Now go fall in line with all the other smelly hippies.
Posted on 11/11/2005 5:04:55 AM PST by kristinn
We see them every day on the back windows of SUVs, on the fuel doors of sedans--stickers and magnets that say "Support Our Troops." Sometimes they sport yellow ribbons; sometimes American flags. Often they are weathered, peeling off the metal or glass. We see them so often it's easy to tune them out. Like the inoffensive "Have a nice day," the slogan is a pleasant sentiment that skims across our consciousness and disappears into the air.
On Veteran's Day, when we honor all of those who have served our country through the military, it's helpful to take a closer look at these three words that have become so familiar: What does it mean to truly support our troops?
Often, when people ask us to support our troops, they are asking us to support the Bush Administration's decisions in Iraq. But is the Administration supporting our troops by sending them into a war based on lies? By sending them into one battle after another with inadequate body armor, inadequately armored vehicles? By bringing home the wounded in the dead of night so we can pretend they don't exist? By cutting veteran's benefits upon their return, so they have to struggle to pay for their housing, their groceries, their medical care? By making young men and women fight an unwinnable war, a war that no longer has the backing of the American people?
Since March, peace groups including CodePink and Veterans for Peace have been staging a weekly candlelight vigil in front of Walter Reed Hospital in Washington, DC, to highlight the needs of injured soldiers. Lately, the vigils have been met by aggressive counterdemonstrators, who line up on the opposite side of the street with signs denouncing the vigil. These people support the war in Iraq and argue that demonstrations are demoralizing to the recovering soldiers. But how demoralizing must it be for soldiers coming home to discover that in state after state, Veterans Administration hospitals are being shut down? How demoralizing must it be for injured soldiers to have to fight for disability benefits, to be faced with increased co-payments, to be told that their post-traumatic stress disorder is not war-related?
What is the impact on soldiers still in Iraq to learn that the Bush Administration manipulated the intelligence about weapons of mass destruction in order to justify an invasion? How must they feel when they learn that Iraqis don't want us there or understand that their acts of bravery are not making their families safer at home? How demoralizing must it be to see their buddies die in a war that increasing numbers of soldiers don't even believe in?
More than 2,000 of our troops have been killed, and more than 15,000 injured. These numbers are important to remember, but it is also important to remember that our troops are not numbers, not statistics. They are human beings, and there are actions we can take to support them that are much more meaningful than blindly supporting our President or slapping a magnet on the back of our gas-guzzling car.
Send care packages to Iraq: books and snacks and toiletries to mitigate some of the harshness of the desert war zone. Donate to organizations, like the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans, that provide help for returning soldiers struggling to put their lives together after war. Stand on street corners with candles and signs that spotlight the injustices our troops face. Support groups like Iraq Veterans Against the War, made up of courageous soldiers speaking out against the war. Urge elected officials to end this misbegotten military adventure. Support clean, green energy programs and lifestyles that move us off our dependence on other countries' oil.
As we honor the sacrifice and courage of our veterans, let us recognize that the best way to support our troops is to call for their swift exit from Iraq, to guarantee them the care they deserve when they return, and to make policy changes that will stop us from ever again rushing into a reckless war.
Medea's version of 'supporting the troops' is to give $600,000 in cash and aid to Al Qaeda in Iraq while telling our troops at Walter Reed they are fighting in an unwinnable war.
Now go fall in line with all the other smelly hippies.
Hehe. Yep, they can't stand it that we've matched them outside Walter Reed every Friday night.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie.Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
What a jerk. What's that word that the University of Colorado president used as a term of endearment? I can't say it here.
Keep it up!
ping
If I was in the service and I got moral support like that, I would turn it away. What good is support when all it does is make me question myself? That's not support at all.
Unwinnable only when America quits. Then we live to fight it again.
Let's assume for the sake of this argument that Bush lied. This then begs the question, why?
Can it not be said that if Bush said " I want to take down Saddam Hussein because he is generally a pain in the ass and I'm sick of his shit", these nitwits at code Pinko would have had a hissy fit and screamed "not in my name", "no blood for oil" and "Breasts not bombs" just as they are today. Would the Demoncraps and the MSM 5th Column, and all those on the take in Kofie the Criminal's Oil for Graft program opposed it just the same?
It seems to me that Bush sort of painted himself into this corner by trying to justify the step-down of Saddam with sensational WMD charges. I'm sure that Saddam had everything that Bush said that he did. But in the Run-up to the invasion Saddam had the chance to scatter his stocks and bury them in the desert just to make the US look bad, which again Saddam has again managed to do.
No, this is not about supporting the troops as Code Pinko has suggested, it is about advancing the idea that Bush lied, and that they want to start impeachment proceedings against him. I believe as I suggester earlier that Saddam was a pain in the ass and he needed to be dealt with. He didn't follow the prescriptions for surrender from the first gulf war and there were no other justifications necessary.
Medea the DC Chapter has been there and out numbered you since day one.
ping
Rule 3: forget your moral questions about the war. Morality is for those who support the war and for those who oppose the war, not for those in the war. Those seriously wounded are still fighting the war so clam up about the immorality of this stupid war.
A corollary to this rule is never protest against a war in front of a military facility, especially a military hospital. That is a no-brainer. You demonstrate against those who made the policy to go to war, not against those who are sworn to carry out the order to go to war.
Code Pink has posted on their Website the article that I linked and excerpted above. Apparently they either didn't read the advice within it, or they disregarded the advice.
If the latter, then that is proof positive that they don't care about the troops; that their goal is to humiliate and demoralize the wounded soldiers and their families, and to increase the pain and anguish they are experiencing as they fight to live and to heal their wounds.
I really appreciate all of your efforts. Thank you, kristinn.
Side benefit.
What we really want is for them to go away.
One day they are going to get on a wounded soldier's last nerve...
She seems in serious need of a Midol.
The one TRUTHFUL thing this hater of FREEDOM wrote...
" Lately, the vigils have been met by aggressive counterdemonstrators, who line up on the opposite side of the street with signs denouncing the vigil. These people support the war in Iraq and argue that demonstrations are demoralizing to the recovering soldiers.
"These people" are FReepers who love this Country and love FREEDOM and love and support the troops. I am proud to be one of "these people"!
Happy Veterans Day, and thank you to all who serve or have served and for all who support our troops outside of Walter Reed Medical Center!
It's not going to stop until the rest of America makes them stop.
In order to be consistent, I'm wondering if the cry for a picture should take place with Susie, as it does with Ann? Obviously the reasons for a picture would be different in the case of Susie, but it would certainly add to the ability to recognize the enemy for those of us not in the area. I thought Susie was from CA. Does she fly out from there every Fri or does she reside in DC, or just not present all the time?
The question from the journalist student lurks still.
"Do you want us to win?"
And thank you so much for being there Kristinn.
I am far away from there, but if I get to go visit my friend in D.C. this year I will contact you and be right out there with you and other fellow Freepers.
Now go fall in line with all the other smelly hippies."
What's the point of posting a photo of a woman rolling a TOBACCO cigarette?
Meh... I dunno the dif between them all... Unlike her, I've never tried them.
I always figured that if "Bush lied" about WMD in Iraq, he would have made sure that there was an early and dramatic "discovery" of some kind of stuff to back up the "lie". It wouldn't have been real hard to do. But the fact is that Saddam had so damned much time to hide and/or move most of it to places like Syria - time and opportunit that was bought for him by the French and the Russians especially.
How many dead and injured soldiers did your $600,000 buy, Medusa? Saddam misses you, and says he had a great time when you guys were his honored guests.
I actually agree with her, sort of, on this point. If the war is "unwinnable" it's not because we don't have the power to win, but because Lyndon Baines Bush continues to pursue a no-win strategy and refuses to unleash the force, the weaponry, and the protection needed to enable our troops to get the job done and over with.
Does this set off alarm bells for anyone else?
Does this set off alarm bells for anyone else?
bttt
I guess it's the constant back and forth between him being "evil" and then being "stupid". He probably "forgot" to plant the evidence.
LOL
Teh only problem with that is that, as Ric heard Miniter points out, our troops have found:
1500 gallons of chemical weapons
1000 units of radioactive materials
17 chemical warheads (5X more powerful than Sarin)
177 metric tons of enriched uranium
and, of course, several Sarin shells.
Remember that Saddam had hidden centrifuge parts in teh backyard of one of his ministers, plannign to reassemble the centrifuge as soon as the insepctors went away.
Also remember that, as Bill Gertz of the Washington Times, perhaps hte best national security reporter in America, wrote, our satellite intelligence picked up Russian trucks hauling large loads from Iraqi weapons plants to Syria.
I think we're getting to them more and more as the weeks go by. Even they can't continue to pretend the soldier's support what they are doing. Eventually, the people that show up on their side have to see that we're the ones getting the support. They're not used to being pushed back and they don't like it one bit.
THe Code Pinkos must still be mad at you for blocking Cindy Jihad's bus!
Great job!
Bump to your ping and THANK YOU!
Reading her "crapp" really makes me angry!
Now I have to go out and try to honor Veteran's Day even more!
Thank you for your service to our country BufordP. I know you would do it all over again if they would take you.
so why is the issue that Bush lied still out there?
177 metric tons of enriched uranium nothing to sneeze at.
obviously Barbara Streisand and Code Pinko and Cindy Shitforbrains don't consider enriched uranium to be a problem.
Again, I would have preferred that Bush just said Saddam has not complied with the terms of surrender from 1991 and were going to finish the job...period. We don't need the UN's approval since it was not necessary. Saddam did not live up to the terms of the contract and now we are going to enforce the the penalty provisions of that contract.
What did show up was consistent with an organized effort to clean up the evidence and move it out. Little bits were missed in the process, and that's all we've found. From the satellite photos of convoys heading for Syria, a reasonable person could presume that the explanation (for not finding large caches) was exactly that.
I also discovered, early on, that leftists are not reasonable people. Even more than wmd, the Saddam-terrorist connection was sufficient reason for me to justify invading Iraq. All I needed to see were the photos of the training facility at Salman Pak. In discussions and e-mails with friends and neighbors of a liberal persuasion, it soon became apparent to me that facts and logic were bouncing off their emotional mindset like the nerf rockets my son and I used to play with. I soon ceased to bother them with arguments and facts.
What does work is what we do at Walter Reed every Friday night. Look over the photos in the after action reports and you will see that few people come back for a second "vigil". There is a small core group of professional protesters, along with some chronic underdog type personalities, whose faces show up week after week. The others, whether because of shame, or because even leftists don't like to feel like losers, are never seen again.
I love it that Susie "medea" Benjamin felt the need to blatantly lie about our counter-protest.
Since March, peace groups including CodePink and Veterans for Peace have been staging a weekly candlelight vigil in front of Walter Reed Hospital in Washington, DC, to highlight the needs of injured soldiers. Lately, the vigils have been met by aggressive counterdemonstrators, who line up on the opposite side of the street with signs denouncing the vigil.
"Lately"? We've been there from the beginning, and outnumbered them most weeks to boot. Someday they will quietly give up and go away, because, like the terrorists they so admire, all they respect is overwhelming force. That's why FReepers who possibly can should make the effort to show up at Walter Reed as often as they can, even if it's only once. The troops, the press, the pinkos, and the people who drive by need to see that the Code Pink "vigilers" do not represent the majority of Americans.
Taht certainly was reason enough. All the other stuff was just buttressing it.
We don't need the UN's approval since it was not necessary.
Also true. However, I find it interesting that the people who are most in love with the UN were so upset when we went and enforced one of its resolutions.
"The wheels on the bus go round and round..."
Thank you Bump!
Click here for the full editorial; and here is an excerpt:
Virtually every western intelligence service reached the very same conclusion. So did all the major media between 1998 and 2001--including the Washington Post, the New York Times, and U.S. News. So did the most senior officials of the Clinton administration. In a conversation I had with President Clinton, just before the Iraq invasion, his concern was not whether or not Saddam had WMD but that a war seeking regime change would provide the pretext for him to use them. Add to this the fact that Saddam had sacrificed over $120 billion in oil revenues to U.N. sanctions, presumably to protect his secret weapons programs.
So, what happened? Last year's bipartisan report by the Senate Intelligence Committee stated the panel "did not find any evidence that administration officials attempted to coerce, influence, or pressure analysts to change their judgment related to Iraq's WMD." Earlier this year, the Robb-Silverman report was equally clear, finding "no evidence of political pressure to influence the intelligence community's prewar assessments of Iraq's weapons programs" and no political pressure "to skew or alter any . . . analytical judgments." Rather, the report said, "it was the paucity of intelligence and poor analytical tradecraft, rather than political pressure, that produced the inaccurate prewar intelligence assessments."
All y'all need to direct your comments to the editors who ran this piece of gahbbage....
Thanks for the ping, Buford.
"Lately, the vigils have been met by aggressive counterdemonstrators, who line up on the opposite side of the street with signs denouncing the vigil."
Boy, that lining up on the opposite side of the street holding signs shows real aggressiveness.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.