Democrats dont give a damn about our troops? I've heard the right-wing spew this lie over and over again. We support our troops and want them out of harms way, It is Bush's Iraqi war policy that we do not support. Iraq is and was separate from the so called "War on terrorism"
There was NEVER any ties between 9/11 and Saddam. I know you keep hearing there was from Cheney but you have to step back and take a deep breath and realize that he was misleading you into believing it. There is absolutely NO factual proof of what Cheney has said about Iraq and 9/11.
If anything all the cuts to Veterans and pay cuts to our men and women in combat (by the Republican Congress) indicate that it is your righties who dont support the troops.
What does supporting the troops mean to you Mark? Sending them into a war without proper equipment and without the best armor? What sacrifices have Americans made in order for our troops to have proper armor and helmets to reduce injuries from explosions and bullets?
So quit with the partisan lies about who supports the troops. If you said I didn't support the troops to my face I would be obliged to have to make you eat those words.

"This is very important in this nauseating election season - imagine howit is for our troops, engaged in battle, and wondering if November will bring a disgraceful, Democrat-led retreat from Iraq, rendering all their sacrifices in vain."

I'm sure that's on the top of their worry list, Mark.

Lomstradamus,

You don't, in point of fact, support the troops - you reveal that in your "want them out of harms way" comment...the troops, while not wanting to be killed and injured, only want to get out of harms way by securing absolute victory...if you are not 100% behind the pursuit of 100% victory over our enemies, then you are not supporting the troops. Period. Do you support the cops but don't want them to arrest criminals? That is the sort of position "I support the troops and want them to come home" is. It is a nonsensicle position - it is the position of someone who either wants to hide his true position, or is just too ignorant to really undestand what he is saying. You let me know which describes you better.

There are no do-overs in war - there is victory, or defeat. Your choice, as an American in 2006, is to decide if you want victory or defeat. To say that we shouldn't have gone in to Iraq is pointless - we're there now and we can't go back in time and undo what we did. Your decision: what do we do now? Do we go for victory, or do we call ourselves defeated and come home? Choose one of them, and let the fruit tell us what sort of tree you are.

Tom,

Trust me - it is. I was one of them, once upon a time...I know how they think.

Yea, keep telling yourself that, Lomstradamus.

On a rather cool note, I ran the Army Ten Miler today and while wandering around the exhibit tents walking off post race muscle cramps, I saw the Canadian Army had a great booth, very supportive and dignified.
A far better image of Canada than the kooks that post here present. Those Canadian kooks are as fortunate as their American counter-part kooks that post here that their respective Army's are covering their whiny asses freedom to spew.

You know what these guys in Iraq are going through, eh Mark? And from your experience, you can safely say what's keeping troops awake at night is the democrats winning control of the house?

In all honesty Tom, Yes he does & yes he can! Simple as that!

Tom,

Don't be absurd - but they do worry that their sacrifices will come to nothing because a shift in American politics causes the defeatists to take control...the military is very tradition-bound and retains a long-term corporate memory...at the back of every soldier's mind is the worry that they'll be sent in to battle, only to have the plug pulled by fools and cowards back in the United States...our troops know they are the best the world has ever seen and they know they will win, provided they are supported to absolute victory...

If the Democrats were to win and the Iraq mission gets scuttled, then I hope you and the rest of the left will sit down with the troops and explain why winning Congress was more important than winning a war.

I see the village idiot is still alive--I go away for a golf vacation and pray that he steps in front of a bus, but alas, Tom (Shipley) is still here.

I'd love to see him in a room full of US Marines, telling them how much he supports them, all the while degrading their mission. Yes, I'd love to see that. I'd love to be one of the Marines in the room with Tommie--I'd have him crying like a beyotch in less than a minute.

Pseudo-patriots such as yourself sicken real men, Tommie. Stay out of our way, little wimp--you could get hurt. Pu**y!

(Ed. Note: Obscenity edited)

Hey Lomstradamus, how's about some originality? I mean, can you be more of a parrot than what your silly little post shows you to be? Every talking point available is in it, you stupid little moron.

Maybe you could join Tom Shipley, in that room full of Marines--they wouldn't need any special equipment to make beyotches out of you and him.

Sorry, Noonan, but these guys are past the point of sickening. I just got finished watching "Flight 93" on the History Channel, and all I could think of is that these kooks are just as dangerous to this country as the animals who hijacked those planes on 9/11. That's right--they're just as bad as the terrorists. That's how I feel, and that's why 1H8L1BS...

(Ed. Note: Obscenity edited)

Lomstradamus,

"Iraq is and was separate from the so called 'War on terrorism'".

Funny that the terrorists think that Iraq is the central front in the war on terrorism. That's why they have expended so much of resources (men and material) in Iraq.

And you are you to make this determination? If the National Strategy for Combating Terrorism identifies Iraq as the central front in the Global War on Terrorism, it must be.

"If anything all the cuts to Veterans and pay cuts to our men and women in combat (by the Republican Congress) indicate that it is your righties who dont support the troops."

I'm a veteran and I haven't had any of my benefits cut. In fact, my retirement pay as increased faster than the rate of inflation, medical benefits have been increased, and the Survivor Benefit Plan improved.

As for military pay, since 2001, base pay has increased by nearly 20%. In no year was the pay cut. In addition, those serving in a combat area are exempt from Federal Income Tax, and receive immiment danger pay, Hardship Duty Pay, and a Family Separation Allowance if they have dependants. Also, they are eligible to deposit up to $10,000 (per year) of their pay and allowances into a special svaings account with a guaranteed return of 10% per year.

So I guess that makes you either a bold-faced liar, or a mindless sheep who has bought the lies of the left, hook, line, and sinker.

I H8 libs, you sound to me to be deeply insecure and possibly unhinged. You think liberal Democrats are as dangerous to this nation as Osama bin Laden? (Hint: he's the one who's not at all connected to Iraq.) Maybe you should enter therapy since you can't make a point without calling your opponents "stupid little moron[s]" or "biatches" (really pathetic, btw).

Have a nice day!

Lomstradamus keeps parroting the tired old, debunked old, whine that Cheney said Iraq was tied in with 9/11. Ain't so, Lom. Anyone who cared about the truth could and would go back to the transcripts of speeches to learn that Iraq was never accused of being part of 9/11.

The bigest enemy of this country is a faction of radical zealots who choose to believe lies which support their determination to to attack, and who are driven, no matter what they claim, solely by hatred. And we also have a bunch of loony Muslims to worry about.

Moderate Voter,

You do make a strange point, unintentionally: it is a strange reality and many Democrats had stronger ties to Saddam than bin Laden did...you know, McDermott and Moore, etc...

"They've been shedding buckets of crocadile tears for our dead and wounded, but they are much happier when they are accusing them of war crimes...and, of course, they are not-so-secretly delighted with each dead soldier because that, in their view, gets them one more dead stepping stone closer to power."

That might be the most offensive accusation I've ever heard against liberals. For such a bold statement, could you please provide specific instances where Democrats have expressed happiness when accusing soldiers of war crimes and of learning soldier's deaths?

And no, I do not mean circumstantial evidence that simply conforms to your deeply misguided worldview. Please, be specific for a very specific type of accusation. Thank you.

Hey America, vote for the dimnut party who are incapable of identifying a US soldier...what an absolute disgrace.

Just goes to show how out of touch Howie Dean and his band of idiots are from the US Military and the American people. You just shake you head and think...these dimnut knuckleheads want to be in power.

"...at the back of every soldier's mind is the worry that they'll be sent in to battle, only to have the plug pulled by fools and cowards back in the United States..."

Mark, I've read numerous accounts of soldiers who have questioned why they are in Iraq and what the winning strategy is there. Next time you're at the book store, check out "Killing Time in Iraq" written by a soldier.

Now, I'm not saying all soldiers hold this view, and I'm sure there are soldiers who have concerns as you have described, but you seem to be making a blanket statement about all soldiers. You have served, so I think you would know that soldiers hold a wide-array of personal views. A friend of mine who was stationed in Kuwait before the war questioned the invasion prior to it occurring.

You can read numerous accounts on soldier's blogs, in new films and books of soldiers who are frustrated with US strategy in Iraq. Most of what I've read is not as you've described it, but quite the opposite. Now, you can go ahead and blame the media here, but that does not change the fact that these are US soldiers expressing their views. And they do not jive with your "they worry about democrats being elected" line.

You can use the fact that you've served to support your argument (not in this conflict, mind you). But I've seen, heard and read differently. And I'm not foolish enough to claim all soldiers think this way. But I'm also not foolish enough to buy what you're selling.

Deleted - subject of comment is a person who lends credence to anti-military slanders.

It is NOT surprising that the leftist/libs would NOT honor our own American troops, as they want our troops to fail in the war on terror. That, has been obvious from the beginning, and they can no longer hide their anamosity towards our troops. This hatred (disguised when they pander to a camera pretending to 'back our troops, but not the war extended into Iraq-where terrorists have been for a LONG TIME) is because of their total hatred from day one of President Bush. It was Never about our success in fighting terrorism
"It was, and always WILL BE, about their hatred of President Bush". They have shown their disdain from day one of this man, and have gone on the opposite issues of him, in each and every case they could. Look at anything that he has accomplished, and you will find the liberal/leftists immediately throwing out their insults, lies and innuendo at the President. It is this group of hatefilled radicals in our very own country, that are trying to bring America down, in the only thing that matters to them-"THEIR POLITICAL ASPIRATIONS, THEIR PERSONAL CAREERS, AND THEIR LOWLY, SICK PARTY-DEMOCRATS".
It is sad to see, that they would be more than willing to see America FAIL, in order to reach their objectives-"A return to power, which is ALL that matters to them"....Sad, very, very sad.
They will take anything that happens in our country, and "Blame Bush"---funny though, how the very same people, did NOT condemn the shennanigans and immoral behavior of the Clintons
in ALL the disgrace they both brought forth from their 'time in power'. They take each and every incident as an opportunity to blame Bush, when even one of their own Senators, Kennedy, was the very person responsible for the 'death of a young
woman, that he left to die in his car, while he saved himself/career, and that is what Dems do best-Save Themselves-At All Costs. Look at the behavior of Barney Frank-who had his lover running a prostitution ring out of Barney's own apt.-That too, got a pass. There are just too many incidents of the Leftists to go into, but the list is quite long on Deaths, Corruption, Money Issues in fundraising, Files kept on their enemies, many people either jailed or killed-and
leaving Americans unprotected in a Terrorists War
brewing on THEIR watch. But oddly enough, It is all glossed over by the prior Administration and their liberal friends in the MSM, who have given them carte blanche, in all the above mentioned failures....but in turn, they have continued beating up on the current President, who had to pick up on the results of the prior administration's failures, of which the main one being the tragedy of 9/ll, that could have been halted before it even happened, had Clinton, kept his 'eye on the ball in his 8 years, instead of lining the Clinton's pockets, and turning the Whitehouse into the whorehouse that he did....All the while, his wife sat by "pretending to be the last one to know-the unsuspecting wife, if you will", when she has ALWAYS known what Slick Willy
was all about. It was all about these two being the power-hungry, money-mongers they were, AND, always will be.

Hey Muffy, a news flash for ya: Sgt Thompson is probably another one of those reservists who became a reservist just so's he could get some bennies from the government. The polls he cited are old news. Amy Goodman is a lefty hack journalist who ignores the troops who have a different story, like the one I heard from an Army Major I saw the other day at Lowes. He just returned from Iraq, and told me that while the going was difficult at times, the good far outweighed the bad, and the media were not reporting the good.

Your turn, Muffy. Now excuse me whilst I become unhinged...

"To say that we shouldn't have gone in to Iraq is pointless"

No. The world will hold the likes of you accountable.

Blindly caring only of victory is your error.

Mark,

My assertion is self evident.

USA,

The world? The world has no authority over me - only God and the laws I subscribe to as an American citizen have any hold on me.

1H8L1BS: Sgt Thompson is probably another one of those reservists who became a reservist just so's he could get some bennies from the government.

Mark: "Deleted - subject of comment is a person who lends credence to anti-military slanders."

Mark, you delete the words of a soldier who served in Iraq. Who aws exercising his freedom of speech? But don't delete 1H8L1BS' attack on that soldier.

You won't allow a soldier who served for YOU to be able to have his voice heard on your cite? Why? Because you don't like what he has to say???? What a coward you are.

I'm going to repost that interview. What exactly lends credence to anti-military slander? (There's more, but I think this is all if not more than was orininally posted...)

AMY GOODMAN: I spoke with Sgt. Marshall Thompson on Monday in Salt Lake City in his first national broadcast interview. He began by talking about why he plans the walk.

SGT. MARSHALL THOMPSON: Well, I got back from Iraq about two months ago, and I knew I’d have to do something to make things right. And so I decided, my wife and I, that it would be a good idea to do a walk through Utah. Utah is my home state, and I love it. It's also the reddest state in the nation. It's kind of a symbol of the last bastion of support for the war. So I thought that if I could walk through Utah in a peaceful manner and show that there's support in Utah for peace, then that just might be what turns the tide.

AMY GOODMAN: What did you do in Iraq?

SGT. MARSHALL THOMPSON: I was a military journalist. It was a great job. I got to travel all around Iraq and interview thousands of soldiers. So I really got a good idea of what's going on over there.

AMY GOODMAN: You were editor of the Anaconda Times?

SGT. MARSHALL THOMPSON: That's correct.

AMY GOODMAN: What is the Anaconda Times?

SGT. MARSHALL THOMPSON: It's a newspaper. It’s a military publication. It's for the largest base in Iraq.

AMY GOODMAN: And who ran it?

SGT. MARSHALL THOMPSON: Well, there's a unit, a public affairs unit, and I was part of that unit.

AMY GOODMAN: Were you able to print anything you wanted in the Anaconda Times?

SGT. MARSHALL THOMPSON: No, we were not able to print everything we wanted. We tried. We saw our mission as supporting the troops, so we were always trying to give them the good information of what was really going on, because they know what's going on. They're not being fooled by anybody. And so we wanted to be credible with them and print everything that happened. Of course, there is a level of censorship when you're working for the U.S. Army. It’s just the way it goes.

AMY GOODMAN: Like what? Give an example.

SGT. MARSHALL THOMPSON: There were a few times I wanted to do some stories about how, for instance, Turkey was sending special forces over the border to attack Kurdish groups, you know, without permission, violating Iraq's sovereign borders. I was kind of outraged, and I wanted to print that story, but that was one that got squashed.

AMY GOODMAN: By who?

SGT. MARSHALL THOMPSON: By my commanders. They're all very well-intentioned, but nobody wants to get in trouble. And that was a story that looked like trouble, and so it did not make it.

AMY GOODMAN: Turkey, a U.S. ally, attacking the country that the U.S. is occupying.

SGT. MARSHALL THOMPSON: Exactly. Plus it was kind of -- they were using the same rationale that we used to go into Iraq, saying, well, they've got a terrorist problem. If they can't handle it, then we’ll go in and help them with it. And so we have no moral high ground there. We couldn't tell them not to do it. And they continue to do it to this day.

AMY GOODMAN: Marshall, why did you join the military?

SGT. MARSHALL THOMPSON: I love my country. And I really wanted to serve it.

AMY GOODMAN: When did you join?

SGT. MARSHALL THOMPSON: I joined in 1999.

AMY GOODMAN: Before the 2001 attacks.

SGT. MARSHALL THOMPSON: Yes. I was deployed to Kosovo during the 2001 attacks. And I’ve been very proud of my service. And it's just been a hard time in Iraq, because this war is unjust. And no amount of patriotism that I have can change that.

AMY GOODMAN: How did you come to the conclusion that it's unjust?

SGT. MARSHALL THOMPSON: Well, it happened before the war started. I was on the fence. And when Colin Powell addressed the UN, I believed him, like most people did, I think. But then there was something in me that kept bothering me, and it was that the decision to go to war with Iraq was based on fear, fear of something that hadn't happened yet. And those are never good decisions. We can't make fear-based decisions. So I decided that even if they had weapons of mass destruction, that I was going to be opposed to the war.

Then, years later when I went to Iraq, spent a year there, saw what happened, it was only reinforced. And I knew that I was going to have to come home and do something to make it right for my participation in it and just because I feel more responsible for what goes on over there, having been there for one year.

AMY GOODMAN: You interviewed hundreds of soldiers?

SGT. MARSHALL THOMPSON: Thousands.

AMY GOODMAN: Thousands of soldiers in Iraq. What is their attitude to the war?

SGT. MARSHALL THOMPSON: Most soldiers want to withdraw. That is proven. There was a Zogby poll. 72% of recently turned Iraqi vets want to be out of Iraq by 2006.

AMY GOODMAN: 2006?

SGT. MARSHALL THOMPSON: By 2006. That means this year. And my experience backs that up absolutely. There is a lot of pressure for soldiers not to speak out. There’s fear of court-martials. There’s fear of their commanders getting mad at them. There's a lot of reasons why soldiers don't speak out. But nobody should be fooled. Soldiers know what's going on over there, and they are not happy about it.

AMY GOODMAN: What was the response when the soldier asked Rumsfeld about why they weren't being protected?

SGT. MARSHALL THOMPSON: That was -- we loved it. We thought that, you know, score one for the little guys.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/27/146243

Why are you censoring what a US soldiers has to say and why are you allowing a disparing remark about that soldier to remain on your site?

You talk a lot about the soldiers' in Iraq, about listening to their opinion. About respecting them. But here, as in many cases, you don't back up your words with actions.

One comment that needs to be made. First before I make it, as a former USAF officer, I do support the troops, but like others do not support the mission, but now the comment. If the military has opposition to a change in the administration the we all have a big problem as the military as a entity, not as individuals, is supposed to be subordinate to the civilian government regardless of what the civilian government and to suggest that as an organization they would or should oppose the decisions of that government is quite dangerous

One question Tom, Is there any cooberation of Sgt.Thompsons testament? Personally, most journalists these days can be trusted as far as they can be thrown!

Well, there have been news reports that Turkey may have sent troops into Northern Iraq, though Turkey denies they have.

And I don't think anyone doubts that US military publications censor some of the material submitted to publish.

His claim that thousands of troops agree with his view point? Well, i guess we have to take his word, unless he has transcript or recordings. I haven't really looked too much into it. But I have read and seen many soldiers who question to war and what they are doing there.

Regardless, I've never known it the policy of this site to require corroborative evidence lest a post be deleted.

Bearman, is there evidence that this guy is lying?

Well I hate to be a bubble burster Tom but, For every soldier that doesn't support the war there are 10,000 that do! Does this mean the war must be going well? According to your philosophy it does! Case closed! Now evidence that this guy is lying? I didn't say he was lying, I just asked if he had even a single other soldier backing up and cooberating his side of the issue, or is it just he & his wife? It really boils down to "What do you want to believe Ship," cause we could find people on both sides of the issue all day long. Now when my brother comes back from fighting in Iraq to tell me that the job is getting harder and his brothers are dying, because the ANTI-WAR movement and the MSM gives credence to the terrorists movement and helps them recruit more because we have been so demonized in the media! What the hell, if you guys want to kill our boyz because you don't like G.B.'s politics so be it, just don't expect us to be happy about it!!!

Well, I hate to be a bubble burster as well, but this...

"Well I hate to be a bubble burster Tom but, For every soldier that doesn't support the war there are 10,000 that do!"

Is BS.

"It really boils down to "What do you want to believe Ship," cause we could find people on both sides of the issue all day long."

Have you read my other posts in this thread? This entire debated started with Mark's comment:

"This is very important in this nauseating election season - imagine howit is for our troops, engaged in battle, and wondering if November will bring a disgraceful, Democrat-led retreat from Iraq, rendering all their sacrifices in vain."

He was making a blanket statement that US troops do not want demcrats elected. Personally, I've read many interviews with soldiers who question the war and what we're doing there. I've seen documentaries that show soldiers who supported the war going in, but didn't when they left.

As I've said, I know not all soldiers think this way. Many do support the war. All of them do their duty, but some questions whether they should be there. And there's a sizable amount of them.

I believe there are more Iraq vets running as Democrats than republicans.

This is all to show how idiotic Mark's statement was. Then he, after bloviating about listening and respecting soldiers, censors one when he doesn't like what the soldier was saying. I don't see how you get more hypocritical.

And this is just completely idiotic...

"What the hell, if you guys want to kill our boyz because you don't like G.B.'s politics so be it, just don't expect us to be happy about it!!!"

Idiotic, maybe Tom, but one of our seasoned Iraq vets said it Tom, so what the hell Tom! MY PERSONAL feelings are, my respect for those willing and ready to stay the course and finish the job far outway the ones who "QUESTION" authority all by themselves by walking across UTAH!

By the way TOM, the Army & Marine corp soldiers re-upping for second and third terms do not support your perception of this issue. Marks statement was about as idiotic & TRUE as the soldiers statement! It's all about what YOU want to believe TOM!