100% free online dating, chat, forums, and friends...

( new topic )

... that your son/daughter has been killed in Iraq.

Yes, we know the current administration promised "an immediate end to Bushs illegal war", but before that immediate task could be accomplished we had another immediate task, a bigtime hoola multi-million dollar celebration party to attend, and some other 'immediate' tasks in the form of politics as usual.

So, if you voted in the current administration because we said there would be an immediate end to Bushs illegal war, well... well... that was just a lot of talk. And it appears that the war might not have been illegal (after all this administration clearly still supports that war).

Please give us more time to accomplish all of the things were going to accomplish, were inexperienced, and be warned any criticism or questioning of the current administrations progress may result in you being labeled a "narcissistic ass" hatin on the Obama savior.

(You couldn't do a better job anyhow.)

Now bury your loved one with our condolences, and take a chill pill.

PS... did you enjoy the inauguration ceremony? We spent a lot of money and time on that, anything that could have made it better in your opinion? More rock stars? More talk about peace, prosperity, and an end to the war in Iraq? More superficial feel good about ourselves activities?

Sincerely,

The Designated National Office.

WOW!

now you are simply being passive agressive. thanks tck. (*singing* You with the sad eyes.Dont be discouraged. Oh I realize. Its hard to take courage. In a world full of people.You can lose sight of it all. And the darkness inside you. Can make you feel so small. But I see your true colors. Shining through. I see your true colors. And thats why I love you. So dont be afraid to let them show. Your true colors. True colors are beautiful, Like a rainbow. Show me a smile then, Dont be unhappy, cant remember. When I last saw you laughing. If this world makes you crazy. And youve taken all you can bear. You call me up. Because you know Ill be there. And Ill see your true colors. Shining through. I see your true colors. And thats why I love you. So dont be afraid to let them show. Your true colors. True colors are beautiful,. Like a rainbow.(when I last saw you laughing) If this world makes you crazy. And youve taken all you can bear. You call me up. Because you know Ill be there. I see your true colors. And thats why I love you. So dont be afraid to let them show. Your true colors. True colors are beautiful, Like a rainbow..."

please insert"magic pussy" in between a few of the true colors lyrics!

MsAries - most respectfully, this isn't about me.

This is about mothers and fathers and brothers and sisters losing loved ones.

This is about Americans who voted for a president to end a war.

Americans who now see a president focused primarily on money (the economy).

As their loved ones die.

Hail to Obama on high... as the death toll rises above 23.

Celebrate the new dawn... because for some soldiers, that new dawn will never come.

Rolling Stone had a huge expose (pronounced ex-po-zay) on all of the stars who turned out for the huge party/bash/celebration of 'hope' in Washington DC.

Is that what we have been relegated to, as a nation, 'hope'?

F*ck 'hope'... I want to see some action taken. Immediate action on the Iraq war as promised.

Let's party and celebrate accomplishments AFTER they happen.

How many unemployed broke people are gonna party tonight because they 'hope' for a job next week?

How many families of soldiers are throwing a party because they 'hope' their loved ones will come home sage from the Iraq war?

Party on... Oh Happy Day... but wake up at some point and realize there's nothing to celebrate while our soldiers are dying.

tck you weren't so worried about the Iraq war and the casualties under the Bush administration the last 8 years pushing around 5000 casualties,now all of a sudden you are.Obama been in office not even 2 months and you want him to preform miracles,sounds like a true republican or a racist___...

A racist? Explain that logic sometime, I need to know, lol?

What does the past administration have to do with saving soldiers lives NOW?

The past administration started this war so soldiers should continue to die NOW?

(I was VERY much in favor of the Iraq War in order to remove Saddam from power.)

Do you believe that the Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. military cannot put an immediate halt to the Iraq War? I find it amazing that some citizens are so unknowledgeable on the powers of the Commander-in Chief. In fact - who is the Commander-in-Chief, Swamper, do you know?

I sound like a racist now because I want an immediate end to the war. Geeeez.

Swamper - I think people like you want to see another 1,000 soldiers killed because you hate Bush.

One thing about Freedom of Speech,I say what I see.

We all see things different.

Some would suggest your the Commander-in-Chief of Mingles.

I suspected I was correct. Some hate Bush so much they don't mind if more soldiers die.

Yes, you are free to speak hatred and death toward the soldiers. Sad, but true.

you preach freedom of speech here daily / don't take anything I say seriously...

LOL, now where did I say hatred towards USA soldiers / twisting things around like you normally do...

Yea blame it on the present administration. If the past one had never got us into war cause he was pissed off at husein and the world tower needed a way to re build and Exon didnt need to put their pipeline through Afhganistan from Uzbekistan we would have never been in this mess. So remeber to bring george Bush and Dick chenney up on Charges. They both need to be hung for mass genocide.

More soldiers should die because of Bush & Cheney?

Wow. People... do you really think this way?

I'd like to debate more / but its sat.and snowing and I have a 5 mile run to do...

People, this isn't about me, blame, Bush, Cheney, or racism. It's about U.S. soldiers dying in a war we need to STOP NOW. I did NOT vote for McCain. I wanted to see an IMMEDIATE end to the Iraq War, that's why McCain didn't get my vote.

This is about mothers and fathers and brothers and sisters losing loved ones.

This is about Americans who voted for a president to end a war.

Americans who now see a president focused primarily on money (the economy).

As their loved ones die.

I want Obama to stop the war.

Celebrate the new dawn... because for some soldiers, that new dawn will never come.

I pray that the citizens of this country can put aside their petty ego battles and blame.

Some of the stuff I read here is SCARY. People don't care that soldiers are DYING... why?

No TCk No more soldiers need to die. We need to bring them back now. however we cant due to the mess Bush and cheney put us in. We have to slowly remove our selves. We can then hope things will be fine. Please also remeber the soldiers were not forced to go in. they volunteered. They are doing the job they voluntered to do. However this does not mean we should be there. Remeber it was Bush and Cheney who put us there.

Thanks, Mike.

God bless us all, lol.

I am sincerely learning something from the posts here.

One guy down at the gym says Bush & Cheney are still so powerful that Obama and the democrats don't have the stones to end the war. He says all the democrats talk about is how Bush & Cheney started the war, like Bush & Cheney still rule and since they started it no one can stop it - they're still too powerful.

Another guy at the gym says that once Obama got into office and started looking at the real picture, as opposed to pre-election bullshit & lies, Obama realized that the war was a good idea and the war needs to continue. So Obama isn't saying much if anything about the Iraq war right now.

With all of the pre-election rhetoric about ending the war I thinking these guys might be right - Bush & Cheney still have a lot of power.

It is true - all the democrats have to say is how Bush & Cheney started the war.

???

I think that's rather narrow minded of you and you really need to get off your high horse about the inaug party. It's already happened, Obama didn't ask to spend those dollars so get. over.... it. Your continual whining about it is rather lame.

Why don't you focus on something that CAN BE changed instead of pissing and moaning over something that already happened and is now in the past?

Every president has an inauguration party. It's just a fact that ridiculous amounts of money are always used/spent for parties. So why not just drop the party crap for Christ's freaking sake.

Our armed forces people are involved in a war not because they were forced to go. One volunteers to become part of the military. You're just trying to stir shit up and twist everyone's words around much like you tried to with mine in another blip.

It takes only an instant to do screw something up, and can take what feels a lifetime to fix the problem and recover from it. And sometimes, it takes more people than just the one who ****ed up the situation to begin with.

its is not so much bush and cheny. It is the world power rockefeller and rothchilds people as such. Bush and cheneyy are just puppets in the scheme of things.

http://zeitgeistmovie.com/

Please see both movies. they will give you deeper understanding of what is going on in the world today.

Personally I think republicans are so tired of all the ridicule toward the Bush administration that they're just chomping at the bit for a little payback. The problem is they're not waiting until it's justified...if it took this long for things to get so bad economically, and if soldiers have been dying for years over in Iraq, how is it all supposed to be fixed in a matter of weeks? A person gets behind in their bills and changes some things up to try and play catch but it takes seemingly forever, yet the economy of the whole country is supposed to be fixed overnight? People spend years trying to mend fences with a neighbor, but a war overseas that's been going on for years is feasibly expected to be "fixed" in a matter of a few weeks?

Without jumping on the side of either party, it's just not a practical assumption. It takes longer to get a increase or decrease in child support for one child passed in a court of law than a matter of months, so how exactly do you expect an overhauled, innovative, brand new economic strategy proposal for the entire country to get through a house and senate of mixed party, self-absorbed, liberal and conservative senators and representatives with agendas of their own? Or a policy to put an end to a conflict overseas involving other ruling parties and agendas, vested interests of other countries, and opposition of military leadership in many cases?

This is like buying a house and selling it the next week and then complaining about the lack of accrued equity. We elected the guy for 4 years, not 4 weeks.

Slinky - why don't "you" focus on something that CAN BE changed instead of pissing and moaning over something that already happened and is now in the past? (Your words... don't shoot me )

Your post consists entirely of whining, pissing, and complaining. Please provide some substance about what can be changed, as you suggest, okay? For Christ's freaking sake, as you say... read your own words.

Michael - your previous post mentioned Bush & Cheney not only once, but twice. Now your most recent post says it is not so much Bush & Cheney?

- - - - - - -

Let's focus on what we can do to end the war?

Is the war a good idea?

Is that the message Obama is sending?

Is Obama saying that maybe starting the war wasn't a good idea, but now the war is necessary?

- - - - - - - -

Polite calm debate folks, no need to get into an uproar, please.

Captain, I agree with what you are saying. But the pre-election platform was so heavily concerned with an end to the war I really truly believed something, anything, would be done in the first 30 days to address the ending of the war.

Just found this newsclip from Reuters:

Iraqis open arms to romance as violence fades.

Sat Feb 14, 2009 8:37am EST

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Romance is in the air in Baghdad as war-weary Iraqis celebrate Valentine's Day after a sharp drop in violence, allowing lovers to cautiously hold hands in parks and to buy gifts for their sweethearts.

Public courtship and more daring clothing for women are increasing after years of growing intolerance, perhaps signaling the Islamic dogma and conservatism that accompanied Iraq's slide into sectarian slaughter may be losing their grip.

"You cannot imagine how happy I am today," said Usama Abdul-Wahab Khatab, a recent university graduate nestled beside his girlfriend at a riverside Baghdad park.

A year earlier, the park shook to the sounds of artillery fire that rained on the U.S. diplomatic and military Green Zone complex across the river, launched by religious militias whose reign also kept unmarried men and women apart.

Although Iraq is predominantly Muslim, celebration of an originally Western day for lovers became popular after the ouster of Saddam Hussein in the U.S.-led invasion of 2003.

- - - - - - -

Maybe Bush's illegal was wasn't such a bad idea after all?

maybe that area is safe,but not the rest of Baghdad:

BAGHDAD Iraqi officials deployed 5,000 plainclothes military personnel south of Baghdad on Saturday, beefing up security in an attempt to stop deadly bombings against Shiite pilgrims that have plagued the country over the past three days, police said.

The increased security came a day after a female suicide bomber struck a tent filled with women and children resting during a pilgrimage to the Shiite holy city of Karbala, killing 40 people and wounding about 80 in the deadliest attack in Iraq this year.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/subjects/military/

I remember the "end the war immediately" words, but I also remember the "16 month plan" to withdraw troops. Then right before taking office or right after.....might have been between Nov and Jan 20th.....Obama met with military advisors and again changed his strategy. He decided that working with the guys on the ground and making a plan to withdraw strategicly was best. I know Gen Petreaus (sp?) has said it'll take longer to make a smooth withdraw and not leave Iraq unprotected.

Obama's inexperience shines through on this......no knowledge of military operations. He's learning it's not like playing battleship, or some computer game.....this is real and it's not as easy to do as it is to say.

With that said....his inaction on the war is more than likely from assigning priorities and the economy won. It's not that he's doing nothing....although it appears that way....but, getting his stimulus bill passed to save the economy is what he made a priority and rightfully so......if the country collapses.....none of the rest is going to matter.

Tck....you supported the war and the troops from the beginning.....you know they are volunteers.....no one wants to see troops killed, but you know that's a fact of war. My son is gearing up for his fourth deployment......probably not Iraq this time, more likely Afghanistan.....but, regardless....you're more than aware it's going to take alot of time to get out of either region....you're starting to act like a Cindy Sheehan wantabe.......maybe you should buy some property near the Obama's and protest, then demand to speak to "the chosen one" about his political and empty promises........

Barack Obama will responsibly end the war in Iraq:

"Immediately upon taking office, Obama will give his Secretary of Defense and military commanders a new mission in Iraq: successfully ending the war. The removal of our troops will be responsible and phased."

This was taken from Obama's campaign site......http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/

I agree with the summations of the Captain and Robbi.

I remember the same quote about "ending the war immediately", which worried me. But he changed it and for most of his campaign it was "16 months", which still would, in my opinion, have created a disaster. Once he won the nomination, he changed it to "consulting with the Joint Chiefs".

Imagine if he was an extreme liberal and followed through on his original "promise" of "immediate withdrawal".

It has been shown in the news, that the dramatic drop in casualties and overall violence in Iraq, is because of Gen Petreaus's policies. Only a fool would ignore him. Obama's inexperience has been showing, but at least he's listening and showing that he's not a fool.

As far as tck ranting about a president that he doesn't like, well, I can relate to that.

But it's one thing to rant after 4+ years of failings and lies, it's another, to right out of the gate, want someone to fail esp. when ALL of America needs him to be right and succeed.

(Cimmaron, are you 'ranting' about something, or, are you discussing information? I believe you are presenting information in a concise and polite manner until you suggest another's information is 'ranting'. Possibly consider having some respect for the information of others and not belittle their writings as 'ranting'. Your call, but the subtle insult toward me is obvious. )

Basically what I see here ALOT is that because Hillary Clinton and others (me included) WERE in favor of the war in the beginning, and then at some point these people realized the war is wrong, this has something or anything to do with the CURRENT state of the war.

YES, Hillary Clinton voted in favor of the war 7 years ago. As the war progressed she changed her mind. Should she have stuck with her original decision no matter what? Is that what people are saying?

Someone explain this concept, please.

Thanks!

(P.S. I am beginning to see that even democrats in the highest offices appear to be seeing that "Bush's war" is useful and productive and it is "America's war" under a new administration. I believe that President Obama, who I like and support, studied what his predecessor had done and came to the conclusion that the war is a good idea. I feel that any opinions he expressed to the contrary may have been campaign BS. I respect a man or woman who can admit they changed their mind in light of further thought.)

I was very much in favor of the war in the beginning, to remove Saddam from power.

Now I am ADAMANTLY opposed to the war. History is history - it is gone. NOW matters.

I truly do NOT want to see any more soldiers die in Iraq.

STOP THE KILLING, STOP THE DEATHS OF OUR SOLDIERS!!!! I plead for it!

If that makes me a "Cindy Sheehan wannabe" or any other names so be it.

It is time for international forces, or the U.N., or another country to save Iraq.

(When/if someone close to you is KILLED remember your own words!)

IMMEDIATE RELEASE No. 096-09

February 13, 2009

DoD Identifies Army Casualties:

The Department of Defense announced today the death of four soldiers who were supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom. They died Feb. 9 in Mosul, Iraq, of wounds suffered when an improvised explosive device detonated near their vehicle. They were assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 8th Cavalry Regiment, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, Texas.

Killed were:

Lt. Col. Garnet R. Derby, 44, of Missoula, Mont.

Sgt. Joshua A. Ward, 30, of Scottsville, Ky.

Pfc. Albert R. Jex, 23, of Phoenix, Ariz.

Pfc. Jonathan R. Roberge, 22, of Leominster, Mass.

For more information media may contact the Fort Hood public affairs office at (254) 287-9993; after hours (254) 291-2591.

- - - - - - -

When you make further posts regarding the Iraq War please consider the families left behind. They realize that Bush started the war. They realize their loved ones were volunteers. They may or may not have been in favor of the war at some time in the past. They realize all of this, I am certain... but they may not realize why the U.S. military is still there... TODAY... and why they will be there tomorrow.

Please continue to provide your reasons on 'why'.

I find it amazing that people expect the man to 'fix' in 8 weeks what an idiot spent 8 years f*ucking up. Look at the numbers if you want to play that game. How many people have died in the 8 years Bush was in office compared to the 8 weeks Obama has been in office? And factor in the after effects of Bush's decision, because that is still present. Please, use some common sense.

actually, he's been "in office" for less than a month - since 20 Jan

"I find it amazing that people expect the man to 'fix' in 8 weeks what an idiot spent 8 years f*ucking up. Look at the numbers if you want to play that game. How many people have died in the 8 years Bush was in office compared to the 8 weeks Obama has been in office? And factor in the after effects of Bush's decision, because that is still present. Please, use some common sense."

I really, truly, honestly, though Obama was going to make ending the war priority #1.

(There is no 'fix' action, what has occurred has occurred, it cannot be fixed.)

I do not see the Iraq War as being priority #1, I see $$ taking the priority.

I was WRONG. Forgive me. I am neither republican or democrat.

I respect ALL of the reasons and opinions for continuing the Iraq war. Though I disagree.

I respect President Obama's decisions.

But... at the same time... I have a right to air my own opinion here, just as you all do.

I fear that many republicans might be secretly gloating because the democratic administration isn't making an end to the Iraq War a priority. These republicans secretly gloat because while their man Bush was in office he was under CONSTANT pressure to end the war. Now these republicans feel some vindication, political vindication. SOLDIERS DIE.

I fear that many democrats might be secreting gloating because as more and more soldiers are killed in Iraq these democrats it makes the Bush administration look worse and worse. Now that their man is in office it is okay for the war to continue, there are now good valid reasons to continue the war NOW. Political vindication for their man. SOLDIERS DIE.

In other words - I fear that politics is driving the continuance of the Iraq War.

republicans secretly like it because the democrats are failing to end it. Democrats secretly like it because it makes the Bush administration look bad. SOLDIERS DIE.

I believe the right thing to do would be for whoever is president (I don't care republican, democrat, independent) were to publically put on the shoes thrown at Bush and proclaim: "As the Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. military I am leading our troops out of Iraq today. Generals, line up behind me, form up the troops, and start marching. Hut 2,3,4... NOW."

Meanwhile... all politics aside... don't shoot the messenger... SOLDIERS DIE.

"How many people have died in the 8 years Bush was in office compared to the 8 weeks Obama has been in office?"

This seems to be an important question among those who currently favor the war.

The soldiers who die today... compared to those already dead... honestly - you can compare?

Do you suggest the loss of these lives today is somehow minimized by the previous losses?

Honestly - you can compare?

God bless you.

Dude... this technique is no better than the last one.

(To each their own opinion and 'technique'. Thanks for the comment.)

I think the 'technique' we all need to begin thinking about is the "anti-party politics technique".

I find it astounding that I am the ONLY one in this entire thread desiring an immediate priority toward ending the war.

I am the only one.

Astounding.

I agree completely with your second sentence, and it's my pleasure to comment.

I think the 'technique' we all need to begin thinking about is the "anti-party politics technique".

Thank you.

I am VERY serious in my surprise when I talk to people at the gym, people at work, people in general... every single person deals with the subject from a political perspective. I sincerely believe my fears of republicans/democrats working against each other as I described above is occurring. There is so much animosity between the two parties that 99% of people have become desensitized to the fact that soldiers are dying.

I'm not joking, I'm not provoking. Anyone who thinks this is a trivial subject please see:

http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/

There are names, faces, lives, and loved ones behind the statistics.

and this didn't bother you so much 27 days ago?

Someone....shoot the messenger.

(figuratively, of course)

tck, I get your point about the horror behind the scenes and the headlines...yes, there are men and women with real lives and real families dying over there. I just don't recall reading your outrage at that back when you were supporting the war back in the beginning, and for quite a while afterwards. Are those men and women any more dead under a democratic administration rather than a republican one? You can't point to the human side of things just because a different party comes into power if you've disregarded it before. Those soldiers lives were no less important years ago, and we need to remember that Barrack Obama is not the man who sent them there. He could possibly be the one that brings them home though, if we don't give up on him before he even has a chance to get those slow moving political gears in motion. Nothing happens quickly in Washington, regardless of who is at the helm. The things you're mentioning should have always been at the forefront of concern, not just now. The blame for that doesn't really belong in the current administration. It will if it continues, but it's too early to gage that is all I'm saying.

No, 27 days ago I figured that Bush didn't have the integrity, the honestly, the whatever, to admit to himself or a nation that it was/is time to put an end to the war.

I decided long ago that Bush was so connected to the war, so focused on 'winning' something, that Bush wasn't going to end it. No chance, in my opinion.

Once again - I really, truly expected the war to receive 1st priority after the election.

I did not vote for McCain. McCain to me, meant more of the war.

I understand that Obama isn't going to halt the war right now, that much is clear. What is bothersome to me right now is that the war does not seem to have a high priority - money does. There is little mention of the war.

(HW - the messengers are being shot each day. See the website I referenced. It might be a big joke because your Canadian sons & daughters are safe, but some South of you feel differently. U.S. messengers are being shot.)

Captain - there is no need for ANY blame.

Forget blame, forget fault. Soldiers are dying today.

Hillary Clinton wanted the war. I wanted the war. Many people wanted the war.

These people all changed their minds a long time ago. Do we say, "Well you got what you wanted and that is why more soldiers are going to die"...?

Are these peoples' previous choices enough reason to continue the war?

I find it obvious by most of the people I speak with that further deaths of soldiers is acceptable to them. Most everyone asked reminds us that it isn't Obama's fault, Bush started the war, Bush is to blame, and therefore it is okay for more soldiers to die.

Illogical, but true?

Cristo, soldiers dying is a serious subject.

I'm not going to tolerate you mocking their deaths in this thread.

No matter what you think of ME... have some respect, please.

Feel free to post intelligently on the topic.

Anyhow Captain, I agree 100% with your thought:

"The things you're mentioning should have always been at the forefront of concern, not just now. The blame for that doesn't really belong in the current administration. It will if it continues, but it's too early to gage that is all I'm saying."

Time will tell. Let's hope for the best.

I am just going to concentrate on being more 'accepting' of the fact there's nothing I can do to put any kind of priority on ending the war.

I'm sincerely looking forward to that day though.

as I posted before and you deleted - you're half-right (again)

illogical but true

here is alink to what is going on in Iraq. if you never saw sadam hang take a look.

http://shock.military.com/Shock/gallery/popular.do

Thanks for explaining that, Cristo.

(I misunderstood your previous post, I see now it was not meant to be mocking toward the troops.)

I am in no way in support of any war, nor would I compare the value of lives of those lost to those still fighting. That is not what I said, nor did I imply. So don't conjecture what I 'meant' in my post TiCK. Everyone wants the war over with. EVERYONE. And Chris, you're right. Less than 8 weeks. But let's all expect Obama to make everything 'right' in less than 4 weeks. There will be no making it 'right'. He can only try to repair the damages done in the last administration. Obviously, to those who lost people in the war, there is no repair to be had.

I'm sorry Tck, but given your very strong and unmovable pro stance on the invasion and war in Iraq, your comments about stopping the war now while writing how the war was maybe not a bad idea after all, has the appearance of being tongue in cheek. I can't tell if you're playing "the devil's advocate" in here and just using this as a platform for a wind up.

I would like to address your comments that indicate that you still think invading Iraq was a good thing.

Besides the invasion killing almost twice as man Americans as 9/11 and developing a situation that looks like more Iraqi's died in than under Saddam while creating a huge opening for Iran to gain an influential foothold in Iraq while not detecting their nuclear program , it now appears that by not finishing the job in Afghanistan, the Taliban are now making very strong moves towards destabilizing Pakistan by moving out of the tribal territories and into the cities.

I've been reading interviews with people like Richard Armitage talking about the rise of the Pakistan Taliban and how that country is on it's way to becoming a failed state with 50 to 100 nuclear weapons. Somehow or other, whether Iraqis having the freedom at the moment to celebrate Valentines day doesn't seem as important. And even less so, when one considers that Bush admin. officials like Wolfowitz, Cheney, Rumsfeld saw the invasion as an opportunity for oil.

And how is it that Obama with limited access to intelligence assessments at the time he was running to get the democratic nomination, saw what would happen if we didn't focus more on stabilizing Afghanistan, while Bush, with access to classified intelligence didn't?

I felt that the invasion of Iraq was a good thing to remove Saddam from power and remove from that nation of any weapons of mass destruction. Just like Hillary Clinton, the current Secretary of State also felt at the time. At some point along the path both Hillary and I became opposed to the Iraq war.

Though I do not understand what anyone's (Hillary and/or me) desire to start the war 7 years ago has to do with everyone placing a higher priority on stopping the war now.

I believe the here and now is what counts, and that we as a nation may have our priorities in the wrong order.

Just my opinion.

I agree Tck we need to stop the war. We can pull our troops out ASAp. hey we did it in Vietnam. Let them fend for them selves. They will do what is right for them the same as we should too.

I need a job!

(I'm leaving your post there Bullwinkle, because I think it represents the opinion of way too many people - jobs & the economy are a higher priority than the lives of our troops.)

I have become a huge proponent for soldiers rights and better treatment for military members. I think they are caught in the middle of a political chess match, regardless of political leadership. I think they are coming home wounded and scarred both physically and emotionally, if they come home at all. I think their tours of duties and their abilities have been stretched to the breaking point, perhaps beyond. I think that once they do come home they aren't cared for properly.

All politics aside my personal interest is in supporting the troops. Bush, Obama, and politicians be glorified or damned according to ones personal choice.

But our troops are a sacred asset to this nation.

I'm proud to say I am a Cindy Sheehan wannabe. I have changed my position/opinion regarding the Iraq war, and I am man enough to admit it.

When you see the flag-draped silver aluminum coffins rolling down the conveyor belt take a moment to realize that someones dead son or daughter or brother or sister is inside yes, girls too, teenagers in some cases. Each coffin represents an individual.

It is my sincerest hope that a few more Cindy Sheehan wannabes emerge from within the citizens of this nation.

Our nation economy is very important, but not as important as our most treasured national asset our soldiers.

Just my humble opinion.

"just like Hillary Clinton, the current Secretary of State also felt at the time"

I don't understand why you keep bringing Hillary Clinton into this topic or what she has to do with Obama's campaign "promises".

I think that there are several reasons why the majority of the Senate voted in favor of invading Iraq. First and foremost is because they were given false and misleading information that was cherry picked by the Bush administration in order to justify an invasion. The Bush administration, with the help of George Tenet, misled the American people, the Congress, the Senate and their own Secretary of State in order to justify an invasion that was in the planning stages well before 9/11.

Then you have the mentality that no one in our government wanted to appear soft on terrorism.

There is a big difference between making a decision to act because one is mislead by false information and making a decision to to create false information in order to mislead others to act.

And that, in my opinion is one of the differences between Hillary Clinton and any other government official that voted in favor of invasion and the Bush administration.

Of which now, I am more and more convinced that Bush was just a puppet. If that's true, then he question is who was Cheney, who was pulling the strings, getting his instructions from?.

All politics aside -

I was mislead in my information regarding the Iraq war. I thought the objectives were to remove Saddam from power and eliminate weapons of mass destruction. Then the objectives changed (or further objectives were added) after a few years. We were ALL mislead.

I believe we were ALL mislead and that's why I mention Hillary - everyone thinks Hillary had an excuse, poor Hillary was lied to, that's the only reason she voted in favor of the war. Hey - let's all be excused then, we were all mislead to some degree, right?.

- - - - - - - -

Cimm, you and others continually mention Bush & Cheney, who are BOTH HISTORY now.

WHAT DO BUSH & CHENEY HAVE TO DO WITH MAKING THE END OF THE IRAQ WAR A PRIORITY NOW BEFORE MORE SOLDIERS ARE KILLED?

Hang Bush by his feet if you want, BUT FIRST & FOREMOST - LET'S PUT A HIGH PRIORITY ON ENDING THE WAR!

More dead soldiers while we squabble about who started the war? Where are our priorities? How many will die today while people look back at who is to blame?

No the Iraq war was because whn The bin ladens loaned George bush the money to service oill companies. Sadam told Bush to kiss his ass, He did not want anything to do with Bush. Bush was a puppet. Bush came back and knew the only way he could do anything was to become president and use the us army to pay him back. Thanks Bush and all those who voted for him. Ug what a mess. I still believe Osam is on his ranch in Texas. hehehehe

and people wonder why they call it "dope" lol

Pentagon rethinks photo ban on war coffins.

Images of flag-draped coffins at Dover could have profound effect on nation.

By Ann Scott Tyson and Mark Berman

Updated 4:39 a.m. ET, Tues., Feb. 17, 2009

WASHINGTON - Every week, Air Force cargo jets land and taxi down the runway at Dover Air Force Base, Del., carrying the remains of fallen U.S. troops. After a chaplain says a simple prayer, an eight-man military honor guard removes the metal "transfer cases" from the planes and carries them to a mortuary van.

The flag-draped coffins are a testament to the toll of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as to the sacrifice borne by those who serve in the military and their families. But this ceremony, known as the "dignified transfer of remains" and performed nearly 5,000 times since the start of the wars, is hidden from the American public view by the Pentagon.

President Obama said last week that he is considering lifting the ban on photographs and videos at Dover, in place since the Persian Gulf War in 1991, raising fundamental questions about the impact of such images on the public morale in wartime.

For Obama, changing the policy would carry some political risk as he ramps up the war effort in Afghanistan with tens of thousands of fresh troops, increasing the likelihood of combat deaths that could produce photographs of numerous coffins arriving at one time at Dover, the sole U.S. port of entry for the remains. At the same time, Obama has advocated transparency in government, and continuing to hide the Dover ritual from public view conflicts with that principle as well as with public opinion on the issue, polls indicate.

"Showing these pictures would remind people of the war," said S. Robert Lichter, director of the Center for Media and Public Affairs at George Mason University. But he added that "what turns people against a war is not knowledge that Americans are dying but the belief that they are not dying for something" worthwhile.

- - - - - - - - - - -

Allow the full truth to be seen. Don't hide any aspects of the war.

Place a higher priority on ending the Iraq war.

I think this would be a good change......keep in the forefront of peoples mind. Not being able to afford that boat you want, or bitching about your tax return seems dismal compared to what some are giving for YOU!!

This is not intended to incite hostility or bash anyone. The following quote is not mine, I read it on another site today. It raises some thought:

- - - - - - -

"Has anybody observed that the Iraq War is now over, or is it just me? Since Obama was elected the War has become a small nuisance. Nothing has been on the front page of the paper about the War since. You think I jest? Look at your paper today. Reply back if you have ANY story about Iraq (or even Afghanistan) on the front page. It's not on the headline on any of the internet news pages. Also, last night with Brian Williams, not even 1 story about the war. Wierd huh?"

- - - - - - - -

I ask myself - what could possibly be MORE important than the war?

Think about it?

'I ask myself - what could possibly be MORE important than the war?"

Sex baby--------------hehehehehehehehe---

Indeed, Michael.... most people I talk to all suggest something more important in their eyes.

Support the troops!

Indeed. Support the troops, because they really really need it. It is a thankless thing to be at the sharp end. Ironically it might allow Obama to quietly do what needs to be done, if the war drops out of the news.

I have said it before: The US and their allies are in it for the long haul, if there is to be any hope of some stability. Both regions are political powder kegs.

How long is a tour in Iraq anyway?

Tck? JoJett?

Gith - As of August 1, 2008, it went back to the standard 12 months tour of duty after being lengthened to 15 months back in April 2007.

**I heard announced last night that Obama agreed to send 17000 more troops to Afghanistan.

Tours for National Guard brigades is now 12 months start to finish. That means only 2 months of training on Federal orders. They expect us to train on our own or do it on drill weekends. My tour in Iraq will start in April sometime and we have been told roughly home by Feb 2010.

I have seen mention that some soldiers are involuntarily having their tours of duty extended.

I have been reading of substandard support and medical care for soldiers returning home.

There have been 17,000 U.S. soldiers committed to the war in Afghanistan.

I am in favor of bringing all soldiers home. If Iraq and/or Afghanistan turn into a 'hotbed' of terrorism, the USA can consider assisting other countries in joint efforts to combat the problem. If a crazy leader like Saddam emerges I'm in favor of pinpoint surprise missile attacks rather than ground troops.

It is a vastly changing world, the U.S. should no longer be the world police force. Let's protect our own borders and fix some of our own problems.

Support the troops! Bring them all home alive!

I second that tck! Bring em home, now, all of them. There's nothing winnable in Afghanistan. Bin Ladin has left the building. Clinton blew his chance in Sudan and Bush blew his at Tora Bora. You don't make "wars on terrorism", or rather if you think wars can solve terrorism, you lose.

Iran holds enough uranium for bomb.

By Daniel Dombey

Published: February 19 2009 21:18 | Last updated: February 19 2009 21:18

Iran has now built up a stockpile of enough enriched uranium for one nuclear bomb, United Nations officials acknowledged on Thursday.

In a development that comes as the Obama administration is drawing up its policy on negotiations with Tehran over its nuclear programme, UN officials said Iran had produced more nuclear material than previously thought.

- - - - - - - -

I think the 'United Nations' should handle this situation in an acceptable and complete manner, or, the United States should get the f*ck out of the U.N.

Contrary to unpopular opinion the United States is NOT the United Nations.

Time for the U.N. to prove it is worthwhile... or disband.

Actually I am pretty sure he was supporting a "responsible" end to the war in Iraq. Unfortunately, responsible means to undo much of the damage we have done there, as this war was supposed to be against Saddam Hussein's dictatorship. If we just cut and run, leaving Iraq in a war-torn state, they become perfectly vulnerable to Al Queda's underhanded ways of soliciting support. Yes, I know that a lot of Americans died in Iraq, but to give groups like al queda the chance to garner support by rebuilding Iraq for them would be like allowing all of those loyal service men and women to have died for nothing at all. In addition, we would look like people who are not of our word, as we promised to liberate them. That being said, I did not like the idea of us going out there. I felt that we had enough on our plates with Afghanistan and Bin Laden, but what's done is done, and the only way to end it is to finish it, not cut it short. Otherwise we will soon be back in Iraq for a third time. Who of us wants that?

And what do you call Finished? Not being a smart-***either,I respect your opinion. I'd really like to know and how long will that take? Till the Sunnis and Shiites love each other? The hundred years John McCain said? And why are we and our children responsible?

I have to agree with the Shopstar...I was behind the war in the beginning too, but enough is enough already. I don't buy the logic just posted that since we are in it, we need to finish it. If you are following a road you no longer believe to be viable, then why is it you need to keep traveling down it until it dead ends??? Everybody makes mistakes, everybody fails...the mark of an intelligent person, or country for that matter, is to realize when you do and STOP doing it. Otherwise, hell...we'd still be in Vietnam. That surely would never have been "resolved" according to our standards.

Support the troopds is a lot of hog wash. How can we support when we have no say so. Take a little time and either go to a VA hoapital or research and see how our troops are being supported when they come back. Support our troops. Bull shit. It just make the sayer feel he is doing something. During vietnam . our troops were called baby killers and treated like shit. Now that we are in this war oh support the troops. America only supports when it allows the saying to think he is looking good in front of his peers. So as to the sdaying support our troops. Hog wash and bull shit.

Abrupt changes in any system cause instability. This is a fact , be it science or political science. We need to make a gradual and real drawdown of troops in Iraq. At the same time the Iraqi government (military) needs to improve it's capability in regards to maintaining stability in the country. The U.S. can't be a world police force. We gave it a good shot. If Iraq in reality turns out to be a naturally fuuked up place, then so be it. You can't change what doesn't want change.

Having said all this, one must realize that Iran is not comfortable having a large, and potentially hostile force so close to its frontier. Is this fact causing the mullahs to behave nicely? Probably. Do the Gulf States, and the Saudis want a U.S. military presence in the region? Clearly.

Support the troops? Bullshit?

Perhaps what we see is a need to support the troops better than the support they currently receive?

I always thank military members for serving their country - they are amazed when I do that. It appears that many people do not like war, so they don't like the troops - and the troops are basically ignored. Kind of like the guys who clean out septic tanks. We think, "Just do the job and stay out of sight...". Both are important jobs, absolutely critical in society, but vastly under-appreciated, right?

What ways can we support the troops? Pay their bill in a restaurant, just for starters. Thank them for the job they do. Throw them a salute when you see them on the street. Never ignore them or pretend you don't see them.

What ways can YOU think of to support the troops?

I think we should care for them better when they come home hurt *physically OR mentally* and limit them to two tours. What's up with this four tour stuff??

Keerok, We (U.S.) maintain more than 700 military facilites in more than 130 different countries. Kind of "over extended" is all. Small wonder most of the world considers us (U.S.) as imperialistic.

Involuntary extension of a person's military time needs to end, I agree.

No one asked them to join. Most went in because they thoought they would get something for nothing. But ah. They were fooled and actually had to do their job. Where is it written that they should only do 2 tours. During vietnam world war2 korea. Soldiers were drafted in and spent their whole time in the war. If the person did not want to be in war. Why did they join? As I said to get the freebies. If they are injured. then when they come back. they should fall under the ssame as everybody else. Work mens comp. They need to do the same as the rest of us when we are injured at our job. Oh well I guess they are special. Special what i dont know. Most were to lazt to even go further then high school. Ha!

michael.......I stand by my first assessment of you........You sound like that typical asshole that never served....or did you join to get your college??

Geesh mikey, that was quite a lungful, don't bogart man! And what college did you attend? My children have already graduated, but I want to make sure my grandchildren don't attend the same college as you did. Your spelling is worse than mine stoned. ( I wanted to say something like that ^ robbie. I already visited here and left. Thanks! )

Just a knee jerk reaction Shop......being career military, then having son's in the military I get pretty upset about comments like his.......fact is I agree to some point with him.....I have seen alot of people join for college only to be upset when deployed or asked to do what the military requires.....that pisses me off also....But, it's the whole "As I said to get the freebies. If they are injured. then when they come back. they should fall under the ssame as everybody else. Work mens comp. They need to do the same as the rest of us when we are injured at our job. Oh well I guess they are special. Special what i dont know. Most were to lazt to even go further then high school"

I got news for ya.......They are doing what you won't so that you can have what you have and say what you've said! Do you know how many people don't have an opportunity to go to college any other way? Has nothing to do with lazy! I would put my son, currently at Bragg and three tours in Iraq up against anyone you got as far as lazy....He's in top shape, grabs every school they will send him to and refuses to accept disability although he could get out today and probably draw 70-90% because of physical and mental injuries received while trapsing around the desert for people like you, Michael. Not asking for anything other than the pay they offer and opportunities to make himself better.........

Robbie, he is not worth it. (((hugs)))

moron /mrn, mor-/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [mawr-on, mohr-] Show IPA Pronunciation

noun 1. a person who is notably stupid or lacking in good judgment.

2. Psychology. a person of borderline intelligence in a former classification of mental retardation, having an intelligence quotient of 50 to 69.

Hey dude many of us don't do this for freebies as you call them. We take chances with our lives while many of you can't or won't to protect this country even with retards like you in it. I am goin on my second tour to Iraq in a month. I did reenlist in the guard for the money, college benefits, subsatndard medical care or any other reason other than to give my daughter a safe place to live without fear of being randomly blown up by some demented religious freak. Now on that note since we are risking our lives I think we deserve benefits like education, life medical care, etc.

BigJohn... thanks for serving your country.

Thanks for giving all of the 'Michaels' a safe & comfortable place to live their lives (and to talk shit).

Thanks man, for taking care of all those who cannot take care of themselves. Without the military's protection and government subsidies, the 'Michaels' of this world would be dead or enduring slave labor.

You do it for me, you do it them, you do it for us all - thanks.

If that's the way you see it, BigJohn, you have every right to join up and put your neck on the line. But certainly since WW2 most of the wars the U.S. has been involved in were about MONEY. Either nice fat defense contracts for some of the key industries, or to secure the U.S. oil interests abroad. If the great American brainwash works, and enough enthusiastic young men keep signing up, the politicians will keep playing their games. People who travel and live abroad get a very different picture of what is really going on.

Iraqi police shoot dead four US soldiers.

Feb 24 10:37 AM US/Eastern

Iraqi policemen shot dead four US soldiers and their local interpreter in the main northern city of Mosul on Tuesday, an interior ministry official said. "Four US soldiers and their Iraqi interpreter were killed by two Iraqi policemen who opened fire at them in the Dawasa district of (central) Mosul and then fled," the official told AFP, declining to be named.

The incident took place during a US army visit to the Mosul headquarters of the Iraqi police in charge of protecting the city's bridges, police said. The bullet-riddled body of the interpreter was taken to the local mortuary.

It was the third such fatal shooting involving US soldiers in just over a year in Mosul, one of the country's most restive cities.

On November 12, an Iraqi soldier shot dead two US soldiers in the city before being shot dead himself, but US and Iraqi officials differed sharply on what actually happened.

Iraqi officials said the soldier opened fire after an altercation with the Americans during a joint patrol in the city, but the US military insisted it was an unprovoked shooting inside an Iraqi army compound.

Mohammed al-Askari, Iraq's defence ministry spokesman, said at the time that the shooting took place during a joint patrol to inspect security procedures in Mosul, which the US army says is Al-Qaeda's last urban bastion in Iraq.

An official in the Iraqi interior ministry said "a US soldier slapped an Iraqi soldier during the patrol."

A similar incident took place in Mosul in January 2007 when an Iraqi soldier opened fire on American troops during the erection of a combat outpost in the city, killing two US soldiers, according to Iraqi officials.

US and Iraqi forces operate together throughout the country, and the United States has long said that the training of Iraqi troops and police is a central part of its military strategy.

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

He said, she said, they said , we said... but who cares... they're all DEAD.

Time to bring our soldiers home (alive).

StillHopeful -

I am going to leave your post up because YOU are the exact reason the U.S. needs to leave Iraq.

(The U.S. doesn't need to be protecting your country, that has been over-run by middle easterners, anymore. We should sit back and watch you wallow in your own shit.)

Let France deal with their own unruly neighbors. It isn't the U.S.'s job any longer.

You might well be advised to spend less time in the gym and bone up on geography instead. France is nowhere near Iraq. And I have met more expat Americans here than any middle eastern folk. They seem to want to leave the Great American Dream for some odd reason.

France is a hell of a lot closer to Iraq than the USA is, study up yourself, lol.

It seems France was VERY MUCH against the invasion of Iraq because France had business contracts with Saddam's government - France didn't want to lose that income.

I'm not concerned with who YOU have met, Still, I was referring to YOUR country. Nice try tho'.

Please try and tell me there are more American 'expats' in YOUR country than middle easterners, and then try and convince me you like the middle easterners being in your country.

If you can, try and not evade answering truthfully and honestly (Frenchmen often have difficulty in that regard).

Re-submit, perhaps consider an attitude change.

I do indeed have a closed mind to insult posts.

If you have anything intelligent to present in a more personable manner, feel free.

But if it is another 'French bidet' post perhaps spare yourself some time?

It's not that you don't have a point stillhopeful....many of our conflicts, which aren't even "wars" really are started or maintained for the wrong reasons. Iraq was started for a good reason and maintained for the wrong reasons. However, the average GI has no say in it....they are there for a reason and they fulfil that purpose. Heroes everyone of them. I believe just as many wars are started for the wrong purpose and change, so do people joining the military. You join for one reason and soon you're staying for another reason....Patriotism being one of those reasons.....

I do think you probably need help with that word though........

Patriotism

Pa"tri*ot*ism\, n. [Cf. F. patriotisme.] Love of country; devotion to the welfare of one's country; the virtues and actions of a patriot; the passion which inspires one to serve one's country. --Berkley.

patriotism

noun

love of country and willingness to sacrifice for it; "they rode the same wave of popular patriotism"; "British nationalism was in the air and patriotic sentiments ran high"

read his profile - he's an "ex-patriot"

they call them "ex-pats" for a reason

"People who travel and live abroad get a very different picture of what is really going on."

His information is better than ours.

Another one of these internationally all-knowing guru's with access to special information not readily available here in the USA.

Gosh... we've never had people like that here before!

(Feel free to express your opinion StillHopeful, but it's worth as much as anyone else's. )

You have to remember,(stillhopeful) France never added blue and red to their flag till 1946. Probably why he likes it there. Only those "mid-easterners" that were rioting there a few years back sure were mal-content, with that great open inclusive system. Sorry, tck. This is getting off topic.

Now to get on topic, Hey Mickey, why do you neo-libs always have a problem with the people in the military getting any extra or deserved benifits for putting their lives on the line. But you don't blink an eye over creating more expensive social programs that are obviously money for nothing giveaways and do nothing for the betterment of society or the economy as a whole.

"Neo Lib"??

I newly minted word!

Nothing is free in life.

Whether someone joins the military because of the enticement of benefits for college (the military does play that card in recruitment programs), the development of a trade that will apply to civilian life, because their patriotic, because they want to fly a jet, they believe in their President or not, they all share one thing in common. They have a job to do.

So, if you're working in uniform for your country, what's so free about the benefits that you get? Esp. when those wages don't compare to civilian wages (unless of course your an officer)?

I agree that most wars (and I include past and present) have some sort of economic side to them (Hitler's was about taking land for the expansion of Germanic peoples and was funded by some of the same industrialists of the time who also funded WW1), unfortunately a country still needs a military power for it's protection.

While I also totally agree with this comment "Either nice fat defense contracts for some of the key industries, or to secure the U.S. oil interests abroad", I find it interesting that you would leave out the fact that prior to our invasion of Iraq, France, Germany, China and Russia all had nice fat multi, multi million dollar (as in hundreds of millions, not tens of millions) contracts with Iraq connected to oil, telecommunications and other types of infrastructure in that country.

The same types of contracts that they have in other countries throughout the world. You know, in places like Burma, Nigeria, Sudan (where the Chinese now own all of the contracts to their mineral rights), etc.

Perhaps you might care to bone up a little more on Geo-politics before you start laying all of the blame at the door step of America. In my opinion, by not doing that, you put yourself in the same boat as those you desginate geographically challenged in this debate, just a different side of it.

And while you're talking about American men and women signing up because they've been brain washed, perhaps you can explain what these French guys in Chad are doing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9Ze_g9y2Es (from the "check out these amazing landscapes" forum)

Welcome to the forums stillhopeful

Actually, this one's much better (trust me) .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nltc_dq_VXI&feature=related

Chad's not exactly a neighboring country, is it?

no - but france (not the americas) certainly left a recent "footprint" with it's failed colonialism policies there...

to be specific, france and england with their failed colonialism practices are/were the root cause of 99% of the CURRENT problems throughout africa, the middle east, and the near east

(and southeast asia as well)

american's involvement there NOW is one of the end results of a GREAT DEAL OF "mucking about" by others (previously listed)

how easy it is to blame current american problematic issues on failed colonial problems of others....

^^ LOL Surely you jest! Not the perfect members of the great EU./// While I'll be the first to admit our foreign policy shortcomings, I agree 100% with that observation.

Pentagon lifts media ban on coffin photos.

Associated Press / updated 36 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Families of Americas war dead will be allowed to decide if news organizations can photograph the homecomings of their loved ones, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday.

Gates said he decided to allow media photos of flag-draped caskets at Dover Air Force Base, Del., if the families agree. A working group will come up with details and logistics.

The new policy reverses a ban put in place in 1991 by then President George H.W. Bush. Some critics contended the government was trying to hide the human cost of war.

- - - - - - - -

This is a good move in my opinion... shows the price we are paying for the war.

February 27th...

I see now that President Obama has a plan to end the war, and, keep 35,000 to 50,000 troops in Iraq at the same time.

Hey all of the suckers that fell for his 'end the war' bullshit prior to the election?

I think he just said whatever he had to say to get elected. Too bad huh? That's politics.

(I do not find leaving 50,000 troops in Iraq anything close to being an end to the war.)

Just my opinion... I'm not pleased with this development.

Yes tck, doesn't sound like an end to me either. Almost the same time table Bush gave for "combat troops". But to hear the Neo-libs talk, "now we have an end". In other developments. After Attorney General Eric Holder on one day and a Dem. Reps. delegation visited Gitmo earlier in the week, talk in Dem. circles in D.C. thinks it not as inhumane as first thought and maybe necessary. Military tribunals also. Renditions are seemed OK now too. Also Obama Justice Dept. argues in Federal court on continueing "state secrets" in warrentless wiretap cases. Same as Bush Administration. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

"Let me say this as plainly as I can: By August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end," Obama said in a speech at the Marine Corps' Camp Lejeune, North Carolina.

- - - - - - - - - -

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN): Meanwhile, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani visited neighboring Iran, where the supreme leader warned him that the United States is planning a prolonged stay in Iraq.

On Friday, Talabani met with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who described Tehran's ties with Iraq as "growing and deep," according to IRNA. The two leaders vowed to expand their political, cultural and security relationships.

- - - - - - - - -

The leaders of Iran and Iraq vowed to expand their political, cultural, and security relationships.

IRAQI LEADERSHIP PLEDGES STRONGER TIES WITH IRAN - NO TIES WITH THE USA.

IRAQ: "USA, PLEASE GET OUT OF OUR COUNTRY. WE'RE MAKING FRIENDS WITH IRAN NOW."

USA: "NO, WE ARE GOING TO INCUR THE DEATHS OF MORE AMERICANS, FOR YOUR BENEFIT, WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT. AFTER MORE U.S. SOLDIERS ARE KILLED YOU CAN ALIGN WITH IRAN."

???

Security gains jump-start sales of American SUVs in Iraq

BAGHDAD Here's a bailout idea for the American auto industry: Send all those unwanted SUVs to Iraq.

Just as General Motors is halting production of the Hummer, and other sport-utility vehicles fall out of favor with cost-conscious and eco-friendly Americans, the gas-guzzling behemoths are experiencing a rebirth among young and wealthy Iraqis.

"Eighteen-year-olds, they buy the Hummer," says Hidar al-Dalfiy, who opened a dealership called Hummer Cars in eastern Baghdad five months ago. "It's showing off."

Most Iraqis avoided driving flashy cars during the worst years of the war, fearing it would make them a target for kidnapping or worse.

Now that security has improved, Hummers the slimmed-down, civilian versions of the U.S. military Humvees that have patrolled Baghdad for six years have earned a reputation as a sturdy car that can stand up to Iraq's crumbling streets.

"The Iraqis are very rich," said Shwan Burhan, a car dealer in the Zaiuna district of Baghdad. "As soon as the security improved, they started buying cars."

Lower-priced Korean and German cars are still the best sellers in Iraq, according to al-Dalfiy and other dealers. While there are no nationwide data on sales of American cars in Iraq, Burhan says he has sold 150 of them in the past two years compared with none before that. Other dealers also said sales were up.

Hazam Bakir, a Baghdad businessman, says his regular drives from Baghdad to the southern city of Basra now look like caravans of American SUVs.

The high costs of the American cars a lightly used Hummer H3 typically goes for a little more than $30,000 are somewhat offset by Iraq's low gas prices of about $1.65 a gallon. The nation sits on the third-largest oil reserves in the world, so prices rarely rise too much.

- - - - - - - - -

Published reports state that while the USA is in an economic DECLINE, our dollars and soldier's lives will continue to be spent on the Iraqi economic INCLINE.

(Once the Iraqi economy is better than the U.S. economy 'maybe' the U.S. will leave Iraq. 'Maybe', but don't count on it.)

Will oil $$ RICH Iraq ever pay the U.S.A. for saving their country?

BAGHDAD The U.S. military says an American soldier has been killed in the shelling of a U.S.-Iraqi base in the northern city of Mosul.

Iraqi police say the joint base was hit by mortar rounds Tuesday.

Nobody has claimed responsibility for the attack. But it underscores the resilience of Al Qaeda in Iraq and other groups after repeated attempts to break their hold in Mosul.

The U.S. military says rounds hit the base and that one American soldier has died of wounds.

THE FINAL INSPECTION

The soldier stood and faced God,

Which must always come to pass.

He hoped his shoes were shining,

Just as brightly as his brass.

'Step forward now, you soldier,

How shall I deal with you ?

Have you always turned the other cheek ?

To My Church have you been true?'

The soldier squared his shoulders and said,

'No, Lord, I guess I ain't.

Because those of us who carry guns,

Can't always be a saint.

I've had to work most Sundays,

And at times my talk was tough.

And sometimes I've been violent,

Because the world is awfully rough.

But, I never took a penny,

That wasn't mine to keep...

Though I worked a lot of overtime,

When the bills got just too steep.

And I never passed a cry for help,

Though at times I shook with fear..

And sometimes, God, forgive me,

I've wept unmanly tears.

I know I don't deserve a place,

Among the people here.

They never wanted me around,

Except to calm their fears.

If you've a place for me here, Lord,

It needn't be so grand.

I never expected or had too much,

But if you don't, I'll understand.

There was a silence all around the throne,

Where the saints had often trod.

As the soldier waited quietly,

For the judgment of his God.

'Step forward now, you soldier,

You've borne your burdens well.

Walk peacefully on Heaven's streets,

You've done your time in Hell.'

Author Unknown

It's the Military, not the reporter who has given us the freedom of the

Press. It's the Military, not the poet, who has given us the freedom of

Speech. It's the Military, not the politicians that ensures our right to

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. It's the Military who salutes

The flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by

The flag.

If you care to offer the smallest token of recognition and appreciation for

The Military, please pass this on and pray for our men and women who have

Served and are currently serving our country and pray for those who

Have given the ultimate sacrifice for freedom.

Unopened claims letters hidden at VA offices.

A new report about Veterans Affairs Department employees squirreling away tens of thousands of unopened letters related to benefits claims is sparking fresh concerns that veterans and their survivors are being cheated out of money.

VA officials acknowledge further credibility problems based on a new report of a previously undisclosed 2007 incident in which workers at a Detroit regional office turned in 16,000 pieces of unprocessed mail and 717 documents turned up in New York in December during amnesty periods in which workers were promised no one would be penalized.

"Veterans have lost trust in VA," Michael Walcoff, VAs under secretary for benefits, said at a hearing Tuesday. "That loss of trust is understandable, and winning back that trust will not be easy."

Unprocessed and unopened mail was just one problem in VA claims processing mentioned by Belinda Finn, VA's assistant inspector general for auditing, in testimony before the House Veterans' Affairs Committee.

Auditors also found that the dates recorded for receiving claims, which in many cases determine the effective date for benefits payments, are wrong in many cases because of intentional and unintentional errors, Finn said.

The worst case uncovered by auditors involved the New York regional office, where employees testified that managers told staff to put later dates on claims to make it appear claims were being processed faster. A review found that 56 percent of claims had incorrect dates, although no evidence was found of incorrect or delayed benefits payments. Finn said workers reported that this practice had been used for years. (You can learn more about controversy in the CNN video below.)

- - - - - - - -

Is it time to bring our soldiers home and focus on internal USA problems yet?

(Yes.)

Generals share their experience with PTSDStory. Memory of soldier who died before his eyes stays with one general. Another still questions himself over suicide bomb attack that killed 22. By sharing stories, they hope to ease stigma attached to stress. Military should have different view of post-traumatic stress disorder, they say.

By Larry Shaughnessy and Barbara Starr, CNN

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Army generals aren't known for talking about their feelings.

Brig. Gen. Gary S. Patton says he wants the military to change the way it views post-traumatic stress disorder.

But two high-ranking officers are doing just that, hoping that by going public they can remove the stigma that many soldiers say keeps them from getting help for post-traumatic stress disorder.

Brig. General Gary S. Patton and Gen. Carter Ham have both sought counseling for the emotional trauma of their time in the Iraq war.

"One of our soldiers in that unit, Spec. Robert Unruh, took a gunshot wound to the torso, I was involved in medevacing him off the battlefield. And in a short period of time, he died before my eyes," Patton told CNN in an exclusive interview. "That's a memory [that] will stay with me the rest of my life."

Ham was the commander in Mosul when a suicide bomber blew up a mess tent. Twenty-two people died.

"The 21st of December, 2004, worst day of my life. Ever," Ham said. "To this day I still ask myself what should I have done differently, what could I have done as the commander responsible that would have perhaps saved the lives of those soldiers, sailors, civilians."

Both generals have been back from Iraq for years, but still deal with some of the symptoms of the stress they experienced.

"I felt like that what I was doing was not important because I had soldiers who were killed and a mission that had not yet been accomplished," Ham said. "It took a very amazingly supportive wife and in my case a great chaplain to kind of help me work my way through that."

Ham and his wife drove from Washington State to the District of Columbia right after he returned from combat.

"I probably said three words to her the whole way across the country. And it was 'Do you want to stop and get something to eat?' I mean, no discussion, no sharing of what happened," he explained.

Ham still can't talk to his wife about much of what he saw.

For Patton the stress hits him in the middle of the night.

"I've had sleep interruptions from loud noises. Of course there's no IEDs or rockets going off in my bedroom, but the brain has a funny way of remembering those things," Patton said. "Not only recreating the exact sound, but also the smell of the battlefield and the metallic taste you get in your mouth when you have that same incident on the battlefield."

Both acknowledge that in military circles, there is still a stigma attached to admitting mental health problems.

"If you go ask for help somehow you believe it or you might believe others think it of you, that you're somehow weak. That's wrong and intellectually we all know it's wrong, but it's still there. It's still palpable in some communities," Ham said.

Patton wants to see a change in the way post-traumatic stress disorder is viewed by the military.

"We need all our soldiers and leaders to approach mental health like we do physical health. No one would ever question or ever even hesitate in seeking a physician to take care of their broken limb or gunshot wound, or shrapnel or something of that order. You know, we need to take the same approach towards mental health," Patton said.

Having two generals talk publicly about their own battles with stress and how counseling helped should help remove some of that. Patton said he wants servicemen and women to know that they can come forward.

"Know absolutely that your chain of command and your leadership in the military at our highest levels recognize this issue and want to encourage our soldiers to seek out that mental health assistance," Patton said.

Ham agreed. "I think, frankly, I think I'm a better general because I got some help."

- - - - - - - -

Our military members need the best care for their unseen injuries too.

Support the troops!

Troop drawdown detailed as bomb rattles Baghdad.

BAGHDAD (AP) About 12,000 U.S. troops will leave Iraq by September under President Obama's pledge to end America's combat role here, officials said Sunday, hours after a Baghdad suicide bomber killed as many as 32 people.

The troops probably will be removed from Baghdad and Anbar province once the main battlefields of the war. All 4,000 British soldiers in southern Iraq are slated to leave by September.

A U.S. spokesman, Maj. Gen. David Perkins, said Iraq's security has "greatly improved, and it has moved from a very unstable to a stable position." He cited a 90% drop in violence that he called its lowest level since the summer of 2003.

Perkins described Sunday's attack, the worst in Baghdad in months, as a sign that U.S.-led coalition forces have militants on the run.

"We are by no means complacent," Perkins said at an afternoon Baghdad news conference. "We know that al-Qaeda, although greatly reduced in capability and numbers, still is desperate to maintain relevance here in Iraq."

- - - - - - - - -

The Al Queda problem will exist if we leave now, or ten years from now.

Bring them home (alive).

When the "threat" to leave becomes reality I think the Iraqi's will stand up and be counted. Al Queda is not something that will be wiped out. As long as there is one left, the problem will exist.....but, the only way to rid the country from them is for all Iraqi's to stand up and say enough is enough. This won't happen as long as US (and allies) troops are on the ground. I don't think the people of Iraq want to return to the ways of Saddam's rule. Although they may not go to the extreme's the US has as far as freedoms and democracy, I believe we had a major impact on that country and the Iraqi people are better off for it!

Time to bring em home in a responsible manner.....

Officials: Afghanistan Taliban leader was at Gitmo

By PAMELA HESS 18 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) The Taliban's new top operations officer in southern Afghanistan had been a prisoner at the Guantanamo Bay detention center, the latest example of a freed detainee who took a militant leadership role and a potential complication for the Obama administration's efforts to close the prison. U.S. authorities handed over the detainee to the Afghan government, which in turn released him, according to Pentagon and CIA officials.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

The U.S. military expends our soldiers' lives in capturing hostiles.

The Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. military sets the hostiles free.

The Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. military commits more troops to counter the hostiles.

(Does this make any sense to anyone?)

Everybody blames BUSH for the war okay ill give you that but what about the past two years when the Democrats had the majority and still never once tried to end the war its like i said in other posts dont blame just Bush blame your entire Govt. but your right its easy to single out one person...just like everyone give Obama credit for doing nothing...note it was Nasty Nancy who drew up the first draft of the all mighty Stimulus Package but Obama got credit for that so you know what tck blame Bush all you want if it makes you feel good

(Flip... lol... read the posts from the beginning. Your last line is hilarious! )

The president always takes the credit/heat for what the federal government does, because he is its most visible representative.

Lets be realistic here. Iraq is not quite ready for us to leave although it is close to it. Besides, pulling out of Iraq now will not stop more soldiers from dying, as they will likely be shipped over to Afghanistan, where they will be needed. And don't tell me that Afghanistan was unnecessary, remember, the Taliban WAS supporting terrorism, and is now making a comeback.

I won't tell you A'stan was unnecessary, but I will tell you I do not feel it it the responsibility of the USA. And I believe unless there is world support for the USA's presence in A'stan we should pull out of that mess too.

I DO firmly believe that pulling out of Iraq now WILL stop more soldiers from dying.

To each their own beliefs.

Obama gave promises off of what he knew at that time in his campaign. Now that he is in office he knows the real reason why we in in Iraq. None of us really know why we are there we just think we do. The same reason why we are there now is the same reason why the first bush took us there what did everyone think was going to happen when they elected his son into office with Cheny of all people. It was us as America that got us into this war because it was us that elected him. I mean no one could see that he couldn't speak properly while he was running in his first or second campaign. I wouldn't be surprised if next after Afghanistan and Iraq if we also ended up going to war with Korea and Russia. We are getting weaker by the day because we are losing more and more soldiers by the day and every other nation is getting stronger because they are building there armies. I think we f***ed ourselves with this war and i knew it from the beginning and i love America what we need to do is fix our foreign relations, in a timely matter withdrawal our troops, and get our economy back on track. Then the government needs to stop fighting over there own agendas and start doing what's right for the American people and make sure we don't get ourselves into this type of predicament again. History doesn't have to repeat itself.

Congrats on an excellent first post, welcome.

Afghanistan is our responsibility as the terrorists the Taliban supports attacked us on our own soil and started this war. Iraq was not our responsibility. Terrorism just became an excuse for Bush to avenge Saddam Hussein's attempt on his father.

Very true, Gtr. And lets not forget who supported the Taliban in their efforts to throw the Russians out of Afghanistan.

Unfortunately, it is impossible to defeat an insurgency by military means. This leads to a sense of futility amongst those who must stand and watch and wonder why there are no significant military gains. The only way to defeat an insurgency is by building social and economic infrastructure. Schools, hospitals, water and sewage treatment, agricultural improvements. And for the most part it is not the military but the aid agencies (many of them NGO's) who are doing this work. All that the military can hope to do is make it possible for those agencies to do their work.

Canada has been in Afghanistan since 2002. In that time there have 112 Canadian soldiers who have lost their lives (out of 2500 in-country). About 10% of those casualties have been "friendly fire" (I hate that term). Most of the remainder have been lost to IED's. Very few of those casualties have occurred in actual combat.

Incidentally, most of the "friendly fire" incidents involved U.S. forces (one bombing by an F-18, one strafing by an A-10 and one attack by a civilian "security force."

But the REAL work being done is being carried out by teachers, builders and medical personnel. Knowing that progress is being made by these groups is what keeps our troops going back (many of them are Reservists who volunteer, and are not obligated to be there).

Good recap of recent US history... how it all started, why it all happened. Great stuff.

March 16, 2009:

Time for the USA to leave Iraq and A'stan.

Time for the rest of the world to get together and see if they want to help.

Anyone and everyone, from retard to rocket scientist can say, "But don't forget... Bush started the Iraq war"... (as if someone may 'forget', lol.).

A wise man will say, "But one man is keeping the Iraq war going... and his name is NOT Bush".

We're just tying up loose ends in Iraq, its just a matter of time before we're outta there. And keep in mind, the shoe-throwing reporter got a three year sentence.... Uday(sp) would have beheaded him if he threw his shoes at Saddam Hussein.

It takes time for a large military force to successfully and safely withdraw. I'm sure no one wants a repeat of the mad scramble to get out of Saigon.

I'm sure that the military is laying the plans to effect a withdrawal. But once the word is given, don't expect it to happen overnight.

As for Afghanistan, remember that the forces there are international. The U.S. is the largest contingent, but by no means the only ones putting their asses on the line. The eventual pull-out there may well take years rather than months.

"I'm sure that the military is laying the plans to effect a withdrawal." I'm glad you are 'sure'.

Withdrawal plans? Combat operations we declared over.... what back in 2004? Get real. The proposed 'pull out' has already taken years rather than months, lol.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

March 21, 2009:

Anti-war activists said even though former President George W. Bush is out of power, they are disappointed with what they see as stalled action from Obama. Several of them said they supported Obama during his campaign, but that his administration has let them down by not ending the war sooner.

"Obama seems to be led somewhat by the bureaucracies. I want him to follow up on his promise to end the war," said 66-year-old Perry Parks of Rockingham, N.C., who served in the Army for nearly 30 years, including in Vietnam. "But the longer it goes, the more it seems like he's stalling."

Obama has said he plans to withdraw roughly 100,000 troops by the summer of 2010. He promises to pull the last of the U.S. troops by the end of 2011, which is in accord with a deal Iraqis signed with Bush.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I believe Obama lied about his 'plans' to end the war in order to get elected.

I do not believe Obama has any plans of his own regarding the war, Obama is following Bush's former directions.

In short - I believe Obama is a phony, a sham, and a sociopathic liar who will say whatever you want to hear at any given time.

WAR = HELL ON EARTH

ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THE PRINCE OF DARKNESS HAS NOT REARED HIS UGLY HEAD

ONE DAY IT WILL BE DOOMSDAY FOR THE DECEIVER.

SUFFER THE MASSES FOR NOW.

MAY GOD BLESS YOU ALL

Obama Scraps 'Global War on Terror' for 'Overseas Contingency Operation'.

Obama has reportedly ordered an end to use of the phrase "Global War on Terror," a label adopted by the Bush administration shortly after the September 11 attacks.

- - - - - - - - - - -

Our soldiers are now giving their lives for the "Overseas Contingency Operation".

It's no wonder the U.S. military member suicide rate is way up.

Honest Abe (Obama's fav) Once said "how many legs does a dog have if you count the tail as a leg?" someone answered "5", Abe said " no, 4, at the end of the day its still a tail." Obama can call it what he wants I guess. Makes the neo-libs happier.

I expect the military member suicice rate to drop now that they have decided to lift the "back-door draft" that had been in effect for the past few years.... Yet another sign that our job is almost done in Iraq. What's happening now is nothing like that "Mission Accomplished" announcement back in 2003. We can't just rush it now... We did just that in the Gulf War and look where we ended up 12 years later. I don't think we would have had to go back if we had finished it the first time.

"Army Suicide Rate at 30-Year Peak February 2, 2009."

WASHINGTON -- President Obama says he won't consider speeding up the troop pullout from Iraq even though security has improved and violence has decreased.

"I think the plan that we put forward in Iraq is the right one" because it calls for "a very gradual withdrawal through the national elections in Iraq," he said in an interviewed aired Sunday on CBS' "Face the Nation."

While he didn't dispute the notion of military progress, Obama said there's plenty to do on the political side to resolve differences between the various sectarian groups. Iraq's security forces also need to be trained, he added.

"I'm confident that we're moving in the right direction. But Iraq is not yet completed. We still have a lot of work to do," the president said of the war that's winding down after six hard-fought years.

Separately, Defense Secretary Robert Gates told "FOX News Sunday" that he hasn't seen "anything at this point that would lead me to think that there will be a need to change the timeline."

The plan that Obama announced last month calls for withdrawing combat troops by the end of August 2010. After the drawdown, a large force of as many as 50,000 troops -- about one-third of what is there now -- will remain with a new, noncombat mission: train Iraqis, protect U.S. assets and personnel and conduct anti-terror operations.

- - - - - - - - -

What was Obama saying about the Iraq War one year ago?

Yes, and somewhere I missed his "exit strategy" for Afganistan. I do recall him saying about in the future not entering into conflict without one. Like I said before, Bin Ladin is gone from there. Bring the troops home. If he pops up, go get him, don't stay forever.

Barack Obama made an impassioned plea to Americas allies to send more troops to Afghanistan, warning that failure to do so would leave Europe vulnerable to more terrorist atrocities.

But though he continued to dazzle Europeans on his debut international tour, the Continents leaders turned their backs on the US President.

Gordon Brown was the only one to offer substantial help. He offered to send several hundred extra British soldiers to provide security during the August election, but even that fell short of the thousands of combat troops that the US was hoping to prise from the Prime Minister.

Just two other allies made firm offers of troops. Belgium offered to send 35 military trainers and Spain offered 12. Mr Obamas host, Nicolas Sarkozy, refused his request.

- - - - - - - - - - -

Barack... your horseshit about 'protecting Europe' is HORSESHIT - Europe doesn't care.

Barack, you look like an ASSHOLE when Belgium offers 35 troops and Spain offers 12.

Barack - they're making fun of your dumb ass. Wise up dumbass.

(35 and 12, lol, what a swift kick in the ass, lol.)

CNN:

Obama lauds NATO allies for Afghanistan support.

President Barack Obama said today he is "pleased that our NATO allies pledged their strong and unanimous support" for the new U.S. strategy toward fighting militants in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

- - - - - - - - -

Yup, all of the foreign leaders strongly and unanimously support the U.S. troops fighting in A'Stan.

Clap your hands in strong and unanimous 'support'.

(Um.... Barack? Get a clue. )

Obama is now transferring troops directly from Iraq to Afghanistan.

What is different about the Iraq war since the new president took office?

Iraq: US raid 'crime' that breaks security pact.

By BRIAN MURPHY, Associated Press Writer Brian Murphy,

Associated Press Writer 2 hrs 4 mins ago

BAGHDAD Iraq's prime minister denounced a deadly U.S. raid on Sunday as a "crime" that violated the security pact with Washington and demanded American commanders hand over those responsible to face possible trial in Iraqi courts.

The U.S. military, however, strongly denied that it overstepped its bounds and said it notified Iraqi authorities in advance in accordance with the rules that took effect this year governing U.S. battlefield conduct.

The pre-dawn raid in the southern Shiite city of Kut ended with at least one woman dead after being caught in gunfire and six suspects arrested for alleged links to Shiite militia factions.

- - - - - - - - - - -

I think the Iraqi Prime Minister should toss the U.S. out of Iraq for this!

I mean enough is enough, right Mr. Prime Minister? Time to put your foot down and control this nonsense. Tell those Americans (that keep your dumb ass alive) to leave!

As a penalty for this 'crime' the U.S. should have to leave Iraq NOW.

My own feelings are that the Iraq war, and the lives of our troops, have become completely political, and that is very SCARY for anyone in the military.

U.S. soldiers might now die so that a politician can 'look good'. Talking about troop reduction is bullshit in my opinion. I already heard all kinds of bullshit talk about an immediate end to the war during campaign speeches - now the same people say "wait", the end to the Iraq war is being planned. Were they lying then, or are they lying now?

I do NOT feel that the objective of the Iraq war is any longer in the best overall interest of Iraq or the USA... I believe the Iraq war is now 100% about politics.

I believe the politicians will do with Iraq, and U.S. troop lives, whatever is necessary to further serve their own political gains.

YES - I do firmly believe that politicians WILL trade troop lives for political gain.

YES - I believe democrats will justify further troop deaths by saying "Obama inherited the Iraq war - it is all Bush's fault. Bush started the war, blame the deaths on Bush and the republicans."

YES - I believe there are some democrats who might actually WANT further troop deaths just to make Bush and republicans look bad (worse).

Pray for the troops, they're unprotected by government leadership.

Military: 3 American troops killed in Iraq.

BAGHDAD (AP) Three U.S. troops have been killed in fighting west of Baghdad, the military said Friday, making April the deadliest month for American forces in Iraq since September.

Iraq insists on US leaving cities by June 30.

May 4, 5:14 PM (ET) By ROBERT H. REID

BAGHDAD (AP) - Iraq's government Monday ruled out allowing U.S. combat troops to remain in Iraqi cities after the June 30 deadline for their withdrawal, despite concern that Iraqi forces cannot cope with the security challenge following a resurgence of bombings in recent weeks.

Asking U.S. forces to stay in the cities, including volatile Mosul in the north, would be embarrassing for Iraq's prime minister, who has staked his political future on claims that the country has turned the corner in the war against Sunni and Shiite extremists.

The departure of heavily armed combat troops from bases inside the cities is important psychologically to many Iraqis, who are eager to regain control of their country after six years of war and U.S. military occupation.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

It would be rude not to respect the Iraqi's wishes.

GET THE FVCK OUT OF IRAQ...!

...NOW!......

OVER and OUT!! lol

Gonna be nice but it's not exactlly how it seems. I am in Baghdad right now. Not gonna talk about what things are happening or gonna happen right now for opsec reasons. I will let you all know the real story when it happens as the news orgs. usually have it wrong.

BAGHDAD -- A U.S. soldier reportedly walked into a "stress clinic" on a Baghdad base, opened fire -- killling four of his fellow servicemen -- then took his own life.

- - - - - - - - - -

We'll never know for sure what's behind this catastrophe, but the soldiers are stretched to the max as far as how much they can take.

With everything going on here, and everything going on there, I'm sure tensions are HIGH.

Once again... bring 'em home SOON...!

Take care BigJohn! You and all the troops are in our thoughts and prayers. Thanks for all you do. Hope to see all of you home or out of there. The SOONER the Better.

CNN) -- A Vietnam War veteran killed in an Iraq roadside bombing this week has become the oldest American service member to be killed in both Iraq and Afghan combat, the Pentagon has confirmed.

Vietnam vet is oldest Iraq casualty.

Maj. Steven Hutchison -- a 60-year-old soldier from Scottsdale, Arizona -- died on Sunday in the southern Iraqi city of Basra after a bomb went off near his vehicle in the region.

Hutchison spanned two war eras. He enlisted in the Army at 19 and served in Vietnam, according to a news report on CNN affiliate KNXV-TV.

3 U.S. Soldiers Killed by Roadside Bomb in Baghdad.

Thursday, May 21, 2009

Remember them all on this special Memorial Day.

May: U.S. troop deaths up in Iraq; 20 killed.

By Aamer Madhani, USA TODAY

May is already the deadliest month for U.S. troops in Iraq since September.

This month's death toll reached 20 when the military reported a soldier was killed by a roadside bomb Wednesday. The total is due in part to an unusually large number of non-combat deaths, including a mass shooting at a Baghdad military base. An American soldier has been charged in that case.

- - - - - - - - -

Bring 'em all home. We've got our own problems. We're not the world police force anymore.

Amen to that!, tck!

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) A U.S. soldier was killed during a patrol in Iraq,

the U.S. military said on Friday.

BAGHDAD The U.S. military has released a Shiite militant accused of being involved in the 2007 killing of five American soldiers, officials said Tuesday.

Laith al-Khazali's release comes amid reports of negotiations with his militia group to free at least one of five British hostages.

Al-Khazali and his brother Qais, who were both detained in March 2007, are accused of organizing a bold raid on a local government headquarters in Karbala that killed five U.S. soldiers on Jan. 20, 2007. The brothers are leading members Asaib Ahl al-Haq, or League of the Righteous, which is allegedly backed by Iran.

A British Foreign Office spokesman said the release was part of "the wider Iraqi government reconciliation process of reaching out to groups that are willing to set aside violence in favor of taking part in the political process."

The spokesman declined to be identified in line with department policy.

- - - - - - - - - - -

This accused killer of U.S. soldiers was set free as part of "the wider Iraqi government reconciliation process of reaching out to groups that are willing to set aside violence in favor of taking part in the political process."

Reach out to killers of soldiers, console them, set them free, maybe they won't kill again?

By Mike Mount

CNN Senior Pentagon Producer

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The suicide rate among U.S. Army soldiers jumped in May -- continuing a four-month upward trend and on a record pace for a second straight year, according to Army statistics released Thursday.

Bump

WASHINGTON (AFP) - - Nearly twice as many US army soldiers today are either alcoholic or engage in damaging behavior such as binge drinking than six years ago, and experts blame the rise on repeated tours in war zones.

- - - - - - - - - -

What was Obama saying about the Iraq War during his presidential campaign?

Something about ending the Iraq War being an immediate priority?

Hmmm... the priority of saving lives must have shifted.

Armed forces alcoholism is not a new thing. Remember the tv show mash? Them two surgeons actually built their own still for cryin out loud. I understand that it was just a tv show but they may have gotten that idea from people who actually served in the korean conflict. I guess if I had nothing immediate to look forward to except another day that might just be my last on earth, Id want to be drunk all the time too.

Now that it has been officially recognized, however, what does the military intend to do to help those who come back home with a case of alcoholism they didn't have when they left?

I was in the military (Air Force) and we did our share of drinking.

What stood out to me in the news report was the 'twice as many as six years ago'.

I hope they're getting the aftercare they deserve and I hope the war ends SOON.

EXCLUSIVE:

Former Vice President Dick Cheney on Monday said he is concerned about U.S. forces withdrawing from Iraqi cities within 24 hours.

Mr. Cheney told The Washington Times' "America's Morning News" radio show that he is a strong believer in Gen. Ray Odierno, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, and that the general is doing what needs to be done.

"But what he says concerns me: That there is still a continuing problem. One might speculate that insurgents are waiting as soon as they get an opportunity to launch more attacks.

"I hope Iraqis can deal with it. At some point they have to stand on their own. But I would not want to see the U.S. waste all the tremendous sacrifice that has gotten us to this point."

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Alternative? There is none other than indefinite occupation of Iraq (no way).

Get Out Now!

July is deadliest month for US-led forces.

KABUL July is shaping up as the deadliest month of the Afghan war for U.S.-led international forces.

- - - - - - - - - - -

Get out of Iraq and A'stan...!

NOW!!!!

does any one think if we pull out now,,the insurgents, will stop trying to kill us,,,,they hate the west,, they will kill us in afgan,,america,britain,,pakistan,,any where they can reach us,,i say,we should stay and fight,on ground of our choosing,,,its war,,,,soldiers die,,thats their job...their vocation,,,what did we expect....a bloodless war,,,,how soft we have become....remember the towers

Respectable opinion, Flans. My only answer is that the Iraq War has been a temporary non-solution to a permanent problem. Everything you mentioned will happen if our soldiers are dying in Iraq or not, right?

- - - - - - - - - - -

July 17, 2009... BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Three U.S. soldiers were killed when their base in Basra was attacked by indirect fire, the U.S. military said Friday.

- - - - - - - - - - -

Barack?

What was one of your foremost criticisms of Bush? (End the war)

What was one of your foremost campaign platforms? (End the war)

Iraq Restricts U.S. Forces.

American Officials See Link Between Limits, Spate of Attacks.

By Ernesto Londoo and Karen DeYoung

Washington Post Foreign Service

Saturday, July 18, 2009

BAGHDAD, July 17 -- The Iraqi government has moved to sharply restrict the movement and activities of U.S. forces in a new reading of a six-month-old U.S.-Iraqi security agreement that has startled American commanders and raised concerns about the safety of their troops.

In a curt missive issued by the Baghdad Operations Command on July 2 -- the day after Iraqis celebrated the withdrawal of U.S. troops to bases outside city centers -- Iraq's top commanders told their U.S. counterparts to "stop all joint patrols" in Baghdad. It said U.S. resupply convoys could travel only at night and ordered the Americans to "notify us immediately of any violations of the agreement."

- - - - - - - - - - -

Iraqi leadership now plays a large factor in U.S. troop safety.

Maybe when Barack gets back from Ghana, if he isn't on vacation, maybe he should read this.

Leave Now! We will gain nothing waiting till 2010-2011 except more wasted mostly Young American lives.

The current occupation of Iraq had nothing to do with the "war on Terrorism" or a search for WMDs. It had everything to do with Bush jr. wanting to finish the job that Bush sr didn't finish (and perhaps should have) a decade earlier.

Afghanistan is a different story. There we had confirmed involvement in terrorism on the part of the Taliban (which, by the way is a monster created by the U.S). Leaving there now may well cause more problems than staying to finish the job.

"The current occupation of Iraq had nothing to do with the "war on Terrorism" or a search for WMDs. It had everything to do with Bush jr. wanting to finish the job that Bush sr didn't finish (and perhaps should have) a decade earlier."

So what... that's all history - is there any reason we shouldn't leave Iraq NOW...?

Barack Obama is the president and commander-in-chief, now, not either Bush.

LOL. tck, my last comment vis-a-vis Iraq is meant to agree with your position. There was no justification for invading Iraq in the first place. The U.S. should never have went there in the first place, and should not be there now.

My point is that Afghanistan is a different story and I think there was justification for going there, and there is justification for finishing the job there.

I don't think we have the human resources for either war.

- - - - - - - - -

Soldiers in Colorado slayings tell of Iraq horrors.

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. Soldiers from an Army unit that had 10 infantrymen accused of murder, attempted murder or manslaughter after returning to civilian life described a breakdown in discipline during their Iraq deployment in which troops murdered civilians, a newspaper reported Sunday.

Some Fort Carson, Colo.-based soldiers have had trouble adjusting to life back in the United States, saying they refused to seek help, or were belittled or punished for seeking help. Others say they were ignored by their commanders, or coped through drug and alcohol abuse before they allegedly committed crimes, The Gazette of Colorado Springs said.

Several soldiers said unit discipline deteriorated while in Iraq.

"Toward the end, we were so mad and tired and frustrated," said Daniel Freeman. "You came too close, we lit you up. You didn't stop, we ran your car over with the Bradley," an armored fighting vehicle.

With each roadside bombing, soldiers would fire in all directions "and just light the whole area up," said Anthony Marquez, a friend of Freeman in the 1st Battalion, 9th Infantry Regiment. "If anyone was around, that was their fault. We smoked 'em."

Taxi drivers got shot for no reason, and others were dropped off bridges after interrogations, said Marcus Mifflin, who was eventually discharged with post traumatic stress syndrome.

The unit was deployed for a year to Iraq's Sunni Triangle in September 2004. Sixty-four unit soldiers were killed and more than 400 wounded about double the average for Army brigades in Iraq, according to Fort Carson. In 2007, the unit served a bloody 15-month mission in Baghdad. It's currently deployed to the Khyber Pass region in Afghanistan.

Soldier John Needham described a number of alleged crimes in a December 2007 letter to the Inspector General's Office of Fort Carson. In the letter, obtained by The Gazette, Needham said that a sergeant shot a boy riding a bicycle down the street for no reason.

Another sergeant shot a man in the head while questioning him, lashed the man's body to his Humvee and drove around the neighborhood. Needham also claimed sergeants removed victims' brains.

- - - - - - - -

Bizarre.

I can say this... if I was over there... I'd shoot whatever moved... ask questions later.

At least in Afghanistan, the U.S. is not going it alone. Britain and Canada have been bearing the brunt of it there for 7 years and I can say that the feeling here north of the 49th is generally one of relief that the U.S. has increased its presence.

With only 2500 troops in-theater, Canada has been dealing with some of the worst and most intense fighting in Afghanistan for some time: not only typical skirmishes with insurgents but actual pitched battles against organized formations in well-prepared defensive positions.

Having said that, Canada has been holding the line and making progress. The newly-arrived U.S. reinforcements may well tip the scales completely in the coalition's favor. Time will tell.

War is hell and what happens in war isn't fair, humane or good for anyone. NOW, what are we doing to help our troops that are returning and have witnessed/participated in this type of savage behaviour??? I know they (Army) are very reluctant to diagnose PTSD and have even heard that they have quit diagnosing it. Now, instead of discharge they are trying to keep the guys in. They won't get the help they need, but, this way the Army can keep it under raps (my opinion). My son is in the middle of a big battle with the Army over this as we speak. It's been going on for some time now and the Army has been screwing him over ever since he mentioned he had PTSD. Another couple of months until he's officially discharged. We're hoping it goes that quickly, but eventually his story will come out also....as we intend to publicize it in hopes that the public will wake up and demand proper treatment for our heroes......do it now....or pay alot more twenty years from now, a lesson learned from Nam.......

Agreed, Robbi.

I can't imagine anyone walking out of any war without PTSD. I hope your son gets what he needs Robbi, by whatever means it takes.

In WWI and WWII they called it "shell shock." Now its PTSD. By whichever name you call it, history shows that nations who call upon their young men and women to go in harms way tend to do little for them once the conflict ends.

It is a crime and should not be tolerated. My mother worked as a nurse for many years in Camp Hill Veteran's Hospital in Halifax Nova Scotia. During the late 70's and into the mid-80's I got to know some of the vets there. Most of them are of course gone now, but many of the WWI vets especially, 60-70 years after their war ended, still suffered from it.

PTSD is not something that goes away with time, but with help, people can lead lives that approach normalcy. Perhaps this time around things will be will be different? One can always hope.

I am hoping. If nothing else they just need to "de-fuse" these guys and teach them how to keep from "snapping" when things happen.

"Some Fort Carson, Colo.-based soldiers have had trouble adjusting to life back in the United States, saying they refused to seek help, or were belittled or punished for seeking help. Others say they were ignored by their commanders, or coped through drug and alcohol abuse before they allegedly committed crimes, The Gazette of Colorado Springs said."

Heroes to Zeros in one day as soon as PTSD is mentioned. My son had two civilian diagnoses for PTSD and the Army refuses to accept that. They are willing however to give him an arrangement of drugs though......since according to them he has acute adjustment disorder, insomnia and something else that I don't remember, but it's a name for his extreme agitation. The treatment is the same, the drugs are the same, the behaviours are the same, but the long range benefits from the Army/Government

are not the same. The discharge with PTSD will give him a monetary amount every month. Which by the way, will be necessary for life long counselling etc.

Bottom line, they are not taking care of our men and women in uniform. They have been tossing them aside and into the civilian population so things like the above can happen. I truly believe that the general population probably doesn't know it, or might not even care much because their next payday and next bill is what they are focused on. I understand, but we need to stand up and make sure they aren't making a costly mistake with these people.

It was in one of Obama's campaign promises.......to ensure our fighting men and women were taken care of when they got home......Just another hollow, sound good slogan....

Robbie, it's hard, I know. I will keep you and your family in my prayers along with the prayers for all our troops.

(((hugs)))

This is a more complete article referencing the one TCK posted above. Very interesting. My focus is not on what happened over there as much as what we're doing with the guys/gals coming back. Through all the stories of mental health, commanders, sergeants, belittling, whining, lack of help etc. etc. therein lies my son's story. And it's not over.......

http://www.gazette.com/articles/iframe-59065-eastridge-audio.html

Incredible article.

- - - - - - - - - -

"Its almost like a religious experience to see a battlefield," he said. "To hear the explosions to see a person bleeding out and die see everything on fire and smell the smoke and burning flesh. It makes you truly realize what it is to be alive. Combat is the biggest rush you can have."

On his wrists were red dotted "kill lines" marking where, if needed, he could slit them. On his arm were the twin lightning bolts of the Nazi SS. Wrapping his neck like a collar were the words "BORN TO KILL, READY TO DIE."

- - - - - - - -

I read the whole thing, unbelievable, but believable under the circumstances.

Listen to the interviews at the end.

By Michael R. Gordon

updated 2:45 p.m. ET, Thurs., July 30, 2009

WASHINGTON - A senior American military adviser in Baghdad has concluded in an unusually blunt memo that the Iraqi forces suffer from deeply entrenched deficiencies but are now capable of protecting the Iraqi government, and that it is time "for the U.S. to declare victory and go home."

Prepared by Col. Timothy R. Reese, an adviser to the Iraqi militarys Baghdad command, the memorandum asserts that the Iraqi forces have an array of problems, including corruption, poor management and the inability to resist political pressure from Shiite political parties.

For all of these problems, however, Colonel Reese argues that Iraqi forces are competent enough to hold off Sunni insurgents, Shiite militias and other internal threats to the Iraqi government. Extending the American military presence in Iraq beyond 2010, he argues, will do little to improve the Iraqis military performance while fueling a growing resentment.

- - - - - - - -

Time to leave Iraq.

Inside the Taliban: 'The more troops they send, the more targets we have'

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Still in Iraq, escalated war activities in A'stan...

That 'end the war' talk was just Obama campaign bullshit... and it worked.

Obama told the Veterans of Foreign Wars on Monday that the United States didn't choose to fight in Afghanistan but was forced to invade that country to stop future Sept. 11-type attacks at home.

- - - - - - -

Now the United States was 'forced' to fight in A'stan.

Who was it that 'forced' us?

you can check out any time you want but you can never leave "dov"

"Who was it that 'forced' us?"

I'm surprised you would ask that.

I'd say the individuals in Afghanistan who planned the 9/11 attack and caused it to be carried out.

Of course, you don't HAVE to do anything, but there could be a price associated with non-action.

I don't believe Obama was 'forced' to do anything, I think he 'decided' to do it.

And in my opinion, if you don't HAVE to do anything then I guess you aren't FORCED to do something.

Many presidents have used this type of double-talk. It isn't true though, there was no force involved.

I think the facts are:

Bush invaded Afghanistan. FIne, ok, he wasn't forced to.

Why are you even mentioning Obama in this context?

He's escalating, not invading. That's been done already, years ago.

Bush and Cheney, remember. The gifts that keep on giving... especially Cheney.

Pardon me for butting into the Obama-bash.

I guess all of the presidents were 'forced' to do what was unpopular, lol.

Maybe someday they'll be 'forced' to keep campaign promises.

Only Barack Obama can end the wars and stop the deaths.

Don't care who started it, don't care who's to blame.

Barack Obama - end the wars.

Well, he took the job, I guess he must take the heat. I sure hope he's up to it.

I only wish it was all his fault, and he actually could stop the wars.

I don't see him as any less a pawn then Bush, I just think his handlers don't have anywhere near the control over him that they had with Bush.

JMO, carry on.

Well Kee......he doesn't have Cheney leading him around and I don't even know if Biden could spell Afghanistan. Hillary tried throwing her weight around a little and got stopped short. I still can't figure out who it is that's pulling Obama's strings, but I'm sure it will reveal itself in the future. Rest assured someone is. He hasn't really got much done in the way of campaign promises albeit he's been a tad busy with "hot spots" such as the economy.

But he did get fly fishing lessons and a family trip to Yellowstone National Park recently.....

(It is always important to realize there's nothing we can do here except discuss it, nothing's gonna change by our opinions. No right or wrong views really. )

I talk with people here and in real life about the war(s) and it always goes back to Bush/Cheney.

And I inquire further - what can Bush/Cheney do about the war today?

Their answer, always - Bush & Cheney can do absolutely nothing.

So my next question, "Why do these names keep coming up?"

Answer - "Because it is their fault that we are in the wars to begin with."

Now... there may be one or possibly two people on the planet who don't know who started the war, and who's fault it is but I remain curious as to, "What do Bush/Cheney have to do with the war today, and why do most people somehow feel Bush/Cheney are part of any conversation regarding an end to the war(s)?"

(I have a suspicion it is all based on political likes & dislikes, and that is a scary prospect. I'm beginning to believe some people feel the war should continue, soldiers should continue to die, so people will increase their dislike for Bush & Cheney and those who supported them. Very much like, "You Bush lovers should have thought about that before you supported his war efforts..." Many families and loved ones are caught in the middle of such a 'spite' scenario.)

So... I pose the question(s) - "What do Bush/Cheney have to do with the war today, and why do most people somehow feel Bush/Cheney are part of any conversation regarding an end to the war(s)?"

"I still can't figure out who it is that's pulling Obama's strings, but I'm sure it will reveal itself in the future. Rest assured someone is."

I see it that way, also.

As far as who or what to focus on, I don't see the world through a microscope, unless there's a reason to focus in that fashion. Focus is good: just make sure you are seeing the forest along with the trees.

So basically, imo anyways, if you don't look at the whole pic, past/present/future, again imo, you might as well just sit down and give it up, you aren't seeing what's there.

Bush/Cheney-wise, I brought up Bush because he started both wars, not Obama, in regards to the "forced" issue. Perhaps I misunderstood...

Cheney is a loose cannon, still in the picture, trying to influence the game he should be written out of, but isn't. Very much still a hawk, very, very responsible for the carnage he and Bush wrought. Very much still involved. That's part of the recent past, almost the present, not too many months have passed.

To reiterate *or beat a deaad horse * Past, present, future, all must be considered and taken into account, or bad decisions tend to get made.

"(It is always important to realize there's nothing we can do here except discuss it, nothing's gonna change by our opinions. No right or wrong views really. smile)"

Yup, I agree completely, and what I'm posting is just my opinion.

75 killed in Baghdad attacks.

Bombs rocked Baghdad today killing 75 people and wounding 310 others. The attacks make it one of the deadliest days since the U.S. handed over security to the Iraqis. There were six explosions within an hour, Iraq's Interior Ministry officials said.

- - - - - - - - -

Control of the henhouse has been turned over to the foxes.

Time to get the fvck out of Dodge.

Bring Em Home Now!!!!!!!! Iraq and Afghanistan!

Sounds like a great idea, Shop.

1 more year, 5 more years, 10 more years, it will be be the same, except for higher body count and injuries to fine young men who deserve so much more for their service. Not to just serve the political whims of a bunch of "armchair" idiots. Have I said "Bring Em Home Now" yet?

And fine young Women! (major omission on my part, Sorry!)

Four U.S. service members were killed today by a roadside bomb in southern Afghanistan, U.S. forces confirm to CNN.

We regret to inform you that Obama doesn't have the time right now to manage, or seek, and end to "Bush's wars".

Obama is having a great time on vacation, playing golf, and enjoying time with his family.

If someone close to you is killed in action during the military commander in chief's vacation period please accept the Obama Administration's deepest sympathies.

And always remember the Democrat motto: "Bush started the wars."

Four U.S. service members killed in Afghanistan.

Obama's busy working on a higher priority topic - health insurance (see the irony?).

Besides... Bush started that war.

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Roadside bombings in Iraq killed four American troops and seven Iraqis in a flurry of attacks Tuesday corresponding with a Muslim holy month when insurgents regularly step up their fighting.

- - - - - - - - -

It is Bush's fault... be sure to let the families know that, Barack.

U.S. commander in Afghanistan talked with Obama only once.

The military general credited with capturing Saddam Hussein and killing the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, says he has spoken with President Obama only once since taking command in Afghanistan.

"Ive talked to the president, since Ive been here, once on a VTC [video teleconference]," Gen. Stanley McChrystal told CBS reporter David Martin in a television interview that aired Sunday.

- - - - - - - - -

Obama is focusing on HIS priority - health insurance reform.

Other high ranking democrats are taking on such critical issues as 'climate crisis'.

8 U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan.

Eight U.S. service members and two members of the Afghan National Security Force were killed Saturday in a battle with militants at two security outposts in eastern Afghanistan, officials said. The attack is the deadliest for U.S. troops in Afghanistan since July 13, 2008.

- - - - - - - -

The commander-in-chief of the U.S. military has been engaged with higher priority items than troop deaths.

(A boondoggle to Denmark in relation to Olympic Games - more important than troop deaths.)

(NOTE: retarded posts will be removed, thanks - Designated Local Office.)

People are beginning to wonder why Obama is completely ignoring the wars and solders deaths.

Here is some of their reasoning, that while shocking, makes some sense:

1.) Obama is ignoring the wars and soldier deaths for his own political gain. Whatever makes the past administration look bad, may tend to make the Obama administration look good, because the Obama administration doesn't have any accomplishments at all.

2.) Obama won't end the wars and bring the troops back because it will only add to the unemployment figures already approaching record highs due to the bungling of the 'stimulus' package, which to date has only served to 'stimulate' unemployment and create a colossal waste of taxpayer money.

Sad leadership in our country right now, sad.

your a racists boy.

Bump^

KABUL, Afghanistan (CNN) -- Four U.S. service members died in a roadside bombing attack, and two civilians were killed in crossfire during a military operation, military authorities in Afghanistan said Friday.

- - - - - - - - -

We regret to inform you that the most recent Nobel Peace prize winner cannot make a decision regarding the two (2) different wars he commands over, and as a result people are dying.

Obama has more important things to attend to than soldier deaths.

Such as the Olympics and receiving the Nobel peace award.

Besides, that's Bush's war.

U.S. official resigns over Afghan war.

Foreign Service officer and former Marine captain says he no longer knows why his nation is fighting.

By Karen DeYoung

Washington Post Staff Writer

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

- - - - - - - - - - - -

His nation is still fighting because Obama is a weak limp dick lying motherf*cker, that's why.

Simple as that.

Veteran's Day is over... but for the servicemen serving, the day is never over.