Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Tue 01/03/2006 View Mon 01/02/2006 View Sun 01/01/2006 View Sat 12/31/2005 View Fri 12/30/2005 View Thu 12/29/2005 View Wed 12/28/2005
1
2006-01-03 Home Front: Culture Wars
Murtha says he wouldn't join military now
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Frank G 2006-01-03 09:56|| || Front Page|| [11139 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 Is it a crime to kick Murtha in the balls ?
Posted by wxjames 2006-01-03 10:07||   2006-01-03 10:07|| Front Page Top

#2 Our all-volunteer military has no place in it for cowards, blowhards, and terrorist sympathizers, so Murtha wouldn't be suitable material anyway. Win-win, I say.
Posted by Mike 2006-01-03 10:10||   2006-01-03 10:10|| Front Page Top

#3 Not really surprising.
Some of us have gone from moonbat to thinking, a few are going from moonbat to... moonbat.

I mean, if you have been a democutandrun for so many years without puking...you remain a democutandrun...
Posted by Poitiers-Lepanto">Poitiers-Lepanto  2006-01-03 10:22||   2006-01-03 10:22|| Front Page Top

#4 Well, duh. He's like, WAY too old.
Posted by mojo">mojo  2006-01-03 10:26||   2006-01-03 10:26|| Front Page Top

#5 Mike:

Rep. John Murtha (D)

"A decorated Vietnam combat veteran who retired as a colonel after 37 years in the U.S. Marine Corps."

you call that non-suitable?
Posted by Cassini 2006-01-03 10:27||   2006-01-03 10:27|| Front Page Top

#6 What does he want exactly? To come home without finishing the mission? Civil war for Iraq? An arguable defeat for the democrats to tout against George Bush? That seems like a heavy price for the dimocrats to get a temporary "one up" on the Bush administration.
Posted by bigjim-ky 2006-01-03 10:34||   2006-01-03 10:34|| Front Page Top

#7 I forget where I read it (might have been here) but I am glad people like Murtha aren’t joining the armed forces and those that are joining are of the right character that we need right now. The last thing the Armed forces need right now is another sniveling whining blowhard like Murtha. BTW if I was young and had it to do all over again I would raise my hand and promise another 20 years.
Posted by Cyber Sarge">Cyber Sarge  2006-01-03 10:36||   2006-01-03 10:36|| Front Page Top

#8 
So he was a Marine? Well, so was Lee Harvey Oswald. Just meaning that even if there are more brave and patriotic people in the Marines than elsewhere you cannot tell that just because someone is/was Marine he is automatically a agood guy
Posted by JFM">JFM  2006-01-03 10:39||   2006-01-03 10:39|| Front Page Top

#9 That is good, 'cus we don't want your defeatist kind anymore. We go in to fucking win, not dick around and give up.
Posted by mmurray821 2006-01-03 10:48||   2006-01-03 10:48|| Front Page Top

#10 Is he retiring? If not, can we get a young Iraqi veteran to run against him? I'd gladly donate money to the cause.
Posted by Penguin 2006-01-03 10:52||   2006-01-03 10:52|| Front Page Top

#11 So he was a Marine? Well, so was Lee Harvey Oswald.

And Scott Ritter.
Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2006-01-03 10:55||   2006-01-03 10:55|| Front Page Top

#12 Maybe the VFW should get him to be their keynote speaker. I'm sure he'd get a memorable welcome.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-01-03 10:55||   2006-01-03 10:55|| Front Page Top

#13 Exactly what does "winning" the Iraqi War mean?
How do President Bush and Republicans define it?
Posted by Cassini 2006-01-03 10:59||   2006-01-03 10:59|| Front Page Top

#14 Cassini:

Right now, John Murtha is the best friend Zarqawi has in this country. Many years ago, John Murtha was probably a very different man. (Are you the same person you were even ten years ago?) That John Murtha may well have been a decent, honorable patriot--but today's John Murtha is a terrorist sympathizer and a backstabbing coward.
Posted by Mike 2006-01-03 11:05||   2006-01-03 11:05|| Front Page Top

#15 Answer: The Iraqis create and maintain a stable, democractic government thus becoming a role model for other peoples in the Middle East who wish to join the modern world. Then, when we are certain that their army and police forces are up to their assigned tasks, we leave save for a few scattered military bases.

Posted by Secret Master 2006-01-03 11:07||   2006-01-03 11:07|| Front Page Top

#16 ignore the troll
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-01-03 11:20||   2006-01-03 11:20|| Front Page Top

#17 Mike:

I totally disagree with you on Con. Murtha.
Even though I dont totally agree with him on some of the specifics of his re-deployment plan,
I believe his speaking out was a galvanizing point, that told President Bush that he no longer has a "never ending" open commitment of the American people or Congress to "stay the course" for a "undefined victory" in Iraq.

If you have noticed since Con. Murtha spoke out,
both Congressional Republicans and Democrats have put pressure on and passed legislation for President Bush to respond with specific progress reports and a timetable for handing over power to the Iraqis and redeployment of U.S. forces there.

I believe President Bush's recent speeches on his Iraq policy, in the face of losing a majority of american public support on the Iraq War,coupled with withering anti-war criticsm, and the recent announcement by Sec. Rumsfield on upcoming redeployment of U.S. forces in Iraq are direct responses to the ball that Con. Murtha got rolling to get this Iraqi War on a direction of completion as the american public becomes increasing impatient the rising total of U.S military deaths/casualties.
Posted by Cassini 2006-01-03 11:25||   2006-01-03 11:25|| Front Page Top

#18 "Maybe the VFW should get him to be their keynote speaker. I'm sure he'd get a memorable welcome."

Especially since that filthy slimeball did the same whining during Somalia, which helped get us in this mess in the first place.
Posted by Ernest Brown 2006-01-03 11:53|| saturninretrograde.blogspot.com]">[saturninretrograde.blogspot.com]  2006-01-03 11:53|| Front Page Top

#19 I believe President Bush's recent speeches on his Iraq policy, in the face of losing a majority of american public support on the Iraq War,coupled with withering anti-war criticsm, and the recent announcement by Sec. Rumsfield on upcoming redeployment of U.S. forces in Iraq are direct responses to the ball that Con. Murtha got rolling to get this Iraqi War on a direction of completion...

Cassini, try to keep up. The drawdown of troops was planned a long time before Murtha became a media darling.
Posted by Jonathan">Jonathan  2006-01-03 11:54||   2006-01-03 11:54|| Front Page Top

#20 Think what you will, Cassini, but when you get right down to it, you'd have sent the troops home from Valley Forge; hung Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin from the second floor of Independence Hall; and kissed King George III's behind, too.
Posted by Darrell 2006-01-03 11:59||   2006-01-03 11:59|| Front Page Top

#21 "... and the recent announcement by Sec. Rumsfield on upcoming redeployment of U.S. forces in Iraq are direct responses to the ball that Con. Murtha got rolling..."

Maybe...just maybe...conditions in Iraq made force redeployment inevitable. And maybe...just maybe...Murthas statement as well others was timed just prior to that predictable announcement. And maybe...just maybe...the motivation for timing the upsurge in anti-war rhetoric was to take credit for said redeployment. And maybe...just maybe the result would be the democrat faithful would see their party as actually accomplishing something.
Maybe...just maybe that type of political trickery isn't beneath the democrat leadership.
Posted by DepotGuy 2006-01-03 12:08||   2006-01-03 12:08|| Front Page Top

#22 jonathan:

Of course troop redeployment was preplanned,
but did you ever hear of any specific timetable for it? Think those upcoming midterms and repub
complaints have anything to do with rumsfields
recent announcement?
Posted by Cassini 2006-01-03 12:10||   2006-01-03 12:10|| Front Page Top

#23 I keep wondering where Rep. Murtha's constituents stand with regards to his comments. This link to CNN seems to indicate "No Backlash"

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/22/murtha.reax/

Can anyone from his voting district back this up? Is he saying what he believes or is this just something to keep him ut of hotwater as is supposed on other threads?
Posted by TomAnon 2006-01-03 12:12||   2006-01-03 12:12|| Front Page Top

#24 How come we don't hear any more about Murtha's son's lobbying and making money with the Pelosi empire? Boy that dropped off the radar so fast that I can't even remember what it was about.
Posted by 2b 2006-01-03 12:16||   2006-01-03 12:16|| Front Page Top

#25 troll - we are familiar with your parrot points. You don't need to recite them as if we weren't already familar with them. It's annoying.
Posted by 2b 2006-01-03 12:17||   2006-01-03 12:17|| Front Page Top

#26 We don't need his district's support to try, convict and execute him for treason like he deserves. Maybe once a few of these traitors suffer their legal and just punishment, the rest will crawl back under their rocks with the rest of vermin.
Posted by Silentbrick">Silentbrick  2006-01-03 12:18||   2006-01-03 12:18|| Front Page Top

#27 we are familiar with your parrot points.

I noticed that too. All these little nits have been touched on here and on other blogs countless times, yet still they have this annoying habit of being repeated...
Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2006-01-03 12:19||   2006-01-03 12:19|| Front Page Top

#28 2b

Look in the mirror, it sounds like you are talking to yourself.
Posted by Cassini 2006-01-03 12:20||   2006-01-03 12:20|| Front Page Top

#29 Bomb arama:

What's so funny is that I can say the EXACT same things about repub/con "talking points" on Iraq,
Murtha, Pelosi, Reid, Kennedy, THE MSM etc...
I can go to ANY Conservative/RNC website or publication, network or talkshow and hear the same bs over and over andn over and over...
It's ridiculously funny to hear you complain....
lmao
Posted by Cassini 2006-01-03 12:24||   2006-01-03 12:24|| Front Page Top

#30 troll.
Posted by 2b 2006-01-03 12:27||   2006-01-03 12:27|| Front Page Top

#31 Why is this newsworthy? Some fat pig "old school" congressman who, like hundreds of thousands of others, served in Vietnam.

BFD

Let's be honest. This fuckstick wouldn't pass muster today. Individuals will heads stuck in their asses are not permitted in today's armed forces.
Posted by Captain America 2006-01-03 12:35||   2006-01-03 12:35|| Front Page Top

#32 Captain America:

As much as I hate to say this because, I have been thinking it since i read all these hateful
comments on Con. Murtha coming from repubs/cons in this site for him taking what i think is a very logical stand about the Iraq War.

So rantburg moderators, I hope you understand
in the call for fairness what I am asking.

Do you right wing repubs/cons believe that President Bush and V.P. Cheney are suitable
for today's military, in regards to their OWN
dubious histories/records with respects to U.S. military service.

After all, Con. Murtha IS a decorated
Vietnam War Veteran with 37 years of military service who retired as a Marine Colonel.

Can either of those guys say anything similar?
Posted by Cassini 2006-01-03 12:48||   2006-01-03 12:48|| Front Page Top

#33 Troll puke - aisle #32.
Posted by JerseyMike 2006-01-03 12:55||   2006-01-03 12:55|| Front Page Top

#34 Cassinni...I am a senior Reserve officer, mobilized once. I have a son who will soon be commissioned and over in the sandbox as a JO in the infantry.

I am a "decorated" officer, too. But being a "decorated" officer does not give me the right to be a seditious, treasonous SOB who is subject to, and in direct violation of the UCMJ.
Posted by anymouse">anymouse  2006-01-03 13:07||   2006-01-03 13:07|| Front Page Top

#35 Chickenhawking is not convincing here. Con. Murtha should be honored for his service to the nation, but his service in the Marines THIRTY yers ago does not place him above criticism. Most people here at the Rantburg think he is wrong. Get over it.
Posted by SR-71">SR-71  2006-01-03 13:17||   2006-01-03 13:17|| Front Page Top

#36 Retaliate, hurt Murtha in the worst possible way.
Cut off his Microphone.
Posted by Redneck Jim 2006-01-03 13:30||   2006-01-03 13:30|| Front Page Top

#37 SR-71

Ad hominen attacks on Con. Murtha dont impress me either.

Face facts, with the dubious military service record and nonservice records of Bush-Cheney it is absolutely ludicrous for right wing repubs-cons to talk these two "up" as if they are some
some superpatriot macho-men, who more than likely, if asked to volunteer for today's military, would take the SAME actions they did TODAY as the did when they were eligible to drafted. Get over That.
Posted by Cassini 2006-01-03 13:45||   2006-01-03 13:45|| Front Page Top

#38 Both shameful and seditious. I wonder if he would recommend that our soldiers go AWOL as well?
Posted by Besoeker 2006-01-03 13:49||   2006-01-03 13:49|| Front Page Top

#39 Every time some anti-american like murtha pipes up, Zarq thinks to himself "Maybe we can win this thing".
Posted by bigjim-ky 2006-01-03 13:50||   2006-01-03 13:50|| Front Page Top

#40 "Ad hominen attacks on Con. Murtha dont impress me either."


And then one sentence later...

"...with the dubious military service record and nonservice records of Bush-Cheney it is absolutely ludicrous...."

Blah, blah blah.

Please do not feed or tease the trolls....
Posted by Mark E. 2006-01-03 13:54||   2006-01-03 13:54|| Front Page Top

#41 Bottom line to all you repubs/cons.

Even when the U.S. "wins" in Iraq .

NOTHING going on over THERE is going to
prevent another domestic terrorist attack on
the U.S. in the future. If so, please explain how?

The FBI and the CIA testified before the U.S.
Congress that terrorist "cells" are ALREADY here in the U.S. as we speak.

Is that a fact or not?
Posted by Cassini 2006-01-03 13:57||   2006-01-03 13:57|| Front Page Top

#42 Mark E. Mark:

Face it, If President Bush and V.P. Cheney were asked to voluteer for todays military, I am willing to bet you they would do the same things
they did when they were eligible to be drafted before.

Bush would join the National Guard and Cheney would get 5 deferments. lmao
Posted by Cassini 2006-01-03 14:02||   2006-01-03 14:02|| Front Page Top

#43 Keep up the good fight, Cassini!

I'll be right over with those TANG records! Really! I just gotta find mah car somewhere here in the Galleria parking lot, and I'll be right over!!
Posted by Lucy Ramirez 2006-01-03 14:14|| ]">[ ]  2006-01-03 14:14|| Front Page Top

#44 Cassini: George Bush served. He learned to fly an F-102 -- not an easy thing to do. It was a dangerous airplane, and he flew numerous interceptor missions in it (his unit was tasked to intercept Russian 'Badger' bombers that flew along our coast). He lost interest in flying when it became clear that, despite an excellent record as a Reserve officer, he wasn't going to get the chance to advance. The Air Force was down-sizing after Vietnam, and active duty officers were getting all the plum jobs.

It is equally wrong to insult George Bush as it is John Murtha over their military service. I don't do either.

As to other, non-trolling questions you posted --

Exactly what does "winning" the Iraqi War mean?

It means that Iraq has a democratic government (or governments). It means a stable state or states. If the Iraqi people decide to form 3 states instead of 1, that's fine as long as it's peaceful.

Winning means Iraq is stable enough that it can't be used to sponsor, aid or abet terrorism, and that whoever ends up in charge of the elected government does not lead the country in ways that harms us.

Winning means average Iraqis have a chance -- a chance mind you, not a certainty -- of having a decent country and a decent life for themselves and their children.

How do President Bush and Republicans define it?

Please go to whitehouse.gov and look at the President's speeches. He defines winning clearly, and not in dissimilar terms to what I outlined above.

At Rantburg, we put a premium on what people actually say as opposed to what others say they said. So with the President -- if you want to know what he defines as winning, go read his speeches. It's all there. You don't need the MSM spin, and you don't need ours.
Posted by Steve White">Steve White  2006-01-03 14:22||   2006-01-03 14:22|| Front Page Top

#45 More from Cassini --

NOTHING going on over THERE is going to prevent another domestic terrorist attack on the U.S. in the future. If so, please explain how?

Reducing the capabilities of al-Qaeda over there makes it more difficult for them to strike over here. They do not have infinite capacity. Reducing the capabilities of other terrorist groups and various Ba'athist reprobates changes conditions in these other countries, and makes them less hospitable to terrorist groups.

Terrorists need a base, a home from which to plan big missions. You can do all the planning you need for a small-group, small-scale attack from a hotel room. But if you want to stage a big attack you need a safe place to plan the work. Notice all the planning that went into 9/11 -- al Qaeda spent years setting that up. They could do that because they had safehouses throughout Europe and safe bases and camps in Afghanistan. Reduce the latter, expose the former, and you make large scale attacks less likely.

The FBI and the CIA testified before the U.S. Congress that terrorist "cells" are ALREADY here in the U.S. as we speak.

Correct -- hence the NSA program, hence other counter-terrorist measures.

You have to understand that it's a coherent, global strategy. Focusing on one to the exclusion of others means you miss the big picture; and doing only one part without the others means you're more likely to fail to stop the terrorists. The plan requires each part -- terrorist interdiction, vigorous law enforcement at home and in friendly countries, surveillance, intel, destroying terrorist bases abroad, killing terrorists abroad, and overthrowing states that harbor/sympatheize with terrorists -- to be aggressive and successful.

Doing some parts without the other parts leads to failure.
Posted by Steve White">Steve White  2006-01-03 14:29||   2006-01-03 14:29|| Front Page Top

#46 Besides which, the Copperheads are trying the same tactics as they did in 1864 : dredge up someone with military experience to criticise the sitting President to improve their political fortunes. Back then, it was General McClelland - today is former Marien Murtha. The Copperhead revival in the Donks is the reason no one in my family is a Donk anymore.
And besides which, prior military does not excuse stupidity today. I don't cut McCain slack for stupid ideas, just because he was a POW in the Hanoi Hilton.
Posted by Shieldwolf 2006-01-03 14:34||   2006-01-03 14:34|| Front Page Top

#47 Oh, and let's not forget the Libs other war hero, John F'nk Kerry. If memory serves, John was a highly decorated Vietnam war hero that the American people refused to vote into office some 14 months ago.

Murtha wouldn't join the military now, but Bush is IN the military, he is commander-in-chief. He was given the job twice by the American people.

Murtha and his big-ass friends are against the US mission, against the military. He would not be permitted into the military even if he tried to join,

Even so, I would love to see footage of this asshole being put through Marines boot camp.
Posted by Captain America 2006-01-03 14:34||   2006-01-03 14:34|| Front Page Top

#48 Steve White:

Its really funny that all of these hateful,insulting comments and ad hominen attacks on Con. Murtha (D)
by right wing repubs/cons are taken as legitimate commentary, while my comments on
Pres Bush and V.P. Cheney, in which i use no profanity or name-calling are called "trolling"... you guys crack me up.

Seriously, I have read President Bush's Global War On Terror Strategy. Some of it I agree with,
some of it I dont.

It's just my bottomline opinion that if Al Qaeda chose to strike tommorrow or in the near future here in the U.S. nothing going on in Iraq is going to stop it.

Posted by Cassini 2006-01-03 14:41||   2006-01-03 14:41|| Front Page Top

#49 NOTHING going on over THERE is going to
prevent another domestic terrorist attack on
the U.S. in the future. If so, please explain how?

Hmm. Sorry, can't resist.

Ok, here's a timeline. Try to keep up.

9/11/01....al-Qaeda destroys the World Trade Center, part of the Pentagon.

9/12/01....Osama does happy dance in Afghanistan. Threatens more attacks, vows to bring infidels (as in, you & me, Cassini, and everyone else reading this) to their knees. Burqas for everyone, etc.

9/15/01 (thereabouts)....we demand that Afghanistan hand Osama over. They refuse, give lame excuse that they never heard of him, even though he has huge training camp in their country.

10/01.....we invade Afghanistan. Mullah Omar and Osama are either hanging out in a cave on the Pakistani border or are decaying protein spots, depending on who you believe. Instead of following up on their "success" of 9/11, Osama is reduced to pirating copies of Fahrenheit 911 and making increasingly more whiny spots to be broadcast on Al-Jazeera.

03/03.....we invade Iraq.

04/03.....we capture Abu Abbas in Baghdad, who was behind the Achille Lauro hijacking in 1985. Abbas and other terrorists were enjoying the hospitality of Saddam Hussein. Died in our custody about a year later. Sorry, our bad!

12/05.....Iraq has it's third election. Even the Sunnis get a clue and participate. This is considered to be so ordinary by the major news outlets that they give it about the same amount of coverage that they gave the Bolivian elections that took place that month. (Actually, they gave Bolivia more coverage....free cocaine being something that the media talking heads can really get behind.)

01/06.....America has thankfully not had a major terrorist attack on its territory in over 4 years. Zarqawi, head of al-Qaeda in Iraq (which, according to some brilliant talking heads has absolutely nothing to do with Osama's al-Qaeda...the name is just a funny coincidence, and they'll be settling it any day now in court, you betcha!), is now topping unpopularity polls in Iraq and his native Jordan. Baby Assad cries himself to sleep, worrying that he's gonna be next, and starts to withdraw from Lebanon. Qaddafi has given up all of his secret weapons plans. Suicide bombings go down in Israel due to the wall, and also due to the fact that Saddam ain't around to "reward" families of the shahids with 25k per boom.

Yep, you're right, Cassini. No connection at all.

Posted by Desert Blondie 2006-01-03 14:42|| http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com ]">[http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com ]  2006-01-03 14:42|| Front Page Top

#50 What a waste of time.

Arguing, logically or otherwise, with the Talking Points fresh off the DUmmy press. Every point addressed or shot down merely moves the troll to the next - never any admission of flawed memery, much less disingenuous trollery.

And, besides, everyone knows that closing with LOL or lol or lmao trumps all cogent arguments.

Ban it or ignore it.
Posted by Elmath Shagum4940 2006-01-03 14:48||   2006-01-03 14:48|| Front Page Top

#51 ES, you're right. Sorry for wasting Fred's bandwidth....
Posted by Desert Blondie 2006-01-03 14:51|| http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com ]">[http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com ]  2006-01-03 14:51|| Front Page Top

#52 AND... Iraq has attracted jihadis from all over the world, like mosquitos to a bug zapper.
Posted by Darrell 2006-01-03 14:52||   2006-01-03 14:52|| Front Page Top

#53 It's just my bottomline opinion that if Al Qaeda chose to strike tommorrow or in the near future here in the U.S. nothing going on in Iraq is going to stop it.

Look at it this way Cassini, if those Al Qaeda cowardly, homicidal, 70 virgin crazed punks COULD have hit us again, my guess is they certainly would have. Truth be known I suspect your REAL "bottom line" is, you are simply hoping they do.
Posted by Besoeker 2006-01-03 14:52||   2006-01-03 14:52|| Front Page Top

#54 What's so funny is that..

Yawn.
Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2006-01-03 14:55||   2006-01-03 14:55|| Front Page Top

#55 E.S.

youre right, arguing with braiwashed repubs is a waste of time. same canned rnc answers, different day. I have heard this same bs so many times it makes me wonder if any of you on the right ever have an original thought. this is really boring...I'm outta here for a while.

Posted by Cassini 2006-01-03 14:55||   2006-01-03 14:55|| Front Page Top

#56 Reducing the capabilities of al-Qaeda over there makes it more difficult for them to strike over here. They do not have infinite capacity. Reducing the..

Don't bother, General. Even Pearle Vision couldn't prescribe a corrective lens thick enough to cure that kind of myopia.
Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2006-01-03 14:59||   2006-01-03 14:59|| Front Page Top

#57 Let's see... what do I value most, original thought or correct thought? Answer: correct thought! I must be really boring.
Posted by Darrell 2006-01-03 15:00||   2006-01-03 15:00|| Front Page Top

#58 Con. Murtha? Must have been demoted from colonel for sedition.

I think Con is three ranks below PFC.

Posted by Johnnie Bartlette 2006-01-03 15:11||   2006-01-03 15:11|| Front Page Top

#59 I can't take these idiot lefties who now tout "Viet Nam Veteran" as some badge of honor deserving respect and inferring credibility. This from the same scum of the earth that spit on them and called them baby killers. Makes me want to puke. Vile scum indeed.
Posted by Sgt. D.T. 2006-01-03 15:26||   2006-01-03 15:26|| Front Page Top

#60 President Bush has been transformed into a great leader by the events of 9-11-01. He is courageously fighting the War On Terror against the enemies of the U.S. who are jealous of our way of life. He has vanquished Al Queda in Afghanistan and has Osama bin Laden on the run.
He has removed a brutal dictator, Sadaam Hussien from Iraq who a direct threat to the U.S. because he possessed huge caches of WMD's and a reconstituted nuclear weapons program. He had the capacity to supply these wmd's to other terrorist groups and was a training base for terrorist groups.

The War on Terror is a global war in which the spread of democracy to the middle east will stop anti-americanism and terrorist attacks against the U.S.

The followers of the Democratic Party and its leaders Pelosi, Reid, Kennedy, Dean, Murtha and Kerry are traitorous, treasounous, communistic/socialisitc, anti-americans who hate President Bush and who blame America first.

The Main Stream Media is complicit with the Democratic Party in slanting the news with a
liberally biased negativity to turn the
american public against President Bush and the republicans. They never report any good news from Iraq and whatever they accomplish on the economy etc into a negative thru coded reporting.

Black People in the U.S. are dependent on the Democratic Party for social program handouts, which is why they vote in bloc for them. They are a lazy, shiftless bunch that doesnt want to work and most of their males are responsible for 90% of the crime in the U.S.

Illegally immigrating Hispanics are another problem that needs to be resolved because they come here and put a strain on the system and commit crimes, plus they refuse to learn
English. Our borders need to be protected.

We Repblicans and Conservatives believe in God,
Truth, Justice and the American Way.

God Bless America!!!
Posted by Cassini 2006-01-03 15:28||   2006-01-03 15:28|| Front Page Top

#61 Uh Oh. I think Cassini's upset.
Posted by pussnboots 2006-01-03 16:02||   2006-01-03 16:02|| Front Page Top

#62 Cassini,
You asked what constitutes a win in Iraq. How about a united and democratic Iraq? How about a united and democratic Lebanon? How about a Syria free from a murderous dictatorship? How about an Iran that's not in the grip of some madman trying to create the end of the world? Are these goals good enough?

The sad thing is the Dems, if pressed, will admit they'd do the same things as Bush. Only they are sabotaging everything Bush does so they can win the next election.

The blood of our soldiers and countless Iraqis is on their hands.

Al

Posted by Frozen Al 2006-01-03 16:04||   2006-01-03 16:04|| Front Page Top

#63 Uh Oh. I think Cassini's upset.

Must be. If I made a promise and failed to live up to it, I'd be upset too. Unless "a while" was really meant to be only a half an hour.... :D
Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2006-01-03 16:16||   2006-01-03 16:16|| Front Page Top

#64 bomb-a-rama

No, i have seen the failure of my ways, I have been converted. what's that thing you right wingers say:

"Being young of heart i was a liberal, when i became older and more mature i became a conservative."

See my post#60..

Did I get all the rnc talking points correct?
Posted by Cassini 2006-01-03 16:25||   2006-01-03 16:25|| Front Page Top

#65 If you think about it, Cassini shares most of the more prominent aspects of genital herpes.

If there was a cure for the latter would you apply it?

Then why not the former?
Posted by .com 2006-01-03 16:28||   2006-01-03 16:28|| Front Page Top

#66 Cassini -
As somebody who was lucky enough to avoid service in Vietnam because the county I was in had so many volunteers that they didn't draft anybody after 1952... and with a draft lottery number of 17....

If you want to base your analysis of Murtha and Bush off of late 60's and early 70's world views of young men - I was far left then and would still call Murtha what he is. BTW the Democrats have never been of the people. Just read what the traitor Philp Agee had to say about them. Remember he did a study for the CIA on the real difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. Its worth reading before you continue spouting off in defense of their fools.
Posted by 3dc 2006-01-03 16:29||   2006-01-03 16:29|| Front Page Top

#67 3dc

See paragraph#3 of post#60.

I have been converted.
Posted by Cassini 2006-01-03 16:48||   2006-01-03 16:48|| Front Page Top

#68 Cassini. We changed our minds. We don't want you.
See. That was pretty open minded...
Posted by tu3031 2006-01-03 16:52||   2006-01-03 16:52|| Front Page Top

#69 What about the republican "Big Tent"? lol

gotta go..it's Miller Time..

later dudes..

Posted by Cassini 2006-01-03 17:04||   2006-01-03 17:04|| Front Page Top

#70 Okay, so is it a crime to kick Cassini in the balls (KITB)?
Just consider; the only motivation for anti-Bush statements is to replace Bush as CINC with a dhimmocrat. Now that we know this, what can be gained by debate against such a jerk ?
I kitb takes less effort and is far more rewarding.
Posted by wxjames 2006-01-03 17:11||   2006-01-03 17:11|| Front Page Top

#71 .com, I think you just insulted herpes. ;)
Posted by Desert Blondie 2006-01-03 17:12|| http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com ]">[http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com ]  2006-01-03 17:12|| Front Page Top

#72 Thanks, Cassini. I haven't been called dude since about 1987. Probably before you were born.
Think I'll head home now. The wife's waiting on the "big tent".
Posted by tu3031 2006-01-03 17:16||   2006-01-03 17:16|| Front Page Top

#73 One thing we can be sure of, Cassini doesn't have is hemmrhoids.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-01-03 17:16||   2006-01-03 17:16|| Front Page Top

#74 In Cassini's case, which end would you check first, Nimble?
Posted by .com 2006-01-03 17:21||   2006-01-03 17:21|| Front Page Top

#75 Did I get all the rnc talking points correct?

I wouldn't know, as I'm not big on talking points. How about asking a member of the RNC?
Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2006-01-03 17:21||   2006-01-03 17:21|| Front Page Top

#76 DB - Would a micro / nano apology be appropriate?
;-)
Posted by .com 2006-01-03 17:40||   2006-01-03 17:40|| Front Page Top

#77 The issue with Cassini and Murtha is they are both from a "loser" class of people. They cant even define victory, and in the fight of terrorism it is complex. If they think, and I think they do, that this is some sort of sporting event they need to get off the nitox and back on O2. We fight day in and day out against the "Loser" stigma Murtha and his generation "won" during his years as an officer. There is no way I would let this guy in the ranks of the unit I am now responsible for. I wish people like Murtha and Cassini would STFU, stop the loser embracement, and get with the program working for victory.
Posted by 49 pan">49 pan  2006-01-03 18:33||   2006-01-03 18:33|| Front Page Top

#78 The problem isn't with Rantburgers' claimed definition of victory.

The problem is that most of them tend to define "victory" one way (a stable, democratic Iraq, etc a definition I'd agree with) -- and then they use an entirely different and irrelevant criterion in order to measure progress to that goal (namely number of terrorists or insurgents killed vs the number of American soldiers killed).

So half the time the goal seems to be to drive terrorists and Islamofascists *away* from Iraq, so as to give it a chance for democracy and prosperity.

Half the time however, people make it sound as their goal is to drive said jihadis *into* Iraq, so that they can be killed there ("flypaper strategy"), regardless of the civilian casualties and cost to democracy and prosperity that this would cause.

Whenever you hear people measure an absurd tally of say "10.000 jihadis killed but only 1000 American soldiers killed" and yet they don't even care to mention Iraqi civilian casualties, that's when you know their definition of victory has nothing to do with the "democratic and peaceful Iraq" that they in other times will claim to support.
Posted by Aris Katsaris">Aris Katsaris  2006-01-03 19:20||   2006-01-03 19:20|| Front Page Top

#79 My question to Cassini, patriotic American no doubt, is what is his definition of victory in Iraq?
Posted by Scott R">Scott R  2006-01-03 19:30|| http://five24.net]">[http://five24.net]  2006-01-03 19:30|| Front Page Top

#80 It's World Wide Web Tag Team Trolling! Cassini softens them up then the partner enters the ring to deliver the definitive sermon on Victory. From a Greek, no less. How Glorious.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-01-03 19:36||   2006-01-03 19:36|| Front Page Top

#81 Nimble, look at yourself if you want to look at a troll, because I'm not one.

Your comment on the other hand (unconstructive, content-less, insulting, and baiting) is the very definition of trollery.
Posted by Aris Katsaris">Aris Katsaris  2006-01-03 19:42||   2006-01-03 19:42|| Front Page Top

#82 Remember, Murtha was the one who advised Bill Clinton that we couldn't win in Mogadishu and that the morale of the troops there was so low there was nothing they could accomplish therefore the best course of action was to retreat. Bin Laden himself said this was what convinced him the Americans wouldn't fight back. His opinion was reinforced after the Cole bombing. Murtha has been a surrender advocate for quite some time. It's my feeling he doesn't want to see any more American soldiers get killed, period. The only way to accomplish that is to withdraw from trouble spots and hope they go away. He has what a lot of officers get and all the good ones get over and that is the reluctance to risk lives. I don't know if he realizes he is a tool being used.
Posted by Deacon Blues 2006-01-03 19:48||   2006-01-03 19:48|| Front Page Top

#83 Ah, an evening at the 'Burg! Beats the TV any day of the week!

Steve White and Desert Blondie spelled it out quite nicely, I think. Nothing more sad than seeing Cassini's beautiful theory murdered by a brutal gang of facts!

Waitaminute.... Did he HAVE a theory?
Posted by Bobby 2006-01-03 19:59||   2006-01-03 19:59|| Front Page Top

#84 Aris:
I agree with your post to a point. The goal for most of us is indeed a stable and Democratic Iraq for the reason I listed in post #15: it sets an example. There were other motives for the invasion, but let's skip those for the moment as their pros and cons can always be debated at another time.

As what hopefully passes as a thoughtful conservative/Republican I would define this future Iraq, which from the evidence presented I strongly believe is in the process of being born before our very eyes, as being “stable” in the sense that there are no serious rebellions going on (small ones are historically a constant all over the world). I would define “democratic” as having a reasonable level of individual representation combined with some sort of constitutional guarantees of liberty that cannot ever be violated by the will of the majority. For example, the Shia and Kurds can’t vote to disenfranchise the Sunni. I want for these two things to be accomplished in a reasonable period of time, though I am hesitant to put a specific time frame on this for domestic political reasons that have little to do with Iraq per say.

I don’t want to see innocent Iraqi civilians get hurt, nor am I indifferent to their plight. If one takes the (I would argue inaccurate) view that we are the cause of the violence, than forming a stable democracy ASAP would be my number one priority if I were an Iraqi leader. Get it going and we will leave, simple as that. I honestly believe that this process will begin this year just like the President has said it will.

As to the flypaper theory... well, it seems to be true whether any of us like it or not. So lets be pragmatic: kill as many Islamofascist terrorist idiots as we possibly can while its convenient, figure out something else after we leave.

Oh, and Nimble, FYI Aris is not a troll. He posts here often, amicably, and generally only responds with insults when insulted.


Posted by Secret Master 2006-01-03 21:05||   2006-01-03 21:05|| Front Page Top

#85 Cassini - you are dodging so fast its almost admirable. You have avoided addressing any of the facts presented you, and have repeated the same old disproven propaganda of the left. You answer questions with question, and reason with ridicule, instead of trying to refute you merely gainsay. You endlessly butress your fantasy world at the expense of the facts. Its fascintaing and rather sad, you obviously were intellgient at one time, before your self deceptions in defense of your ego overcame your reason.

You may want to visit a psychiatrist - you continued refusal to address reality and make up one instead speaks of a deep psychosis on your part.
Posted by Oldspook 2006-01-03 21:09||   2006-01-03 21:09|| Front Page Top

#86 I think RB is flypaper, too.
Posted by .com 2006-01-03 21:14||   2006-01-03 21:14|| Front Page Top

#87 As for murtha, his reserve officer career was relatively undistinguished, and he apparently was a ticket puncher in Vietnam, not a leader.

His is guilty of aiding and abetting the enemies of the nation by spouting their propaganda in saying the war cannot be won. His spreading of sedition and propaganda for the enemy srves as a force multiplier - the only one available to the terrorists. He appears to be completely oblivious to the consequences of his word and their effects on our troops morale and advancing the cause of terrorists.

He is worthy of no respect given his apparent cowardice in the face of terrorism in Somolia and now Iraq, and apparent political opportunism at the cost of our soldiers blood.

And when I run into him, I will tell him so personally, for the sake of all the Marines and other servicemembers that I work with daily. He's not worthy of the honor of being called a Marine any more.
Posted by Oldspook 2006-01-03 21:16||   2006-01-03 21:16|| Front Page Top

#88 He appears to be completely oblivious to the consequences of his word and their effects on our troops morale and advancing the cause of terrorists.

Not to defend Murtha...but the same can be said of all the "kill all the Muzzies" talk sometimes seen on RB.
Posted by Murtha Focker 2006-01-03 21:26||   2006-01-03 21:26|| Front Page Top

#89 And yet, the only people that tend to bring that kind of 'talk' up are trolls or people that are extremely new. Like when it came up in the other thread before Christmas, I haven't seen any of the regulars mention that for LONG time and even then they got told to tone it down.

I'm beginning to think that bringing up this sort of 'talk' is another DNC talking point.
Posted by Silentbrick">Silentbrick  2006-01-03 22:25||   2006-01-03 22:25|| Front Page Top

#90 jeez! Cassini sounds almost like NotMikeMoore, doesn't he? Same old smelly tripe - new serving dish. Eat up
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-01-03 22:38||   2006-01-03 22:38|| Front Page Top

23:49 Frank G
23:40 Phil
23:39 Rafael
23:38 Rafael
23:35 Redneck Jim
23:27 Frank G
23:26 Frank G
23:23 Rafael
23:17 Bardo
23:14 49 pan
23:13 Claviter Omuque3310
22:51 trailing wife
22:44 trailing wife
22:38 Frank G
22:30 Sherry
22:25 Silentbrick
22:20 Rafael
21:59 .com
21:58 bruce
21:55 Glenmore
21:52 RWV
21:50 .com
21:45 .com
21:42 Mahou Sensei Negi-bozu









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com