Anti-war mom Cindy Sheehan gives up her protest - Page 2




 
--
Anti-war mom Cindy Sheehan gives up her protest
 
May 30th, 2007  
mmarsh
 
 
Anti-war mom Cindy Sheehan gives up her protest
Good to see you again Chief...

I don't think she smeared it, she wanted a reason of why her son died. She got it, he died for nothing except to put money in other people's pockets. Iraq was and still is a very profitable business venture for some very large businesses (Haliburton, Mobile, Bechtel)...Thats the only reason for war that still holds water. Every other reason turned out to be bull.

She got that message across along time ago. And now she had become a magnet for all sorts of weirdos on the left and on the right which has twisted the original purpose of her protest.

It was time to close the zoo
May 30th, 2007  
Fox
 
 
IMO, I don't think her son died for "nothing." He, himself, decided to join the military as an infantry. Being an infantry can be very dangerous. Their job is to fight against the enemy.

He got ambushed by the insurgents? Well, my brother got ambushed by the insurgents all the time when he was in Iraq. It's happens. To me, I think he died for his country.

I still don't understand why is his mother, Cindy Sheehan, protesting against the war and Bush. Did she voted for Bush in 2000? Did his son join the military before 9/11 or after? Why he joined the military? The son ought to tell his mother not to protesting against the war. That is his job to fight. He volunteered the mission like Chief said. I think he wants to fight for his country.
May 31st, 2007  
mmarsh
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
IMO, I don't think her son died for "nothing." He, himself, decided to join the military as an infantry. Being an infantry can be very dangerous. Their job is to fight against the enemy.

He got ambushed by the insurgents? Well, my brother got ambushed by the insurgents all the time when he was in Iraq. It's happens. To me, I think he died for his country.

I still don't understand why is his mother, Cindy Sheehan, protesting against the war and Bush. Did she voted for Bush in 2000? Did his son join the military before 9/11 or after? Why he joined the military? The son ought to tell his mother not to protesting against the war. That is his job to fight. He volunteered the mission like Chief said. I think he wants to fight for his country.

That her son died for 'nothing' is actually Cindy Sheehan's quote.

Nobody is questioning her sons (or any soldiers) duty. Soldiers do as they are ordered, and you are right being in the military does entail certain risks. But just because people volenteer to risk their lives to serve in the Armed Forces does not give Washington Politicians (most of whom never served themselves) the right to be reckless with those lives. Just like the mayor of whatever town you live in doesn't have the right to be reckless with the lives of the Police or Fire Department.

When a President puts troops in combat he had better be sure that he is doing so for the right reasons, namely the defense of the nation or of others. But when a President lies about going to war, when he puts our soldiers lives in extreme danger in order to push an extremist ideology, to enrich powerful friends, or to stroke his own ego, that is being reckless.

And Mrs Sheehan is right on that score, they died for no good purpose.
--
Anti-war mom Cindy Sheehan gives up her protest
May 31st, 2007  
Marinerhodes
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmarsh
That her son died for 'nothing' is actually Cindy Sheehan's quote.

Nobody is questioning her sons (or any soldiers) duty. Soldiers do as they are ordered, and you are right being in the military does entail certain risks. But just because people volenteer to risk their lives to serve in the Armed Forces does not give Washington Politicians (most of whom never served themselves) the right to be reckless with those lives. Just like the mayor of whatever town you live in doesn't have the right to be reckless with the lives of the Police or Fire Department.

When a President puts troops in combat he had better be sure that he is doing so for the right reasons, namely the defense of the nation or of others. But when a President lies about going to war, when he puts our soldiers lives in extreme danger in order to push an extremist ideology, to enrich powerful friends, or to stroke his own ego, that is being reckless.

And Mrs Sheehan is right on that score, they died for no good purpose.
Note: I use the word "you" as an inclusive term so that I include all those that agree with Mmarsh, this way I do not have to ask the same questions repeadtedly.

Human Rights, Civil Liberties, and all the benefits of a democratic society. Yeah...died for absolutely nothing and this war is for absolutely nothing except profit. Let us stick to fact instead listening to the muckrakers and those that want their 15 minutes of fame or those that are pushing a political agenda. The President did in fact go to war to protect others. Think about it, in every aspect, for more than 30 seconds. Don't give a kneejerk reaction, seriosly think about your view then think about it in the reverse. Think about what could/would happen if we had never gone to war. Also, think about how many times that government (Iraq) defied the UN Council. Think about the rules that were violated by that government. Also remember the United States issued an ultimatum: Let us in and abide by the UN Council or we will invade. Well to paraphrase a Cool Hand Luke (and subsequent Guns N Roses) line:

"What we have here is a failure to communicate. Some people just don't learn. So you get what we got here last week. Well, that's the way he wants it, so he gets it. I don't like it any more than you".

People keep throwing out the "Lie" word. I will ask the same question I have always asked. What exactly do you know about it? You know what the media releases, you know what the President told us, you know what his Cabinet told us. You know all these things but you have never been inside the man's head to know what he thinks. You weren't behind closed doors hearing what he heard. You weren't the one gathering the information for a decision brief. Until you were the one in his shoes, having the information to hand that he had, getting the advice he got, you have absolutely no right to second guess his decision.

But you have never had your boots on the ground over there. You (from what I can tell) have never willingly put your life at risk for ideals or beliefs that you support. If the American people (Because according to the media ALL of America is against the war) feel so strongly against the war, then why are young men and women still enlisting? Why is it that the services aren't having a harder time recruiting people?

I mean stop for one second and think about both sides of the coin instead of turning a blind eye to the side you don't want to look at.
May 31st, 2007  
mmarsh
 
 
MarinerRhodes

The reason we went to war was because of the WMDs there was no other reason given till after the invasion was over. When the WMD excuse failed, they tried tie Saddam to 9-11. And when that was proved wrong, they attempted the Democracy-Human Right excuse (except things are now worse then they were under Saddam). And all of this was AFTER the invasion had ended. You asked me how I know Bush is lying, a government that continually changes its story is a good indicator. My 8 year old cousin tells better tall tales.

The Human Rights-Democracy argument isn't an excuse either. Adolf Hitler claimed to be defending Human Rights when he invaded the Sudentenland and Poland. Stalin said the same thing about Eastern Europe. If Bush really cared about Human Rights he would have sent troops to Darfur 2 years ago, because what is going on in the Sudan is far worse than whats going on in Iraq. I find it amazing how anyone can claim Bush is standing up for Human Rights and Democracy in Iraq when our President has been busy dismantling both back at home.

The war-profiteering excuse is being used by Bush political enemies I don't deny that, but it also happens to be true. Halliburton had posted record profits for both 2004 and 2005. 2005 was $1.4 Trillion alone. The oil industry Mobile, Chevron, Texeco, have all posted record profits as well. Iraq has the 2nd largest oil supply in the world, its a no-brainer that big Business would come to exploit it. Big business is greedy, and predatory. It has always has been so. Its Teapot Dome all over again.

Common sense, thats how I know Bush lied. For example, remember when Blair claimed Saddam could launch missiles from silos within 45 Minutes. Only one problem, any defense analyst could tell you that Iraq had no ICBM silos or any rocket with the range to hit either Europe or America. A non existing missile armed with a non-existing warhead. Another piece of pure 100% BS was the whole Nigerian Yellow cake affair in which Bush's 2003 State of the Union contradicted the testimony of his own Chief Inspector because the truth didn't coincide with party doctrine. The No-bid contract debate is another Bush lie. He claimed all military bids would be by open bid when if fact it was closed bid, decided months before. Most of the Bids given to Halliburton and Bechtel. So on and so forth, one lie after another. If the president said the Earth were round I wouldn't believe it, thats how low his credibility is.

I might be wrong on this last part, as I admit I cannot say for certain has I have never served myself (although I regret it). So these are not my own experiences but of people I know. I have a hunch the reason most people enlist is not because they specifically want to go to Iraq. Perhaps the media does exaggerate about Iraq, but its not Disneyland either. There are 3800 dead servicemen who will agree with me on that point. My college buddies who were Gulf War vets didn't sign up to kick Saddam out of Kuwait. Most of them signed up for financial aid reasons. So I think they enlist for a multitude of reasons. A career, to get skills, for an education, a sense of patriotism, for money, etc. I only have 1 college friend who is currently serving in Iraq. He joined because they promised him he would fly. My father joined the US Army to pay for law school, not because he wanted to go to Vietnam.

Anyway we are probably getting too far OT...
May 31st, 2007  
5.56X45mm
 
 
I find it funny that she said that she felt that she started to be used by the Democrats. SHE WAS SUPPORTED BY THEM THE WHOLE TIME.

She's a nut job and a communist, hanging out with Chavez and his ilk.
May 31st, 2007  
Marinerhodes
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmarsh
MarinerRhodes

The reason we went to war was because of the WMDs there was no other reason given till after the invasion was over. When the WMD excuse failed, they tried tie Saddam to 9-11. And when that was proved wrong, they attempted the Democracy-Human Right excuse (except things are now worse then they were under Saddam). And all of this was AFTER the invasion had ended. You asked me how I know Bush is lying, a government that continually changes its story is a good indicator. My 8 year old cousin tells better tall tales.

The Human Rights-Democracy argument isn't an excuse either. Adolf Hitler claimed to be defending Human Rights when he invaded the Sudentenland and Poland. Stalin said the same thing about Eastern Europe. If Bush really cared about Human Rights he would have sent troops to Darfur 2 years ago, because what is going on in the Sudan is far worse than whats going on in Iraq. I find it amazing how anyone can claim Bush is standing up for Human Rights and Democracy in Iraq when our President has been busy dismantling both back at home.

The war-profiteering excuse is being used by Bush political enemies I don't deny that, but it also happens to be true. Halliburton had posted record profits for both 2004 and 2005. 2005 was $1.4 Trillion alone. The oil industry Mobile, Chevron, Texeco, have all posted record profits as well. Iraq has the 2nd largest oil supply in the world, its a no-brainer that big Business would come to exploit it. Big business is greedy, and predatory. It has always has been so. Its Teapot Dome all over again.

Common sense, thats how I know Bush lied. For example, remember when Blair claimed Saddam could launch missiles from silos within 45 Minutes. Only one problem, any defense analyst could tell you that Iraq had no ICBM silos or any rocket with the range to hit either Europe or America. A non existing missile armed with a non-existing warhead. Another piece of pure 100% BS was the whole Nigerian Yellow cake affair in which Bush's 2003 State of the Union contradicted the testimony of his own Chief Inspector because the truth didn't coincide with party doctrine. The No-bid contract debate is another Bush lie. He claimed all military bids would be by open bid when if fact it was closed bid, decided months before. Most of the Bids given to Halliburton and Bechtel. So on and so forth, one lie after another. If the president said the Earth were round I wouldn't believe it, thats how low his credibility is.

I might be wrong on this last part, as I admit I cannot say for certain has I have never served myself (although I regret it). So these are not my own experiences but of people I know. I have a hunch the reason most people enlist is not because they specifically want to go to Iraq. Perhaps the media does exaggerate about Iraq, but its not Disneyland either. There are 3800 dead servicemen who will agree with me on that point. My college buddies who were Gulf War vets didn't sign up to kick Saddam out of Kuwait. Most of them signed up for financial aid reasons. So I think they enlist for a multitude of reasons. A career, to get skills, for an education, a sense of patriotism, for money, etc. I only have 1 college friend who is currently serving in Iraq. He joined because they promised him he would fly. My father joined the US Army to pay for law school, not because he wanted to go to Vietnam.

Anyway we are probably getting too far OT...
Have you even considered the other side of the coin or are you still repeating yourself?
May 31st, 2007  
mmarsh
 
 
I don't understand what side of the coin do you mean? Do you mean as soldier? As an Iraqi? as a Neo-conservative Republican? As a camel? Please specify...
June 1st, 2007  
Marinerhodes
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmarsh
I don't understand what side of the coin do you mean? Do you mean as soldier? As an Iraqi? as a Neo-conservative Republican? As a camel? Please specify...
What I mean to say is I can see other's views on why they think the war is wrong, why they feel thay have been lied to, why they do not have confidence in the leaders of the US. I understand why they may have trepidations in trusting anything the government says. Afterall look at all the negative publicity the war and the current government has gotten.

What I can not see is why anyone refuses to even give the benefit of the doubt. Why they have to try and second guess the person that is elected to make those decisions and basically call them a liar, idiot, incompetent etc etc yet uphold others that have been called the same thing. . . Oh wait...we weren't in a war with many of the others so that makes their lies and scandals less important.

As far as I know there has never been a war in history that is popular. Supported perhaps, but never had 100% support of the nation or the world.

People keep repeating what they are told but for some reason may not stop to view the rest of the picture. Only focus on what they want to see. IMO this is called tunnel vision.

We are way off topic I suppose so I will just let this drowsy dog go back to sleep.

P.S. Good thing Gator ain't in this thread. He would be conversing with himself. *snickers softly*
June 1st, 2007  
mmarsh
 
 
MarinerRhodes

I'll respond very quickly...

I DO see the other view, I just don't agree with it. In my opinion, the evidence that I have been given by both the Media, by the U.S-Other Nations Governments, by reading blogs of people who were there don't support that view. I am not a pacifist or a peacenik, but I thought this was a mistake from day 1, and I hate being right about that. I would have much rather been wrong on Iraq because if I had been, we wouldn't be in the big mess we are in now.

The reason I am determined in my views is because the evidence is overwhelming supportive of it. I cannot in good conscience support something I know on at least partly misrepresented. Its like being on jury duty, I cannot convict someone if the prosecution lied\misrepresented the evidence.
 


Similar Topics
War Debate Cited As Aiding Al Qaeda
Democrats Taking Aim At War Budget Request
How US Is Deferring War Costs
Should Bush meet with Cindy Sheehan?
Anti war protests, Isaac Bonewits and all that!