Today on Blogcritics
Home » Death, Deceit and our Future

Death, Deceit and our Future

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

We’re at war. At this point people either care why or they are focusing on how we are going to win and what the future holds for us. Both are complicated issues and for me I think the answer is a complicated one for several reasons. First off we need to have a public discussion about how we got where we are today and if our leaders told us the truth. Regardless of what you think about our current path we all need to know if our government told us the truth. That issue alone is vital to our rights in this country. If our government told the country misleading information to further a completely different agenda than the one spelled out before the war, someone (or everyone) needs to answer. I mean, really answer based on a rigourous investigation, an investigation based on the facts. I’m tired of this blame game. First it was the CIA’s fault. Then it was the lawyer’s that prepared the intelligence for the president. It was the joint cheifs and it was the rest of the friggin’ world. Man, all I want to know is if the most powerful man in the world used the resources available to him to the fullest extent to keep this country out of harms way. What ever happened to “the buck stops here?” Apparently the new slogan sitting on the desk of the president is “The blame stops here” because nothing is every his fault and he is never wrong.

The bottom line for me is that if he can’t take credit for the decisions he ultimately made then he is a puppet. I want this man to stand up and be honest and take responsibility for the actions he authorized. That would be a bold and honest step and I’m betting that it would win him a lot more fans than his current game plan of shield, blame and distort. Our country deserves better.

Second, we need to have an honest discussion about where we are now and where we are going in the future. The current game plan is the neoconservative idea that we need to basically convert the world to democracy by force. In a perfect world or another time this might be a viaable option. But in today’s world with today’s enemies I think we need to rethink that plan. The problem is that we are hated simply because we are considered invaders, occupiers, and in some circles we are considered terrorists ourselves. Osama Bin Laden was an ally of our country in the past but that all changed. Why? He simply did not wake up one day and attack a country that keeps to themselves. He didn’t attack us because we love the decadence of Britney Spears, and he didn’t attack us because of our liberal television and hollywood movies. We were attacked because we (the infidels) have violated or helped to violate their sacred land. All they want is to be left alone and we just can’t seem to do that. Remember terroism is not the cause of our pain it is the result of our actions. There would be little or no terrorism without a reason. We are fighting unemployed, uneducated, radically motivated, civilly challenged people. They fight because they believe in their mission and that is simply to protect their land, family and way of life from the infidel. They are like the Amish in a way. They feel that the outside world is corrupt, decadent, and evil. It flies in the face of everything that they hold dear and the United States of America is the head of the beast that attacks them.

So as I sit here I still wonder why some people believe that taking the route of violence and conversion of belief will ever solve the problem facing us. Why is it not a better plan to get the hell out of Mesopotamia and regroup to protect our homeland with as many people and with as much money as we can spare.

Right now the entire population of The United States accounts for about 6% of the world population. Our active military is somewhere around 500,000 of that and they are spread throughout our own country and 100 countries around the world. Yeah, you head me right. So how can anyone believe that we can continue to fight this battle, protect our own country and protect the U.N. nations that we have pledged to defend if a crisis arises? I understand the broad concept of fighting the war overseas so we don’t have to fight it at home. Without thinking that sounds great! But the problem is that we are not fighting an army as we did in WW1 or Korea. We are fighting an army of ghosts. They can cross our borders, live among us, come and go without us noticing and show up at any time. They don’t want to fight us abroad, they want to destory us at home. They don’t care how long it takes because they are already dead. All the guns, tanks, bombs and democracy will not stop them. In fact it does nothing but fuel them, enrage them, and it most importantly grows their ranks.

I’m looking to the American people to start asking more questions, think logically, read beyond the propaganda and what comes out of the White House, study the history of our enemies and do your best to help this country make the right decision going forward. Our task at hand now is to determine if this president is on best track to protect our children and their future. That is the most sacred task we have at hand today.

Powered by

About Yensid

  • Claire Robinson

    I must disagree, Yensid. The “only” issue you mention should not be the “only” issue, and isn’t.

    As citizens of a country, we are not privvy to all the intelligence information that our leaders have. We shouldn’t be privvy to it, because if we were, so would our enemies be.

    This “leader” didn’t put us in harms way. Terrorists put us in harms way. Our leader used the information he had, the best available, and that, coupled with the fact that the country we targeted was run by a heinous dictator who murdered hundreds of thousands of his OWN people, has to be taken as a package. I would have been fine with the statement “We are going to go unseat Saddam because he is an oppressive dictator and needs to be unseated”….so would MOST of the American people. After the terrorists attacks in 1993 on the WTC, at embassies around the world, the attack on the USS Cole, and the WTC, we had every right to go whip his ass, without anyone’s permission, because we have a right, and a duty, to protect ourselves (and others); because we do know that regardless of his wmd’s, he is a terrorist sympathizer and a murderer.

    HE HAS SAID WHAT YOU SUGGEST. Have you not been listening? Iraq deserved better, Afghanistan deserved better, and we have and are doing what we can to give it to them.

    I would like to take the nice, gentle “enlightenment” route and say that our future depends on educating the misguided. It isn’t going to happen. You cannot retrain an entire generation of people educated in madrases who hate out guts and all we stand for. You cannot negotiate with terrorists.

    We must do what we must do. We must let Israel do what it must do. If we want any future at all.

    I, for one, am not willing to live in fear. Anything that my country needs to do to prevent that is fine with me.

    Nice post, and thank you for giving me the opportunity to spout off.

    Claire

  • Eric Olsen

    Yensid, I have been following your recent posts and they are well-written and thoughtful, I mostly disagree, but like Claire, I REALLY disagree with the notion that we brought this on. What brought this on is a sense of Islamist entitlement, furious outrage that the Islamic world is, by all measureable standards, an incredibly disastrous cesspool of despotism, poverty, ignorance, and suppression, and the desire to blame all but themselves for their current sewer-dwelling status.

  • andy marsh

    That’s a first…comparing islamic terrorists to the Amish…HOLY MACKERAL!!! I have seen it all!!!

  • http://www.tude.com/ Hal Pawluk

    It was William Kristol’s agenda, Yensid.

    You can read about it on the neocon site Project for the New American Century.

    I’ve also blogged a bit more about the timeline to this disaster. Here’s an excerpt from my What the Heck is a ‘Neocon': Part I: (links open in new windows)

    In 1996, then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu asked an Israeli think tank to come up with a foreign policy statement for him. Here are some excerpts from it:

    [Introduced the idea of getting rid of Saddam:] “Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right …”

    [And the idea of having the Hashemites control Iraq, which James Woolsey raised again last year in the Wall Street Journal:] “Were the Hashemites to control Iraq, they could use their influence over Najf to help Israel wean the south Lebanese Shia away from Hizballah, Iran, and Syria. Shia retain strong ties to the Hashemites: the Shia venerate foremost the Prophet’s family, the direct descendants of which — and in whose veins the blood of the Prophet flows — is King Hussein.”

    The report was produced by Richard Perle, Douglas Feith [now Undersecretary of Defense] and others [A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm]

    A few days after the report was prepared, Prime Minister Netanyahu presented it virtually verbatim to the US congress, looking for help from the US to get rid of Saddam.

    Congress didn’t buy it, so in early 1998 a few right-wing partisans in the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) presented an “Open Letter to the President” (Clinton), once again asking for an attack on Iraq (“In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing”). An amazing number of signatories to that letter have since become part of the Bush administration and clearly had a big hand in the invasion of Iraq. Here are a few whose names you’ll probably recognize:

    Donald Rumsfeld (Secretary of Defense)
    Paul Wolfowitz (Deputy Secretary of Defense),
    John R. Bolton (Undersecretary of State)
    William Schneider, Jr. (Chairman of the Defense Science Board in the U.S. Department of Defense)
    Elliott Abrams (National Security Council, Middle East and North Africa portfolio)
    Zalmay Khalilzad (Bush’s ambassador to Afghanistan)
    R. James Woolsey (not in the current administration)
    William Kristol
    William Bennett
    Vin Weber
    Richard Perle

    That didn’t work, either, so PNAC sent the letter to Republican Senate Leader Trent Lott and Republican House Leader Newt Gingrich. A few months later, the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 was passed.

  • http://yensidtlaw.blogspot.com/ Yensid Tlaw

    Thanks for your comments. I feel I need to clarify a few things. First I understand that we can’t get the whole scoop on the CIA’s secret files. That is not what I am saying. But when our government takes its people to war they need to know why and they need to believe in that mission based on the facts presented. When our brave men and women are asked to give their life for a cause I would expect that we should not mislead them. It is apparent that you have only been listening to the mouth of our administration and not reading and researching the evidence on what we knew and when. The publishing company I work for recently won a prestigious award for their coverage of the intelligence claims BEFORE the war. They were basically questioning everything instead of jumping on the war wagon like the rest of the main stream press. They won the award because their investigative reporting turned out to be true as we know now that there are no WMD’s, no connections to Al-Queda, no nukes, no programs, nothing except a lame, weak dictator. So the people like you that go around saying that the president used the information that he was given is really thin if you have done your homework. You’re basically telling me that some journalists can debunk the information that the president is giving us but the CIA can’t? This was public record and they proved that the initial reasons for going to war were extremely thin. If that is correct then we have some serious problems beyond Saddam or saving some Iraqis. Second, there is a lot of quotes and documented information in interviews, articles, books, etc. that tell the true story. I challenge you to do the research. As always there is propaganda out there but if you have half a brain you can determine what is documented fact or bogus spin.

    http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0804-11.htm

    http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=122149

    My big thing with all the American cowards out there is this. You all want to hide behind our military as the solution. You have no problem sending our kids to die just so you can feel a little safer. I think everyone should be made to go and serve in our military and be asked to give your life for this cause. I’m guessing based on the intel at this point you wouldn’t. You would hide under your rock in your fucking plush house behind your computer and shiver in your own piss before you put one foot on the sands of Iraq. You would come up with an alternate solution so fast.. you probably wouldn’t even say the word gun let alone hold one in your hands because deep down inside your soul you are a god damn coward.

    Oh, and I wasn’t comparing the Amish to the terrorists I was comparing Islamic people that BECOME terrorists to the Amish. If I was an Amish and some killed my kid I might just lose my friggin’ mind and start taking some lives baby! THAT is what we are missing in this whole debate. I’m not calling our proud troops baby killers, I’m just saying that the cost of this war on the people of Iraq have cost them dearly. Over 20,000 dead and yes, I agree they are casualties of war. This happens in war. But when it comes down to a man with simple beliefs in Iraq and he sees the American people invading and occupying their country and they see their family members and children dead and bloody in the street, I’m telling you that there is going to be some fucking Jihad man. 20,000 dead and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis that are attached to them are pissed and we have no one to blame but ourselves and our allies that we protect.

  • andy marsh

    so..the terrorists attacked us because we violated their holy land…and the muslims in Chechnya…they killed all those school children why??? BECAUSE THEY ARE FANATICS!!! And they kill their own people now why??? BECAUSE THEY ARE FANATICS!!! And they rape and torure women why??? Come on, say it with me…BECAUSE THEY ARE FANATICS!!!

    You make BS excuses for why a group of fanatics flew 2 planes into 2 buildings filled with innocent people.

    In a war I could almost understand the attack on the pentagon…it is after all a military target.

    Let’s get this straight, Islam is a religion that has it’s basis in the same God as Judiasm and Christianity. And for the most part muslims are God fearing, peace loving people…and then theirs that group, that group that just can’t stand freedom of religion…that group that wants all the infidels dead…and why do they want that??? come on…one more time…say it with me…BECAUSE THEY ARE FANATICS!!!

  • Eric Olsen

    I have often wondered what would happen if the circle looped all the way around and Pat Buchanan actually connected with Noam Chomsky.

  • http://yensidtlaw.blogspot.com/ Yensid Tlaw

    You know this just proves my point. The American people are so caught up in their own world that they don’t take the time to realize what is really going on. Why does someone become a fanatic? Ten thousand people just don’t wake up and suddenly decide to be pissed off and go out and kill people. And yes, they believe in god but the core teachings of their religion are much, much different. They take those teachings to the extreme and THAT is how they become fanatics. THAT is why they believe that it is their mission to destroy us. Our actions are the cause of their fanaticism
    baby, and killing 10,000 or even 100,000 won’t stop the cancer man. It just feeds it.

    You want to talk about rape and torture, lets talk about our lovely friends the Saudis? Shall we? If we are out to safe the F-in’ world why didn’t we invade Saudi Arabia? Their record of abuse is just as long as Iraq, is just as long as North Korea, on and on. I am so tired of that “It’s all for the Iraqi people” argument man! This is about us, our servicemen and our country that got duped into a losing war. I challenge any of you to give me a good reason why you believe these people suddenly woke up one day and decided to hate the United States if the reason for their hatred has nothing to do with our hand.

    Bring it on. Oh, wait I forgot… THEY’RE FANATICS!! Get your head out of this administrations butt and read your history books. Start with the administration of Jimmy Carter and revisit this subject when you arrive back in the real world.

    Here’s a little bit of fun reading. I doubt you’ll spend the time though.

    http://arbus.blogspot.com/2004/09/welcome-to-war.html

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/03/21/CMGQI5DIKR10.DTL

  • andy marsh

    I really hate it when I have to do a bunch of research for these Dennis Miller type references Eric…but I do end up learning something!

  • curt

    andy –

    how do you feel about yensid’s suggestion to send your kids to the front lines in iraq?

    – curt

  • Eric Olsen

    Andy was in the navy for 20 years – he’s done his part

  • andy marsh

    I’ve done enough time for my entire family…thank you very much…and I have said in a previous post, that anyone who could get his kids in the guard would and if you tell me any different, I’ll call you a liar!

    Thanks Eric

  • Eric Olsen

    Talk about reading history – do you have the slightest sense of the arc of Islamic history, the sense of exceptionalism and entitlement, the history of fanatacism that has arisen whenever Islamic dominance has been challenged? They look backwards for rescue not forwards, the entire culture has stalled for hundreds of years because of this straitjacket.

    Why in the name of sanity would you ASSUME that we must have done something to piss these people off other than progress and prosper? Talk about “just wanting to be left alone” – we just do our thing and cruise along and assume the world is a jolly, reasonable place. These utterly insane, resentful freaks came to realize that if they blamed us for their appalling political, cultural, educational, scientific, economic situation, then they would never have to look inward, accept any blame for their sorry state of affairs, and their leaders – as in Saudi Arabia, which I agree sucks from the same rotten teat – are happy to agree that all of the blame lies with the West, and especially the Great Satan and Little Satan, so they don’t have to answer to questions about the pitiful state of their satraps, either.

    I agree that most Muslims are peaceful fine folk, but their religion has been hijacked by fanatics and they must put their own house in order or others – namely us – will be forced to continue to attempt reform from the outside. We can no longer afford to do our own thing and assume all is well with the rest of the world – we have been exceptionally painfully awakened

  • andy marsh

    find me a reference that isn’t another blog!!! Oh yeah, and something out of san francisco…now I see why you’re mind is where it is.

    You’re right, 10,000 just don’t wake up like that..it comes from years and years of brainwashing. Why else would a supposedly sane person strap a bomb to their ass and walk into a crowded market filled with innocent people. Why else would a person fly a perfectly good airplane filled with innocent people into a perfectly good building?

    I get the feeling that you’re one of them.

    Eric…would you feed his IP to the FBI please??? He scares me!!!

  • http://yensidtlaw.blogspot.com/ Yensid Tlaw

    Let me clarify something here. First off I am not for putting our children on the front lines. I am simply asking you that if you had a choice to go yourself or send your children based on the current intelligence and situation in Iraq, would you? Should we ask our current servicemen? Is that what they signed up for? I’m pretty sure that Army recruiter showed up at their door and said “Sign on that dotted line to defend your country!” They didn’t sign up to save the friggin’ world and they shouldn’t be expected to.

    Regarding your past comments you don’t offer any new solutions. Is beating these people into submission the solution? Will they ever stop if we decide this IS the solution? Have you even read what I said in my post? How in the world can we be expected to fight a world wide war against these people. What can we do to stop them? Do you actually think force is the answer to the problem? Trust me I am definitely not a flower child as you would accuse. I realize that there are reasons for war but we are fighting a different war now my friends. Flexing our muscles and pull out our cocks for a measuring contest is not the way to go about winning this war. They people will smile and put their dicks away and as soon as you turn turn around you’ll have a ten inch knife in your spine. They might even submit for 10 or 20 years but they won’t forget what we have and are currently doing in their lands.

    And yes, I have a strong understanding of their history and our own. Our combined recent history is the cause of their hatred for us and I can do nothing but tell you to read your history books man.

    And yes, Andy has officially proven me right. The American people are so busy pulling their heads out of their asses that they can’t even take the time to read a couple simple links before responding with some radical, raving response! Jesus it is no wonder you are brainwashed. And by your idiotic, prejudice response I can see which side has done their work on on your mind. If you took the time you would see the blog story is simply commenting on another great story and then linking. This is commentary on the reality of the situation in Iraq. If you believe we are doing more good than harm over there this might be a good jumping off point for more discussion and reading. The secord story chronicles a mans trip into the heart and minds of the Iraqi people and the larger picture that we face today. The fire is spreading…

    And lastly, Before you open you mouth to speak again I would hope that you have something intelligent to say. If you have read my past posts you will see that I am only trying to find a solution to our troubles. I believe that twisting that into me being a terrorist would probably qualify you to be one first.

  • andy marsh

    that’s exactly what I did…after I finished my 20 years in the navy…I went to terrorist school.Training is not very long and only 9 out of 10 graduate, that poor bastard that had to do the homicide bomber demo…well, he’s gonna go see those 60 Virginians, he’s pretty lucky!!!

    And as a matter of fact, after 9/11 I did contact a navy recruiter, to see if I could go back on active duty, unfortunately, they wouldn’t take me.

    As far as beating them into submission, hey, if that’s what it takes, so be it!

  • curt

    maybe gw bush’s daughters should go, to make up for the 18 months that he was awol.

  • Forrest

    Disney Walt, er…Yensid Tlaw…

    Is there some irony being expressed here, or what?

    It is a cartoon world out there, for some.

    Andy, my thanks for your twenty year service.

  • curt

    andy, eric –

    i find this mindset that since andy already spent 20 years of non-combat service the rest of his offspring should automatically be exempt from the armed forces. huh???

    if that standard applied in the 1960s, who would’ve fought the politicians war in vietnam, since a good share of those 2 1/2 million boys who were sent over there were children of world war 2 vets?

    what about the thousands of 3rd, 4th and 5th generational military families, a majority of whom had multiple siblings who served?

    so andy – you don’t expect someone else’s children to “beat the iraqis into submission” for you, do you? what about you eric – how come you’re not on the front lines yet?

  • andy marsh

    I am a 3rd generation military family member…it actuall goes back even farther than that…but we’ll just leave it at 3 for now…Eric fights that battle from here…and we need people fighting that battle…and it was only non-combat in the sense that this was a relatively peaceful time in our history. I was stationed on U.S. Navy destroyers for more than half of the time I was in the navy.

    My next comment should sufficiently piss off the ERA types, but no, I don’t think my daughters should have to serve in combat, I don’t think anyones daughters should have to serve in combat.

    I’ve said this before, after 9/11 I tried to get back in the navy…they wouldn’t take my old ass. Besides the fact that my specialty was sonar and Iraq has no submarines, although Iran has 2, well sort of…I guess they left the doors open on the first one and they’re afraid to sink the 2nd one ’cause they might not be able to get it back up again. I’ll gladly do any time that anyone thinks my daughters need to do!

  • andy marsh

    curt – what was your function in the navy in the early 70’s?

  • SFC SKI

    “I think everyone should be made to go and serve in our military and be asked to give your life for this cause.”

    So when are you signing up?
    We don’t want conscripts, thanks, we want only those who choose to serve.

    “They didn’t sign up to save the friggin’ world and they shouldn’t be expected to.”

    They signed up to defend the US, better we do it on their land than wait until they get to ours.

    Your hindsight is 20/20, of course now certain reasons behind the war are now seen as invalid, so far, but we only know there are no WMD because we went there, could we have afforded to wait and find out by their use. The same report regarding the lack of WMD says the mechanisms were in place to restart and produce WMD within months.

    What can we do to stop them, you ask? We defeat tose that cannot be negotiated with, and we do what can with those that are reasonable.

    It’s funny that so many who complain about US action in Iraq as compared to NK or Iran are so willing to overlook the fact that these 2 countries have already told the rest of the world to piss up a rope , they will pursue WMD production.

    Yensid, you say you understand there are reasons to go to war, then contradict yourself. The problem you and the other like minded individuals have is you are willing to intellectualize and examine the problem, but never make a decision and take action. I suppose your grasp of history allows you to forget the previous 14 years of Iraqi history, holding out that hope that this time wold have been different, a diplomatic approach would succeed.

    It’s a tough row to hoe, but I believe history will prove it was the right step.

  • http://yensidtlaw.blogspot.com/ Yensid Tlaw

    SFC SKI,

    Thanks for your civil and well worded comments. They are noted and appreciated.

    Regarding my comment about requiring people to serve, I may have not clearly stated my thoughts correctly. I am just saying that in a perfect world if we all had the choice to serve or not serve based on our own evaluation of the situation and the threat posed, most of the people in a America that put fourth hawkish opinions would probably prove that they are suddenly not hawks but chickens.

    They are willing to put others lives in danger to save their own. Even if it is just for the chance that they might feel a little tiny bit more secure. I find that to be a cowardly action. I would challenge anyone to step up to the plate for this cause or willingly give approval for their children to serve for the current cause. It is easy to support a cause when you are the one hiding behind the ones required to give their life.

    I for one would be willing to defend my homeland if required and I did consider entering the military when I was younger but my parents talked me out of it. I had other options. But I would sign up to defend my homeland if required. Defending another country though and giving my life for their security is not something that I am willing to do. I realize that some good could come out of this but I’m guessing that the possibilities could be endless on the other side of that arguement.

    As you say though, only time and history will tell who is right. At this point we need to bring the world back together to help us stabilize this country and get them a quality government and leadership. Then we need to get the hell outta there and continue the war on terrorism by securing our country and going after individual terrorists where they breed. Attacking entire countries is not the answer. We need to work with countries to root out the terrorists and also find out the cause of terrorism. This is a complicated problem that can’t be solved by military force. I’ll commenting on this in my next post.

  • andy marsh

    I bet yensid doesn’t even know what the first 3 letters in your name mean Ski!!!

  • SFC Ski

    I can see now the point you were trying to make regarding the first comment.

    “… I would sign up to defend my homeland if required. Defending another country though and giving my life for their security is not something that I am willing to do.”

    There is the crux of the argument, some see things as you do, the threat will be manifest on our shores, then it will be engaged. Others like myself see what we do as engaging and hopefully removing the threat before it reaches our shores.

    “This is a complicated problem that can’t be solved by military force [alone]” I think that says it better.
    No one wins by being purely defensive, we must go on the offensive when possible. Jaw-jaw IS better than War-War, but if your opponent knows you can’t or won’t back up your talk, they stop listening.

  • curt

    andy –

    radioman and then special services, navcomsta hono.

    didn’t volunteer for vietnam because i didn’t want to go. i didn’t do much…could’ve done more…but i’ve never espoused to be something i’m not, and at least i served – which is more than the chickenhawk warmongers like dick cheney, john ashcroft, dick armey, rush lardbaugh, bill bennett, karl rove, etc, etc, did; all of whom supported the war, as long as it was SOMEONE ELSES blood being shed over there.

    it’s amusing to me how brave they are now, 35 years too late.

  • http://www.shortstrangetrip.org joe

    Is hono short for Honolulu?

  • http://yensidtlaw.blogspot.com/ Yensid Tlaw

    I think we are finally getting down to the guts of it now. I agree that we need to fight the war abroad and at home. I am not content to wait for the threat. The big difference is that I believe we need to root out these people one by one with intelligence, special ops forces and get to them where they live and operate. Combine this with understanding the terrorist mindset better and rebuilding our relationships around the world. This will continue to help the world as a whole fight the threat better and more efficiently. The situation in Iraq is an example of a bold, messy, resource intensive AND costly slap to terrorism that does nothing but encourage the underlying problems of terrorism and raise our debt. We need to fight this war around the world, it needs to be clean and agressive. John Kerry has a great plan to put more money into our homeland security but to also double our special ops and intelligence budget for this exact task. Bombs and overtaking entire countries is not the answer. Like I mentioned before these people are ghosts. They can go anywhere and do anything if they really want and they do have the will. They will cross our borders and live among us and the only way we can defeat them is deal with (#1) trying to reduce future terrorism and (#2) Reducing current terrorists and securing our country so they can’t infiltrate our communities. It can’t be a one sided battle overseas and it can’t continue on the current path we are on. It’s expensive, we have over 1/3 of our active duty troops trying to secure this mess AND while we are cleaning it up, our own borders remain open. 4000 people a day cross our borders and that is a threat. Whether you like to admit it or not the terrorists are already here and they are among us. We’ll be fighting them at home now whether we wan to or not.

  • http://yensidtlaw.blogspot.com/ Yensid Tlaw

    This is kinda related to the recent conversation. I just stumbled over this and found it kinda amusing regarding the service record of politicians on both sides. Not that I take sides. :-)

    DEMOCRATS

    * Richard Gephardt: Air National Guard, 1965-71.

    * David Bonior: Staff Sgt., Air Force 1968-72.

    * Tom Daschle: 1st Lt., Air Force SAC 1969-72.

    * Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam Jan. 1971 as an army journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade.

    * Bob Kerrey: Lt. j.g. Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor, Vietnam.

    * Daniel Inouye: Army 1943-47; Medal of Honor, WWII.

    * John Kerry: Lt., Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat V, Purple Hearts.

    * Charles Rangel: Staff Sgt., Army 1948-52; Bronze Star, Korea.

    * Max Cleland: Captain, Army 1965-68; Silver Star & Bronze Star Vietnam.

    * Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-53.

    * Tom Harkin: Lt., Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve, 1968-74.

    * Jack Reed: Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army Reserve 1979-91.

    * Fritz Hollings: Army officer in WWII; Bronze Star and seven campaign ribbons.

    * Leonard Boswell: Lt. Col., Army 1956-76; Vietnam, DFCs, Bronze Stars, and Soldier’s Medal.

    * Pete Peterson: Air Force Captain, POW. Purple Heart, Silver Star and Legion of Merit.

    * Mike Thompson: Staff sergeant, 173rd Airborne, Purple Heart.

    * Bill McBride: Candidate for Fla. Governor. Marine in Vietnam; Bronze Star with Combat V.

    * Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star.

    * Pete Stark: Air Force 1955-57

    * Chuck Robb: Vietnam

    * Howell Heflin: Silver Star

    * George McGovern: Silver Star & DFC during WWII.

    * Bill Clinton: Did not serve. Student deferments. Entered draft but received #311.

    * Jimmy Carter: Seven years in the Navy.

    * Walter Mondale: Army 1951-1953

    * John Glenn: WWII and Korea; six DFCs and Air Medal with 18 Clusters.

    * Tom Lantos: Served in Hungarian underground in WWII. Saved by Raoul Wallenberg.

    REPUBLICANS

    * Dick Cheney: did not serve. Several deferments, the last by marriage.

    * Dennis Hastert: did not serve.

    * Tom Delay: did not serve.

    * Roy Blunt: did not serve.

    * Bill Frist: did not serve.

    * Mitch McConnell: did not serve.

    * Rick Santorum: did not serve.

    * Trent Lott: did not serve.

    * John Ashcroft: did not serve. Seven deferments to teach business.

    * Jeb Bush: did not serve.

    * Karl Rove: did not serve.

    * Saxby Chambliss: did not serve. “Bad knee.” The man who attacked Max Cleland’s patriotism.

    * Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve.

    * Vin Weber: did not serve.

    * Richard Perle: did not serve.

    * Douglas Feith: did not serve.

    * Eliot Abrams: did not serve.

    * Richard Shelby: did not serve.

    * Jon! Kyl: did not serve.

    * Tim Hutchison: did not serve.

    * Christopher Cox: did not serve.

    * Newt Gingrich: did not serve.

    * Don Rumsfeld: served in Navy (1954-57) as flight instructor.

    * George W. Bush: failed

    * Ronald Reagan: due to poor eyesight, served in a non-combat role making movies.

    * B-1 Bob Dornan: Consciously enlisted after fighting was over in Korea.

    * Phil Gramm: did not serve.

    * John McCain: Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross.

    * Dana Rohrabacher: did not serve.

    * John M. McHugh: did not serve.

    * JC Watts: did not serve.

    * Jack Kemp: did not serve. “Knee problem,” although continued in NFL for 8 years.

    * Dan Quayle: Journalism unit of the Indiana National Guard.

    * Rudy Giuliani: did not serve.

    * George Pataki: did not serve.

    * Spencer Abraham: did not serve.

    * John Engler: did not serve.

    * Lindsey Graham: National Guard lawyer.

    PUNDITS & PREACHERS

    * Sean Hannity: did not serve.

    * Rush Limbaugh: did not serve (4-F with a ‘pilonidal cyst.’)

    * Bill O’Reilly: did not serve.

    * Michael Savage: did not serve.

    * George Will: did not serve.

    * Chris Matthews: did not serve.

    * Paul Gigot: did not serve.

    * Bill Bennett: did not serve.

    * Pat Buchanan: did not serve.

    * John Wayne: did not serve.

    * Bill Kristol: did not serve.

    * Kenneth Starr: did not serve.

    * Antonin Scalia: did not serve.

    * Clarence Thomas: did not serve.

    * Ralph Reed: did not serve.

    * Michael Medved: did not serve.

    * Charlie Daniels: did not serve.

    * Ted Nugent: did not serve. (He only shoots at things that don’t shoot back.)

  • curt

    yes, honolulu, hawaii

  • http://www.shortstrangetrip.org Joe

    To paraphrase Patton, I guess that beats shoveling shit in Louisiana.

  • SFC SKI

    Interesting list.

  • http://www.shortstrangetrip.org joe

    Kind of cherry-picked though, ie. no mention of Colin Powell, analgous members of the most recent Dem admininstration, or left-leaning pundits and celebrities. Additionally, if you were to tally up the numbers for members of Congress with military experience you would see that there are more veterans on the Republican side. But interesting nonetheless.

  • Eric Olsen

    Yensid, your most recent explications are much more reasonable and make much more sense, but you are missing one element: the path you discuss is essentially the path we were on before, the only way to get at the “underlying causes” you mention is to include a major military component because it is only way the necessary change will be enabled – it’s the only way for us to be taken seriously.

  • andy marsh

    I was wondering that myself. I would liketo see a list that was NOT handpicked by a liberal!!! A list of ALL the members of congress!

  • http://www.shortstrangetrip.org joe

    here’s info for the house and senate

  • andy marsh

    Looking at that list, I would say that yensid really had to pick and choose to come up with the list that he did. Gives a whole different perspective!

    Thanks Joe

  • http://yensidtlaw.blogspot.com/ Yensid Tlaw

    Sorry for that list. I am not a liberal picking through the total list for sure. A friend of mine sent that to me so I thought I would forward it on. It is interesting though.The point about that list is that a lot of the people on that list have been HAWKS from the beginning. This is my big point if you read back through the conversation. It is so easy for people to justify war as the solution while you site behind your computer, safe in your house or in your comfy TV or radio studio making millions. A lot of the people on that list preach military might on a daily basis and they would be shitting themselves if they even were required to hold a gun. We just need to be careful when suggesting war as a solution and always ask yourself if you would be willing to do the same. Read the links I provided earlier and you’ll see that the president should have had serious doubts about the evidence in Iraq and if he would have read his history he would have seen that this would not be an easy trip. Our members of the military were sent into harms way and thousands will lose their lives before the rest come home. All they expect when being sent into battle is to know the truth.

  • curt

    joe –

    its the naval communication station, near wahiawa, oahu, in between a tropical rain forest and a pineapple field.

    andy –

    also spent some time on the uss kitty hawk and the uss southerland; wasn’t much, but better than nothin’, i guess.

  • andy marsh

    Yensid, you defend the military ,by saying that they’re being sent in harms way….The military feels otherwise.

    the majority of active duty military want George W. Bush to be president.

    So either defend them, or deny them

  • http://yensidtlaw.blogspot.com/ Yensid Tlaw

    Andy, I want to see stats on this. I’ve heard generals say that if they can get their men by age 18 they will have them for life. OF COURSE people in the military think they are doing the right thing.

    For more opinions from the actual troops read here: http://www.optruth.org/main.cfm?actionId=globalShowStaticContent&screenKey=hear&lnav=1

  • andy marsh

    The generals don’t fight the war.

    Did you find another site that picks and chooses like the site you got all your congressional mis-information?

    And I was brainwashed from a very young age. I knew I was going in the navy when I was abour 16. I had already made that decision, because I KNEW it was the right thing.

  • http://yensidtlaw.blogspot.com/ Yensid Tlaw

    Andy,

    Look at the damn site before you spout off. And quit twisting my words around. I am not against the troops or serving in the military. I think I have made my point on this issue. thanks for your comments.

  • curt

    andy,

    i’d like to see your documentation that a majority of active duty military want gw bush to be president.

    i would think they’d choose a combat vet over a guard deserter.

  • http://www.shortstrangetrip.org joe

    I think this was pretty widely reported regarding the preferences of the miltary in the upcoming election.

  • curt

    i stand corrected, that surprises me, at least if you believe in polls.

    a couple other interesting statistics were 1) 55% of the vets who served in afghanistan and iraq said the war was worth it, while 40% said it was not;

    and 2) 47% of the active vets believed the war in iraq has reduced the risk of terrorist attacks in the u.s., while 45% said it has not.

  • curt

    oh, and yenslid –

    you’re list of right-wing war-wimps is missing at least one name…

    the brave and courageous cyber-patriot chickenhawk: rj elliott.

  • curt

    andy,

    i think you missed yensid’s point of posting the list of right-wingers who didn’t serve.

    99% of those listed espouse their own patriotism, promote and support the invasion of iraq, sending others into harms way; but when it was THEIR turn to serve they somehow managed to avoid or evade service. otherwise known as chickenhawks.

    on the other hand, most of the liberals who did not serve have made no bones about how they feel that maybe warfare is not the solution to everything.

  • andy marsh

    Curt – I’ve noticed how liberals that served pick no bones about serving. take Charlie Rangell for instance. He made it a point to reintroduce the draft, just to see if he could rile up some rich kids. The only service that matters is BAD service…and what John Kerry did, accroding to the POW’s and the Swift Boat vets, was DEAD wrong…and you can try to blow sunshine up my ass for days…but I’ll take the word of a Congressional Medal of Honor winner any day of the week over john kerry.

    Good Night!!!

  • curt

    “the only service that matters is bad service” ???

    sorta like how ol’ gw abandoned his guard post for 14 months, constituting desertion…would that qualify?