Chow Hall Reaction to Election

From Blackfive:

Got this from a soldier in Iraq at 11:18pm CST last night:

Just got back from Breakfast – Rahm Emanual came on and was talking about the “failure in Iraq” and welcoming the new speaker, Nancy Pelosi – he was booed by the entire chow hall.

Michael Steele As RNC Chair?
CBS Projects Webb Winner -- Dems To Control Senate
  • jhow66

    Just so everyone will know who he was talking about–she now goes by the name Speaker Stretch”.

  • Gianni

    The uberleft have slammed the troops every chance they get, and they try to act as if they care bout them.

    No wonder dems always want to disallow the military vote.

  • kaz

    It’s too bad that the ire of the troops isn’t directed at the civilian leadership who bungled the occupation and reconstruction of Iraq in the first place. Who decided to disband the Iraqi military and send 2 million men into the streets of a country with 60% unemployment? Who decided to disband the Iraqi police forces? Who didn’t ensure enough troops were on hand to establish security after the fall of the regime? Who decided to purge the top three layers of management from every Iraqi ministry and government agency?

    Answer: Bush and Rumsfeld. Iraq didn’t have to turn out this way. Bush and Rumsfeld have more responsibility than anyone else.

  • jpm100

    And if the army wasn’t disbanded and displayed disloyalty to the new government and loyalty to the Bathist branch of the insurgency, that would be Bush and Rumsfeld’s fault too, right?

  • Scrapiron

    How about Senate Majority leader Reid, a man with a criminal record that would rival a Mafia Don, and the democrats new love child Osama Obama, already proven a criminal and a liar and he’s in his first term. By 2008 he’ll be caught up with Mafia Don Reid.

    There is no way to succeed in a war when you have almost half of congress and all of the MSM providing National Security secrets along with bundles of aid and comfort to the enemy. There have been more acts of traitorism in the past three years within the democratic party as there were in WWI through Vietnam, and that’s a hard record to break. The only thing the democrats lack now is to get 5 million Iraqi’s killed and they’re working hard at that. I expect them to match or exceed the number of dead Iraqi’s at their hands with a similar or larger number of Americans in U.S. cities. Anything from this day forth is on their heads.

  • Jo

    But, but, but, but, but, Brian was just in here telling us what Zogby says the troops think.

    Zogby!! (I’m still laughing)

    Nancy or Hillary. Wonder which one the troops despise more.

  • Gianni

    The libs seem to want to win a war by fighting ‘nice’, and giving people looking to kill any American they can all the rights afforded US citiens.

    Troops cant shoot at people they see setting up IEDs on the road, WTF? Yup, lib influence for you!

  • Scrapiron

    Everyone should go to the DNC and read their manifesto for rule, if they haven’t dumped it already. I found it through a link from another blog. It’s quite different from the contract with America. It is fashioned after their ever popular Nazi’s rule as expected. Quite comical if you’re like me, old, retired and don’t give a sh** about much anymore. I’d hate to be a young person just starting out with high hopes of making big money. You will be able to but they will take 75% of it for the ‘common good’. Rich democrats are the ‘common good’. Even funnier is when the harp about the rich republicans when the filthy rich are mostly democrats. Can I use Peloshi, Hanoi John, and drunken Ted as an example?

  • epador

    I’ve been in those chow halls. There’s often one or two folks who don’t agree with the majority as described, but they rarely vocalize.

    Except certain Reservist/Guard folks (but only some). But then their issues, at least from their point of view, are somewhat different than the AD folks.

    Which pretty much mirrors the at home scene – not in numbers but in process – the anti-Bush segment is concentrating on what they see wrong and different from their point of view, and the pro-administration folks see a common mission, even if they don’t agree with the way it may be handled at various levels.

  • (Pssst…scrap…”traitorism” the word you’re looking for is ‘treason’.)

    “The libs seem to want to win a war by fighting ‘nice’, and giving people looking to kill any American they can all the rights afforded US citiens.” Gianni, you fail to recognize the fact that the liberals refuse to accept the fact there is a war to be won at all. If there’s no war, then you can be nice. It’s just a problem to be solved…some criminals to be rounded up and locked away (in a nice executive prison, not some evil, illegal, death camp like Gitmo)…a bump in the road to socialist utopia (because those have a good record of working out)…

  • Tim in PA

    Yeah, the military can get fed up with poor leadership, but there’s nothing that can piss them off quite like backstabbers back home who do all they can to make us lose the war just to score domestic political points. Bonus points for badmouthing the troops and painting them all as neanderthals while also claiming to act out of concern for them.

    Lefties, take note — our servicemembers are not stupid, and they don’t buy it.

    … As for the old Iraqi “military”; you’re talking about a dysfunctional arab military with no real NCO’s. Their regular army wasn’t much more than guys wearing green holding AK’s. Even if you could guarantee the loyalty and comeptence of all of the officers, the rest of them weren’t worth much. Can’t polish a turd.

  • SShiell

    One thing the troops react to is actions not words. Lieberman has been to Iraq no less than 8 times. Based upon his own eyes and ears, and the words he hears from the troops on the ground that he talks to, he has decided upon the course he needs to take regarding the war. He is someone they can respect.

    How many times have Murtha, Kerry, Kennedy, Pelosi, Clinton (Hilary or Bill) been to Iraq? Based upon what information do they formulate their decisions relative to the war and the troops. How do you think the troops react to Murtha calling them guilty of crimes of humanity that have not even been investigated. Or similar words of “support” from others who claim they support the troops.

    The troops know who put them into this fight and they know who supports them. They do not need to read the MSM to know their backs are not covered by reporters who cover the war from the safety of their hotels in the green zone. And they know they can’t depend upon people like Murtha or Kennedy or even Kerry when the chips are down.

    You want to know when the war is lost? Ask them. Not some bullshit Zogby poll. Zogby could have told you that 95% of the marines on Guadalcanal (1942-3) wanted to go home. Ask the question and the troops will respond – honestly. Don’t play semantics and say that because the troops want to go home the war is lost.

    These troops do not see the cause is lost – and that is evidenced by their re-enlistment numbers. Not once has the Army missed any goal of re-enlistment since the war began – Iraq or Afghanistan. Those are the numbers that will tell the tale.

  • seamus

    My reaction? Oh the fuck well. They can boo al they want. It don’t change the facts.