Basso, Always eager to blame the messenger. Can you read? The military exploited Tillman's death for blatantly political purporses. Which caused his parents a great deal of pain. And you and tj and Runs From Rats, blame Batman for posting an article reporting this? And you make slimey comments insinuating that he somehow supports terrorists. Only in your twisted world is reporting the truth akin to supporting terrorists. In the real world you can hold people and institutions accountable when they f- up and still oppose terrorists. In fact, this accountablity is a critical component of a free society that stands in opposition to terrorist and terrorism. Batman gives you way too much credit.
when batman starts a couple of threads that highlight some of the good our military is doing in iraq or afghanistan i will gladly retract my earlier statement. i have a host of links i can forward to get him started.
ok, so from now on you can only start threads about people you know or have a relationship with. i get it. yesterday my sister had lasagna for dinner...debate and discuss.
Of course it's natural that I, as the messenger, am the target of the usual bozos here. It's straight out of Rove -- when you can't fight the facts (which is usually with these guys), bash the source and each of its messengers. I'm used to it. But since some folks are apparently more interested in my motivation in posting this thread than anything that was actually in the article, I'll let you in on my thinking. Certain ones who are on my ignore list (it consists entirely of Jorge, texxx, Sir Jackie and basso, just to be clear) are fond of deflecting any criticism of Bush's disastrous foreign policy by daring us to tell it to the parents of these brave soldiers. Tillman was a favorite political tool to that group and a quick search of Jorge's posts in particular would, I'm sure, bear out the fact that he was commonly used to deflect criticism over Abu Ghraib. And so I say to those people, take your defense of the lying liars in the White House to the Tillman home. You will not find friends there. That was the main reason I posted this story. The secondary reason was to throw a wrench in the spokes of those who would suggest there are only two possible responses to Bush's policies: You can either be a patriot, by supporting every single thing they do in the foreign arena, contorting yourself and your beliefs to unbelievable extremes; or you can be a terrorist sympathizing traitor. To these people -- Jorge used to be the king of this McCarthyesque thinking, but basso's easily outpaced him of late -- you are either 'with us or agin us.' So the second reason I posted this article was to challenge that thinking by asking, "Since there are only two options, is the Tillman family comprised of patriots or traitors?" It's a rhetorical question I know, since these guys long since abandoned any interest in honest debate, and their responses here have again borne out a thing I have long since believed about them: These guys would have liked nothing better than to have lived in the Soviet Union under Communism. They are more Russian than Russians.
Batman, when was the last time you drew attention to the positives that the American troops were accomplishing overseas? You realize they are putting their life on the line for you, correct? One would think that you'd have the dignity to at least acknowledge their commitment and say ONE SINGLE THING about them that isn't 100% negative. I believe that you are upset at the past 5 years of political losses and you are taking your frustrations out by highlighting negative stories (real or contrived) every chance you get. It's gotten so out of control that you don't even think twice about trashing the troops, so long as it gives you that 5-10 seconds of instant gratification.
It is like this. Apparently some people don't understand the horrors of war, and why they should never be entered into lightly except as a means of last resort. If(as was the case with Afghanistan) they may be legit, it is important that they are handled competantly, with integrity, and those that mess up, and dishonor our military(as this administration, and leadership have done) are held accountable. Posting these kinds of stories might help to break through that point to someone. There are plenty of these kinds of stories which should tell you something about the way the leadership of this nation and its use of the military are handling things. It makes sense to me that those who really care about the military and the U.S. would want accountability, and to wipe out those that bring shame to an otherwise honorable force. I could easily say that anyone who supports Bush, and tries to keep these kinds of stories from being publicized hates America, and supports terrorists. Which do you think has helped more with terrorist recruiting, a semi-free media reporting human rights abuses by the U.S. or the U.S. torturing, killing, and depriving liberty to innocent citizens, while reporting false tales of its own soldiers and how they died? I know which you seem to spend more effort denouncing. What a wacky sense of priorities.
Batman isn't trashing the troops. Every single thread that Batman has ever posted trashes people who have done horrible wrongs and deserve to be trashed. When was the last time you held anyone accountable for their mistakes? When was the last time you responded to one of the boards own war veteran's challenge for you to join the military and put your money where your mouth is?
as i mentioned above, i will gladly retract the aspersions i cast in your direction in this thread if you will only start a thread or two highlighting some of the good the military is doing in the greater ME, including afghanistan. no need to suggest it reflects well on the bush administration, just demonstrate you think the miliraty might not be all torturers. here's a link to get you started. not all of it's directly related to the military, but much is and it'll perhaps widen you perspective. as to the larger question of there being only two possible reactions to the iraq war, or the administration's larger WoT, i've argued for sometime that there's ample room to criticize the Bush from a pro-war leftist perspective, one that argues that the bush-doctrine doesn't go far enough, that we should be even more active in pursueing democracy in the region. one that recognizes the central tenent if that doctrine, that freedom in the ME and US security are inextricably intwined, and we should be more agressive with iran, the palestinians, syria, etc. and one that recognizes islamic fascism for what it is and is not afraid to call it by name, a rancid philosophy that keeps 1.5B people in a death grip of shame, perversion, and hatred. if you can't bring yourself to look the hatred in the eye, and only focus on the latest episode as yet another example of America's arrogance, or one more foul-up by the government and its military, that only serves to make the fight harder. yes, there's much to criticize the Bush administration for. but until the left can call evil by name (batman, here's the chance for you to indulge some of that higher moral ground you cited in another thread) their criticisms will only read as sour grapes.
It is indeed sad that the US military sought fit to lie about Tillman's death for propaganda purposes. This dishonors Tillman's sacrifice. This is predictable as we all have seen demontrated proof of Jorge's own penchant for lying. CAN ANYONE FORGET THE FAMOUS THREAD WHERE HE FALSELY CLAIMED THAT HE HAD NO IDEA SENFRONIA THOMPSON A WELL KNOWN LOCAL BLACK STATE REP WAS AFRICAN AMERICAN. I guess it is hopeless to ask Jorge to get upset about the Tillman lie like Pat Tillman's family members are. In this case Jorge essentially takes it upon himself to claim that the Tillman family is enganging in : Yet another attempt to undermine support for the war and the troops. Yet another attempt to provide propaganda for the terrorists to recruit new members.
Traitor_Jorge, you just loves the troops, except when you bash people like Aggierocket who actually served and don't even aknowledge him or b**** about a Veteran's hospital/shelter being built on your route to work.
Boy, I'm going to regret this. Why can't I ever stick to my ignore system... Jorge: I supported the action in Afghanistan and I continue to support it, even while I find fault sometimes with the way it's carried out. I support all efforts to capture or kill Bin Laden and all Al Qaeda operatives. I laud the bravery of our armed forces for it is far greater than mine and it is necessary to protect America and her freedoms. I believe the vast, vast majority of American troops are there for the right reasons and do everything they can to do the right thing. In fact, I even sympathize with the ones who do the wrong thing, even the criminals among them like those at Abu Ghraib or the ones that tortured that poor innocent taxi driver to death. War is hell and I don't believe even those most criminal soldiers bear the ultimate responsibility for their actions. I find far greater fault with a system that not only fails to prevent those abuses but actually seems to endorse them. But my point here is I feel our troops are basically very good, very brave people doing important work. When I criticize a particular action, I do not seek to impugn them -- I naturally seek to criticize the ones responsible for the policy. I also know that our troops perform various and great humanitarian deeds, from building schools to feeding the hungry to protecting the innocent to healing the wounded. Why don't I post about that more? Because those good works are their job. To the degree that it's news when they do their jobs, it's akin to a human interest story. I see no great need to "debate" those contributions. I think we'd all agree we're happy about those contributions. There is a disagreement though over whether those troops whom I support ought to be in harm's way in an elective war. That's a debate. Well, that's a debate when two sides are debating. Pretty rare around here. Around here one side debates and the other says one of two things: You're negative or You're a terrorist loving, troop hating traitor. And that's gonna be the end of this exchange, Jorge. That is until such a time as you break free from your talking points and argue in earnest. I'm eager for you to do that. I'm rooting for you too.
if the debate is about an elective war, why do you choose to enter that debate over actions in afghanistan, which you said so eloquently above you support?
So Batman, you still haven't answered why you never start threads that speak positively about the troops? Why not? Why is it 100% negative?
Nice deflect, basso. The elective war is one thing I've wasted time arguing with you guys over the last years, yes. You know there are many, many more. But, cool. Lesson learned. That ought to hold me a couple months. See ya, fellas.
and yet you ignore my longer post above, and TJ's query. why don't you balance some of your negative posts about the military with some positive ones. it's an incredibly easy way to aquire the retraction you've said you crave. prove what blowhards we are, and how wrong we are about your motives. it's a fork full of easy pie.
Did you even bother to read his post above? He commended the troops, congratulated them for their service, admitted that their service is far greater than his own, and specifically stated that he only seeks to impugn those at fault for egregious actions. Are you really saying that the only people allowed to criticize the military actions are people who lavish praise on the military for doing their jobs?
Jorge, you didn't respond to my post. Is your penchant for lying, as evidenced with your non-credible statment on your ignorance of the race of Rep. Senfronia Thompson, the reason why the lies and deceit about Tillman's death does not concern you-- only the story about it,or a repost of the story?. You are aware that the military is short of volunteers to fight the Iraq War? The majority of Americans, who don't think the war has been worth it, are starting to vote with their feet by not joining or reupping despite signing and resigning bonuses in the $ tens of thousands. While I don't advocate that even someone misguided like you should have to give their life needlessly for what I feel is a stupid cause, I would certainly think it honorable for you to go to Iraq given what you profess to believe. I do think we could all understand if a physical or a mental disability keeps you from serving and acting honorably on your professed beliefs.
Yep. And I also know that we have insufficient troops in Afghanistan, and that the reason troops remain in Afghanistan is to provide a token force in the "War on Terror" while this administration's focus is clearly on Iraqi resources, and not on finding the man/men responsible for the stated "reason" for going to war in the first place. Afghanistan should be the primary, and probably the ONLY, battleground in this war. What so many have been suckered into is blindly supporting 'war' in general - not supporting a particular goal, or a particular motivation, but supporting war. The support for war is a reflection of the support for this administration, and the armed forces, in a way that does not distinguish between one action, or one branch, and another. It's unthinking and unreflective cheerleading, and all the more fanatical for it. The bull**** that so many have been suckered into is not the war in Afghanistan - it's the unwavering support for an administration that is willing to waste the lives of men like Tillman in an area that, while portrayed as the 'cause' of the war, is only a desert where an understaffed token skirmish takes place while the real goal is pursued elsewhere with no regard for the lives lost on the original, and only justifiable, field of battle.
