliable...;) Absolute faith corrupts as absolutely as absolute power Eric Hoffer All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Edmund Burke
-
because the Generals are afraid of losing their jobs for contradicting Bush's happy talk... Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
because the Generals are afraid of losing their jobs for contradicting Bush's happy talk... Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
Chris Losinger wrote: the Generals are afraid of losing their jobs for contradicting Bush's happy talk in real life it is called, insubordination. however, give the source (LA Times) there is no assurance that these generals even exist. Mike "We ain't stuck on stupid." badass Lt. General Russel Honore **"Remember - live bunnies are a great source of nourishment"**silly-assed cartoon
-
Chris Losinger wrote: the Generals are afraid of losing their jobs for contradicting Bush's happy talk in real life it is called, insubordination. however, give the source (LA Times) there is no assurance that these generals even exist. Mike "We ain't stuck on stupid." badass Lt. General Russel Honore **"Remember - live bunnies are a great source of nourishment"**silly-assed cartoon
Mike Gaskey wrote: in real life it is called, insubordination in real life, pissing on the org-chart is a far more honorable thing to do than aiding a misguided fool in feeding more american soldiers into a pointless occupation. Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: in real life it is called, insubordination in real life, pissing on the org-chart is a far more honorable thing to do than aiding a misguided fool in feeding more american soldiers into a pointless occupation. Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
yawn, more left wing blather from our local liberal... for balance, here's some right wing blather :-D RIGHTWINGBLATHER[^] The anti-war, anti-Bush MSM both here and abroad have reached a state of near-rapture... A little-noticed role reversal has occurred in American politics... The media have filled the political and intellectual vacuum that left the Dems entirely bereft of ideas, able to say nothing other than "no." Today the opposition party to the Republicans is not the Dems but the mainstream media itself. They write, they speak, and the Dems follow.
-
yawn, more left wing blather from our local liberal... for balance, here's some right wing blather :-D RIGHTWINGBLATHER[^] The anti-war, anti-Bush MSM both here and abroad have reached a state of near-rapture... A little-noticed role reversal has occurred in American politics... The media have filled the political and intellectual vacuum that left the Dems entirely bereft of ideas, able to say nothing other than "no." Today the opposition party to the Republicans is not the Dems but the mainstream media itself. They write, they speak, and the Dems follow.
greghop wrote: The media have filled the political and intellectual vacuum that left the Dems entirely bereft of ideas, able to say nothing other than "no." Today the opposition party to the Republicans is not the Dems but the mainstream media itself. They write, they speak, and the Dems follow. :laugh: how completely fucking stupid Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
greghop wrote: The media have filled the political and intellectual vacuum that left the Dems entirely bereft of ideas, able to say nothing other than "no." Today the opposition party to the Republicans is not the Dems but the mainstream media itself. They write, they speak, and the Dems follow. :laugh: how completely fucking stupid Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: in real life it is called, insubordination in real life, pissing on the org-chart is a far more honorable thing to do than aiding a misguided fool in feeding more american soldiers into a pointless occupation. Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
Chris Losinger wrote: in real life, pissing on the org-chart is a far more honorable thing and even in the private economy it gets you fired, justifibly. Chris Losinger wrote: aiding a misguided fool in feeding more american soldiers into a pointless occupation. so I guess you're suggesting that we'd be better off with a military that wasn't answerable to a civilian head, or that the civilian head the military reported to was some silly-assed liberal who would prefer that we kowtowed to anyone who might hurt one of our soldiers. Mike "We ain't stuck on stupid." badass Lt. General Russel Honore **"Remember - live bunnies are a great source of nourishment"**silly-assed cartoon
-
Chris Losinger wrote: in real life, pissing on the org-chart is a far more honorable thing and even in the private economy it gets you fired, justifibly. Chris Losinger wrote: aiding a misguided fool in feeding more american soldiers into a pointless occupation. so I guess you're suggesting that we'd be better off with a military that wasn't answerable to a civilian head, or that the civilian head the military reported to was some silly-assed liberal who would prefer that we kowtowed to anyone who might hurt one of our soldiers. Mike "We ain't stuck on stupid." badass Lt. General Russel Honore **"Remember - live bunnies are a great source of nourishment"**silly-assed cartoon
Mike Gaskey wrote: and even in the private economy it gets you fired, justifibly. some people value their conscience more than their paycheck. Mike Gaskey wrote: so I guess you're suggesting that we'd be better off with a military that wasn't answerable to a civilian head sorry, that guess was incorrect. if this guy feels compelled to speak his mind, good for him. and if what he says it at odds with what Bush is saying, someone should make an effort to find out why, even if the answer makes Bush look bad. i'm sure you disagree; Cult of Bush Rule #1: anyone who makes Bush look bad is unquestionably wrong, and it's the Wingnut's solemn duty to then find out why they're wrong. Mike Gaskey wrote: or that the civilian head the military reported to was some silly-assed liberal who would prefer that we kowtowed to anyone who might hurt one of our soldiers beat that strawman! beat it good! the more you beat it, the more right you become! Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker -- modified at 15:08 Monday 3rd October, 2005
-
The generals say they should.[^] Will Bush listen? Alvaro
I cannot take anything the Bush administration does seriously. The corruption, the cynical disregard for humanity, the cronyism and incompetence, all wrapped in a slimey flag of ultra-marketed nationalism repulses me. -- consdubya from fark.com.
Didn't Condi just suggest we need to invade the whole Middle East? Or was it the whole world??? :-)
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: and even in the private economy it gets you fired, justifibly. some people value their conscience more than their paycheck. Mike Gaskey wrote: so I guess you're suggesting that we'd be better off with a military that wasn't answerable to a civilian head sorry, that guess was incorrect. if this guy feels compelled to speak his mind, good for him. and if what he says it at odds with what Bush is saying, someone should make an effort to find out why, even if the answer makes Bush look bad. i'm sure you disagree; Cult of Bush Rule #1: anyone who makes Bush look bad is unquestionably wrong, and it's the Wingnut's solemn duty to then find out why they're wrong. Mike Gaskey wrote: or that the civilian head the military reported to was some silly-assed liberal who would prefer that we kowtowed to anyone who might hurt one of our soldiers beat that strawman! beat it good! the more you beat it, the more right you become! Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker -- modified at 15:08 Monday 3rd October, 2005
Chris Losinger wrote: some people value their conscience more than their paycheck. I realize this isn't something you would understand, but when you work for someone the contract includes loyalty. when you can't exercise the loyalty, you resign. an unamed general who speaks against his/her leadership is a coward unwilling to live up to his/her contract. If the general(s) in question disagree, they should resign, then speak out. Chris Losinger wrote: so I guess you're suggesting that we'd be better off with a military that wasn't answerable to a civilian head sorry, that guess was incorrect. Oh, I see, it has to be a civilian head you personally approve of then. Chris Losinger wrote: or that the civilian head the military reported to was some silly-assed liberal who would prefer that we kowtowed to anyone who might hurt one of our soldiers beat that strawman! beat it good! the more you beat it, the more right you become! that was the other choice. you can't have it both ways. you either have civilian control of the military where the final responsibility lies with the president or you don't. if it is with the president, my apologies if your personal choice didn't make the cut, but he didn't and mine did and yes, I happen to support him --> because if he doesn't have our support, we lose. if we weren't at war I'd join you in sniping at him about any number of issues but when it comes to the war effort my view is overt opposition simply aids the enemy. Mike "We ain't stuck on stupid." badass Lt. General Russel Honore **"Remember - live bunnies are a great source of nourishment"**silly-assed cartoon
-
Chris Losinger wrote: some people value their conscience more than their paycheck. I realize this isn't something you would understand, but when you work for someone the contract includes loyalty. when you can't exercise the loyalty, you resign. an unamed general who speaks against his/her leadership is a coward unwilling to live up to his/her contract. If the general(s) in question disagree, they should resign, then speak out. Chris Losinger wrote: so I guess you're suggesting that we'd be better off with a military that wasn't answerable to a civilian head sorry, that guess was incorrect. Oh, I see, it has to be a civilian head you personally approve of then. Chris Losinger wrote: or that the civilian head the military reported to was some silly-assed liberal who would prefer that we kowtowed to anyone who might hurt one of our soldiers beat that strawman! beat it good! the more you beat it, the more right you become! that was the other choice. you can't have it both ways. you either have civilian control of the military where the final responsibility lies with the president or you don't. if it is with the president, my apologies if your personal choice didn't make the cut, but he didn't and mine did and yes, I happen to support him --> because if he doesn't have our support, we lose. if we weren't at war I'd join you in sniping at him about any number of issues but when it comes to the war effort my view is overt opposition simply aids the enemy. Mike "We ain't stuck on stupid." badass Lt. General Russel Honore **"Remember - live bunnies are a great source of nourishment"**silly-assed cartoon
Mike Gaskey wrote: I realize this isn't something you would understand, but when you work for someone the contract includes loyalty. first of all: don't be an asshole. and now that the unjustified personal insults are out of the way... Mike Gaskey wrote: If the general(s) in question disagree, they should resign, then speak out. in your opinion. the Army and the country will probably exist beyond whatever damage Bush does to it. and maybe this person's loyalty is with the Army and the country, rather than the goofball calling the shots. Mike Gaskey wrote: Oh, I see, it has to be a civilian head you personally approve of then. :confused: Mike Gaskey wrote: if we weren't at war I'd join you in sniping at him about any number of issues but when it comes to the war effort my view is overt opposition simply aids the enemy. :laugh: as if... you support incompetency in an effort that you deem so important that it excuses incompetency in everything else. clearly, you're not so worried about what he actually does in the effort, only that he does something... face it, the GOP is a cult. here's a challenge: when Bush is finally gone, and the Dem steps in to take over the Iraq mess, will you refrain from saying anything negative about her ? yeah. fucking. right. Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
Chris Losinger wrote: some people value their conscience more than their paycheck. I realize this isn't something you would understand, but when you work for someone the contract includes loyalty. when you can't exercise the loyalty, you resign. an unamed general who speaks against his/her leadership is a coward unwilling to live up to his/her contract. If the general(s) in question disagree, they should resign, then speak out. Chris Losinger wrote: so I guess you're suggesting that we'd be better off with a military that wasn't answerable to a civilian head sorry, that guess was incorrect. Oh, I see, it has to be a civilian head you personally approve of then. Chris Losinger wrote: or that the civilian head the military reported to was some silly-assed liberal who would prefer that we kowtowed to anyone who might hurt one of our soldiers beat that strawman! beat it good! the more you beat it, the more right you become! that was the other choice. you can't have it both ways. you either have civilian control of the military where the final responsibility lies with the president or you don't. if it is with the president, my apologies if your personal choice didn't make the cut, but he didn't and mine did and yes, I happen to support him --> because if he doesn't have our support, we lose. if we weren't at war I'd join you in sniping at him about any number of issues but when it comes to the war effort my view is overt opposition simply aids the enemy. Mike "We ain't stuck on stupid." badass Lt. General Russel Honore **"Remember - live bunnies are a great source of nourishment"**silly-assed cartoon
Mike Gaskey wrote: because if he doesn't have our support, we lose. :omg: It's amazing how your reasoning is also used by countries like North Korea and China to brainwash their citizens into unquestionable support for their leaders. X| A bad leader is a bad leader, and it's up to us, the ones being led, to ensure that we're not heading down the wrong path or else "we lose". The North Koreans don't have that choice. We do, so excercising it should never be considered a loss -- quite the opposite. Alvaro
I cannot take anything the Bush administration does seriously. The corruption, the cynical disregard for humanity, the cronyism and incompetence, all wrapped in a slimey flag of ultra-marketed nationalism repulses me. -- consdubya from fark.com.
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: I realize this isn't something you would understand, but when you work for someone the contract includes loyalty. first of all: don't be an asshole. and now that the unjustified personal insults are out of the way... Mike Gaskey wrote: If the general(s) in question disagree, they should resign, then speak out. in your opinion. the Army and the country will probably exist beyond whatever damage Bush does to it. and maybe this person's loyalty is with the Army and the country, rather than the goofball calling the shots. Mike Gaskey wrote: Oh, I see, it has to be a civilian head you personally approve of then. :confused: Mike Gaskey wrote: if we weren't at war I'd join you in sniping at him about any number of issues but when it comes to the war effort my view is overt opposition simply aids the enemy. :laugh: as if... you support incompetency in an effort that you deem so important that it excuses incompetency in everything else. clearly, you're not so worried about what he actually does in the effort, only that he does something... face it, the GOP is a cult. here's a challenge: when Bush is finally gone, and the Dem steps in to take over the Iraq mess, will you refrain from saying anything negative about her ? yeah. fucking. right. Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
Chris Losinger wrote: don't be an asshole. and now that the unjustified personal insults are out of the way... oh alright - that was without thinking thru the meaning. Chris Losinger wrote: this person's loyalty is with the Army and the country, rather than the goofball calling the shots then he should resign, period. Chris Losinger wrote: you support incompetency your view says incompetency, that is far from a universal opinion as registered at the polls. Chris Losinger wrote: the Dem steps in to take over the Iraq mess, will you refrain from saying anything negative about her ? Condi? no joke, but you're making a huge assumption. and regardless, yes I will as long as her / he doesn't decide to turn tail and run. Mike "We ain't stuck on stupid." badass Lt. General Russel Honore **"Remember - live bunnies are a great source of nourishment"**silly-assed cartoon
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: because if he doesn't have our support, we lose. :omg: It's amazing how your reasoning is also used by countries like North Korea and China to brainwash their citizens into unquestionable support for their leaders. X| A bad leader is a bad leader, and it's up to us, the ones being led, to ensure that we're not heading down the wrong path or else "we lose". The North Koreans don't have that choice. We do, so excercising it should never be considered a loss -- quite the opposite. Alvaro
I cannot take anything the Bush administration does seriously. The corruption, the cynical disregard for humanity, the cronyism and incompetence, all wrapped in a slimey flag of ultra-marketed nationalism repulses me. -- consdubya from fark.com.
Alvaro Mendez wrote: brainwash their citizens hint - all power structures attempt to brainwash their subjects families ? yes businesses ? yes non government organizations ? yes governments ? yes religions ? yes yes dissent is a positive part of democracy & suppressed in totalitarian regimes
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: because if he doesn't have our support, we lose. :omg: It's amazing how your reasoning is also used by countries like North Korea and China to brainwash their citizens into unquestionable support for their leaders. X| A bad leader is a bad leader, and it's up to us, the ones being led, to ensure that we're not heading down the wrong path or else "we lose". The North Koreans don't have that choice. We do, so excercising it should never be considered a loss -- quite the opposite. Alvaro
I cannot take anything the Bush administration does seriously. The corruption, the cynical disregard for humanity, the cronyism and incompetence, all wrapped in a slimey flag of ultra-marketed nationalism repulses me. -- consdubya from fark.com.
Alvaro Mendez wrote: A bad leader is a bad leader, and it's up to us, the ones being led, to ensure that we're not heading down the wrong path or else "we lose". you do that every 4 years at the polls. the constant harping from weak assed liberals and the media does nothing but help the enemy, there is no doubt in my mind that they look at this drivel and assume they can beat us. Mike "We ain't stuck on stupid." badass Lt. General Russel Honore **"Remember - live bunnies are a great source of nourishment"**silly-assed cartoon
-
Alvaro Mendez wrote: brainwash their citizens hint - all power structures attempt to brainwash their subjects families ? yes businesses ? yes non government organizations ? yes governments ? yes religions ? yes yes dissent is a positive part of democracy & suppressed in totalitarian regimes
Anonymous wrote: all power structures attempt to brainwash their subjects From here:[^] brainwash v 1: persuade completely, often through coercion; "The propaganda brainwashed many people" 2: submit to brainwashing; indoctrinate forcibly Persuasion and brainwashing are not the same. hint -- I didn't say our government does it.
I cannot take anything the Bush administration does seriously. The corruption, the cynical disregard for humanity, the cronyism and incompetence, all wrapped in a slimey flag of ultra-marketed nationalism repulses me. -- consdubya from fark.com.
-
Alvaro Mendez wrote: A bad leader is a bad leader, and it's up to us, the ones being led, to ensure that we're not heading down the wrong path or else "we lose". you do that every 4 years at the polls. the constant harping from weak assed liberals and the media does nothing but help the enemy, there is no doubt in my mind that they look at this drivel and assume they can beat us. Mike "We ain't stuck on stupid." badass Lt. General Russel Honore **"Remember - live bunnies are a great source of nourishment"**silly-assed cartoon
Mike Gaskey wrote: there is no doubt in my mind that they look at this drivel and assume they can beat us. I'm not as doubt-free as you are since I don't know how these people operate. But, who knows, you could be right, at least in some cases. Does that then follow that if liberals and the media were to vanish, our enemies would surrender or be easier to defeat? Would a one-party system make it easier for us to invade countries and quickly claim victories? Alvaro
I cannot take anything the Bush administration does seriously. The corruption, the cynical disregard for humanity, the cronyism and incompetence, all wrapped in a slimey flag of ultra-marketed nationalism repulses me. -- consdubya from fark.com.
-
Chris Losinger wrote: don't be an asshole. and now that the unjustified personal insults are out of the way... oh alright - that was without thinking thru the meaning. Chris Losinger wrote: this person's loyalty is with the Army and the country, rather than the goofball calling the shots then he should resign, period. Chris Losinger wrote: you support incompetency your view says incompetency, that is far from a universal opinion as registered at the polls. Chris Losinger wrote: the Dem steps in to take over the Iraq mess, will you refrain from saying anything negative about her ? Condi? no joke, but you're making a huge assumption. and regardless, yes I will as long as her / he doesn't decide to turn tail and run. Mike "We ain't stuck on stupid." badass Lt. General Russel Honore **"Remember - live bunnies are a great source of nourishment"**silly-assed cartoon
Mike Gaskey wrote: your view says incompetency, that is far from a universal opinion as registered at the polls. funny... i just saw a huge flying 3d pie chart that says 33% of Americans support Ws handling of Iraq. maybe not universal, but when 2/3s of the country think you're doing something wrong, odds are pretty good that you're doing something wrong. Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: your view says incompetency, that is far from a universal opinion as registered at the polls. funny... i just saw a huge flying 3d pie chart that says 33% of Americans support Ws handling of Iraq. maybe not universal, but when 2/3s of the country think you're doing something wrong, odds are pretty good that you're doing something wrong. Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
Chris Losinger wrote: i just saw a huge flying 3d pie chart that says 33% of Americans support Ws handling of Iraq today. tomorrow it will say something different. you can't and shouldn't run a country by opinion polls, there is only one poll that matters and it is in November. Mike "We ain't stuck on stupid." badass Lt. General Russel Honore **"Remember - live bunnies are a great source of nourishment"**silly-assed cartoon