Oh, don’t worry, the military doesn’t get singled out in such a statement of trust. It usually extends to any governmental agency and/or a politician or a company — any of whom tend to hire PR people to massage the truth. It’s not the government or business are known for truth-telling standards.
As I said sarcasm just doesn't work well in this medium. Frankly, I have personally been impressed by the Military's candor and self examination during this whole operation. This is just a key disagreement we have. You are reaching for an impossible standard. I have already said this.
Most of the time, the small guy, various individuals, are the ones who are trying to tell the truth on a matter. So, I’ll be giving a lot of weight to individuals whose first-hand experience is “at stake” so to speak, rather than a bigger organization (whomever that might be) who has an overall agenda in what they’re doing.
This is simply a raw over generalization. I listen to Military sources both organizational and individual and this group in our Military is the best there has ever been in the history of the world. If the level of transparency they are offering is not enough for you at this point, you would have to be sitting in their meetings and briefings and frankly thats not in our nations best interest. The Military is already trying too hard and should find a way to back up a bit.
Hey, we’re not talking about putting yellow tape around a piece of ground where the enemy is still zinging bullets around. To put it in that category is nowhere near what telling the truth is about. It’s simply giving an accurate rendition of the story — well..., let’s say one that, at the very least, matches what the main participant says... That would be a good starting point...
This is beyond being completely unrealistic. But, some are saying the Military is already trying to conform to some version of this level of documenting. This is part of the Democrat "Slow Bleed" strategy, to cause our soldiers and Marines to second guess themselves as they attempt to be more policemen than war fighters. Soldiers are not suited to police work in general though they can do similar things in a pinch.
The standards in battle are dangerous for our guys if you try to make it pretty. Its just not that sort of endeavor. And, scandal and controversy about actions are post action issues, we cannot afford this effort to hamstring these guys, this is all about running up their casualties with an eye toward justifying the DEFEATIST stance.
I’m not playing devil’s advocate here. What I said, it’s meant in the plainest sense that anyone can read or understand. The big problem here — on Free Republic — is that it’s “polarized” (politically speaking). That means that everything is literally “charged” with one political pole or the other.
This is clearly a cogent and insightful remark. But, frankly, Free Republic rarely tolerates much representation of the other side so its not so polarized as rational or bizarre. This is ok, because we are often soaked in the words and ideas of the Liberals and we come here to share with like minded people and to brainstorm in a supportive milieu. In that this can encourage group think, that is a possibility, but on the whole folks around here have to swim against an almost impossible tide of distortions and twisted charges that deny reality as we know we lived through it. The Democrats are actually planning to hold hearings on the veracity of the "16 words" controversy which is a proven fact. The British not only did say this, they reconfirmed it and said in your face! How can this be a lie, but every lib you run into will say this is a lie. Insane. So understand when you start quoting this insanity, there isn't much patience for it.
As far as “researching” my other postings, you probably wouldn’t find them interesting, but rather hum-drum. I mean, is anyone’s posting more interesting than to oneself? That would be like telling any one of us to write a book about ourselves and see if we could even sell it to our own relatives
Eh. I just couldn't get where your deep suspicions were coming from. I recently was really insulted here by someone in the Active Military and it brought me up short, because this guy had no idea of the price that volunteers pay to get out and counter protest the crazies. I noticed at that time, there is a divide between civilians and military that can be irritating in that some do look down their noses at the rest of us. But, alas, this is not a common stance, just it takes all sorts. So, I have alot of sympathy for folks saying that civilians have a very valid and important perspective and that civilians are not second class citizens compared to people who are actively serving. But, we civilians who care, actively work to keep these guys morale up and let them know we do support them and their mission. Anything else is not in our own best interests unless and until these guys are facing us rather than our enemies. The Terrorists are truly existential enemies who do intend to murder and intimidate Americans and all free people in this world and they have to be fought on every level. Fought with bullets and ideas. Infighting behind our lines is counterproductive. Reasonable oversight is extremely productive. But this oversight is not necessarily the concern of the general public on the level of each individual unit's actions except as exposed by history as notable events.
have to be speaking truth on these issues (whatever the topic of discussion is).
The issue is whether "truth" in the context of the interpretation of events through the lens of intentional misrepresentations by the current Democrats is a reasonable exersize. Once you accept their frame, it becomes problematic. The Tillman episode and the rescue of Lynch were accompanied by statements by the military which were at least 80% accurate within 30 days of the action, and increasingly accurate as you review the press releases actually released by the military so that the history they are offering now is more accurate by far than anything offered in these hearings. I just reject outright that there is anything to be wanted from the military in the way of increasing their reporting or transparency. Abu Garib, other than the pictures, was a Military report released to the public long before CBS got their hands on it and blew it all out of proportion. They were already working on indictments and accountability for these actors. Right now, they are pressing charges against a corrupt Colonel and its in the news. If you look at the Military information sites you can get a gusher of good and bad news. Its just insane to ask for more. So complaining in this situation about their performance in this is based only on accepting the proposition argued by leftists that the Military is "evil" inherently. Crap! Thats just baseless and wrong. So let this go and find the facts, free your mind of the Democrat talking points.
You said — “Garph.. you have sucked me into another round.”
—
Look, if you don’t want to go around and around, that’s fine.
Just understand that I’m not coming at a lot of these things from a political viewpoint. I’m here, on this forum, mostly talking from a “worldview” that is *primarily* from a Biblical viewpoint and from the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. And that is very likely going to end up coming out differently that some from a political angle.
I can understand the political angle and analyze it as well, but that’s not my main viewpoint.
Of course, not every last thing I ever talk about is going to be strictly from that viewpoint, either. I do talk about computers and traveling and other stuff. I’m sure that those other things are not *explicitly* talked about in the Bible. However, pretty much *everything* is *implicitly* talked about in the Bible, in the ways we “use and interact” with all these things that we do.
So, please feel free to drop the whole discussion if you wish. I mean, I’m not going to come up with a “new worldview” because of this particular discussion... :-)