7 GI's speak out.

[Garfield1966]

The article can speak for it's self.


The War as We Saw It

 

[UAL_TECH]

The article can speak for it's self.
The War as We Saw It

SOSDW. (Same Old #### - Different War)

I would have been for the war if I weren't agin it... :blink:

There isn't one 'politician' that did not have a hand in this 'killing field', and I curse them 'ALL' for their complacent political decisions.

But we 'ALL' should respect our positions as 'fodder'.

Economically, patriotically, and subserviently to serve the top 10% that lead us to suck our country dry!

:rant: Over,
UT

 

[Garfield1966]

What are you talking about? This article had to do with 7 GI's perspective. Maybe I missed something.

 

[local 12 proud]

The article can speak for it's self.
The War as We Saw It

While we have the will and the resources to fight in this context, we are effectively hamstrung because realities on the ground require measures we will always refuse — namely, the widespread use of lethal and brutal force.

Interesting...sounds like hands are being tied from fear of reprimand.

We need not talk about our morale. As committed soldiers, we will see this mission through.

This statement says it all!

 

[delldude]

Seven opinions does not make gospel for I............

Whats that saying about opinions??

We wouldn't be in this mess if Clinton hadn't signed the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998.

All those friggin Dem's signed off on the war so whats the big deal?

Its about WMD's

 

[Garfield1966]

Interesting...sounds like hands are being tied from fear of reprimand.

Too me it sounds like they are not willing to use force that is not appropriate to the context of the situation.

 

[local 12 proud]

Too me it sounds like they are not willing to use force that is not appropriate to the context of the situation.

Like dell mentioned, everyone has one! 😉

 

[Garfield1966]

Seven opinions does not make gospel for I............

Whats that saying about opinions??

We wouldn't be in this mess if Clinton hadn't signed the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998.

All those friggin Dem's signed off on the war so whats the big deal?

Its about WMD's

Yes and those Dems need to be kicked out of office for putting their career ahead of the nations best interest of the nation. How ever it is interesting that you want to ake the route of blaming Clinton when he was POTUS with a Repub congress and now you want to blame a Dems in a Repub Congress with a Repub POTUS.

Just curious, are you ever going to hold your party responsible for anything or are you always going to blame someone else? Your POTUS and V-POTUS lied and got Congress through the use of fear and manipulation to support him in his failed endeavor.

 

[Gilding the Lily]

We wouldn't be in this mess if Clinton hadn't signed the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998.

Oh, you mean that Iraq Liberation Act that was sponsored by a REPUBLICAN, and approved by EVERY REPUBLICAN in the Senate???

 

[local 12 proud]

Your POTUS and V-POTUS lied and got Congress through the use of fear and manipulation to support him in his failed endeavor.

Sooooo..... if the Bush administration lied about the WMD threat then I guess the previous Administration lied as well? How about congress, who manipulated them then?

Ya see Gar you can't have it both ways though I know how you libbers like it to be as such!

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 | Source

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 | Source

"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998 | Source

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 | Source

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton.
- (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998 | Source

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 | Source

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 | Source

 

[KCFlyer]

Sooooo..... if the Bush administration lied about the WMD threat then I guess the previous Administration lied as well? How about congress, who manipulated them then?

Ya see Gar you can't have it both ways though I know how you libbers like it to be as such!

You mean like these guys:

“You can support the troops but not the president.â€
–Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

“Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?â€
–Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

“If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy.â€
–Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush

“I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning . . I didn’t think we had done enough in the diplomatic area.â€
–Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

“I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan todayâ€
–Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

“Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is.â€
–Governor George W. Bush (R-TX).

Of course, those guys were talking about Clinton, so it was okay. Today anybody uttering those words is unpatriotic and a traitor.

 

[local 12 proud]

Sooooo....Then KC your admitting that the Clinton administration lied?

That there were no WMD's?

Funny thing is had BJ Clinton stormed in to disarm a tyrant who had been known to use those nasty WMD's you libbers would be praising him, instead your hatred of 'Bush 43' is so intense your hoping for a defeat as a way back into the White House.

You folks are disgusting to say the least!

 

[KCFlyer]

Sooooo....Then KC your admitting that the Clinton administration lied?

That there were no WMD's?

Funny thing is had BJ Clinton stormed in to disarm a tyrant who had been known to use those nasty WMD's you libbers would be praising him, instead your hatred of 'Bush 43' is so intense your hoping for a defeat as a way back into the White House.

You folks are disgusting to say the least!

Nope...heck anybody know Iraq HAD them....we gave them to them. For the record, I never voted for Clinton either time....Perot and Dole. I guess that makes me a "libber". After all, Bob Dole was always known as the great liberal senator from Kansas. And nope....I wouldn't have supported a unilateral invasion if Clinton did it. But then again, Clinton could do no right by you "conservies"...he was a pansy because he would have looked for UN Support before invading. If he didn't get it, I doubt he would have gone ahead and invaded while giving the rest of the world a good look at his middle finger - much as W did.

 

[delldude]

After all, Bob Dole was always known as the great liberal senator from Kansas.

Dole has E.D.......guess it would have been better with him and Monica then anyway... 😱

 

[local 12 proud]

Nope...heck anybody know Iraq HAD them....we gave them to them.

You better hit the books, the US was not the only supplier. Guess ya never know when a dog might get rabid.

The phrase ...the enemy of my enemy is my friend can come back full circle and get ya by the short hairs, looks like saddam played both sides and lost! 😛

Clinton could do no right by you "conservies"...he was a pansy because he would have looked for UN Support before invading. If he didn't get it, I doubt he would have gone ahead and invaded while giving the rest of the world a good look at his middle finger - much as W did.

Your right about that, we know how much teeth the corrupt UN has. all bark and NO bite! just like the pansy libbers.