[plschwartz]

Originally Posted by WarC

To me, supporting the troops means respecting their mission and their chain of command. I believe that is the obligation of citizens while at war. Anything less hurts the effort and plays into the hands of the enemy through loss of morale, loss in recruitment, tactical stagnation, and political infighting.

I am afraid this is a post 9/11 kinda opinion. Supporting the Cheney doctrine of a "unitary president" during times of war.
They would reduce us from a democratic to an imperial form of govt..

This attitude has not been the American tradition. As you seem to have an interest in history check out congressional war discussions during say WWII or Korea and see our traditions

[plschwartz]

I caught a little piece from a VFW meeting.
It was stated that the greatest influence on troop moral is how they would be treated when they get home....
to Walter Reed??
What effect will the tragedy of the Military Hospital system awaiting wounded troops have on the moral in Iraq??

[WarC]

Originally Posted by plschwartz

I am afraid this is a post 9/11 kinda opinion. Supporting the Cheney doctrine of a "unitary president" during times of war.
They would reduce us from a democratic to an imperial form of govt..

This attitude has not been the American tradition. As you seem to have an interest in history check out congressional war discussions during say WWII or Korea and see our traditions

I think it is the other way around, I think since Vietnam there has been a growing movement to take power -away- from the executive branch, especially where it concerns war and the military.

The President in a time of war is the Commander in Chief. That is the power granted to him once Congress authorizes it. I would argue that there have been many controversial Presidents who have exercised that power: Lincoln, Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman to name a few...These were all men who made controversial decisions (Lincoln and the civil war, Wilson and Roosevelt in entering the world wars, Truman and the bomb and firing MacArthur...). I do not feel that it is outrageous or unconstitutional to afford this administration the same right, given to the executive branch by virtue of our constitution.

It is a sign of how warped our sensibilities are that we now have a party that is eager enough to stab our war effort in the back that they will re-visit their authorization in an attempt t re-write history as it happens!!! I view that as a greater disgrace to American tradition than any effort by this administration.

There is a saying that goes something like "it is better to be led by one rat than by many lions"...war is an effort that calls for a singular leader, a decision maker...war by committee will fail because there will always be disagreement which will result in stagnation on the best way to move forward.

[WarC]

Originally Posted by plschwartz

What effect will the tragedy of the Military Hospital system awaiting wounded troops have on the moral in Iraq??

The other night I was listening to a liberal radio program that was going into that issue. Following that story, they detailed the account of arab journalists in Afghanistan who had their film confiscated by US soldiers. After that story, they talked about the US dropping two 2,000lb bombs on a complex in the same country and how it killed several members of a family there. They played some of the angry vitriolic chanting at the anti-US rally that occured afterward.

Nothing about the war itself. Nothing about US operations. Nothing on the events in Iraq that day.

What kind of effect will that negative reporting have on moral in Iraq?

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by WarC

I think it is the other way around, I think since Vietnam there has been a growing movement to take power -away- from the executive branch, especially where it concerns war and the military.

That's exactly right and the irony is Schwartz and the rest of the liberals are extemely hypocritical on this point--they profess to support the Constitution yet they have lobbied for neutering the power of the office of the President for their political ideology of envy and hate. As I have said many times, people think I'm defending Bush when I am really defending the Constitutional grant of power to the President. Liberals can't do anything except by committee--they are afraid to make a decision alone preferring for some majority consensus (which is often impossible). Well the framers knew the dangers of that type of thinking (essentially you are left with balless, leaderless nations like France). The protection against it is the office of the President.

[sglv]

Originally Posted by WarC

Nothing about the war itself. Nothing about US operations. Nothing on the events in Iraq that day.

What kind of effect will that negative reporting have on moral in Iraq?

You're how old? All I can say is Wow! Very Wow!

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by WarC

The other night I was listening to a liberal radio program that was going into that issue. Following that story, they detailed the account of arab journalists in Afghanistan who had their film confiscated by US soldiers. After that story, they talked about the US dropping two 2,000lb bombs on a complex in the same country and how it killed several members of a family there. They played some of the angry vitriolic chanting at the anti-US rally that occured afterward.

Nothing about the war itself. Nothing about US operations. Nothing on the events in Iraq that day.

What kind of effect will that negative reporting have on moral in Iraq?

Precisely the kind the liberals want. They profess to support the troops, but we all know that's crap--they don't support them anymore now than they did in Vietnam and after--they just know its political suicide to do anything else--liberals don't like the military--never have and never will. So they give lip service to supporting them yet everyday do everything they can to discourage them and to make sure they fail.

[sglv]

Originally Posted by Mulder

Precisely the kind the liberals want. They profess to support the troops, but we all know that's crap--they don't support them anymore now than they did in Vietnam and after--they just know its political suicide to do anything else--liberals don't like the military--never have and never will. So they give lip service to supporting them yet everyday do everything they can to discourage them and to make sure they fail.

And I have no doubt Mulder that you go into great detail to explain the fallacies of their plans, as do I, to anyone willing to listen How are you by the way? It's been a long time.

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by sglv

And I have no doubt Mulder that you go into great detail to explain the fallacies of their plans, as do I, to anyone willing to listen How are you by the way? It's been a long time.

Fine--how are you sg?

[sglv]

Originally Posted by Mulder

Fine--how are you sg?

LOL, why confused?

[ekim68]

Originally Posted by Mulder

As I have said many times, people think I'm defending Bush when I am really defending the Constitutional grant of power to the President.

Sounds like you're defending Bush....The problem is the abuse of that power of the presidency that you defend.

[poochee]

Originally Posted by sglv

Poochee, what is an honest war? I've never heard of such a thing. Was the American Revolution an honest war? I think the King would not think so. Was the Civil War an honest war? I think the slave owners would not think so. World War I, World War II - I think Germany would disagree even though they were major reasons for them.

I see your point.

[oldie]

Originally Posted by Mulder

That's exactly right and the irony is Schwartz and the rest of the liberals are extemely hypocritical on this point--they profess to support the Constitution yet they have lobbied for neutering the power of the office of the President for their political ideology of envy and hate.

Hate .. HATE .. oh dear, oh dear .. why do I despair

I will openly state that you are totally out of order there Chris, and should admit to being so. I hope your intention is not an attempt to poison the minds of our younger members here

Oldie

[linskyjack]

Honest war? Yes, the Revolution, the Civil War, World War 2, Korea were honest wars. WW1, Vietnam, Iraq2---no.

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by oldie

Hate .. HATE .. oh dear, oh dear .. why do I despair

I will openly state that you are totally out of order there Chris, and should admit to being so. I hope your intention is not an attempt to poison the minds of our younger members here

Oldie

Are you on drugs? I stated my opinion, which is accurate--hopefully the younger members will learn your ideology is born out of greed, ignorance, and hate--we'd all be much better off. You are out of order and have been for years with your continuous attack on both British and American troops. All one has to do to see your hate is to go read the thread where you attempted to disparage two American servicemen and the entire US military with a leftist hack article completely devoid of any facts and which I proved was entirely innacurate. You were totally out of order for making that thread and should be ashamed of yourself for it.