Cindy Sheehan and W to be neighbors

[GrrlGoalie33]

Sheehan is not pushing her agenda she is the voice for millions of Americans and thousands of parents who have lost their children in this "war". Her battle did not start until after her son had died, so his death was the cause and not the effect of this battle of hers.

There are hundreds of groups that fight things every day, so should they all be ashamed of their fight? Are they disgracing what they are fighting for?

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

or would you do something to make sure that other people didn't have to suffer that similar fate, or worse, suffer through it again with another of your children?

How about make sure they don't join the military?

If you don't want to go to war, joining the US military is a pretty dumb idea.

He made his choice, his mother needs to accept that. I guarantee if her son didn't die she wouldn't be doing all of this.

[Ozy_Flame]

While Sheehan is a tenacious and noble anti-war activist who has done a significant job as an advocate of the anti-war movement, why does no one talk of what Casey Sheehan thought of the war? I'm sure he didn't fully agree with the nature of the War in Iraq, but for someone who re-enlisted right after the war began, AND volunteered his services to a Quick Reaction Force when the 5th Cavalvry Regiment came under attack (which ultimately lead to his death), you'd have to think that maybe he was more pragmatic about the American presence in Iraq than his mom certainly was.

Casey Sheehan is a true hero, and unfortunately his story has been much overshadowed by his mother's activism, regardless if you agree with her or not.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Casey Sheehan is a true hero, and unfortunately his story has been much overshadowed by his mother's activism, regardless if you agree with her or not.

[arsenal]

Originally Posted by Frankster

Sheehan is not pushing her agenda she is the voice for millions of Americans and thousands of parents who have lost their children in this "war". Her battle did not start until after her son had died, so his death was the cause and not the effect of this battle of hers.

She has used her son's death to push her into the limelight.
And she is using it to push an agenda.

On January 24, 2006, Sheehan took a trip to Venezuela, sponsored by that nation's foreign ministry......she stated "I admire President Chávez for his strength to resist the United States" while saying she agreed with Harry Belafonte's statement that President Bush is "the greatest terrorist in the world." Also, while in Venezuela, Sheehan released a statement that unless Senator Dianne Feinstein voted to filibuster the Supreme Court confirmation of Samuel Alito, she would challenge Feinstein for her Senate seat.

Sheehan wrote that she "decided to buy property in Crawford to use until George's resignation or impeachment, which we all hope is soon for the sake of the world." She also stated that she "can't think of a better way to use Casey's insurance money than for peace", and that she is sure that Casey would have approved.

I am not saying she doesn't have a right to upset or angry, or doesn't have the right to protest. By all means go ahead. What I am saying is by using her son's death, who by all accounts wanted to be in Iraq, wanted to help the Iraqi people, and wanted to be in the military, as the catalyst to start her campaign against President Bush, she is tarnishing what her son and thousands of other young men and woman from around the world are trying to do in Iraq. You pull out now, and yes, all their deaths will be in vain. You continue on in Iraq, then their deaths wont be for nothing.

Originally Posted by Frankster

There are hundreds of groups that fight things every day, so should they all be ashamed of their fight? Are they disgracing what they are fighting for?

No, I am not saying that. Everyone has the right to fight in what they beleive in. It is the way she is using her sons death that I don't agree with.

[Flashpoint]

Originally Posted by arsenal

I am not saying she doesn't have a right to upset or angry, or doesn't have the right to protest. By all means go ahead. What I am saying is by using her son's death, who by all accounts wanted to be in Iraq, wanted to help the Iraqi people, and wanted to be in the military, as the catalyst to start her campaign against President Bush, she is tarnishing what her son and thousands of other young men and woman from around the world are trying to do in Iraq. You pull out now, and yes, all their deaths will be in vain. You continue on in Iraq, then their deaths wont be for nothing.

I don't understand your mentality. The thousands of deaths in Iraq are for nothing. Period.

If you are fighting a war on terror, then why would you go into a country that had no connection to terrorists?

The country that didn't support terrorists, and was a secular state held together by a horrible dictator, is now descending into civil war, is a breeding ground for terrorisim, and will very quickly become a fragmented series of Islamic regions heavily influenced by Iran. The world is now far worse off than it was with a contained, and stable Iraq.

The really aggrivating part is how it is totally unfolding just like was predicted 3 years ago when the US invaded for no apparent reason.

Are the US soldiers, and Iraqi civilians dying for freedom? Democracy? To fight terror? No on all counts. None of those 3 things is going to happen. You can't force democracy at the end of a rifle. You can sure create a lot of people who hate you though.

So what are they dying for?

Because Saddam Hussein was a bad guy? There are a lot of "bad guys" out there. Some of them even support terrorisim. Some of them lead countries that had 9/11 bombers from them. Like Saudi Arabia. You know, where it is legal to execute minors and the mentally handicapped.

Oh, wait, that happens in the US too...

I ask again = Other than securing Oil, why are all these lives being wasted?

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

I ask again = Other than securing Oil, why are all these lives being wasted?

How about maintaining the American way of life? Try this on for size. Consider what would happen if Iraq actually shifted over to the Euro dollar as their standard for their oil bourse. What impact would that have on the marketplace and demand for American dollars. Consider that Iran was supposed to do the exact same thing, but has held off to this point (gee, the last guys that thought of this got invaded). Venezuela has moved to the Euro standard and Russia is now considering it as well. If all of these countries jump to the Euro standard, what would that do to the money market and demand for the US buck? Would the maket be flooded as countries switched to Euros? Would that no devalue the US dollar? What would that do to the $6 trillion in debt the US had? Now imagine what it would do to the $11 trillion they are now in hock? If the US buck becomes a 50 cent dollar to the Euro, and the Euro becomes the trading standard, then the US debt inflates grossly overnight. That $11 trillion could become $20 trillion before you know it. That could bankrupt the nation. Anyhow, its just a theory. It might also explain the run on gold in the US of late. Think about that one for a while.

[arsenal]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

That $11 trillion could become $20 trillion before you know it. That could bankrupt the nation. Anyhow, its just a theory. It might also explain the run on gold in the US of late. Think about that one for a while.

Right.. so how do you explain the pound sterling doing so well? It sure as hell is not a standard. USD is not a "standard" like the Euro is. USD is not the standard in Canada.

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

ask again = Other than securing Oil, why are all these lives being wasted?

Right.. oil.. because the US doesn't buy it from OPEC like everyone else. Because the US isn't seeing increased prices at the pumps either. If it was about oil, why not invade Alberta? Sure as hell would have been alot easier. All of our troops are in Afghanistan.

Fine you think that their lives are being wasted being there right now. I think that if the troops leave now, their lives will have been wasted. Agree to disagree.

[Flashpoint]

Originally Posted by arsenal

Fine you think that their lives are being wasted being there right now. I think that if the troops leave now, their lives will have been wasted. Agree to disagree.

I can respect that. This isn't an easy topic for a lot of folks to talk about. If you don't want to say any more, it is fine by me.

However, I would love to see someone post a well thought out, defensible justification for the war in Iraq. Simply because I have yet to see one that makes any sense to me.


Personally (and it is just my opinion) I think the invasion of Iraq occured for 3 reasons.

1) The administration of George W. Bush wanted to get rid of Saddam Hussein as part of their "legacy". 9/11 just gave them a big reason they could spin. They were able to claimed Hussein was in league with Al Queda, said he had WMD's he was going to give to Al Queda. The perfect excuse for "finishing" what Bush Sr. started.

2) The US will take as many friendly oil rich nations as they can get - even if they are puppet states.

3) A friendly nation in the middle east is an attractive proposition to the US. They are pragmatists, and will always act in what is in the best interests of the American state.


I am all for fighting terror. I think it is a good thing Afghanistan is no longer in the hands of the Taliban. I doubt it is going to last (given the revenue now generated by heroin production of which I believe Afghanistan is now once again the world leader), but I see the United States and Canada as totally justified going in there. The Taliban supported the 9/11 terrorists.

Iraq was not a terrorist state. The Bush administration knew this. They still chose to go in. They didn't have the foresight to take enough troops to secure the country. Once out from under the boot of a dictator, everyone on earth with a understanding of the Iraqi political situation knew the Kurds, Sunni's, and Shia were going to go at each other - and that Iran was going to do as much as possible to create an Islamic stronghold in their neighbour. The current descent into civil war is just warming up.

I am no expert on Vietnam, but this seems an identical situation to me. The US entered for a BS goal, sent lots of their own men and women to their deaths, and killed scores of innocent civilians, all for virtually no reason. Unless you consider George W. Bush's legacy a good reason.

I have yet to hear a worthwhile answer to the contrary.

It isn't a nice thing to say. Neither is war. Not much honour or nobility to be had.




Lanny - Maintaining the dollar as the primary currency of the world seems like a afterthought analysis, inventive, creative, and interesting but nevertheless not a reason for why the invasion occured. Personally, the collapse of the greenback also doesn't seem to be a terribly likely thing to happen, given how many nations are dependant on the US economy. Even if it were imminant, invading a 2nd world power like Iraq probably wouldn't stop it. Just my opinion.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

However, I would love to see someone post a well thought out, defensible justification for the war in Iraq. Simply because I have yet to see one that makes any sense to me.

And I would love to see someone post a well thought out reason justification agasinst the war. I have seen what has been written and none of it has conviced me that it was the wrong decision.

For me it is enough to go in because Saddam was a muderere who was using gas on his own citizens, had already attacked a neighbour and basically deserved to be taken out of power. I didn't care if he had WMD's or was a direct supporter of terrorism he had already done enough to indicate to me that he would always be a threat.

Also I have no problem if the only reason that they went in was for oil. I want oil, need oil and if this war helps the US gain more control and access to that oil thats fine with me.

And to a lesser extent I would support the war because I support Bush and his government. They have done nothing to make me question them and have kept the US out of the Democrats and nut jobs like Gore's hands for the past 6 years so they continue to get my support.

That is why I support the war. I by no means expect it to change other peoples minds no do I care if other people think it is enough to justify it.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Frankster

Sheehan is not pushing her agenda she is the voice for millions of Americans and thousands of parents who have lost their children in this "war". Her battle did not start until after her son had died, so his death was the cause and not the effect of this battle of hers.

There are hundreds of groups that fight things every day, so should they all be ashamed of their fight? Are they disgracing what they are fighting for?

If they are fighting for the same things that Sheehan is fighting for then yes they should be ashamed.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Why? Because she is willing to take a stand and speak out against Dumbya and his war? I have to give her credit, she is tenatious. I would have given up a long time ago.

Oh, and Dis, what would you do if one of your kids was killed in an unnecessary and immoral war? Would you just accept the flag "from a greatful nation" or would you do something to make sure that other people didn't have to suffer that similar fate, or worse, suffer through it again with another of your children? How would you channel your sorrow and hatred?

You've bought into her sob story. That's not her motivation at all.

She's a paid DNC operative whose soul purpose in life these days is to attempt to make Bush look bad (not that he needs the help).

If one of my kids voluntarily joined the military because they believed in it (and by all accounts this describes her son Casey) I would honor the child's service even if I disagreed with it.

I certainly wouldn't stalk a President claiming he won't meet with me when he already has.

She's a joke.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

I can respect that. This isn't an easy topic for a lot of folks to talk about. If you don't want to say any more, it is fine by me.

However, I would love to see someone post a well thought out, defensible justification for the war in Iraq. Simply because I have yet to see one that makes any sense to me.

It's been done dozens of times over the last three years...and ignored every single time.

I have yet to see anyone account for the WMD's that Hussein was known to have when he kicked out the inspectors the final time. And nobody will do it again...because they can't.

[Flame On]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

It's been done dozens of times over the last three years...and ignored every single time.

I have yet to see anyone account for the WMD's that Hussein was known to have when he kicked out the inspectors the final time. And nobody will do it again...because they can't.

"Anyone" doesn't have to account because they aren't responsible for hypotheticals. A president that's admitted they were wrong on that is the only one that has to justify anything for making policy that has been a blatant mistake and many have argued has made matters far worse for the US.
Although I guess there's a difference between justification for a war and how competently; or lack there of, it has been waged or gotten to in the first place.

[Flame On]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

It's been done dozens of times over the last three years...and ignored every single time.

I have yet to see anyone account for the WMD's that Hussein was known to have when he kicked out the inspectors the final time. And nobody will do it again...because they can't.

Did Husein kick them out or did Bush in effect when he didn't give them the time to do t he whole work? It may have been literally Husein but if he sees the tanks and planes coming then why should he contiue with the sharade if he knows what's coming?

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Flame On

Did Husein kick them out or did Bush in effect when he didn't give them the time to do t he whole work? It may have been literally Husein but if he sees the tanks and planes coming then why should he contiue with the sharade if he knows what's coming?

Clinton was President when they were kicked out the last time.

The UN required Hussein to provide documentation of what happened to the remaining weapons (these are NOT hypothetical weapons) and he failed to do it. The UN resolution promised 'severe consequences' and then failed to deliver them.

[Flame On]

I'm not saying weapons were hypothetical. I'm saying the scenarios that would lead to confirm or deny their presence are hypothetical.
The person that made the decision to go in based on them being there (note the distinction, he didn't go in because they were unaccounted for, he went in because he specifically said he could account for them risen here, missile silos there, wmd trucks here etc.) is the one in charge and the buck stops there.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Flame On

I'm not saying weapons were hypothetical. I'm saying the scenarios that would lead to confirm or deny their presence are hypothetical.
The person that made the decision to go in based on them being there (note the distinction, he didn't go in because they were unaccounted for, he went in because he specifically said he could account for them risen here, missile silos there, wmd trucks here etc.) is the one in charge and the buck stops there.

You are missing the point.

They WERE there. It's a fact. The UN inspectors were in the process of destroying them when they were expelled. They weren't done. That means there were some unaccounted for. This isn't based on 'intelligence;

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by moon

Also I have no problem if the only reason that they went in was for oil. I want oil, need oil and if this war helps the US gain more control and access to that oil thats fine with me.

Good for you!!!

It's great to hear someone speak there mind in an honest and reasonable manner on the issues that are essential to the maintenance of an acceptable standard of living North America. Now if we could only clear out some of those lazy minorities, shut down the lefty wackos spreading panic and hysteria about the state of the environment, and get on to harvesting essential vitamins from the bodies of our elderly (who really deserve it for tending to vote on the left anyways) then we could finally have everything in proper order.
And, while we're on the topic of proper order, I've noticed that my neighbor has both a new lexus and an attractive 16 year old daughter, both of which I'm partial to...
Anyways, I'll be back in 20 or so. Just enough time to fire up the chainsaw and return with my just desserts.
Back in a mo'...

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

You've bought into her sob story. That's not her motivation at all.

I haven't bought into anything. My personal belief is that her tactics are over the top and completely push her to the fringe. Protesting is one thing, some of the other stuff (going to Venezuela) is just bizarre. I respect her right to protest and I respect her right to demand a sit down with village idot from Crawford. IMO, Bush can make her disappear by giving her two hours of his time. Do that, and he completely removes the power she wields.

She's a paid DNC operative whose soul purpose in life these days is to attempt to make Bush look bad (not that he needs the help).

Whoa, Dis, back away from the TV and have one of your kids change the channel from FauxNews. You are sounding very much like a sheep when you bleet that. (You know, I think the RNC should change their mascot from the elephant to a sheep. It's much more reflective of those who vote for the party.) A "DNC operative"? Does that job come with a with a cool wrist watch radio or a shoe phone? Do you have ANY proof to support that claim, or is this just one of those ravings from one of the usual lunatics (O'Reilly, Hannity, Coulter, etc.) who are trying to scare the **** out of you?

If one of my kids voluntarily joined the military because they believed in it (and by all accounts this describes her son Casey) I would honor the child's service even if I disagreed with it.

I don't think you would Dis. You can put on a brave face and say what you want, but your historical comments lead me to believe you would want answers, especially if the incursion was one you did not view as moral. I think you would be outraged and would demand some answers. I don't think you'd turn into the raving loon that Sheehan has, but I think you would get involved in some manner. I say that because you're a caring human being with a conscience. You really do care about others and I believe you would channel your grief in a positive way in helping others in the same predicament. You're a good person and would do what you could to make sure that the same thing didn't happen to someone else's kid.

I certainly wouldn't stalk a President claiming he won't meet with me when he already has.

Probably not. As I said, you're a rational human being.

She's a joke.

Yes, she certainly has turned into one.