PDA

View Full Version : Some Balance on Iraq


Suitanim
02-25-2006, 09:08 PM
Did You Know??
Of course you didn't know. How could you?

Did you know that 47 countries have reestablished their embassies in Iraq?

Did you know that the Iraqi government currently employs 1.2 million Iraqi people?

Did you know that 3100 schools have been renovated, 364 schools are under rehabilitation, 263 schools are under construction and 38 new schools have been built.

Did you know that Iraq's higher educational structure consists of 20 Universities, 46 Institutes or colleges and 4 research centers, all currently operating?

Did you know that the Iraqi Navy is operational?! They have 5-100-foot patrol craft, 34 smaller vessels and a naval infantry regiment.

Did you know that Iraq's Air Force consists of three operational squadrons, which includes 9 reconnaissance and 3 US C-130 transport aircraft (under Iraqi operational control) which operate day and night, and will soon add 16 UH-1 helicopters and 4 Bell Jet Rangers?

Did you know that Iraq has a counter-terrorist unit and a Commando Battalion?

Did you know that the Iraqi Police Service has over 55,000 fully trained and equipped police officers?

Did you know that there are 5 Police Academies in Iraq that produce over 3500 new officers each 8 weeks?

Did you know there are more than 1100 building projects going on in Iraq? They include 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals, 83 railroad stations, 22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities and 69 electrical facilities.

Did you know that 96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5 have received the first 2 series of polio vaccinations?

Did you know that 4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primary school by mid October?

Did you know that there are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq and phone use has gone up 158%?

Did you know that Iraq has an independent media that consists of 75 radio stations, 180 newspapers and 10 television stations?

Did you know that the Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of 2004?

Look around - the media isn't telling you much....
http://www.defenselink.mil/multimedia/
http://www.steelernation.com/forums/images/statusicon/user_offline.gif http://www.steelernation.com/forums/images/buttons/reputation.gif (http://www.steelernation.com/forums/reputation.php?p=13622) http://www.steelernation.com/forums/images/buttons/report.gif (http://www.steelernation.com/forums/report.php?p=13622) http://www.steelernation.com/forums/images/buttons/quote.gif (http://www.steelernation.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=13622)

tony hipchest
02-25-2006, 09:16 PM
how much will that all cost us and how long until its used against us in the future? i like people all around the world, and really would wish no race, culture or country harm, but especially us americans.

i hope all those schools weve built arent used as tools to spread the hatred of western civilization and terrorist breeding grounds (that would be kind of counter-productive).

Suitanim
02-25-2006, 09:27 PM
We did several things by taking the war to them. The best example is now we have a well established base right next to Iran.

If we get into this, I want to establish quickly that I will never respond or answer silly anti-war posts. The human animal fights just like any other animal. The US has been and still is the least aggressive World power in the entire history of the World.

tony hipchest
02-25-2006, 09:44 PM
We did several things by taking the war to them. The best example is now we have a well established base right next to Iran.

The US has been and still is the least aggressive World power in the entire history of the World.

that base next to iran is great unless we are cutting our forces, having problems recruiting, grounding our stealths, selling the raptors etc. as i have said, jet noise is the sound of freedom. i love america flexing its muscle more than anyone. i am as pro military as anyone (although a registered democrat) lets just make sure we get something out of it (the war effort) rather than spending ourselves into a deficit just to pour our $$$ into other countries economies and financial, and educational well being. those 10 iraqi tv stations are great and i bet they are having a field day showing bode millers fine representations of the u.s. along with the rest of their hate filled propoganda. nice to see with all the money we have poured in there they are on the brink of civil war.

i am a firm believer in carpe diem and manifest destiny. to bad that is no longer the american way. in my opinion gas should be costing us about 90 cents a gallon right about now.

i freely state my viewpoints on these subjects but rarely argue or debate them. the earths muslim and christian/ jew population is headed for a big ordeal. one none of us can really imagine. to debate it is kind of moot. its pretty hard to stop a runaway train.

Cape Cod Steel Head
02-25-2006, 09:52 PM
how much will that all cost us and how long until its used against us in the future? i like people all around the world, and really would wish no race, culture or country harm, but especially us americans.

i hope all those schools weve built arent used as tools to spread the hatred of western civilization and terrorist breeding grounds (that would be kind of counter-productive).About $100,000 per minute per American citizen

Cape Cod Steel Head
02-25-2006, 09:57 PM
We did several things by taking the war to them. The best example is now we have a well established base right next to Iran.

If we get into this, I want to establish quickly that I will never respond or answer silly anti-war posts. The human animal fights just like any other animal. The US has been and still is the least aggressive World power in the entire history of the World.Did we take the war to them, or deliver them an easier way to kill Americans? If we can't control a country the size of Iraq how could we possibly handle one four times the size of Iraq, with a much larger population?

SteelCityMan786
02-25-2006, 10:22 PM
I guess the media doesn't tell you much after all

tony hipchest
02-25-2006, 10:39 PM
pardon my cynicism but maybe having a base so close to iran will lead to some great business opportunities such as security at our nuclear facilities. maybe even at sandia labs. maybe we can outscource to the iranians to protect our borders with mexico, or transport radioactive materials to the WIPP site.

weve had bases in kuwait and saudi arabia for years. how much more beneficial is having one in iraq? especially when we are under the guise that we are trying to get out of iraq? i am one for war but ONLY if its done correctly and efficiently. wouldnt it have been much more efficient to complete the job correctly in 1991?

Lyn
02-25-2006, 10:44 PM
Is Irag a totally different issue? Why are there still thousands of people living in tents while still waiting for FEMA trailers to live in? I think this last fall and winter should show all of us that our country can not seem to take care of its' own, here at home. SAD.

I really wish I knew why. It took us a quick call of the house and senate and Iraq had 87 billion dollars allocated for the war......why can't we do the same for every single person who lost during the hurricanes? Why are our people living in tents?


Just an observation.

tony hipchest
02-25-2006, 10:49 PM
Is Irag a totally different issue? Why are there still thousands of people living in tents while still waiting for FEMA trailers to live in? I think this last fall and winter should show all of us that our country can not seem to take care of its' own, here at home. SAD.

I really wish I knew why. It took us a quick call of the house and senate and Iraq had 87 billion dollars allocated for the war......why can't we do the same for every single person who lost during the hurricanes? Why are our people living in tents?


Just an observation. there are thousands of trailors sitting around there that wont be released for inhabitation thanks to the red tape involved. america must afraid of being ripped off by americans in need. or maybe theres just not enough money to be made by the elite, by housing these people.

augustashark
02-26-2006, 02:21 AM
there are thousands of trailors sitting around there that wont be released for inhabitation thanks to the red tape involved. america must afraid of being ripped off by americans in need. or maybe theres just not enough money to be made by the elite, by housing these people.


First of all, they are called mobile homes....Better yet manufactured housing! The red tape you speak about has always been there. I don't agree with most of the red tape, but it does have its reasons..

3 to be 4
02-26-2006, 08:06 AM
Im so happy for the wonderful people of Iraq who just love us so much. Im sure they'll be the first people to stick by us in a crisis since we've established such a solid democracy there. In the meantime our military is stretched out beyond belief, Iran and North Korea are more dangerous than ever, our own schools and infrastructure is falling apart, our borders still arent secure, and the ports will run by Arabs. And like early Vietnam, say 1965 or 1966, many people cant bring themselves to see the common sense of what the situation is because to do so would admit maybe those thousands of brave, wonderful, young men and women who have been killed or wounded, died for a cause more related to politics and money than for "freedom".
But the neo-conservatives paint anyone who says this as being against "fighting terrorism" or "forgetting 9/11". Far from the truth. the real fight agaisnst terrorism is in Afganistan,Iran,N.Korea,Syria, and yes, Saudi Arabia. But we have rich interests there so that edict of "any country who harbors terrorists.." is hollow indeed. Iraq was a safe scapegoat because we had no interests there. Yet.
On 9/12 the borders should have been closed, the ports seized (i mean, if we really at war, dont ya think?"), and we should have done what Reagan would have done. Found a nice big empty area of Arabian desert and dropped an H-Bomb as a warning to all. Reagan NEVER would have gotten into this kind of futile land war. He believed in peace through strength and intimidation. Not sending our troops into situations like this.
So its propaganda when you hear this crap about "support the troops", as if, if you are against this kind of war in Iraq you are somehow "against the troops". Bullshit. its just the opposite. We needed to fight terrorism and go to war. But not where we did, why we did.

Arabs hate us and always will. Muslims want us dead. period. they want Israel dead. period. Any real conservative knows this. Any real Christian knows what the Prophesies and Revelation have to say about Israel and Gods love for it.

George W. Bush, the Christian President, should know hes not changing Iraq into America the second. But GW is listening to money and oil. Hes not deliberatly trying to harm anything, hes just terribly misguided and hes got himself and the country in way way too deep. Unfortunatly, he wont and cant learn from another President from Texas that its insane to "stay they course" and kill thousands of americans because we dont want to look
bad. Only the long range damage from this will be much worse than the mistake of 40 years ago.

luvmysteelers
02-26-2006, 11:56 AM
Considering that there is at least one deployed GI that frequents this forum, I think this is a disgusting post to have on here for him to read. Nice way to show appreciation for our military, and the job they do.

Suitanim, thank you for posting what you did at the beginning!! Our media won't tell you these things, because good news doesn't sell. Too bad things got taken so out of context, and this turned into another opportunity to bash our government. Most people are so worried about bashing Bush that they can't see the good things that we have accomplished in Iraq. And yes, there have been good things. Is it going smoothly? No. Is it over as fast as we hoped? Of course not. But we can't just pull out of there now and leave it the way it is. It's not a feasible answer.

Our military IS stretched thin, but the majority of our troops believe in their mission, and the reason we are in Iraq. (yes, I know first hand, I have many friends in the military) There will always be a few who don't, but that's one of the great things about being an American.

Forgive my ranting, this is just something very close to my heart! The soldiers do hear about our negativity, and it lowers morale. It also fuels the fire for those that wish us harm, and validates their efforts to bring us down. Why not redirect our attention into supporting our troops and making their deployments a little easier.

3 to be 4
02-26-2006, 09:29 PM
Considering that there is at least one deployed GI that frequents this forum, I think this is a disgusting post to have on here for him to read. Nice way to show appreciation for our military, and the job they do.

Suitanim, thank you for posting what you did at the beginning!! Our media won't tell you these things, because good news doesn't sell. Too bad things got taken so out of context, and this turned into another opportunity to bash our government. Most people are so worried about bashing Bush that they can't see the good things that we have accomplished in Iraq. And yes, there have been good things. Is it going smoothly? No. Is it over as fast as we hoped? Of course not. But we can't just pull out of there now and leave it the way it is. It's not a feasible answer.

Our military IS stretched thin, but the majority of our troops believe in their mission, and the reason we are in Iraq. (yes, I know first hand, I have many friends in the military) There will always be a few who don't, but that's one of the great things about being an American.

Forgive my ranting, this is just something very close to my heart! The soldiers do hear about our negativity, and it lowers morale. It also fuels the fire for those that wish us harm, and validates their efforts to bring us down. Why not redirect our attention into supporting our troops and making their deployments a little easier.


Thank you for proving my point considering the neo-conservative progaganda. You see?
Dare talk turkey about the policy and its "I think this is a disgusting post to have on here for him to read. Nice way to show appreciation for our military, and the job they do."

Get this through your head, criticizing Bush or the War in Iraq does equal criticizing the military or the troops. That is crap that the Government shoves into people brains over and over and over again to insulate itself from any criticism.

Gee, im sorry but its better to rethink a war and save thousands of lives than to keep doing the wrong thing just to not hurt anyones feelings. Should nobody have spoken up about Vietnam in 1966 to make "their deployments a little easier"?

Suitanim
02-27-2006, 10:36 AM
All I said was "Some balance"...I forgot "No positive news comes from Iraq".

Get this through your head, criticizing Bush or the War in Iraq does equal criticizing the military or the troops. That is crap that the Government shoves into people brains over and over and over again to insulate itself from any criticism.

This is my very favorite argument...it makes no sense at all. Yeah, troops, we support you, but not your mission, which is the very reason for your existence, to fulfill your mission...the same mission we don't support.

Anyway, sorry for saying that anything positive was happening in Iraq...The new season of the Apprentice starts tonight...who wants pie?

3 to be 4
02-27-2006, 08:44 PM
All I said was "Some balance"...I forgot "No positive news comes from Iraq".



This is my very favorite argument...it makes no sense at all. Yeah, troops, we support you, but not your mission, which is the very reason for your existence, to fulfill your mission...the same mission we don't support.

Anyway, sorry for saying that anything positive was happening in Iraq...The new season of the Apprentice starts tonight...who wants pie?


talk about simplicity. Fine. Say the President rounds up 100,000 soldiers, and sends them to the moon on a suicide mission to look for Green Cheese. If I say, gee, thats a stupid mission, I think its a waste of the soldiers valuable lives, in your mind, im not supporting the troops.
Fine.
the President is never wrong. Our government is never wrong. Anything they say I will go along with because they say so, THERE, im supporting the troops. :dang:

Suitanim
02-27-2006, 09:16 PM
That argument would work in Bizarro World, but not in the US. The troops aren't stupid, and that's probably the biggest mistake the far left continues to make...they not only know what they are doing, they also understand the nuances and subtleties of their mission, and how delicate the balance is back home. By advancing retarded "Suicide Mission" scenario's to make a political point, you not only show your lack of support for the troops, you also show how out of touch you actually are with the average trooper in the US military.

The rest of this nonsense is just that...the President is often wrong. They ALL were...

Cape Cod Steel Head
02-27-2006, 09:45 PM
And Bush is wrong more often than he's right. I whole heartedly support the troops. They don't get to pick the missions this idiot sends them on. They have a job to do regardless of what their personal feelings may be. That being said it is possible to support the troops and not this inane war!

luvmysteelers
02-28-2006, 05:49 AM
That argument would work in Bizarro World, but not in the US. The troops aren't stupid, and that's probably the biggest mistake the far left continues to make...they not only know what they are doing, they also understand the nuances and subtleties of their mission, and how delicate the balance is back home. By advancing retarded "Suicide Mission" scenario's to make a political point, you not only show your lack of support for the troops, you also show how out of touch you actually are with the average trooper in the US military.



I couldn't have said it better myself, Suit. Thank you!

And 3 to be 4, yes, it is criticizing the troops when you constantly say "this war is stupid, we should just leave Iraq, we had no business being there, etc, etc." The troops know why they are there, and they believe in and support their mission. Honestly, I couldn't care less if you like George Bush or not..I still sleep at night regardless of YOUR view of our government. But it's too late to "rethink" the war now, we have to finish the job that we started. Get over it!

SteelerzGirl
02-28-2006, 06:25 PM
And Bush is wrong more often than he's right. I whole heartedly support the troops. They don't get to pick the missions this idiot sends them on. They have a job to do regardless of what their personal feelings may be. That being said it is possible to support the troops and not this inane war!

I agree, CapeCod. I support our troops in many ways by sending care packages, etc. But I don't have to like war, and I don't have to like George W. Now where were those WMD again? :dang:

clevestinks
02-28-2006, 06:35 PM
Great work Suit, but the whole deal still scares me. Maybe Colin Powell was right, if we break it we own it! And it seems as if we own it! Civil War and all. Not to mention the dollars being spent! I`m all for world peace, but at what price! We could have rebuilt Lousiana three time for the kind of money spent over there. We could have stop the the starving here. To raise money for over in Iraq, raise the import taxes, and use only that money!

clevestinks
02-28-2006, 06:40 PM
All I said was "Some balance"...I forgot "No positive news comes from Iraq".



This is my very favorite argument...it makes no sense at all. Yeah, troops, we support you, but not your mission, which is the very reason for your existence, to fulfill your mission...the same mission we don't support.

Anyway, sorry for saying that anything positive was happening in Iraq...The new season of the Apprentice starts tonight...who wants pie?
Myself I`m glad to hear the positives in Iraq, i would hate to see all our money going to waste. I know Bush takes a ton of heat for Iraq, and its good to see that things are looking up for some!

3 to be 4
02-28-2006, 09:00 PM
I couldn't have said it better myself, Suit. Thank you!

And 3 to be 4, yes, it is criticizing the troops when you constantly say "this war is stupid, we should just leave Iraq, we had no business being there, etc, etc." The troops know why they are there, and they believe in and support their mission. Honestly, I couldn't care less if you like George Bush or not..I still sleep at night regardless of YOUR view of our government. But it's too late to "rethink" the war now, we have to finish the job that we started. Get over it!


You know, its amazing how you and Suit know that every single one of the troops think this is the right thing. That none of them were honorable enough to fight and die for their country even though they disagreed with the President. We were so fortunate none of them had to be faced with that. 100% of them all agree. Its truly amazing. And even more amazing how you guys know exactly how they all feel.

By the way, no kidding we cant just pull out of the war. Because of Bush we are effen stuck in the situation for as far as the eye can see. I love that arguement too. You cant say Bush was wrong because we cant pull out now. Or, Bush was right because look at all the terrorists that are in Baghdad NOW. Hello!!!!!!! We are stuck in this for a long long time because our President goofed. And Iraq wasnt a HUGE threat before, but they sure are a hotbed of terrorists NOW,not to mention a rallying cry for recruitment around the world,NOW. Because the President goofed, when he should have been standing up to the Saudis, Iran, and N.Korea, he instead used up our goodwill to go after a scapegoat that has stuck us in a nightmare situation that we have to finish
This hardly puts him up on Mount Rushmore.

Ooops, did i just not "Support the Troops"? After his Presidency is over, whats Bush going to do when he's criticized about anything?
Laura: George, you forgot to take out the trash
GW: You're not supporting the troops! You've forgotten 9/11 ! You're not supporting the troops! You've forgotten 9/11 !!

Stlrs4Life
02-28-2006, 09:24 PM
Considering that there is at least one deployed GI that frequents this forum, I think this is a disgusting post to have on here for him to read. Nice way to show appreciation for our military, and the job they do.

Suitanim, thank you for posting what you did at the beginning!! Our media won't tell you these things, because good news doesn't sell. Too bad things got taken so out of context, and this turned into another opportunity to bash our government. Most people are so worried about bashing Bush that they can't see the good things that we have accomplished in Iraq. And yes, there have been good things. Is it going smoothly? No. Is it over as fast as we hoped? Of course not. But we can't just pull out of there now and leave it the way it is. It's not a feasible answer.

Our military IS stretched thin, but the majority of our troops believe in their mission, and the reason we are in Iraq. (yes, I know first hand, I have many friends in the military) There will always be a few who don't, but that's one of the great things about being an American.

Forgive my ranting, this is just something very close to my heart! The soldiers do hear about our negativity, and it lowers morale. It also fuels the fire for those that wish us harm, and validates their efforts to bring us down. Why not redirect our attention into supporting our troops and making their deployments a little easier.

As a Desert Storm Vet of 1991, we heared the same over there. But we didn't look bad on anybody that was against the War. We knew were over there to do a job, and we did it. Maybe we should have finished it while we there in the first place. And the negativity that we heared, did not lower our morale. You didn't have time to let it register. you moved on.

I'm sure there is good things going on over there, as there was the first time we were there. Nobody is saying the other. The Middle East will always hate us, like it was said earlier, we can not just push democracy on them. It will never happen, we will be over there for a long time. And, if GW feels so strongly about this war, and for all of his congressman that also do, why will they not send there own daughters and sons over?

3 to be 4
02-28-2006, 09:38 PM
As a Desert Storm Vet of 1991, we heared the same over there. But we didn't look bad on anybody that was against the War. We knew were over there to do a job, and we did it. Maybe we should have finished it while we there in the first place. And the negativity that we heared, did not lower our morale. You didn't have time to let it register. you moved on.

I'm sure there is good things going on over there, as there was the first time we were there. Nobody is saying the other. The Middle East will always hate us, like it was said earlier, we can not just push democracy on them. It will never happen, we will be over there for a long time. And, if GW feels so strongly about this war, and for all of his congressman that also do, why will they not send there own daughters and sons over?

First of all, thank you so much for your service to our country. And thank you for showing your perspective on things.
You also bring up an interesting point. It seems you can always gauge the level of neccesity of war based on if the "beautiful people" actually serve in it. Lincoln's son fought in the Civil War. I believe FDR's did in WWII, as did the Kennedy's. Rich and powerful fought.
But when it comes to questionable wars the politicians sons and daughters somehow dont. interesting. maybe the leaders themselves realize the waste.

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
02-28-2006, 10:12 PM
i held out for a few days and only read a few post,
I was in Iraq for a year 2004-2005, I saw many things good and bad. I saw schools and police offices being built and the same ones destroyed. I saw children with smiles as we passed them out and ones who would throw rocks at us. It was these children who i thought of most night, they are the future of Iraq and i thought about the ones who smiled at us, and maybe when they became older they would want peace, but the ones who threw the rocks were being taught to hate. Maybe it wasn't hate, but when you look at the whole picture, the Sunni and the Shiates will never get along with each other. The recent threats of a civil war to me sound good as long as our troups pull out first. There are two sides who refuse to get along, once the civil war is over, there will only be one side.....We had our civil war, let them have theirs....regardless, none of it is worth an american soldiers life. Not everything going on in Iraq is bad, infact there is a lot of good as was mentiond in the first thread..but the bad outweighs the good. and its time to make a decision of what our next step is.......Saddam is out, they have a government.....what do we do from here???

luvmysteelers
03-01-2006, 06:56 AM
You know, its amazing how you and Suit know that every single one of the troops think this is the right thing. That none of them were honorable enough to fight and die for their country even though they disagreed with the President. We were so fortunate none of them had to be faced with that. 100% of them all agree. Its truly amazing. And even more amazing how you guys know exactly how they all feel.

By the way, no kidding we cant just pull out of the war. Because of Bush we are effen stuck in the situation for as far as the eye can see. I love that arguement too. You cant say Bush was wrong because we cant pull out now. Or, Bush was right because look at all the terrorists that are in Baghdad NOW. Hello!!!!!!! We are stuck in this for a long long time because our President goofed. And Iraq wasnt a HUGE threat before, but they sure are a hotbed of terrorists NOW,not to mention a rallying cry for recruitment around the world,NOW. Because the President goofed, when he should have been standing up to the Saudis, Iran, and N.Korea, he instead used up our goodwill to go after a scapegoat that has stuck us in a nightmare situation that we have to finish
This hardly puts him up on Mount Rushmore.

Ooops, did i just not "Support the Troops"? After his Presidency is over, whats Bush going to do when he's criticized about anything?
Laura: George, you forgot to take out the trash
GW: You're not supporting the troops! You've forgotten 9/11 ! You're not supporting the troops! You've forgotten 9/11 !!


You're right 3 to be 4, I can't speak for every single soldier. I can, however, speak for the group of 67 soldiers that I CURRENTLY support, and the 48 that are already home..and they have given me the permission to speak for them. They do believe in what they're doing over there. Of course we're stuck over there. And yes, invading Iraq has turned into a huge mistake (happy?) but leaving there prematurely is not the right thing to do. And the aforementioned soldiers, they would like to finish the job that they started.

stlrs4life and BBFW, thank you for your service.

luvmysteelers
03-01-2006, 07:02 AM
This is an e-mail I got just this week. Some of you will appreciate it, some won't. It's from a soldier who is recently back from Iraq.
~~~~~~~

This is AWESOME!!!! Keep it moving it was sent to me from a young man in Iraq that I am proud to know and many more like him!

Ryan L> wrote:
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 06:00:48 -0800 (PST)
From: Ryan L
Subject: Fwd: Men like you!

Note: forwarded message attached.



men like him

Your alarm goes off, you hit the snooze and sleep for another 10 minutes.

He stays up for days on end.

You take a warm shower to help you wake up.

He goes days or weeks without running water.

You complain of a "headache", and call in sick.

He gets shot at, as others are hit, and keeps moving forward.

You put on your anti war/don't support the troops shirt, and go meet up with your friends.

He still fights for your right to wear that shirt.

You make sure you're cell phone is in your pocket.

He clutches the cross hanging on his chain next to his dog tags.

You talk trash on your "buddies" that aren't with you.

He knows he may not see some of his buddies again.

You don't feel like helping out your dad today, so you don't.

He does what he is told.

You walk down the beach, staring at all the pretty girls.

He walks the streets, searching for insurgents and terrorists.

You complain about how hot it is.

He wears his heavy gear, not daring to take off his helmet to wipe his brow.

You go out to lunch, and complain because the restaurant got your order wrong.

He does not get to eat today.

Your maid makes your bed and washes your clothes.

He wears the same things for months, but makes sure his weapons are clean.

You go to the mall and get your hair redone.

He doesn't have time to brush his teeth today.

You are angry because your class ran 5 minutes over.

He is told he will be held an extra 2 months.

He does as he is told.

You call your girlfriend and set a date for that night.

He waits for the mail to see if there is a letter from home.

You hug and kiss your girlfriend, like you do everyday.

He holds his letter close and smells his love's perfume.

You ditch class to go to a movie.

He goes where he is told.

You roll your eyes as a baby cries.

He gets a letter with pictures of his new child, and wonders if they'll ever meet.

You criticize your government, and say that war never solves anything.

He sees the innocent tortured and killed by their own government and remembers why he is fighting.

You hear the jokes about the war, and make fun of the men like him.

He hears the gun fire and bombs.

You see only what the media wants you to see.

He sees the bodies lying around him.

You are asked to go to the store by your parents. You don't.

He does what he is told.

You stay at home and watch tv.

He takes whatever time he is given to call and write home, sleep, and eat.

You crawl into your bed, with down pillows, and try to get comfortable.

He crawls under a tank for shade and a 5 minute nap, only to be woken by gun fire.

You sit there and judge him, saying the world is a worse place because of men like him.

If only there were more men like him

Suitanim
03-01-2006, 09:58 AM
You know, its amazing how you and Suit know that every single one of the troops think this is the right thing.

This kind of ignorance is why I won't respond to any more of your posts on this matter.

As to the anti-Bush stuff, this is from my last post in the "Is this home security" thread.

I get tired and sick to death of this TOTAL partisian split...I don't support the President in every measure, but I support the President. I also supported many of Clinton's views and politics, but not all, and I, in general, supported his as President. I certainly didn't HATE the man and allow blind hate to cloud my vision and somehow convince myself that every single thing he did was wrong.

A great example is this total war on Bush...to suit their needs, his opponents either paint him as a blithering idiot who needs his hand held to make even the smallest decisions, or as the greatest evil genius the world has ever know.

This blind and stupid hatred is doing far more to rip this Country apart than any political party or candidate could ever hope to do, even if the ridiculous notion that one DID NOT have the best interests of the Country in mind were true, which it is not.

Stlrs4Life
03-01-2006, 05:30 PM
You're right 3 to be 4, I can't speak for every single soldier. I can, however, speak for the group of 67 soldiers that I CURRENTLY support, and the 48 that are already home..and they have given me the permission to speak for them. They do believe in what they're doing over there. Of course we're stuck over there. And yes, invading Iraq has turned into a huge mistake (happy?) but leaving there prematurely is not the right thing to do. And the aforementioned soldiers, they would like to finish the job that they started.

stlrs4life and BBFW, thank you for your service.


No problem, would do it again if called.

Stlrs4Life
03-01-2006, 06:40 PM
Just found this poll on military.com:

Troops poll: Pull out of Iraq in six months

By Gordon Trowbridge
Times staff writer


About half of American troops in Iraq believe the U.S. military should leave the country within six months, and three out of four think they should pull out within a year, according to a first-of-its-kind attempt to scientifically gauge the opinion of troops in a war zone.

The poll, released on Tuesday by national pollster John Zogby, includes face-to-face interviews of 944 randomly selected military personnel at four large U.S. bases. Among the findings:


• 29 percent said U.S. troops should withdraw immediately. Another 22 percent said the U.S. should withdraw within six months, and 21 percent within a year. Just 23 percent said they believe troops should remain “as long as they are needed.”

• 58 percent said the reasons for the U.S. mission in Iraq is clear in their minds; 42 percent said it was unclear or they were unsure.

• 85 percent said they believed a main reason for invading Iraq was “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9/11 attacks.” That’s despite the fact that there is very little concrete evidence linking Saddam Hussein to al-Qaida, and that several independent inquiries have found no links whatsoever between Saddam and the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.

Zogby, a widely recognized pollster who has done work for NBC, the Wall Street Journal and other organizations, conducted the poll for the Le Moyne College of Syracuse, N.Y., his alma mater. He said he is unaware of any previous attempts to independently and scientifically poll troops deployed to a combat zone.

Stars and Stripes, an independent publication produced under the auspices of the Defense Department, did an unscientific survey of thousands of troops in 2003, finding low morale and other issues. In January, the annual Military Times Poll — which surveys readers of the Military Times papers as representative of career-oriented troops — found support for the Bush administration’s policy in Iraq slipped significantly in 2005.

Zogby said his poll used civilian surveyors to randomly select troops for face-to-face interviews at four large U.S. bases in Iraq. The technique is similar to those used by U.S. pollsters to perform exit polls outside voting precincts on election day.

Zogby said he could not reveal more information on the personnel used to perform the surveys, or specify which bases were polled, because of concerns for the security of the interviewers.

Suitanim
03-01-2006, 06:46 PM
No offense, but link? "Times" staff writer? What times?

And are these US Bases in the US? Makes a HUGE difference.

augustashark
03-01-2006, 06:50 PM
[QUOTE=Stlrs4Life]Just found this poll on military.com:

Troops poll: Pull out of Iraq in six months

By Gordon Trowbridge
Times staff writer


This is unreal! How low or liberal have we become! This makes me sick, we are now polling troops! Times staff writer! Is this the NY times?

Suitanim
03-01-2006, 07:21 PM
I looked around and found this...

http://www.militarycity.com/polls/2005_main.php

It's clearly not the same article or poll, though...

Troops sound off
Military Times Poll finds high morale, but less support for Bush, war effort

2005 Poll
Disconnect cited between troops, civilian leadership
Four years of combat have done little to dent the morale of the professional military, results of the 2005 Military Times Poll show. But there are also hints in the results that the wave of good feeling may have crested.

By Gordon Trowbridge
Times staff writer

Support for President Bush and for the war in Iraq has slipped significantly in the last year among members of the military’s professional core, according to the 2005 Military Times Poll.

Approval of the president’s Iraq policy fell 9 percentage points from 2004; a bare majority, 54 percent, now say they view his performance on Iraq as favorable. Support for his overall performance fell 11 points, to 60 percent, among active-duty readers
of the Military Times newspapers. Though support both for President Bush and for the war in Iraq remains significantly higher than in the public as a whole, the drop is likely to add further fuel to the heated debate over Iraq policy. In 2003 and 2004, supporters of the war in Iraq pointed to high approval ratings in the Military Times Poll as a signal that military members were behind President Bush’s the president’s policy.

The poll also found diminished optimism that U.S. goals in Iraq can be accomplished, and a somewhat smaller drop in support for the decision to go to war in 2003.

The mail survey, conducted Nov. 14 through Dec. 23, is the third annual effort by the Military Times to measure the opinions of the active-duty military on political and morale issues. The results should not be read as representative of the military as a whole; the survey’s respondents are on average older, more experienced, more likely to be officers and more career-oriented than the military population. But the numbers are among the best measures of opinion in a difficult-to-survey population. The professional military seems to be lessening in its certainty about the wisdom of the Iraq intervention and the way it has been handled,” said Richard Kohn, a professor of political science at the University of North Carolina who studies civil-military relations. “This seems to be more and more in keeping with changes in public views, and that’s not surprising.”

The survey mirrors a similar shift in U.S. public opinion over the last year. The CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll, for example, recorded an eight-point drop in public approval for Iraq policy, from 47 percent in November 2004 to 39 percent in December 2005.

The drops in support seen in the Military Times Poll are “real drops, but I see them as reflecting the tone of the country,” said David Segal, a military sociologist at the University of Maryland. “People in the military talk to folks back home. Eventually, the military does catch up [with public opinion].” Other changes from ’04

Opinions on the president and Iraq weren’t the only shifts in the 2005 poll:

• Positive feelings about Congress, civilian and uniformed Pentagon leaders and the media all fell.

• Respondents also were less likely than in the past to believe other segments of the country viewed the military favorably. In 2004, 37 percent said civilians viewed the military very favorably; that fell to 24 percent this year. Last year, 77 percent said politicians saw the military very or somewhat favorably; 63 percent said so this year.

• There was somewhat more support for opening military service to openly homosexual Americans: 59 percent said open homosexuals should not be allowed to serve, down six points from last year.

• Opposition to the draft fell slightly, from 75 percent last year to 68 percent this year.

• Nearly two-thirds said the military is stretched too thin to be effective, though that figure is down substantially from two years ago.

• Job satisfaction and approval of pay, health benefits, training and equipment remain high — though in many cases, the support is less enthusiastic than in past years, based on responses.

• For the first time in the three-year history of the poll, more than half of respondents said they had deployed in support of the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan.

But few of those shifts appear as significant as those on the president.

to be sure, support for the president and his policies remains stronger in the Military Times Poll than in surveys of the general public: The president’s approval rating is as much as 20 percentage points higher than in the civilian population. Part of that difference is partisan: While roughly a third of Americans describe themselves as Democrats, just 13 percent of Military Times Poll respondents do so.

In follow-up interviews, most poll respondents said they remain solidly behind their commander in chief and his policy in Iraq.

“I think we’re fortunate as a country to have someone who has the focus and the persistence that he does because it’s so easy to get sidetracked,” said Navy Cmdr. Jeff Bohler. “The ability of the president to persevere in the face of overwhelming criticism is really impressive. It takes someone with a spine and courage.”

Many attributed the fall in support, both among the public and the military, withto a misguided lack of patience.

“We live in a society where … people want answers right away,” said Air Force Capt. Randall Carlson, a physics instructor at the Air Force Academy, who said he approves of the president’s policies. “Unfortunately with Iraq, there are no easy answers.”

‘They don’t report good news’ While 73 percent of respondents believe it’s likely the United States will succeed in Iraq, that’s down 10 points from a year ago.

“We’re losing a lot of troops. The suicide bombers are not stopping,” said Air Force Staff Sgt. Melida G. Castano. “It doesn’t look promising at this point.”

But others blamed the loss in confidence on the media, which many said has failed to report positive news in Iraq. Four of every five respondents said they believe media reports are often inaccurate.

“They don’t report the good news, and if they do, it’s on the back page,” said Marine Chief Warrant Officer-3 Michael Edmonson.

Though the number of respondents who have deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan was up 17 percentage points from a year ago, to 61 percent, that does not seem to have significantly affected opinions on Iraq. There was no significant difference in opinions between those who have deployed and those who haven’t, and responses from the Army and Marine Corps — the services under the most strain in Iraq — were not much different from other services.

Kohn, the University of North Carolina researcher, said the shifting opinions on Iraq may simply reflect shifts in the rest of the country. But he said he believes military opinions are at least partially insulated from civilian trends.

“The military is very capable of drawing differing judgments from the general population,” he said. “Military people think about these things with considerable sophistication. That is also sometimes undermined by their instinct to be loyal to the administration — any administration — to the government and to the mission.”

As in the previous two years, Military Times Poll respondents were reluctant to express opinions, even anonymously, about the commander in chief or his policies. About one in five refused to say whether they approved of the president’s performance on Iraq or overall.

“That’s my boss,” Army Lt. Col. Earnestine Beatty said in a follow-up interview. “I can’t comment.” Kohn said he worried that asking such questions of military members and publishing the results could tarnish the military’s image as a nonpartisan institution.

The poll “tends to communicate to the American people that the military is just like any other interest group,” Kohn said. “We want the public image of the military to be decidedly apolitical."

Suitanim
03-01-2006, 07:24 PM
Actually, I found this which is a more accurate version I'd say...

http://www.militarycity.com/polls/2005_chart2.php

1) Are you on active duty?

NOTE: Only active-duty responses were counted in remaining results.
Yes
85%
No
15%

2) Service branch:
Army
48%
Navy
20%
Air Force
21%
Marine Corps.
10%
Coast Guard
1%
No response
1%

3) How many times have you deployed to Iraq?
Once
31%
Twice
11%
Three times
2%
More than three times
0%
Never/no response
53%

4) How many times have you deployed to Afghanistan?
Once
11%
Twice
3%
Three times
0%
More than three times
1%
Never/no response
85%

5) In total, I have deployed in support of the war in Afghanistan and/or Iraq for:
Less than 2 months
3%
3-6 months
19%
7-12 months
22%
13-18 months
10%
19 or more months
7%
Haven't deployed/no response
39%

6) Should the U.S. have gone to war in Iraq?
Yes
56%
No
26%
No opinion/no answer
7%
Decline to answer/no answer
11%

7) Regardless of whether you think the U.S. should have gone to war, how likely is the U.S. to succeed?
Very likely to succeed
31%
Somewhat likely to succeed
42%
Not very likely to succeed
17%
Not at all likely to succeed
3%
No opinion/no answer
6%

8) How soon do you think the Iraqi military will be ready to replace large numbers of American troops?
Less than a year
2%
1-2 years
27%
3-5 years
40%
5-10 years
17%
More than 10 years
7%
No opinion/no answer
6%

9) How long do you think the U.S. will need to stay in Iraq to reach its goals?
Less than a year
2%
1-2 years
11%
3-5 years
35%
5-10 years
30%
More than 10 years
15%
No opinion/no answer
6%

10) Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling the situation with Iraq?
Approve
54%
Disapprove
25%
No opinion
9%
Decline to answer
12%

3 to be 4
03-01-2006, 10:23 PM
You're right 3 to be 4, I can't speak for every single soldier. I can, however, speak for the group of 67 soldiers that I CURRENTLY support, and the 48 that are already home..and they have given me the permission to speak for them. They do believe in what they're doing over there. Of course we're stuck over there. And yes, invading Iraq has turned into a huge mistake (happy?) but leaving there prematurely is not the right thing to do. And the aforementioned soldiers, they would like to finish the job that they started.

stlrs4life and BBFW, thank you for your service.


when did i say we should leave prematurely? We actually agree!!!! It was a mistake going there AND because of it we stuck there for a while. And this is the responsibility of GW. And to say that has nothing whatsoever to do with supporting or not supporting the troops. Ands its been disgusting how he has hidden behind that.

3 to be 4
03-01-2006, 10:25 PM
Actually, I found this which is a more accurate version I'd say...

http://www.militarycity.com/polls/2005_chart2.php

1) Are you on active duty?

NOTE: Only active-duty responses were counted in remaining results.
Yes
85%
No
15%

2) Service branch:
Army
48%
Navy
20%
Air Force
21%
Marine Corps.
10%
Coast Guard
1%
No response
1%

3) How many times have you deployed to Iraq?
Once
31%
Twice
11%
Three times
2%
More than three times
0%
Never/no response
53%

4) How many times have you deployed to Afghanistan?
Once
11%
Twice
3%
Three times
0%
More than three times
1%
Never/no response
85%

5) In total, I have deployed in support of the war in Afghanistan and/or Iraq for:
Less than 2 months
3%
3-6 months
19%
7-12 months
22%
13-18 months
10%
19 or more months
7%
Haven't deployed/no response
39%

6) Should the U.S. have gone to war in Iraq?
Yes
56%
No
26%
No opinion/no answer
7%
Decline to answer/no answer
11%

7) Regardless of whether you think the U.S. should have gone to war, how likely is the U.S. to succeed?
Very likely to succeed
31%
Somewhat likely to succeed
42%
Not very likely to succeed
17%
Not at all likely to succeed
3%
No opinion/no answer
6%

8) How soon do you think the Iraqi military will be ready to replace large numbers of American troops?
Less than a year
2%
1-2 years
27%
3-5 years
40%
5-10 years
17%
More than 10 years
7%
No opinion/no answer
6%

9) How long do you think the U.S. will need to stay in Iraq to reach its goals?
Less than a year
2%
1-2 years
11%
3-5 years
35%
5-10 years
30%
More than 10 years
15%
No opinion/no answer
6%

10) Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling the situation with Iraq?
Approve
54%
Disapprove
25%
No opinion
9%
Decline to answer
12%


Question #6. When troops are asked should the US have gone to war in Iraq, only 56% said yes. 44% did not say yes. So are the 44% "Not supporting the troops"????

augustashark
03-02-2006, 12:35 AM
I will always vote for a president who chooses to be proactive not reactive! Everyone who sides against GW can go on and on with why we should not have went to iraq, or that we should pull out, but it will not change a thing. GW, is not and will not change what he has started!

tony hipchest
03-02-2006, 01:09 AM
GW, is not and will not change what he has started!

therein lies the problem. the whole plan all along is to let the next administration deal with it. to bad he didnt have the guts to tell that to the voting public in the 1st place. in the meantime the pentagon is having to cut the military to pay for the rebuilding of iraq and the training and education of future terrorists and us as a nation is becoming weaker

DIESELMAN
03-02-2006, 01:36 AM
Question #6. When troops are asked should the US have gone to war in Iraq, only 56% said yes. 44% did not say yes. So are the 44% "Not supporting the troops"????

Now thats a stupid question....just because 44% said no the US should not have gone to war that doesn't mean they don't support their own fellow troops.You should be a reporter because they ask stupid questions just like yours.The 44% you speak of stated their opinion and if you were ever in the military you would know what I'm talking about.I served 6 years in the US Army and served in Desert Storm(90-91)...thats all you got over here is each others backs.....not every soldier agrees with being here but they do support each other....

Hawk Believer
03-02-2006, 08:58 AM
Now thats a stupid question....just because 44% said no the US should not have gone to war that doesn't mean they don't support their own fellow troops.You should be a reporter because they ask stupid questions just like yours.The 44% you speak of stated their opinion and if you were ever in the military you would know what I'm talking about.I served 6 years in the US Army and served in Desert Storm(90-91)...thats all you got over here is each others backs.....not every soldier agrees with being here but they do support each other....

The point is that many people will say that if you don't agree with the justification of and intiation of the Iraq war, then you do not support our troops. Some would go so far as to use Ann Coulter logic and declare people who question our presence there as seditious traitors.

A lot of people truly, passionately believe that disagreeing wiht how this campaign was handled and support of the military are mutually exclusive positions. If you believe such premises and you believe this poll has a modicum of accuracy, then over 40% of the troops don't support themselves.

So yes, that was a stupid statement. But thats the point.

DIESELMAN
03-02-2006, 09:48 AM
The point is that many people will say that if you don't agree with the justification of and intiation of the Iraq war, then you do not support our troops. Some would go so far as to use Ann Coulter logic and declare people who question our presence there as seditious traitors.

A lot of people truly, passionately believe that disagreeing wiht how this campaign was handled and support of the military are mutually exclusive positions. If you believe such premises and you believe this poll has a modicum of accuracy, then over 40% of the troops don't support themselves.

So yes, that was a stupid statement. But thats the point.

First of all this is a touchy and emotional topic for a lot of people....I get the point as far as if you don't believe in the war then you don't support the troops BUT 3 to be 4's statement was based on a poll of servicemembers-Originally Posted by 3 to be 4 Question #6. When troops are asked should the US have gone to war in Iraq, only 56% said yes. 44% did not say yes. So are the 44% "Not supporting the troops"????...so read this a couple of times.....so maybe thats not what he meant I will give him the benefit of the doubt......when you start questioning soldiers supporting soldiers I get pissed off...thats just me..I believe soldiers are losing support of Bush and his Administration but not in each other!!!!!

luvmysteelers
03-02-2006, 03:17 PM
Dieselman, it's because of folks like you that we are allowed to voice our opinions and to agree or disagree. I appreciate everything that you are doing for our country. Thank you!

3 to be 4
03-02-2006, 08:31 PM
Now thats a stupid question....just because 44% said no the US should not have gone to war that doesn't mean they don't support their own fellow troops.You should be a reporter because they ask stupid questions just like yours.The 44% you speak of stated their opinion and if you were ever in the military you would know what I'm talking about.I served 6 years in the US Army and served in Desert Storm(90-91)...thats all you got over here is each others backs.....not every soldier agrees with being here but they do support each other....


maybe, just maybe, you can follow me on this. Yes Yes you are right. Just because the 44% percent said no it certainly does not mean they dont support their fellow troops.
thats what i was saying!!!!! that is my entire point!!!!!!!!!! Americans who ALSO did not support going into Iraq and do not support this policy can certainly, at the same time, be "supporting the troops"

WHY is that so hard to fathom?????????????

3 to be 4
03-02-2006, 08:39 PM
First of all this is a touchy and emotional topic for a lot of people....I get the point as far as if you don't believe in the war then you don't support the troops BUT 3 to be 4's statement was based on a poll of servicemembers-Originally Posted by 3 to be 4 Question #6. When troops are asked should the US have gone to war in Iraq, only 56% said yes. 44% did not say yes. So are the 44% "Not supporting the troops"????...so read this a couple of times.....so maybe thats not what he meant I will give him the benefit of the doubt......when you start questioning soldiers supporting soldiers I get pissed off...thats just me..I believe soldiers are losing support of Bush and his Administration but not in each other!!!!!


I cant believe you didnt understand what i was saying. Are you that thick???
Obviously, I was using those 44% to point out that you can not support the policy yet support the troops. that question was posed to those who are saying Americans cant question the war and still support the troops. So im saying, if 44% of troops didnt support the policy, are you (the people questioning if Americans who dont support the policy can support the troops) acccusing these soldiers of "not supporting the troops"?
I was not myself questioning if those soldiers didnt support the troops. Its very frustrating to have to explain myself because either some people cant frickin read, or because they are deliberatly twisting words around to bust chops and play devils advocate.
I certainly hope i made myself clear enough for you.

3 to be 4
03-02-2006, 08:42 PM
I just re-read my own post and realized Deiselman will misunderstand the sentence "Obviously, I was using those 44% to point out that you can not support the policy yet support the troops" let me rephrase....

Obviously, I was using those 44% to point out that it is possible to not support the policy-
yet still support the troops.

there, hopefully that was clear.

DIESELMAN
03-02-2006, 10:18 PM
I just re-read my own post and realized Deiselman will misunderstand the sentence "Obviously, I was using those 44% to point out that you can not support the policy yet support the troops" let me rephrase....

Obviously, I was using those 44% to point out that it is possible to not support the policy-
yet still support the troops.

there, hopefully that was clear.

Hey bro I'm not thick...in my second post I said "so maybe thats not what he meant I will give him the benefit of the doubt......" I get what your point was I'm just trying to point out that not everyone is going to take what you say as how you mean it....enough said on this....no harm bro...

3 to be 4
03-02-2006, 10:22 PM
ok, maybe the "Now thats a stupid question....just because 44% said no the US should not have gone to war that doesn't mean they don't support their own fellow troops.You should be a reporter because they ask stupid questions just like yours" set me off a bit.

like you said, no harm.

BlitzburghRockCity
03-02-2006, 11:59 PM
I guess the media doesn't tell you much after all


They just tell us what they think we wanna hear most of the time :rolleyes:

Stlrs4Life
03-03-2006, 11:41 PM
My poll results came from www.military.com

Stlrs4Life
03-03-2006, 11:43 PM
Now thats a stupid question....just because 44% said no the US should not have gone to war that doesn't mean they don't support their own fellow troops.You should be a reporter because they ask stupid questions just like yours.The 44% you speak of stated their opinion and if you were ever in the military you would know what I'm talking about.I served 6 years in the US Army and served in Desert Storm(90-91)...thats all you got over here is each others backs.....not every soldier agrees with being here but they do support each other....



Exactly.

3 to be 4
03-04-2006, 06:36 AM
Exactly.


refer back a few posts on the thread :dang:

Stlrs4Life
03-04-2006, 03:54 PM
maybe, just maybe, you can follow me on this. Yes Yes you are right. Just because the 44% percent said no it certainly does not mean they dont support their fellow troops.
thats what i was saying!!!!! that is my entire point!!!!!!!!!! Americans who ALSO did not support going into Iraq and do not support this policy can certainly, at the same time, be "supporting the troops"

WHY is that so hard to fathom?????????????

I see what you are saying.

Suitanim
03-04-2006, 09:22 PM
The military in this Country is voluntary. That's really the long and short of it all.

If they were conscripted and/or ensalved into military service, polls would be much more appropriate. But our soldiers are all volunteers and many are legitimately professional soldiers. When careerbuilder.com takes surveys of workers in America, there's always 20-40% that are in some way disgruntled, and they aren't being shot at, and don't face death as a factor in their daily grind.