Your tax dollars...

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
I was gonna start a thread with this but you made a better place...

The House Armed Services Committee is banishing the global war on terror from the 2008 defense budget.

This is not because the war has been won, lost or even called off, but because the committee’s Democratic leadership doesn’t like the phrase.

A memo for the committee staff, circulated March 27, says the 2008 bill and its accompanying explanatory report that will set defense policy should be specific about military operations and “avoid using colloquialisms.”

The “global war on terror,” a phrase first used by President Bush shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the U.S., should not be used, according to the memo. Also banned is the phrase the “long war,” which military officials began using last year as a way of acknowledging that military operations against terrorist states and organizations would not be wrapped up in a few years.

A Rose by any other name...
 

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
I'm pretty sure that's what many of us have been saying since 2003.
 

spike

New Member
No shit, the way the administration has handled it they're the ones that want failure. Or it's the incompetence.

Competence in '08! :toast:
 

Gato_Solo

Out-freaking-standing OTC member
I seriously doubt that anyone 'wants it to fail' or is rooting for failure. Then again, i don't think that throwing more money or troops at the problem is any guarantee of success.

I don't. Not for the reasons you think, either. The insurgents come to mind right off. Our failure is a victory for them. Throwing more money and troops may not guarantee success, but cutting money and removing troops guarantees failure. I've said from the beginning, before this became a debacle, that we should have doubled our number of troops. Instead, we let bean-counters and media pundits run the war, and the result is what we have now. If you notice, you hardly hear a word about Afghanistan anymore. Know why? Nobody is protesting Afghanistan, so there is no news value there. There was in the beginning, but...as the tail wags the dog...the reporting there was abandoned over media interest. Nobody likes to hear about the good guy winning...
 

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
Ya wanna hear about protesting against Afghanistan..cross the border northwards. You'll hear some shortly thereafter...but it won't make the news..not because it's not important, but because of the scale...and you won't hear about it on your end because there just aren't as many American troops in Afghan country than in Iraq.

Afghanistan is only a success in comparison to Iraq - it's still a LOG way off from a fait accompli. Its what happens when you try and take a group of people who think along religious boundaries and try and make them think along regional boundaries - where democracy really works.
 

spike

New Member
Instead, we let bean-counters and media pundits run the war, and the result is what we have now. If you notice, you hardly hear a word about Afghanistan anymore. Know why? Nobody is protesting Afghanistan, so there is no news value there. There was in the beginning, but...as the tail wags the dog...the reporting there was abandoned over media interest. Nobody likes to hear about the good guy winning...

Nope the administration ran the war into the ground and has downplayed Afghanistan as soon as they got their sights set on Iraq. That's why there's WAY more troops, money spent, and attention on the Iraq farce.
 

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
Had the left STFU & not played politics (ala Vietnam) we'd be in a different position today (ala Vietnnam). As a N Vietnamese General said, they were ready to surrender until the media got involved. Then they knew we would beat ourselves.

Not much has changed.
 

spike

New Member
Had the left STFU & not played politics

:laugh: Look at you advocating what you accuse the liberals of doing...

Gonz said:
the liberal protesters are in favor of free speech...so long as it agrees with them. Instead of providing debate, they'll just shut down the war mongering hate filled animal flesh eating right wing asshole because, Allah knows, we can't have both sides presented.

Apparently it's the right (you) that doesn't want both sides presented.

The left using reason to examine the farce did not make it a farce. It was a farce from the start. The left also did not elect incompetence into the white house.

Look for a scapegoat all you want but we all know where the buck stops.
 

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
Apparently it's the right (you) that doesn't want both sides presented.

When has the right attacked a leftist, physically? We'll be glad to listen to their meanderings before shooting them down, metaphorically.
 

spike

New Member
Do you have some statistics on rights attacking lefts and vice versa or something?

Point is you accused the liberals of not wanting both sides presented in one post and then advocated the liberals not being able to present their side in another post.

Obviously hypocritical.
 

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
As can be clearly shown from stories I've put in the RW for several years now...the left gets violent more often & attempts to stop free speech far more often than the right.

The Christian right wants mnoral authority over music & TV, not public speaking events. (btw-they're morons too)
 

spike

New Member
As can be clearly shown from stories I've put in the RW for several years now...the left gets violent more often & attempts to stop free speech far more often than the right.

You're hand picked stories only show your personal bias not any real trends.

Hell, I just post a story about Gingrich wanting to limit free speech, the MPAA is a conservative group, and in the Free Speech Movement who was on which side?
 
Top