Rooster7

Thank you Firstpusk - for providing a perfect example of how liberals present facts in a manner that reinforces their own twisted worldviews. Lets dissect that last sentence: From the names of our fallen soldiers Have we lost soldiers? Yes. For a war of this magnitude, are those numbers significant (relative to other wars)? No, not even close. When a newscaster such as Ted Koppel reads off a list of the dead, is he trying to honor them or is he trying to take advantage of their deaths to manipulate the emotions of the general public? The MANIPULATION seems pretty obvious to me. Has the media ever try to determine the views of these soldiers Did they want to fight this war? Did they know the risks? What did they believe about the war? As a group, how many would like to see America run from this fight? to the gradual withdrawal of our allies Are they withdrawing because they believe the war is wrong, or are these nations bowing to internal political pressure and/or threats of terrorism (i.e., the Spaniards)? If these nations refuse to stand with us, were they ever truly our allies? Perhaps we were merely allies of convenience? Its okay for America to sacrifice her blood for her allies, but apparently some of our allies dont want to make sacrifices. Interestingly, America has remained free for over 200 years. Can any of our allies make the same claim? No? Perhaps its because we have the courage to fight for our freedom. Are these nations acting on principle or are they simply acting like cowards? I think Cowards. to the growing insurgency, Has there been an increase? Yes. But what exactly does that mean? Do people fight the hardest when theyre winning or when their backs are up against the wall? The growing insurgency may simply be acts of desperation. And if even more terrorists are coming out of the woodwork, is that reason to run or to gain resolve? Why does the media choose to label these murderers as insurgents? Who do they represent? Do they represent the majority of Iraqis? Where is the daily coverage of Iraqis embracing Americans? it's become all too clear that facts in Iraq have an anti-Bush agenda. Is this clear? I think this is clear The liberal media and those simple-minded folks who like to put their politics ahead of their country will twist any story (even those that harm America) if it means regaining political power. The Bush agenda is to defend this country against despots. Those who say otherwise have either been asleep since 9/11 or simply have their own agenda. The bumper sticker humor/mentality of late TV fits the Democratic Party well. Both have the same level of dimwitted analysis.

Firstpusk, Interestingly, your bitter condemnation of FOX News does not provoke me to debate. People of the liberal mindset, often categorically deny the most evident truths, especially when they contradict their worldview. In short, I find your charges against FOX News to be predictable if not somewhat amusing. However, your defense of NPR approaches near Zombie-like behavior in that its a futile denial of the obvious. Please NPR is OBJECTIVE? Take another look and try it with your eyes open next time.

I'm with FOG on NPR. I like the British accents (they seem to have a preference for English broadcasters...probably because it adds to their snootiness), but there's definitely a slant to left in their presentations. I prefer FOX News, but undoubtedly there are quite a few people on this forum that think those guys lean to the right. I can accept that analysis, but I have a hard time swallowing that assertion without comment when the same folks refuse to recognize the left leanings of the big three (ABC, NBC, and CBS). I know scores of folks who have no idea what I'm talking about when I point to Brokaw, Jennings, and Rather, as closet supporters of the Dems. I find their lack of discernment and/or their lack of intellectual honesty to be very disturbing. Although, I don't know why I'm so shocked...this nation did elect Clinton - TWICE! Sadly, because so many people watch these guys and trust them like their favorite uncle (including my own mother), they dont look for bias. They accept what they hear as the unblemished truth. Its a little bit scary. All of this explains why so many people think we are the most hated nation. FunnyI dont recall this notion being put forth when a Dem was in office. Hmmmoh yeah, the evil Republican administration is responsible. Yeah, right.(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

Herms, Those are encouraging words. Thanks. Speaking of the "twisted" press, I remember when Hubble was launched and it was discovered shortly afterwards that the mirror was made incorrectly causing some blurring of distant objects. The press made it sound as if the telescope was a complete failure. At that time, even if Hubble was never repaired, it was at least 10 times better than anything we had on the ground or in space. Yet, the press never reported that fact. They preferred the sensational headline (i.e., NASA blunder Costs Taxpayers Billions). Theyre all vying for the next Pulitzer by sensationalizing every wrongdoing and creating exposs even when none really exists. The sad fact of the matter is, it seems most reporters and/or their editors prefer stories that inspires outrage and sensationalism, then those stories that communicate the simple truth. I guess, for the reporter and his newspaper, theres no glory in reporting the heroics of our servicemen. After all, in a story like that, all of the focus is on a true hero, like the marine who saves his buddy or takes out 10 of the enemy by himself. In a story like the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal, the reporter and the so-called whistle blowers are called out and honored. Im not suggesting that stories of abuse should be kept from the public, but Id like to see a little more balance, even if those other stories dont give reporters any leverage to inflate their own egos.

Okay, your words have convicted me. Since you and ScouterPaul are a valuable resource to the BSA and deserve the same respect, I offer the same apology given me. I am truly sorry that you feel the way you do. HmmmIt's rather ambiguous and unsatisfying in several ways, but apparently it serves a purpose.

Firstpusk, I do believe; I was just insulted. Since I perceive it to be so, it must be true. Regardless, I expect a prompt apology. By any chance, did you help write your company's sexual harassment policy? Just being curious And BTW, I dont think you know my parents do you?

Firstpusk, No apology was offerednor is one forthcoming, because no real insult was ever made. First and foremost, I never said ScouterPaul was a farm boy, although he is from Kentucky (per his profile). Second, even if I had, there is no insult in being a farm boy or being from Kentucky. Third, the use of the phrase was a simple attempt to communicate a rather easy to understand concept that is, while we may have our uneducated opinions (due to the fact that we are far removed from the situation in the Middle East as well as the Oval office), the President and his administration are acting on the advice from experts in all of the appropriate fields (world politics, military, and others). Fourth, if I am guilty of anything, its a little light-hearted humor. If this offends, I will not lose sleep over it. Finally, my comment about self-esteem was a subtle way of saying Stop trying to read between the lines and/or just get a thicker skin (i.e. be man enough to engage in a debate and stop whining over perceived insults). Trust me, if I truly wanted to insult you, youd know it. Look at what youve made me gone and done Now were debating insults or rather the perception of one. It must be Friday! (This message has been edited by Rooster7)

Trail Pounder, Of the soldiers reprimanded/charged that I know of, these are their ages: Reese - 39 Frederick - 37 Graner 35 Harman - 26 Davis 26 Sivits 24 England 21 I realize you have a point, which you want to make, but it would be a little more convincing if you didnt bend the truth to get there. With the possible exception of the 21 year old, I think these "boys" are old enough to be called men. In short, they should have had the backbone to refuse the order if they believed it was wrong. Some of these poor, innocent, "just following orders", schmucks are probably older than some of those purported captains and special agents. ScouterPaul, Sorry, but it sounds like you have self-esteem issues. I said what I said rather plainly, and then I even clarified it - But if you still want to believe otherwise - go ahead and feel insulted.(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

ScoutPaul, In regard to the farm boy reference, if it makes you feel better use business executive or fireman or teacher or some other worthy profession. Frankly, I like farmers and Id just assume be labeled as one than some other profession. The point is and I had hoped you could have figured this out on your own I have more faith in our federal intelligence communities and the presidents willingness and ability to act accordingly when informed by them, then I do in the average Joe (or even the above average Joe) sitting on the sidelines bent on critiquing the current administration. Zahnada, Im not sure you understood either of my posts maybe you do. Liberal leaders, by definition, believe in a set of values. From my many years of observing them in action, most of those values revolve around the populations demographics, and thus centers on obtaining votes. If a liberal President did not act like a liberal, and acted according to the best interest of America instead of his career, then I could respect him BUT if that was the case, hed only be a liberal in name.

As to how I would react if a liberal politician was in office, it's a moot point. Unless the polls overwhelming support a military action, most liberals don't have the will or the moral fortitude to deploy our troops - even when common sense dictates otherwise. It's not about what's good for America...it's all about their political careers. The rare liberal or two that has enough sense and ****s to use the military when it's warranted, would have caved to the liberal media and pulled out of the Middle East a long time ago. Many examples of their spineless, self-serving ways are on full display in our Congress today. Rather than worry about what is the prudent thing to say and do while our troops stand in harms way, they are using this event to speculate about the U.S. intelligence community, spread propaganda about Rumsfeld, and exploit every soldiers sacrificeevery deployable act committed by our enemies are merely opportunities to further the liberal cause (i.e. inflict damage on Bush during an election year). With the horrid decapitation of an American in Iraq, how do the beloved democratic leaders in Congress react? Do they focus their disdain on the terrorists? Nothey speak about the cycle of violence, as if parading a bunch of naked terrorists around a jail is equivalent with the savage beheading of a business man whose only crime was being a Jewish American. Their outrage is prompted, motivated, and gauged by two simple catalysts 1) public opinion polls and 2) their ability to exact politically damage on conservatives. If my rant seems over the top and biased, youre right! It comes from endless years of watching and living with the likes of Kennedy, Clinton, Gore, Rangel, Boxer, Jackson, and other mindless buffoons that feign their concern and affection for America to further their careers. Im much less diplomatic about presenting my views than I was a few years ago. These days, the stakes are a lot higher. The way I see it, if you dont know what you believe, then you better figure it out real soon. Our country cant afford fence sitters especially when were in the middle of a war. Im convinced the 9/11 attack was not an aberration that we can afford to dismiss. Nor can we pretend that chasing the Taliban into the hills of Afghanistan will ensure our nations safety. The Muslim extremists have established footholds all over the world. And like these extremists, Saddam Hussein was intent on doing evil on a global scale. Furthermore, Iraq was a safe haven for those willing to inflict harm on America and any other country it opposed. Invading Iraq was the right course of action to take. We may be forced to invade other countries as well. The war on terrorism will probably take decades to win. But if we dont fight it now and fully commit ourselves to rid the world of this menace, then we will leave an insurmountable legacy for our children filled with violence, oppression, and uncertainty.

I'm not convinced. Perhaps if there was some real evidence to make her case, I could be. However, being that she is the one in the photos, and she has much to lose - she doesn't have much credibility. As to wearing blindersno, I just trust those in charge of our government to know more about the world situation than the average ideologue or self-proclaimed expert on terrorism and/or world politics.

ScouterPaul, Im afraid you have a selective memory. President Bush mentioned the mistreatment of the Iraqi people on numerous occasions. He never stated that our sole reason for invading Iraq was due to the development of the WMDs. Furthermore, Im a quite puzzled as to why you believe preventing the torture and murder of innocent lives is not a worthy endeavor for the most power nation in the world. Should we close our eyes to wrongdoing outside of our borders and burry our heads in the sand like an ostrich? BTW, you dont honestly believe that the 125,000 soldiers stationed in Iraq were all tasked to look for WMDs? These men and women have many jobs to perform, and WMDs dont jump up and down screaming here I am. Its a safe bet that there are a very limited number of folks performing this search. Regardless, your claim is tantamount to saying theres no needle in this haystack. In regard to Saudi Arabia, I must assume that the CIA, NSA, and/or other national security agencies have more intelligence on this matter than your average farm boy from Kentucky. The fact that many of the skyjackers had roots in a particular country does not mean that countrys government was complicit. But you probably already know that SR540Beaver, So youre claiming that there was a strategy from on high in the military to use these pictures to humiliate and intimidate the terrorists in Iraq? Is that your supposition? I think thats pretty weak. If the Iraqis were presented with these pictures, those responsible had to know that the U.S. media and the American public would eventually see them as well. What do you think the militarys strategy was to escape condemnation OR Are you implying that they were planning to use these six guards as sacrificial lambs from the very beginning? Of course, there is now a video out of a civilian contractor being decapitated to show us what will happen if we don't leave. I'd like to think we are above using their tactics, but our intelligence community can cook up some pretty strange ideas from time to time. This is just plain insulting, not just to the intelligence community, but to America in general. When you can point to pictures of US soldiers decapitating Iraqis, I will seek your wisdom. Until then, your words do not reflect sound reasoningyou sound like a left-wing conspiracist or worse.

SR540Beaver, A few years ago I wouldn't have bet that our government in the midst of fighting the terrorists who attacked us would have committed 150,000 soldiers and 10's of billions of dollars to overthrow another government and occupy a nation that posed no credible threat to us. Dont you believe in defending the defenseless? If no other reason, was it not worth the effort and cost to prevent the torture and murder of innocent lives in Iraq? Do you think for one minute that Iraq was not trying to develop chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons? Would you prefer to wait for a terrorist nation to strike first? But we did. And I am very thankful that we did. Now here we are looking at pictures of POW's being abused at our hands. Hello Mr. Apple meet Mr. Orange. Please dont attempt to justify your position by mixing issues. The one event has little to do with the other.

ASM1, Im thinking... Thinking... Thinking... Yet, I cannot come up with an explanation for your words. Did someone suggest that we should lower our standards? No offense intended, but what are you talking about?

There are a lot of things that I wouldnt bet onfor example: Several years ago, I would not have ventured to bet that - Two teenagers would walk into their high school and kill 9 of their peers. OR A Christian sect would willingly, barricade themselves in a compound in an effort to avoid the law, placing their children in harms way. OR The U.S. government would storm the same compound with no imminent threat resulting in the deaths of over 80 Americans. OR A mother would let the family car roll into a lake, killing her children. OR A U.S. President would commit sexual acts with an intern in the Oval office while on the phone with a Senator. OR OJ Simpson would cut the head off his ex-wife and get away with it. OR Federal agents would shoot a mother holding her baby between the eyes. OR Two idiots would blow up a federal building killing hundreds. OR 19 fools would fly jets into buildings killing thousands. Of course, this list can go on and on. What would our great, great grandparents say if they were alive today? The point is: There are plenty of unexplainable, senseless acts occurring on a daily basisIm not convinced that these soldiers could not have acted on their own. Im not placing any bets. But then again, I would never have placed bets on the aforementioned events, YET they happened just the same.

There is absolutely no way, and I mean no chance at all Considering that you werent there. Considering that with each new day the world gives witness to more and more bizarre events perpetrated by individuals as well as governments. I think youre overstating your position. You might be right. But, you might be wrong. I dont doubt the capacity of countries or individuals to act foolishly and/or to do evil.

Even if it is just a few "bad apples," it does reflect badly on all of us, and it conflicts grossly with our moral self-image. Agreed. However, its one thing to strive for utopian standards. Its quite another to be judged by them. When a few bad apples killed, mutilated, burned, and hung Americans in Fallujah, we (Americans) were expected to understand that these men were not representative of the general population and act with restraint. Yet, when American soldiers behave badly, the entire administration is portrayed as evil. America cannot control the actions of all of its citizens, even those in the military. Its not fair, reasonable, or moral to hold America to a standard, which effectively says if Americans are involved and anything bad happens, then America was complicit. So, while I am upset that the world will use this event to judge all Americans and its leadership, I do not agree that it is fair, reasonable, or moral to do so. Furthermore, I believe that reasonable people, even those in the Middle East know this. As much as one might want to demonize the people who did this, when you read about them a lot of them seem pretty normal, and their friends and family all say they'd never hurt anybody, etc., etc. I think it's another example of how thin the veneer is between civilized and uncivilized behavior. Agreed again. Which brings to mind two thoughts. One Theres probably more to this story than what the media knows or are willing to share. By that I mean, no one is putting a human face on those soldiers who are accused of this heinous crime. No one is discussing the duress of being a prison guard in a war torn nation where much of the population, in particular those that you are guarding, would like to see you dead or worse. I not supporting their actions in fact, I am disgusted by the whole thing, but I would like to see a little more thought put into the stories about these soldiers and their experience. Two No matter who you are, we are all subject to evil if we let our guard down. (This message has been edited by Rooster7)

I hold the President accountable to address what he knows to be true. I dont hold him accountable for every anonymous action taken by a rogue soldier or public servant. If that was the standard, then we should press for the resignation of every elected official within hours of their oath of office - because there are crimes being perpetrated everyday by subordinates in government. A President should be held accountable for what he knows. If he knew prisoners were being abused gratuitously, then I would be the first to shout for his head. Aside from that, he should find out what went wrong and change it. The rest of this non-sense (blaming the President) is nothing but blind, hateful, and self-serving politics.

Of course - the debacle itself has nothing to do with politics. I don't think any one group is lining to say, "We liked what these guys did to these prisoners." My point was, and is - Liberals are exploiting this horrible story to bash Bush and to gain leverage in an election year. And that fact, does not surprise me one bit - although I do find it be about as low as one can stoop.

Achilleez, I did not see anything in the papers about people being shot. Nor did I read how long they made a specific person stand on a bucket, or what he was told, or if there was more than one person subjected to this. Where do you get your information? Or do you merely assume the worst when it comes to Americans? gsmom, If there's been name calling - I think you started it when you said, "I am ashamed to be an American." Since I'm an American too, I take offense. NJ, If you want to know what liberals believe, take a look at their elected leaders and read a newspaper. It's not that difficult.(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

NJ, In your faith, do you feel all paths lead to God - OR - do you simply feel you have no burden from God to tell your neighbor the truth? Or is it something else? In my faith, I am confident that there is one God, and he expects us those who believe in Him - to tell others the truth. It's that simple. What does "projecting your beliefs onto other people, mean? Has my expression of faith somehow hinder someone elses faith? Am I forcing others to believe as I do? If so, explain to me exactly how this has occurred. You can express your faith as meekly as you desire. I am confident in mine. This fact cannot stop you or others from embracing whatever you're feel led to do whether it's inspired by your own feelings or the reality of GodI have no control over that inspiration or your ultimate choice.

Big_Dog, I agree. But I'd go even further... gsmom, If you're ashamed to be an American, do our nation and our troops in harms way a favor, stay in England. In case you've haven't heard, we're fighting a war. We don't need folks giving the enemy moronic quotes to fuel their passions.

NJ, I agree with you (now that's a rare event) that Pat Tillman's youngest brother is one or more of these things: 1) Grieving deeply 2) Relatively young and somewhat immature - that's not intended to be an insult 3) Very emotional 4) And probably somewhat non-religious himself Given the above, I do understand why he reacted as he did. I'm not condemning him. But, I'm not relating to his thoughts either. I feel he did not do his brother a service with his words. And I think when Rich establishes a better relationship with God; he will be very regretful that he spoke those words. I say this because I believe in the power of prayer, and I'm certain that hundreds, if not thousands, are praying for him. Rich Tillman obviously loved his brother if he ever asks himself where did that love come from, hell realize that there is a God.

As for the damage done in the Arab world, I fail to understand how we (Americans and our allies) are expected to understand that the acts of several terrorists DO NOT REPRESENT the hearts and minds of millions of Muslims or the governments of Middle Eastern countries that are sympathetic to their cause (if not their means) - BUT, when some American soldiers who are risking their lives (and have probably seen a few friends die at the hands of insurgents) take their frustrations out on some captured enemy combatants, all of the world expects us to stand up and confess that we are a hateful nation with dishonorable intentions. Lets use the same standard across the board. Apply the same rules and judgments to everyone. These soldiers have probably lost their careers and may see prison time. With the exception of one act (i.e., the prisoner standing on a box with electrodes), while their actions were disgusting and revolting, they pale in comparison to the acts of terrorists or the acts of Sadams old prison guards. In fact, some of this stuff was probably done in a college frat house (although thats not a fraternity that Id want any part of). Am I defending their actions? No. Do I think they deserve to be punished? Yes. However, I want to hear their stories. Go to Iraq for a few months. Watch your friends die. See innocent people torn apart by the bombs of terrorists. See if youre not changed. Since this is not possible, then at least try to put yourself in their shoes before passing a quick judgment. And whatever punishment these men and women deserve, they are individuals. I understand that they wear the uniform of U.S. servicemen. I also understand that suicide bombers claim to represent Ala and his people BUT Muslims and our Middle-Eastern allies expect us to understand that these folks are exceptions, rogue members of the faith, who are misguided and should NOT be seen as representative of other Muslims. If that be case, they should easily understand that these service members are exceptions, rouge members of the military, and should NOT be seen as representative of other Americans. I hate double standards and I hate hypocrisy. Those who feel likewise should not judge America or its leadership based on the actions of a few. As for labels, I think they apply. The kinds of articles that are being written that draws these conclusions is LIBERAL BLATHER: 1) This is Bushs fault. 2) These solders represent the tip of the iceberg. Theres many, many more doing the same. 3) Americas occupation is no better than what Sadams rule had offered Iraq. 4) This incident justifies all of the horrible accusations made against us. Middle Eastern countries and in particular Muslims have a right to question whether we are trying to do good. 5) We should be ashamed to admit that we are Americans. The above is nothing but the left exploiting a horrible event during an election year to further their cause - no matter what harm it may cause America and our brave servicemen in the Middle East. It's disgusting. It's loathsome. But it is typical for the liberal media (and most of the liberal leadership). I realize that you may not like to recognize this but its true. Im not happy about what happen. I know that what they did was wrong. I realized that the actions of these guards (and the fact that our beloved press has ensured that all our enemies will have these photos for propaganda to fuel their cause) have put more Americans in harms way. No doubt, some idiot will believe that this justifies a suicide bombing and he or she is the perfect martyr to do the job. (This message has been edited by Rooster7)

Achilleez, I dont know if this was truly your intent. However, your chosen title for this thread - The noble, the brave, and the sickening - seems to be making a commentary about our armed forces in Iraq. If so, I take exception to this. When a story comes out in the papers about a pedophile that has breached the ranks of the BSA, do you accord us the same disrespect? The acts of a few individuals (whether that be 1, 10, or 100), should not be used to cast dispersions on 100,000 to 150,000 men and women. Every organization, whether it is the local school system, the BSA, or the US Arm Forces, has individuals with values that are not consistent with the vast majority. In regard to the article, I find it interesting that liberals in the media and elsewhere are using this sad story to defame President Bush. Veronica Crowell writes: This is a perfect example of the Bush White House's lack of leadership. This conclusion is ridiculous. But its typical of a movement in our country today. Blame everyone but those directly responsible. Its not the kids fault; the parents should be blamed. Its not the employees fault; the supervisor should be blamed. Its not the students fault; the teacher should be blamed. Its not the criminals fault; the police should be blamed. Its not the bums fault; society should be blamed. Its not the soldiers fault; the President should be blamed. On and on it goes. Grow up. You are who you are. If you dont like it change, but stop blaming your parents, teachers, the government, and society. Let me give you a clue if youre practicing for God, Hes not going to buy it.