| ||||||
| Militaries and War Debate and discuss global militaries, past and present wars including the war on terror. |
 |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
11-24-2007, 12:42 PM
| #1 (permalink) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Community Leader   Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 687
 |  You Ain't Gonna Like Losing Well, I haven't posted here for awhile, but I thought that this was a gem. I received this in an e-mail from a friend this morning. Read on. You Ain't Gonna Like Losing (Author Unknown) What a difference 60 years makes….’You aint gonna like losing.’ Author unknown. President Bush did make a bad mistake in the war on terrorism, but the mistake was not his decision to go to war in Iraq. Bush’s mistake came in his belief that this country is the same one his father fought for in WWII. It is not. Back then, they had just come out of a vicious depression. The country was steeled by the hardship of that depression, but they still believed fervently in this country. They knew that the people had elected their leaders, so it was the people’s duty to back those leaders. Therefore, when the war broke out the people came together, rallied behind, and stuck with their leaders, whether they had voted for them or not or whether the war was going badly or not. And war was just as distasteful and the anguish just as great then as it is today. Often there were more casualties in one day in WW II than we have had in the entire Iraq war. But that did not matter. The people stuck with the President because it was their patriotic duty. Americans put aside their differences in WW II and worked to get here to win that war. Everyone from every strata of society, from young to old pitched in. Small children pulled little wagons around to gather scrap metal for the war effort. Grade school students saved their pennies to buy stamps for war bonds to help the effort. Men who were too old or medically 4F lied about their age or condition trying their best to join the military. Women doubled their work to keep things going at home. Harsh rationing of everything from gasoline to soap, to butter was imposed, yet there was very little complaining. You never heard prominent people on the radio belittling the President. Interestingly enough in those days there were no fat cat actors and entertainers who ran off to visit and fawn over dictators of hostile countries and complain to them about our President. Instead, they made upbeat films and entertained our troops to help the troops’ morale. And a bunch even enlisted. And imagine this: Teachers in schools actually started the day off with a Pledge of Allegiance and with prayers for our country and our troops! Back then, no newspaper would have dared point out certain weak spots in our cities where bombs could be set off to cause the maximum damage. No newspaper would have dared complain about what we were doing to catch spies. A newspaper would have been laughed out of existence if it had complained that German or Japanese soldiers were being ‘tortured’ by being forced to wear women’s underwear, or subjected to interrogation by a woman, or being scared by a dog or did not have air conditioning. There were a lot of things different back then. We were not subjected to a constant bombardment of pornography, perversion and promiscuity in movies or on radio. We did not have legions of crack heads, dope pushers and armed gangs roaming our streets. No, President Bush did not make a mistake in his handling of terrorism. He made the mistake of believing that we still had the courage and fortitude of our fathers. He believed that this was still the country that our fathers fought so dearly to preserve. It is not the same country. It is now a cross between Sodom and Gomorra and the Land of Oz. We did unite for a short while after 9/11, but our attitude changed when we found out that defending our country would require some sacrifices. We are in great danger. The terrorists are fanatic Muslims. They believe that it is okay, even their duty, to kill anyone who will not convert to Islam. It has been estimated that about one third or over three hundred million Muslims are sympathetic to the terrorists cause…Hitler and Toj combined did not have nearly that many potential recruits. So…we either win it - or lose it - and you ain’t gonna like losing. America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall. Source: 2007 October 11 « Does It All Matter ? | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Sponsored Links |
|
11-24-2007, 01:00 PM
| #2 (permalink) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| SIMPLETON   Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: In my skin
Posts: 7,854
| I'm gonna print up a copy of that letter....Great find.  | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
11-24-2007, 04:05 PM
| #3 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Community Leader Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 665
| Nightrider wrote, quoting from an article: Quote:
YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK Editorial — New York Times 14 July 2007: ----------------------------------------------------- An American who worked for a Halliburton subsidiary pleaded guilty yesterday to receiving kickbacks in exchange for awarding a Kuwaiti company nearly $13 million in contracts to supply the American military with semi-tractor-trailers, refrigeration trailers and fuel tankers in Iraq and Kuwait in 2003. Mr. Heaton pleaded guilty in Federal District Court in the Central District of Illinois to awarding two major contracts in exchange for what was to have been over $200,000 in kickbacks ---------------------------------------------------- Journalist James Glanz reported for the New York Times 26 July 2007: ---------------------------------------------------- One of the largest American contractors working in Iraq, Bechtel National, met its original objectives on fewer than half of the projects it received as part of a $1.8 billion reconstruction contract, while most of the rest were canceled, reduced in scope or never completed as designed, federal investigators have found in a report released yesterday. ---------------------------------------------------- Journalist James Glanz reported for the New York Times 28 July 2007: --------------------------------------------------- Iraq’s national government is refusing to take possession of thousands of American-financed reconstruction projects, forcing the United States either to hand them over to local Iraqis, who often lack the proper training and resources to keep the projects running, or commit new money to an effort that has already consumed billions of taxpayer dollars. The conclusions, detailed in a report released Friday by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, a federal oversight agency, include the finding that of 2,797 completed projects costing $5.8 billion, Iraq’s national government had, by the spring of this year, accepted only 435 projects valued at $501 million. Few transfers to Iraqi national government control have taken place since the current Iraqi government, which is frequently criticized for inaction on matters relating to the American intervention, took office in 2006. The United States often promotes the number of rebuilding projects, like power plants and hospitals, that have been completed in Iraq, citing them as signs of progress in a nation otherwise fraught with violence and political stalemate. But closer examination by the inspector general’s office, headed by Stuart W. Bowen Jr., has found that a number of individual projects are crumbling, abandoned or otherwise inoperative only months after the United States declared that they had been successfully completed. ---------------------------------------------------- Journalists Eric Schmitt and James Glanz reported for the New York Times 31 August 2007: ------------------------------------------------------ An American-owned company operating from Kuwait paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes to American contracting officers in efforts to win more than $11 million in contracts, the government says in court documents. ------------------------------------------------------ Journalists Ginger Thompson and Eric Schmitt reported for the New York Times 24 September 2007: ------------------------------------------------------ Major Cockerham was behind bars, accused of orchestrating the largest single bribery scheme against the military since the start of the Iraq war. According to the authorities, the 41-year-old officer, with his wife and a sister, used an elaborate network of offshore bank accounts and safe deposit boxes to hide nearly $10 million in bribes from companies seeking military contracts. ----------------------------------------------------- Journalist James Glanz reported for the New York Times 31 October 2007: ---------------------------------------------------- More than $100 billion has been devoted to rebuilding Iraq, mainly thanks to American taxpayers and Iraqi oil revenues, but nearly five years into the conflict, output in critical areas like water and electricity remain below United States goals, federal oversight officials reported to Congress on Tuesday. ---------------------------------------------------- Journalist James Glanz reported for the New York Times 6 November 2007: ---------------------------------------------------- More than a year after the Parsons Corporation, the American contracting giant, promised Congress that it would fix the disastrous plumbing and shoddy construction in barracks the company built at the Baghdad police academy, the ceilings are still stained with excrement, parts of the structures are crumbling and sections of the buildings are unusable because the toilets are filthy and nonfunctioning. The project, where United States inspectors found giant cracks snaking through newly built walls and human waste dripping from ceilings, became one of the most visible examples of a $45 billion American reconstruction program that is widely seen as a failure. --------------------------------------------------- Journalists Eric Schmitt and Ginger Thompson reported for the New York Times 11 November 2007: -------------------------------------------------- As the insurgency in Iraq escalated in the spring of 2004, American officials entrusted an Iraqi businessman with issuing weapons to Iraqi police cadets training to help quell the violence. By all accounts, the businessman, Kassim al-Saffar, a veteran of the Iran-Iraq war, did well at distributing the Pentagon-supplied weapons from the Baghdad Police Academy armory he managed for a military contractor. But, co-workers say, he also turned the armory into his own private arms bazaar with the seeming approval of some American officials and executives, selling AK-47 assault rifles, Glock pistols and heavy machine guns to anyone with cash in hand — Iraqi militias, South African security guards and even American contractors. “This was the craziest thing in the world,” said John Tisdale, a retired Air Force master sergeant who managed an adjacent warehouse. “They were taking weapons away by the truckload.” Activities at that armory and other warehouses help explain how the American military lost track of some 190,000 pistols and automatic rifles supplied by the United States to Iraq’s security forces in 2004 and 2005, as auditors discovered in the past year. ...In the armory that Mr. Saffar presided over, for example, his dealings were murky. Mr. Tisdale, who recalled seeing a briefcase stuffed with stacks of $20 bills under Mr. Saffar’s desk, said he thought Mr. Saffar enriched himself selling American stocks along with guns he acquired from the streets. ------------------------------------------------- And it goes on, and on, and... WAR IS A RACKET | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
11-26-2007, 02:29 AM
| #4 (permalink) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Council Member   Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Pakistan
Posts: 1,181
| jesus christ... what a silly tirade.. Apparently the Iraq war went all wrong cuz today's american is a useless, perverted lazy bum who asks unneccessary questions. Of course it couldn't possibly have anything to do with the stupidity of the war in the first place. The way i see it, the absolute lack of faith in the current government is not a failing of the people.. it is a failing of the government. Firstly i would like to deal with one incredibly stupid conclusion reached in this article. He points out that as many as one third of the muslims in the world are sympathetic to the terrorist cause. This here is a classic example of twisting figures to create alarm. Here's why: There is no possible way of actually getting to a figure like this, considering the huge spectrum of islamic societies. Even so, he says that 300 million people are "sympathetic to the terrorist cause". Fine i would say that's not wholly unthinkable. HOWEVER a distinction that he has failed to make is whether those that support the "CAUSE" actually support violence and terrorist means. I have said this on several occasions before, that some of the grievances and complaints uttered by extremists like OBL and Ahmedinejad are GENUINE COMPLAINTS. The muslim population would ahve these complaints EVEN IF NEITHER OBL or AHMEDINEJAD EXISTED. The DIFFERENCE however comes in how they wish to deal with it. The vast majority of these 300 million may agree with some of the goals of the extremists, but that is not the same as endorsing suicide bombings. So this man is clearly off the makr when he says there are 300 million potential suicide bombers out there. All he can claim is that 300 million people agree with some of the statements made by these nutjobs. For instance they both claim that the US exploits the world. YOu don't have to be a potential suicide bomber to agree with that. They want the US out of the muslim countries. YOu don't have a to be a potantial suicide bomber to want that.. all you have to be is a nationalist that believes in the sovereignty of his nation. In fact there are plenty of things that ahmedinejad has said that i agree with. But that is not a support of him or his ham-handed extremism. Hasn't anybody ever wondered how these guys manage to garner support. It is NOT only because they give a violent outlet to violent people. It is because some of the things they say RING TRUE. SO those 300 million people are people that share the same complaints as the terrorists.. howevr the VAST MAJORITY of them will naught to do with the terrorism of OBL. Anyhow as to the rest of the article i would call it a bunch of self-righteous silliness. The War on Terror is not a conventional war. The war in Iraq has nothing to do with the WOT. In fact the attempt to link WW2 patriotism with the Iraq war is a sad attempt at connecting things that have no similarity. WW2 was a retaliation against a nation that had ACTUALLY ATTACKED the US ( as opposed to fake claims of WMDs). WW2 was a war that was thrust upon the US, not one that the rich elite went looking for. WW2 was a war the americans fought because they were called to it ( as opposed to imposing it on the world inspite of world opinion). WW2 was a matter of safeguarding friednly nations against another superpower ( as opposed to the Iraq war which was a matter of safeguarding oil interests- unsuccessfuly). In WW2 the people were not able to get detailed information on the incompetence of the war effort ( like "losing" 200,000 automatic rifles or $2billion in cash) In WW2, the average american was convinced of the righteousness of the war effort ( but the Iraq war was controversial from the start - and rightly so, since it ws clearly a bad move). The reason the Iraq war is being criticized so much is because your leaders can't pull the wool over your eyes so easily any more. It has NOTHING to do with the level of patriotism of the people. WW2 was a different time, a different world, with a different level of awareness. The comparison is moot. The US needs to move on from WW2. This is not that world anymore. Love for all, Hatred for none | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
11-26-2007, 02:59 AM
| #5 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Community Leader Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 687
| Quote:
I just have two questions for you at this point: 1) As a Muslim living in Pakistan: Who do you support, Musharaff or Bhutto? Please tell me because I'm dying of curiosity. . . 2) In your signature - "love for all, hatred for none" - does that include people like Musaraff, Bin Laden and the rest of the Al-Queda network? | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
11-26-2007, 04:22 AM
| #6 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Council Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Pakistan
Posts: 1,181
| Quote:
1) Agreeing with some of the points raised by OBL, Ahmedinejad and their ilk IS NOT THE SAME AS SUPPORTING VIOLENT TERRORIST MEANS. This is a distinction that is important to make, which this hugely biased article would rather that you didn't. It won't be nearly as alarming ( and hence useless to those who wish to create cohesion around the glorious fight against the evil adversary). If he was to say that of those 300 million most of them just agree with the COMPLAINT and NOT with the violent "solution" that OBL suggests, then suddenly the spectre of militant Islam wouldn't be quite as scary now would it? 2) The fact that your people do not support the government's actions is a FAILURE OF THE GOVERNMENT.. not its PEOPLE. Which is something the article vehemently opposes. The onus is put ont he people for not supporting a crazy war unquestioningly ( like good little zombies do) 3) The comparison to WW2 is moot. This world is nothing like the world in the 40s, your country is not the same and MOST IMPORTANTLY - This enemy has NOTHING IN COMMON with the enemy of WW2 ( apart from being the opposition to the US). 4) Bush has done EVERYTHING wrong in the WOT. He alienated where he should have secured allies. He invaded a completely UNINVOLVED country in a devastating war. Every move he has made has VERIFIABLY made your lives less secure. Yet the author has the nerve to say that he was right and everybody else was wrong. See that would only make sense if he had been PREVENTED from doing anything. As we all know, Bush actually did EVERYTHING he wanted to - and it has all failed miserably. That is not the people's fault. That is Bush's fault. It is his fault that you are more hated, less trusted and more threatened now than you have ever been in your history. But the author apparently can't see what the world can see. Anyhow to your questions: Personally i am quite fond of Musharraf. But let's jsut say he is the lesser evil. Bhutto and her husband looted the country TWICE. So did the Sharif brothers. Their administrations were marked by massive corruption, nepotism and a civil dictatorship. Whatever Musharraf is, his regime has changed the face of Pakistan. I would rather that Bhutto and Sharif stayed out of Pakistan and left it to Musharraf to take us through the next 5 years. During this time the media could foster a proper political consciousness in the people, so that new blood could take over the reins once Musharraf leaves. Musharraf is better for the women and minorities of Pakistan. He presents the BEST HOPE for a moderate muslim culture becoming dominant in Pakistan. He may not be the last line of defence against the fundamentalists, but he is unlike any previous ruler in that his major support does NOT come from the religious right. My signature means precisely what it says. I have no hatred for anybody. At worst i have pity, but that too comes from the love i carry for all human beings. I pity OBL. I also pity Bush. Both are humans that at some point or the other have been ruined. So much so, that they actually BELIEVE what they are doing is right. If a man is doing wrong, yet believes that he is right.. should one hate him? or should one pity him for being so wrong? I feel that you may trying to get me to "choose sides". I am sure you will believe that if i don't seethe with anger when i speak of OBL, or curse him or damn him, then i am a supporter of terrorist means. Well that would be completely untrue. I do not judge anybody. Everybody must face their own maker, and i am certainly not one to pass judgement on another's righteoussness. OBL does what he does. Your president does what he does. Both use violence to solve problems ( to bring peace they say). BOTH are responsible for countless deaths. Both are completely convinced of their righteousness. So there is no side to choose. There are merely two sides to the same coin. I am half danish and half pakistani. My mothers side is protestant christian, and my father's side is muslim. I happen to be able to view the situation from a third perspective and i can tell you that EVERYBODY got it wrong. OBL, Bush/Cheney, ahmedinejad etc etc. Each is so terribly convinced of their own righteousness that they will kill to enforce it. I ask you.. what difference is there between Sharia and Democracy, when both are imposed at the tip of a gun? Love for all, Hatred for none | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
11-26-2007, 04:48 AM
| #7 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Community Leader Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 687
| Quote:
Democracy, on the other hand, allows for true religious freedom (freeing the people of the state) while holding oppressive governments in check. America is a republic which stands for democracy - free and equal rights for the people. We have always stood up for people who can not fight for themselves. The American Revolution. The Civil War. WW1 and WW2. The current War on Terror. As an American, I am proud of being a part of the greatest country on Earth. Furthermore - I (like most true Americans) would die protecting my country from Sharia, Nazis, Communists, or any other oppressive regime that threatens our Republic. I have always been willing to do that. . . and always will. Good day. Last edited by Nightrider; 11-26-2007 at 05:12 AM. Reason: spelling | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
11-26-2007, 05:27 AM
| #8 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| The Man You Love to Hate  Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Ketchikan, AK
Posts: 1,700
  | Quote:
Remember, I used your standard. dmk Conservatism, I repeat is not an ideology. It does not breed fanatics....But if you want men who seek, reasonably and prudently, to reconcile the best in wisdom of our ancestors with the change which is essential to a vigorous civil social existence, then you will do well to turn to conservative principles -Russell Kirk- | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
11-26-2007, 05:35 AM
| #9 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| The Man You Love to Hate Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Ketchikan, AK
Posts: 1,700
| Quote:
When the war in Iraq first began the majority of Americans supported it, and believed it was the right thing to do, it was not until after day after day after day of negative stories by the main stream media, did opinion begin to change. The original post was right, this type of criticism did not occur during WW2, nor would it have been tolerated, by the people or by the government. dmk Conservatism, I repeat is not an ideology. It does not breed fanatics....But if you want men who seek, reasonably and prudently, to reconcile the best in wisdom of our ancestors with the change which is essential to a vigorous civil social existence, then you will do well to turn to conservative principles -Russell Kirk- | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
11-26-2007, 07:53 AM
| #10 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Community Leader Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 665
| sgtdmski has babbloniously blustered: Quote:
REALLY LAME You get the LIMPDICK AWARD... - Last edited by highway80west; 11-26-2007 at 08:59 PM. Reason: Sexually explicit photo-none of that. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| Bookmarks |
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:44 AM.
