Quote:
Originally posted by Felix The Assassin:
I'll tell you why. To allow her this day, this freedom of speech, this freedom to travel from one location to another, and the freedom to protest the President of the United States! Now she has these freedoms, and NONE have been lost, even thou she has a loss. She now needs to take her energy, and focus it towards a thing called "SUPPORT OUR TROOPS". The more messages people like this send out, the more our liberal "READ" 'LEFT WEENIE REPORTERS' transmit all over the world. What do you think that does to the moral of the grunt on the ground? Review history, and realize when we gave up on Korea, we could only hold half of the country free. When we gave up on Vietnam, we gave all hope of freedom away. When the Russians gave up on the Balkans, freedom to an extent was removed. Then the British pulled out of the Balkans, and again freedom feel. We are still in the Balkans, however we have many allies on this mission, and freedom has a chance. Didn't know we were still there? It was only a 3 year mission under President Clinton. 9 years later, we are still there. Why? What have they done to us? How many WMD do they have? It ain't all about WMD anymore, the invasion is over, the reason we entered to start with. The country as a whole has given us no resistance, it's the 'Freedom Fighters' (freaking terrorist), and loyalist, and brainwashed underlings seeking favortism from superiors that won't do it themselves, and Allah that are preventing the exit. I thought everybody understood that. Today it's all about building and allowing freedom to reign. But I'll tell you right here on this forum. If we pull out prematurely, WE WILL have to go BACK, and our enemy may have a larger stromger front when we do!
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/08/....ap/index.html
The loss of a soldier, any soldier is a tradgedy. Where would we be today if we would have given up on General George Washington?
|
Felix: I offer a couple of agreements and a few challenges. We both separate the initial (second) invasion of Iraq from the occupation. Leaving now would be worse than invading a nation on spurious claims. I can also understand your anger as it pertains to the effects on troop morale, since you've in all likihood witnessed that firsthand.
I read that (disputed) Wiki on American liberalism, and, while informative, I think it detracts from your usage of the term 'liberal' more than it defends it. It identifies the philosophy of containment as liberal, which is the only mention of political stances on war. Liberal media claims are another matter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_b..._United_States
This is also disputed and as an added caveat, is not up to 'higher standards' of wiki. There's really not much to go on objectively. What it boils down to is that American media is variably subject to some level of political bias (both liberal and conservative), but all American media is subject to structural and financial biases. Those aren't to be overlooked, and it's not something you'll see any media challenge itself on. For political bias, you could point to the Dan Rather SNAFU and daily tallies of American and insurgents killed, but you could also point to the rallying media war-cry in the run-up to the Iraq war. Recently, a very liberal media would have probably put more emphasis on the FBI's recently acknowledged spying on anti-war groups and protesters at the RNC/DNC. Instead I see this in the context of stories about soldiers being awarded medals, non-profits building wheelchair accessible houses for disabled vets, and a local WW2 vet being awarded the veteran of the year award. All of it happened locally (for me), and all were reported.
Quote:
|
I posted that for a simpleton reason. Not all liberals are of the American liberal society, and it is mainly the American Liberal press to the free world that evokes annoyance to the rest of society.
|
Here I see 'liberal media' as a scapegoat. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be against the idea of free press as far as military matters go. Though you're annoyed by this woman and story, it happened. It drove its gaudy train right up to where GW is vacationing. Hell, I'd be annoyed if I ended up behind them in our single lane highways in backwoods Texas going 15 mph lol. However, I didn't see any bias in the actual story. Maybe there's a bias in presenting it, but given all the "One bereaved mother/wife" stories with the opposite message, I wouldn't go to the mat for this. Plus, if you believe in an omni-present liberal media, then that gives you something in common with Rush Limbaugh. I'm just saying...
As for the view of political and military intervention as decreasing and increasing freedom, I'll just say we've been decreasers too, and that this kind of reduction isn't useful in the first place.
...
If we'd given up on George Washington, we might be doing as poorly as, say, Canada and Australia
And lol DBear...never heard that one. I did find "Wingnut" for our conservative friends though, which seems equivalent.