It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cindy Unleashed !!!

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 30 2005 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
Eh, call me crazy



You're Crazy!




And yet you say I get all my news from Rush?


You play the martyr like nobody's business, I'll give you that. As previously stated on several threads as well as here - a spurrious source is a spurrious source.....why do you want arguments where that source is a cornerstone blindly accepted as legit without being called out on it? THe literalism strawman is still a strawman - proving that you are not a Rushie ( which was not directed at you, btw) proves.....what?


Your constant attempts to discredit me because of my age are just showing your own insecurities.


No, you're discrediting yourself fine, I'm just poking the caged monkey for pure vicarious thrill!

Why, particularly on this topic? Sheehan is being lambasted by you for trying to bring under scrutiny a tragicly planned war predicated on cooked & false data, a cluster of an occupation and a guessed upon exit "strategy" that has us engaged in this downward spiral for at least the next 5 - 10 years.....yet she's "brainwashed" & "crazy" to you, in doing what no Republican or Democrat has been vocally doing - asking for accountability!!!
When I was your age I was in the military ....I was more Republican and even less questioning than you of th "home team". While you're obviously pompous in your blind devoution to your positions in support of a very bad Republican administration and a devout Elephant, I was completely smug & dismissive of alternate opinions to "my" very bad Republican administration and more a caricature of the worst parts about a Rightwinger, buzzcut included. My point is that I know your're wrong on these issues as I was on those of my day for pretty much the same reasons. It has nothing to do with assumptions - it's all there for the reading.
As for being "ATS Saavy" : me being called on for referencing topics covered a page away, thus common knowledge, is what I was noting.....can't rightly say I'm pulling rabbits, no?


This topic is irrefutable on a couple things:
- lies and cooked data are what got us into it
- The actual war dead, maimed & injured data is cooked or, in the case of civilians, completely uncounted
- Dems & Repub officials have been all about the power share/next election and have betrayed the American people via deriliction of duty
- "when he feels it's safe" is not a valid exit strategy. No calendar date need be applied, but condition criteria needs to be established, so that we know, when we reach a milestone ( a legitimate one ), what we have left to endure.
- Because of that deriliction of dutiy by our elected officials, Sheehan has brought the debate front & center. She will galvanize opinions, and IMO, win over more than grow opposition because GSFP is fighting the good fight here.

Here's what I asked before: What is out of bounds/treasonous/inflamatory about this mission statement!?

GSFP MISSION




We as families of soldiers who have died as a result of war (primarily, but not limited to the invasion/occupation of Iraq) are organizing to be a positive force in our world to bring our country’s sons and daughters home from Iraq, to minimize the “human cost” of this war, and to prevent other families from the pain we are feeling as the result of our losses. We are also hoping to be lifetime support for each other through our losses.

PURPOSE

-To bring an end to the occupation of Iraq.
-To be a support group for Gold Star Families.

WAYS TO ACHIEVE OUR PURPOSE:

-Provide support and to empower those who have been victimized by the invasion/occupation of Iraq.
-Raise awareness in the United States about the true human costs of the invasion/occupation of Iraq.
-Reach out to families who have lost a loved one as a result of war.






posted on Aug, 30 2005 @ 05:20 PM
link   
Again, Bout time, you seem to be juding others (me) based off of your own mistakes. You think that because your reason for being a Republican was ignorance, then it applies to everyone else. I know a liberal who's a liberal because of his parents. Does that mean every liberal is a liberal because of their parents? No. You screwed up, and that has nothing to do with me.


a cluster of an occupation and a guessed upon exit "strategy" that has us engaged in this downward spiral for at least the next 5 - 10 years.....yet she's "brainwashed" & "crazy" to you, in doing what no Republican or Democrat has been vocally doing - asking for accountability!!!


And suddenly the war protestor knows more about war strategie than the president... Bush is working on an exit strategy. Just because he didn't give us a specific date (Like when Clinton said those troops were going to be home for Christmas...hmmm...), doesn't mean he doesn't have a strategy.

You seem to think that supporting this administration means you've been brainwashed by the media, and are merely following your leader. On the contrary, I hear far more Bush opposition in my day-to-day than I do Bush praise. Although I don't rely on polls, most of the polls do indicate that more than 50% of people don't support what the president is doing. If anybody is going to be accusing anybody of merely following the heard, I would be the accuser, my dear friend.


By Bout Time:
We as families of soldiers who have died as a result of war (primarily, but not limited to the invasion/occupation of Iraq) are organizing to be a positive force in our world to bring our country’s sons and daughters home from Iraq, to minimize the “human cost” of this war, and to prevent other families from the pain we are feeling as the result of our losses. We are also hoping to be lifetime support for each other through our losses.

PURPOSE

-To bring an end to the occupation of Iraq.
-To be a support group for Gold Star Families.

WAYS TO ACHIEVE OUR PURPOSE:

-Provide support and to empower those who have been victimized by the invasion/occupation of Iraq.
-Raise awareness in the United States about the true human costs of the invasion/occupation of Iraq.
-Reach out to families who have lost a loved one as a result of war.


You know what? I think I've already answered these. Yeah, here it is. Page 2:



-To bring an end to the occupation of Iraq.


We're trying to set a country free from tyranny. What part of this does she not understand? Does she think that Bush plans to stay there forever? I'm pretty sure, when he feels it's save, that we're going to get out of there. Since when does Sheehan know more about this stuff than Bush and his administration?


quote: -To be a support group for Gold Star Families.



Unless you support what your son died for, that is.


-Provide support and to empower those who have been victimized by the invasion/occupation of Iraq.



Again, what if a mother doesn't feel "victimized", and feels that her son died for a noble and honorable cause?



posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 09:32 AM
link   
....you'll understand.
Then the idea of the political arm planning a military directive as opposed to the generals would leave you without an exit plan and that a $BILLION$ per week + 100's of lives is too much a deriliction that will never justify "he's working on one."
The GSFP is something you, draft ager, should wholeheartedly support, along with anyone who has served.

The country is set free of the tyrant, now it's in need of being set free from occupation. That's if this was the intent, which it obviously wasn't. You being "sure we'll leave when it's saved" is faith based logic, which isn't really logic at all, is it? Particularly since it's cntrary to the facts.
GSFP states no discrimination in their support of the bereaved - it's an addendum of your own manfacture. The Rove configured counter protest is of parents, if you haven't noticed, whose kid is still alive & deployed.
If a mother doesn't feel "victimized" I'm sure she won't seek out GSFP - how does that diminish their mission statement?
Again, go enlist & then come talk to us after boot & TDY. Make no mistake, I hope you get sent to Hawaii, I just think the service would bring some needed structure & critical thought to your perspectives.



posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bout Time
When You have true accountability....you'll understand.



Well worth the 20 point knock



posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 03:16 PM
link   
"
Well worth the 20 point knock"

Que? 20 point knock?

I meant a career/a seargent/a wife/kids that sort of thing.......stuff that keeps you up at night.



posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 04:58 PM
link   
BT,

You seem to be implying, through telling me I'll only gain true undestanding by enlisting, that most soldiers don't support this war, and learn this by serving in the military. What a ludicrous misconception. But again, you seem to be juding others based off of your own experiences. My uncle has taken 3 tours of the middle east, as the captain of an A-team special forces unit, and you better believe he supports this war. Why? Because this war and the cause is what he and others fighting and dying for. I'd be willing to bet a whole lot of stuff that the majority of the soldiers fighting in the middle east support what they're doing. But since you were in the military at one time, don't support this war, and know of some other people that don't, I guess that means only people who were in the military can speak, and most of them don't support the cause, right?
It's like saying that people who support the war and aren't in the military are hypocrits, or like me saying that anyone against the war who isn't protesting in Crawford is a hypocrit...


Then the idea of the political arm planning a military directive as opposed to the generals would leave you without an exit plan and that a $BILLION$ per week + 100's of lives is too much a deriliction that will never justify "he's working on one."
The GSFP is something you, draft ager, should wholeheartedly support, along with anyone who has served.


So, because he hasn't told us his exact exit strategy, you're just going to assume that he doesn't have one? You think that if he announced his plan to the public, the terrorists wouldn't just hide out until we withdrew?



posted on Sep, 1 2005 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Herman
BT,

You seem to be implying, through telling me I'll only gain true undestanding by enlisting, that most soldiers don't support this war, and learn this by serving in the military.


I'm implying nothing - I'm quite clear in what I'm telling you. To put it as clear as possible: you are green and unexperienced in heavy consequenced responsibility, and by virtue of that, your commentary on certain topics, as evidenced here, is limited. You're probably more attuned to the multi-media feeds of perspective than any of us at that same point in time, though.

Cindy Sheehan is representing people who sustained a loss, the honor of it is not in question. The legitimacy of those who ordered it is.
The notion that peek-a-boo exit strategies exist is nonsense - read the Generals : You've had the last 3 men who were commander-in-chief of the United States Central Command, in charge of all American troops in the Middle East say this war was ill advised, unnecessary and overally piss poorly planned and void of an exit strategy.
Shwarskopf, Zinni and Franks ( while Franks is not on record yet, any one who has been in the military can take the unspoken from an action by a career officer who retires from the biggest command in his life in midstream of a war)
Remember Gen. Sinsheki? Who's estimate of money & manpower were accurate way back then, but not political expedient for Cheney/Bush?
All of these men voted for Bush & all other GOP tickets throughout their lives.
Zinni & Stormin Norman each drew up plans for taking Iraq, as would be befitting to their position. Each man's plan called for 300, 000 troops and laid out the requisite exity strategy per each contingency.
Exits are mapped at the start - Cindy Sheehan does know more than Bush in asking for a transparency he can't provide for an exit strategy, because he's got no plan since he never too the generals, including Powell, recommendations.
Maybe you folks will be more logic receptive when the "milestones" toward exit come prior to 11/06 & 11/08, just as we had "movement" on issues prior to 11/02 & 11/04?



posted on Sep, 1 2005 @ 09:25 AM
link   
Cindy does not represent most of the families that have lost a son or daughter from what I have seen, although that is really no cause to invalidate her ideas. She seems to be suffering from bad association more than anything else, because some of the more radical things she has said aren't normally aired on TV that I have seen.

Personally, I don't think it's possible to publically pressure the Bush Administration due to their "ride this out no matter what" seeming policy regarding Iraq. There was an ocean of justification for the war, but then again there is plenty of justification to fight wars on almost the entire African continent, parts of Asia, and almost the entire Middle East.

I think she has been politicized like so many other things, and I am seeing stark similarities with the right and left on this in the same shameful way it was shown for Terry Schiavo.



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 09:21 AM
link   
I tend to agree with you on most of your post Jethro.

I dont think much of the media..both on the left and the right. I also dont think much of polls simply because of the poor and transparent manner in which the polls were whored out for political reasons during the Clinton Administration. During the Lewinskiy debacle...we were bombarded daily by one poll after another ..all day long and forever!!! It became obvious to me that the polls were for the purpose of swaying public opinion and not reporting public opinion. Proof of this is that when the Lewinsky buisness was over the polls immediately died off...they had done their purpose. No longer needed.
I am very wary of polls no matter what party or media is trying to use them.
Also ..I am very well aware that the bulk of the media shills for their respective political partys. This is not fair and balanced..no matter who makes the claim.
One more thing...both partys will use fear to steer the public by pandering and prostituting their emotions/fear...this is dominantly a Democratic tactic and standard ballywick but both partys will use this on the public. It is simply a matter of you individually deciding when you will cut the string. Almost every tactic used by the Dems is of fear and insecurity with the underlying message that you can count of that party to offer the solution. It is the Democrats who use fear tactics the most...carte blanche. Of this I am sure and it is highly predicatble in their political tactics across the board.

As to Rush. I listen to him because I tire of most of the rest of the talk radio genre. I particulary tire of the droning on of Hannity and his program. I do not agree with Rush on every point but I have to admit .that he makes some intresting predictions.
As to exit strategys...I will remind the people on this board ..that the debacle in Somalia was a exit strategy of the first magnitude by a Democrat and we saw what that caused down the road..not by the admissions of the political partys here in America but by Osama ben Laden. Americans would be wise to remember this fact ..and admission by Osama.
Exit strategy is the tactic used by the left and the democrats to secrue the one avenue for which they think they have leverage in the process..they must drone on and on about this but never use the perspective of Somalia of which I spoke earlier. When you realize the cheap politics of what happened in Somalia...and who died for nothing..you realize a different perspective. Somalia was indeed cheap politics and when the price got to high ..cut and run. Where were the Cindy Sheehans here???
Cindy Sheehan certainly has the right to protest and become a media icon ..if she wants ..but not to me ..I have the right to turn the radio/tv off. I am so glad that the Hurrican Katrinia news has superceeded the media circus surrounding Cindy Sheehan. Same thing with the story of the missing woman in Aruba. These storys have become filler for a lack of real news. I am sorry for the loss of these peoples children ...but this is not front page news.
I am very conservative in my views yet I am dubious about much of the Republican motives. I am also very dubious about the Democratic motives and political techniques. I have learned that the struggle is between these two partys..not necessarily for the benifit of the American people..but for the partys themselves. This is political whoredom. The partys are using the media to aid in prostituting out the American public. For this reason it is intresting to me to watch the Left/Right debates here on ATS and look for people who seem to have caught on to this concept.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Sep, 7 2005 @ 09:14 AM
link   
Thank goodness. Praise God. I am so relieved that this non issue has been taken off the front pages of the pimping whorish media. This became such a media created non event it was astonishing that people actually believed this was of importance.

So when will they try to resurect her or replace her with the next non news construct "Victimization" Strategy? This non issue had reached the proportions and tact of Professional Wrestling. WWE I think they call it. Pitiful.

I am so glad it is off the front pages.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Sep, 7 2005 @ 09:18 AM
link   
Cindy? Who's Cindy?



new topics




 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join