« Can we use this to just shut down the whole state government? | Main | Duke Lacrosse Rape Case - DA Attacks Blogs »

Murtha Recommends a Somalia-Style Pullout from Iraq

Rep. Jack Murtha has moved from irresponsible to dangerous when he recommended a Somalia-style pullout from Iraq on CNN's The Situation Room:

MURTHA: The thing that disturbed me and worries me about this whole thing is we can't get them to change direction. And I said over and over in debate, if you listen to any of it, in Beirut President Reagan changed direction, in Somalia President Clinton changed direction, and yet here, with the troops out there every day, suffering from these explosive devices, and being looked at as occupiers -- 80 percent of the people want us out of there -- and yet they continue to say, "We're fighting this thing." We're not fighting this. The troops are fighting this thing. That's who's doing the fighting.

As Sweetness and Light notes, the 9/11 Commission found that Clinton's retreat in Somalia may have inspired Osama Bin Laden's 9/11 attacks because our pullout made us look weak and conquerable. Our pullout from Somalia wasn't a change in strategy as Murtha tried to paint it in his interview.

Rep. Murtha insists that the only correct strategy for Iraq is to retreat from Iraq, an action that would again make our country and our military look like we are soft and not up to the task. Not only would Bin Laden and his al Qaeda cells get this message loud and clear, but Kim Jung Il of North Korea and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, two leaders who are working to attain nuclear weapons, would as well.

Bryan at Hot Air asks "when does it become legitimate to question not only Rep. Murtha's patriotism, but his loyalty and even his sanity?"

Update: Senate Democrats are going to propose a resolution calling for the withdrawl of our forces from Iraq.

Update II: Uncle Jimbo and Blackfive reminds us that the reason Rep. Murtha is so proud of President Clinton's retreat from Somalia is because he called for it.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Murtha Recommends a Somalia-Style Pullout from Iraq:

» Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator linked with Book: Qaeda Planned NY Subway Attack

» Morning Coffee linked with Somalia and Iraq.. Why Cut N Run will not Work

» Joust The Facts linked with This Is What I Meant ...

» Murdoc Online linked with Has John Murtha (D-PA) completely lost it?

» A Blog For All linked with Has Rep Murtha Ever Looked at a Map?

» Echoes Of Forever linked with PAthetic

» Church and State linked with Jack Murtha Does Not Have "The Force"

Comments (43)

Editor & Publisher teams up... (Below threshold)
Paul Andre:

Editor & Publisher teams up with the WaPoat to commit treason. None of this was cleared by the Lincoln Group or Karl Rove!

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002690071

The nerve.

From the Editor & Publisher piece:

"- Embassy employees are held in such low esteem their work must remain a secret and they live with constant fear that their cover will be blown. Of nine staffers, only four have told their families where they work. They all plan for their possible abductions. No one takes home their cell phones as this gives them away. One employee said criticism of the U.S. had grown so severe that most of her family believes the U.S. "is punishing populations as Saddam did."

- Since April, the "demeanor" of guards in the Green Zone has changed, becoming more "militia-like," and some are now "taunting" embassy personnel or holding up their credentials and saying loudly that they work in the embassy: "Such information is a death sentence if overheard by the wrong people." For this reason, some have asked for press instead of embassy credentials"

(E & P, Greg Mithcell, June 18, 2006)

Yea pull out and watch mill... (Below threshold)
jainphx:

Yea pull out and watch millions die as in Viet Nam,and cambodia.Bugging out brings disaster when ever it has been done.

Kim raises a good point: If... (Below threshold)
Cousin Dave:

Kim raises a good point: If our cut-n-run from Somalia was a "change in strategy", then what was the strategy we changed to?

Jack Murtha strikes me as b... (Below threshold)
RFA:

Jack Murtha strikes me as being a cowardly opportunist.

Go hide under your bed old man. The real Marines will get the boogyman for you.

Pathetic....just plain old pathetic.

of all the things Murtha MI... (Below threshold)
Justrand:

of all the things Murtha MIGHT be, pathetic pawn of the lunatic Left is the MOST complimentary.

it goes downhill from there!

I sure hope Pennsylvania votes this LOSER out of office!!

Murtha, Pelosi, Dean et al.... (Below threshold)
ted:

Murtha, Pelosi, Dean et al. Can it get any better!!!

This all seems too good to be true for the GOP.

Is being in power a hot pot... (Below threshold)
jpm100:

Is being in power a hot potato? Does being in the minority party have most of the frills and none of responsibility?

It must be these days.

I give this round of hot potato to the Dems.

may have inspired... (Below threshold)
Big Mo:

may have inspired bin Laden? It DID inspire him. Heck it even inspired Saddam and his goons!

I remember reading that they were watching pirated copies of Blackhawk Down to inspire themselves before we invaded.

What the hell is wrong with these Democrats? Are thei brain malfunctioning? Do they thirst for power so much that they will do or say anything to get back in power?

Or do they truly believe that Iraq is another Vietnam?

Well, big news: IT ISN'T. No one sane or honest can make the argument tht it is. But by believing it is, they'll turn it into the very thing that they think it is should they ever return to power.

And that'll make the killing fields of Cambodia and the commie mass murders in Vietnam pale in comparison. Because it will confirm in the Islamofascists' minds that we ARE weak and WILL run away--but only when modern Democrats are in power.

(Sorry if I sound like a broken record or a little bit rambling: too much father's day BBQ and beer.)

If the Dem's are so sure th... (Below threshold)
kirktoe:

If the Dem's are so sure that their position is line with a majority of Americans, then why is it that there is not one single mention of the Iraq war in their "New Direction for America".

Actually, there's not one single mention of the war on terror period. Guess they are not serious about getting the terrorists at all, whether they believe that includes Iraq or not.

I'm with Ted, this seems too good for the GOP. Except when you remember that we're dealing with people who are so filled with hatred and rage that they've become totally insane.

How many more elections cycles are they going to lose before they finally figure out that they get their butts kicked on foreign policy every time.

Actually, I think they know that now, but they can't get out of the 1960's to re-access where they are at.

Or do they truly believe th... (Below threshold)
kirktoe:

Or do they truly believe that Iraq is another Vietnam?

Well, big news: IT ISN'T.
=================================
It is like Vietnam in one way (and one way only): You have a segment of the population that is anti-war, anti-American, and pro-socialist rooting for American defeat. The difference is that this time they don't enough sway to affect the outcome of the war (thank God).

After Murtha's pitiful show... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

After Murtha's pitiful show today on the news talk shows you don't have to question his sanity. He is definetly borderline insane or in the late stages of dementia. Someone should appoint him a new handler, the current ones are using him and making a fool of him.

Must be the curse of Woodst... (Below threshold)
914:

Must be the curse of Woodstock driving them on..

Im amazed Elmer Fudd could ... (Below threshold)
914:

Im amazed Elmer Fudd could even dress Himself to appear on the sunday funnies this morning? loonie as He is He should have been wearing a straight jacket. The msm dont control the news anymore thank God. we can all rest easy in that blessing.

The Democrat policy on terr... (Below threshold)
The Listkeeper:

The Democrat policy on terrorism is the same one it always has been... Ignore it, and hope they don't notice us.

Murtha advocated a policy t... (Below threshold)

Murtha advocated a policy that obviously failed in Somalia in 1993 and is suggesting we practice the same policy in Iraq today. What makes him think that the policy will work any better today?

Had we confronted the terrorism in Somalia, the War on Terror would have a much different look.

When was the last time a re... (Below threshold)

When was the last time a resolution in Congress telling the President how to prosecute a war did not cause more people to be killed?

Since Slick Willie is on th... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

Since Slick Willie is on the payroll of the UAE to the tune of millions of dollars doesn't it make sense that the entire clan of Kennedy, Hanoi Johe, Murtha. Paloshi and Reid are also on the payroll of the Islamic nuts. They all seem determined to assist the enemy in every way possible. Money is a big motivator for the left wing. Someone check their freezers and see what you find.

Rep. Murtha insists that... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Rep. Murtha insists that the only correct strategy for Iraq is to retreat from Iraq, an action that would again make our country and our military look like we are soft and not up to the task.

I'd like to offer a suggestion for the regular viewers. For your consideration, could you entertain the possibility that our military may not actually be "up to the task" as it were? This is not to say that our military is weak, or soft, or lacks the will in any way, but that our military presence in Iraq is possibly decreasing the probability of our reaching the desired outcome? As Jay Tea has noted many times, when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. For many on the right, it seems that the military is its hammer in the war on terror, and Iraq, as everything else, looks like a nail. Let's just for the moment entertain another possibility:

By now I'm sure those of you who are not entire within the bubble have heard about the Embassy Memo that details the instability in Iraq (please do read the .pdf) and the fact that anyone working for the US in Baghdad must keep that a secret, not to mention the ever-increasing restrictions on Iraqi women. We, as Americans, must decide what the goals in Iraq must be. It seems to me we have two basic choices, to build a stable, non-threatening Iraq or, to build a stable, pro-west, federalist democratic republic of Iraq (ok, there is a third option, not really a choice: defeat).

Is there anyone who regularly visits this site (or among its authors, and Jay, telling me I should post this on the BombSquat doesn't count) who can entertain the possibility that we have done all we can in Iraq, or at least that we are near the end of our usefulness there, and that our presence actually hurts our own goals? Even if you don't agree with it, can you entertain the possibility?

If you can than you must be able to admit that recommending withdrawal is, even if the wrong decision, at least a debatable one, and that proponents of such a view should not be met with idiotic slurs of anti-Americanism or "love of terrorists" or whatever.

Can we succeed in this war? I hope so. My dream for Iraq is a pro-western, non-authoritative, representative democracy in Iraq. That would be fucking great. The goals of the neo-conservatives (not the Jooooooos, morons) are laudable, its just the tactics they recommend to achieve those goals are wrongheaded, in my opinion. We cannot force the Middle East to become democratic-though that is the recipe for peace in the region-we may only be able to hinder the evolution of democracy.

(For all of you that wish to rebut this with, "you're a liberal, and some other liberal said this, so you have no credibility, fuck off. Such an argument has no credibility, and I don't answer for other people's opinions. For those of you who say, "do you have a better solution?", I have to respond that I don't have one that will result in the quick solution that our current administration promised (yes, look back at their pre-war predictions), but I do think that diplomacy, in many cases (not all), will work better than has our Iraq adventure).

I got so caught up I almost... (Below threshold)
mantis:

I got so caught up I almost forgot to respond to the rest! Ok, first, for the Kim the non-responder:

Not only would Bin Laden and his al Qaeda cells get this message loud and clear, but Kim Jung Il of North Korea and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, two leaders who are working to attain nuclear weapons, would as well.

Do you think our policy of "invade those who have no nuclear programs" might have influenced them a great deal more in that direction?

Bryan at Hot Air asks "when does it become legitimate to question not only Rep. Murtha's patriotism, but his loyalty and even his sanity?"

What an intelligent question to forward on to all of us. I have another: When does it become legitimate to excuse every notion of civilized debate in favor of an intellectually vapid categorization to an "enemy to the cause," in favor of jingoistic sentiment? Hmm, always?

Ok, for the rest of you:

I remember reading that they were watching pirated copies of Blackhawk Down to inspire themselves before we invaded.

I remember Apocalypse Now (you know, the Ride of the Valkyries scene) being inspiring to Iraq War soldiers. Does that mean that Vietnam inspired the Iraq War?

You have a segment of the population that is anti-war, anti-American, and pro-socialist rooting for American defeat.

Hooray, I love when my country loses! By the way, Trotsky! or something.

Had we confronted the terrorism in Somalia, the War on Terror would have a much different look.

Hilarious. How so? Do tell.

When was the last time a resolution in Congress telling the President how to prosecute a war did not cause more people to be killed?

epador, I should expect better of you. When was the last time a resolution in Congress telling the President how to prosecute a war did cause more people to be killed?

Provide proof, please.

mantis, I'll entertain the ... (Below threshold)

mantis, I'll entertain the possibility that the military is not *sufficient* to bring this to the desired conclusion. I'd take some convincing that our military presence is actually a hinderance... at least not one that outweighs the continued benifits.

Hammer and nail... the falacy of that argument is that nothing is *only* nails and you can't build much of anything with only a hammer. But you can't do much *without* a hammer either.

As far as I can tell we're continuing to turn over operations to Iraqi forces, but that's just one very small issue. We spend a heck of a lot of time and effort over there training those people and, personally, I think the longer exposure to American individuals and our military ethos and command structure that happens the better.

We really do do things differently and I think obviously better... for example, our reliance on non-commissioned officers... our NCOs and the relationship between our officers and NCO corp, is very different from what they are accustomed to. Being an officer in our military is not a class issue and not a place for self-enrichment. Even just a small influence in that direction will help and every little bit more than that will help that much more.

(And as someone or other has said... it takes us twenty years to make a senior NCO.)

Attitudes about justice. This isn't minor and I think it's probably more critical than ever, and yes, Iraqis are going to have to figure out rule of law on their own because it's a new thing for them, but *someone* there observing the police and courts can only help.

I think that decisions will continue to be made to reduce the number of troops in Iraq. I think it's important that our *posture* be that while we are doing that, we are entirely willing to do the opposite if necessary.


I'll entertain the possi... (Below threshold)
mantis:

I'll entertain the possibility that the military is not *sufficient* to bring this to the desired conclusion. I'd take some convincing that our military presence is actually a hinderance... at least not one that outweighs the continued benifits.

I'm not necessarily convinced myself. I was against the war because I thought it was an awful idea from the start, but once we we were committed, we had done so much damage (and yes, the first weeks of the war were very impressive, but considering our military might, what else could they have been?), what else could anyone hope for but a successful mission in Iraq? If we were going to war against my own interests and opinions that does not mean I don't desire our success in such a war. I will always hope for the success and dominance of US style democracy around the world. If all nations of the world were free democracies like we are I do believe we could overcome whatever obstacles stand in our way, as a species. Too bad orthodox religiosity prevents world motherfuckin' peace (yeah, I'm lookin' at you).

AH, of course it has NOTHIN... (Below threshold)
Ryan:

AH, of course it has NOTHING to do with ISlamism, which isvolved in most hot wars in the world, its orthodox RELIGION - thus attempting to assign equal weight to the CHristian and jJewis sphere asw to the Islamic sphere. Nice try, attempting to slip THAT little gem by. Look at the list of deeds and number of heads sawn off on video tape, and check the score.

I'm just sitting here think... (Below threshold)
James:

I'm just sitting here thinkin', how many of the good folks who want to stay in the Iraq war, actually have been in a war or the military at all? I'm thinkin' most of em have not or are not. I'm thinkin most of are arm chair patriots. As long as the destruction and devestation of war is 10000 miles away, they are all for it!

Had we confronted the te... (Below threshold)

Had we confronted the terrorism in Somalia, the War on Terror would have a much different look.

Hilarious. How so? Do tell.

It is quite simple really, at a time when respect and cooperation with the U.S. was at its highest point (following the Gulf War) Had we stayed and demonstrated a commitment to Somalia, and allowed them to develop their own representative government, Bin Laden would have had two choices: Fight and lose in Somalia, or retreat into hiding in Afghanistan. Neither of those two options would have allowed Bin Laden to recruit or to receive the charitable funding to carry out his Jihad against the West. In short we would put the battle field with Al Qaeda in Somalia rather than in Afghanistan or Iraq and we would have done it years before Al Qaeda was even fully formed. Our Allies throughout the world would not question if we had the resolve to see a conflict with terrorism and totalitarianism through to the end. Those allies facing Islamic terrorism today would likely not conclude that appeasing the terrorists is their best hope of survival.

But thanks to the Cut-N-Run advice of Murtha and others that is exactly the dilemma that many of our allies face. That Murtha is offering the same failed advice on Iraq is ludicrous, That others are taking that advice seriously is outright scary.

Darrell


Uh, mantis, I asked you fir... (Below threshold)

Uh, mantis, I asked you first. Proof please...

Murtha wins in a walk. Th... (Below threshold)
DickieFlatts:

Murtha wins in a walk. The people in his disctrict know the score. There are a lot of vets in his district and a lot of parents with kids serving. They all know that this war was sham, that it is being poorly run by the drunk-in-chief, and that we can't afford to spend 2 billion a day from here until Bush gets a clue.

Re: Had we confined terrori... (Below threshold)
Dickie Flatts:

Re: Had we confined terrorism to Somalia

At the time we were fighting in Somalia, the terrorists were putting down roots in Afghanistan, Yeman, and Sudan.

James - "I'm just sitting h... (Below threshold)
Big Mo:

James - "I'm just sitting here thinkin', how many of the good folks who want to stay in the Iraq war, actually have been in a war or the military at all? I'm thinkin' most of em have not or are not. I'm thinkin most of are arm chair patriots. As long as the destruction and devestation of war is 10000 miles away, they are all for it!"

You MUST be a liberal, because that crack is typical "chickenhawk" liberal sh!t.

Now, I haven't served, tis true, but many, many, many who support this war have and/or are serving. You have no idea who has or hasn't. So your "guess" is just plain idiotic.

Just hop on over to http://militaryoutpost.net/
and scan the list of blogs on the right-hand column. That should give you an idea of just how many current and ex-military on the right support what we're doing. And hopefully make you hang your head in shame, if you have any.

And it's a stupid argument, anyway. You don't have to be a cop to support the police. You don't have to be a fireman to support firefighters. And you don't have to be a volunteer soldier to support our mission in Iraq.

So sod off, swampy.

Dickie "At the time We were... (Below threshold)
914:

Dickie "At the time We were battling in Somalia,terrorists were putting down roots in Afghanistan,Yemen,Sudan."

So that means We should cut and run?? Why did We not start cutting the roots off then?

" Murtha wins in a walk."

Murtha cuts and runs! The people of Your district know this war was a sham? You mean there are no terrorists that are being killed in Iraq/Afghanistan?

Man did the people of Your district also call for a recount after the last election? wait dont answer..I already know.

Three words: Irey for Congr... (Below threshold)
bungaloebill:

Three words: Irey for Congress. http://www.irey.com/

James, Let's see...people o... (Below threshold)
geofferygellineck:

James, Let's see...people on the right (which include most military persons) who are interested in and support our military should be quiet when it comes to military matters.

People on the left, however, whom abhor anything military, run shreiking shrilly from ickypoo guns,
and have spent their whole lives avoiding any knowledge of, and sneering contempuously at, any meathead interested in such things, should just keep on blathering away.

Sound logic.

If the only people who had a say in politics were people who had military experience
our government would be 98% Republican, consistently. Something (i am guessing here)
you would not like very much.

I spent my younger years absorbed in the lefty party-sphere and heard/felt nothing but contempt
and ridicule for military people. Nothing but.
Now i hear a bunch of hogwash about how they support the troops but not the war. Baloney, were I to show flashcards to my friends I feel quite certain that they would be unable to differentiate between a French soldier and an American one. If they saw a fellow in cammys coming down the street they would switch sides.
Now they feign interest and empathy in hopes of reclaiming political favor with the troop supporting public. Hypocritical Hacks.

"Once a democratically elec... (Below threshold)
b:

"Once a democratically elected Iraqi government emerged, and a national army was trained, the only way we could lose this war was to forfeit it at home, through the influence of an adroit, loud minority of critics that for either base or misguided reasons really does wish us to lose. They really do."

-- Victor Davis Hanson

James: "I'm just sitting he... (Below threshold)

James: "I'm just sitting here thinkin', how many of the good folks who want to stay in the Iraq war, actually have been in a war or the military at all? I'm thinkin' most of em have not or are not. I'm thinkin most of are arm chair patriots. As long as the destruction and devestation of war is 10000 miles away, they are all for it!"

I'm going to take your statement seriously for a moment. Firstly, I served during the first Gulf War, not in the Gulf but technically forward deployed on a base that qualified me for hazardous duty pay. I say "technically" because our problems were mostly local and people did die, but it wasn't directly related to anything happening in the middle east.

For the most part, those in the military do not want war. Duh. But this is not even remotely related to wanting to *stay* once a conflict begins. The two things are very, very, different.

Training for war doesn't make you *want* it, but it does pretty much assume that you do believe that the military can be a force for good in the world. There is an assumption, there *has* to be or why bother, that what they've trained to do can work and is *worth it*. Worth the risk and worth the sacrifice.

People who believe that "war never solved anything" don't tend to favor military service.

Once engaged, wanting to stay is wanting to win and wanting all your effort to mean something in the long run. Because if the military isn't going to be allowed to stick it out and do the job they were asked to do, they shouldn't have been asked to do it in the first place.

But the fact is, they were.

I consider it a horrible slap in the face to those who have spent time over there and who know exactly how hard it is, to now decide that it's too hard so let's stop and let all that effort come to nothing. The personal sacrifices made are incredible. But they were made (mostly) by people who believe in what they do.

You don't think they'd prefer to stay?

Well, okay, no. They *all* want to come home but that's not at the expense of what they've accomplished.

Ask them.

Just don't decide that they have to believe a certain thing or think the way you expect them to think just because that makes sense to you.

Support the troops? Conside... (Below threshold)
Drew E.:

Support the troops? Consider going down to your Local V.A. hospital and filling out a volunteer application. Hey a few hours a week. Even easier is to simply go down and sit in one of the waiting areas. Attend the next funeral of a troop killed in your town. Go out of your way to employ a vet.

Seriously, what are you really doing other than a magnetic yellow ribbon, blaming Clinton and Murtha?
See you won't do these things because of the "effort" it requires. Also such an effort requires a direct connection with the reality.

Cut and freakin' Run? What are you doing or prepared to do for those who have returned?
(By the way if you're a vet in Denver, come out to the Denver V.A.'s annual 4th of July picnic. I be dishin' up the ice cream as usual)..just another moonbat disabled vet for peace...

Continuing to wage a war th... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Continuing to wage a war that cannot be won using the means currently employed fits the classic definition of insanity.

The fact that the Republicans currently in office will never admit their mistakes leaves everyone else the obligation to force the issue, and force an agenda and timetable to end this mess. The "end game" dialog the Democrats have initiated is already having a positive effect towards ending the war in Iraq.

"The "end game" dialog the ... (Below threshold)
Big Mo:

"The "end game" dialog the Democrats have initiated is already having a positive effect towards ending the war in Iraq."

Only in your mind, Murtha, er, Lee.

Big Mo...Whatch doin' for o... (Below threshold)
Drew E.:

Big Mo...Whatch doin' for our returned troops? I hope you are at least givin' a quarter to the vet bum on the corner...

I am currently serving in t... (Below threshold)
Chad:

I am currently serving in the military, and I can tell you right now what the troops want. They want to finish the job. I myself have not been over, but am still trying. Why? To finish it. Do I like the idea of putting myself in harm's way, hell no. But I'll do it, because it's what it takes to keep all this free. People say this war has nothing to do with terrorism, or keeping terrorists at arms length. I ask you, how many attacks have there been inside the U.S. since 9/11? A handful, mostly disorganized, and of smaller scale. I talk to vets, troops, and those who've been there everyday. Not one of the current troops talks about pulling out. I talk to people every day, and they worry about all the time they spent there going to waste. Do I think we need to do more for the guys that have been wounded, and for our vets? Yes I do, we owe them our entire country. How do we do it? We honor their sacrifices by not giving in. By winning. By perservering in the face of ALL adversity. Drew, you have my personal respect for the things you are doing and have done. I just don't see how leaving the Iraqi people to sort this whole mess out without any help is productive. Democracy is what we are there to promote. Yes, it's a hard road, and they might not "get it" yet, but if we show them the way, how can they not figure it out. The greatest tool for democracy in the world is the American soldier. With all our fallibility, all our shortcomings, and all our vices, who puts a more human face on democracy than the people willing to fight for it?

"Yes, it's a hard road, ... (Below threshold)
Lee:

"Yes, it's a hard road, and they might not "get it" yet, but if we show them the way, how can they not figure it out."

Maybe it's the bullets whizzing through their children's bodies that has them all confused? You see, that wasn't happeneing before we invaded their country.

mantis... I try. I really ... (Below threshold)

mantis... I try. I really do. I'd love to have a discussion with you that was all nuanced and involved about all of the different things we need to do and the different methods to achieve our goals, including ones that don't involve guns (and there is a lot of that going on)... but then Lee comes along and about as nuanced as I'm able to get is...

Lee, you're a moron. Our brave men and women are doing a fabulous job and that won't change just because you piss on them.

Oh... and of course children weren't dying before we showed up... that's why Saddam's mass graves only had adults in them and his chemical weapons involved age specific targeting.

Moron.

And there weren't any children's prisons in Kurdistan either. Not. One.

The "liberal" point of view... (Below threshold)
James:

The "liberal" point of view is obviously misinterpreted by the "conservatives". Liberals don't abhor the military. I spent 20 years serving in the U.S. military. What I noticed about conservative political support of the military focused mostly on the procurment of weapon systems, and liberal politics focused mostly on indivdual issues ie pay raises, better living conditions etc. To say that most of the military is conservative is....WOW, where did you get your poll information? Or are you just relying on your gut feeling.
I support the troops whole heartedly,but not the fat cat politicians who started the war under false pretenses. What is the end goal in Iraq? A stable government? Please, I have a better chance of seeing the second coming of christ vs that in my life time.

Synova,I'm guessing... (Below threshold)
James:

Synova,
I'm guessing, you feel we should have stayed in Vietnam too?

James:RE: "To say ... (Below threshold)
kevino:

James:

RE: "To say that most of the military is conservative is....WOW, where did you get your poll information?"

google: military poll voting republican democrat

You'll get numerous hits, including this piece from USA on the 2004 election:

Even so, experts who examined the survey results said they do not bode well for the Kerry campaign's efforts to woo the military, a traditionally Republican and conservative voting bloc. . . . But the results suggest it will be difficult for Kerry to make substantial gains among a group that has strongly supported Republican presidential candidates in the post-Vietnam era.



Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy