Whether you agree or not...

[Rex Kickass]

this is bulls***.

 

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0816051texas1.html

 

People who call her the enemy and destroy memorials to our dead soldiers are hypocrites of the worst degree. She might be kind of a nutjob, but nobody deserves that.

[southsider2k5]

That is classless.

[mreye]

While it's technically a "mock" memorial, it's classless nonetheless.

[Kid Gleason]

So...why did the guy run them over? Is he O.K. with the idea of dead soldiers? I don't think her demands for a private meeting with Bush are all that unreasonable. Somebody needs to take militia boy outside and explain to him that she is showing concern for a fallen soldier, her son.

[Steff]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/16/crawford.protest/index.html

 

Man arrested

Sheehan said she doesn't want to press charges against a pickup driver who early Tuesday allegedly ran over a makeshift memorial for the 1,800 Americans killed in Iraq. Police said he drove a pickup truck over 500 crosses and 40 American flags.

 

Court papers identified him as Larry Northern, 59, from nearby Waco.

 

He has been charged with a felony criminal mischief count, since damage to the memorial was estimated at more than $1,500. He was released after posting $3,000 bail, according to court records.

 

Sheehan said protesters would ask for a restraining order to keep the driver away from their camp.

 

Dave Jensen, a participant in the protest, said the truck driver appeared to be dragging a piece of pipe behind his pickup to aid in the destruction.

[Rex Kickass]

I don't agree with what she's doing, but I certainly don't agree with efforts to vilify her. Or hurt her.

 

Where did the ability to have a civil disagreement disappear to?

[CubKilla]

I don't think her demands for a private meeting with Bush are all that unreasonable.

 

I do actually. Was Roosevelt supposed to meet with the mother of every soldier killed in battle during WWII? Was Lincoln supposed to meet with the mother of every union soldier killed in battle during the Civil War?

 

Fact of the matter is this..... when war's happen, people die. Good people. During times of relative peace, thousands of young men and women joined the military simply because of the "GI Bill". They figured they'd do their 2, 4, 6 years in the branch they chose and then they'll be living the easier life when it comes to college and the job search.

 

How many of them actually realized that their whole plan could go right down the crapper in the matter of 2 hours during one day?

[Kid Gleason]

But this is one person who is taking an interesting, and actually a peaceful stand and statement.

 

I also am not so sure I would relate this war to WWII, nor Bush to Roosevelt. One major difference, the entire country pretty much stood behind Roosevelt and that war. I am also pretty sure that if he could, Roosevelt would have loved to have had a conversation with every single parent who lost a child in the war. It was a much different situation. I know this is stirring a bee's hive, but the two men aren't anywhere near the same, regardless of the job they hold/held.

[Rex Kickass]

So often presidents come across as someone different than they really are.

[mreye]

But this is one person who is taking an interesting, and actually a peaceful stand and statement.

 

I also am not so sure I would relate this war to WWII, nor Bush to Roosevelt. One major difference, the entire country pretty much stood behind Roosevelt and that war. I am also pretty sure that if he could, Roosevelt would have loved to have had a conversation with every single parent who lost a child in the war. It was a much different situation. I know this is stirring a bee's hive, but the two men aren't anywhere near the same, regardless of the job they hold/held.

No, the whole country did not stand behind Roosevelt. He had to secretly send aid to Europe for years. The public did not favor going to war until Pearl Harbor.

[mreye]

I do actually. Was Roosevelt supposed to meet with the mother of every soldier killed in battle during WWII? Was Lincoln supposed to meet with the mother of every union soldier killed in battle during the Civil War?

 

Fact of the matter is this..... when war's happen, people die. Good people. During times of relative peace, thousands of young men and women joined the military simply because of the "GI Bill". They figured they'd do their 2, 4, 6 years in the branch they chose and then they'll be living the easier life when it comes to college and the job search.

 

How many of them actually realized that their whole plan could go right down the crapper in the matter of 2 hours during one day?

I agree about people joining because of the GI Bill, but, correct me if I'm wrong, I believe this kid joined because he agreed with the war effort and had just re-inlisted 6 months or so before he was killed and his father has said he intended to make the military his career.

[FlaSoxxJim]

No, the whole country did not stand behind Roosevelt. He had to secretly send aid to Europe for years. The public did not favor going to war until Pearl Harbor.

True, but I concur with the point Kid is making and think it's central to the Sheehan situation.

 

I agree 100% with CubKilla (it was bound to happen eventually) that peacetime military recruits and reservists looking toward the GI Bill and other benefits after their tours were up did lose sight of the reality that wars do still break out and they may be sent into battle.

 

What is being lost in much of the Sheehan story is that it is the question of the validity of the official justifications for going to war that is at the heart of the protest. Cindy Sheehan certainly understands the risks of combat, and certainly her son did. Her contention is not that she didn't understand that her son might be killed if he went into combat. Her contention is that the publicly stated justifications for going to war were overstated at best if not outright fallacious, ie, with intent to deceive or mislead the American people.

 

If you sign up for military service, you are expected to obey the Commander In Chief. That's the bottom line, sure. But you also expect that when the Commander In Chief says he'll only put you in harm's way as a last resort he actually means what he says. If Cindy Sheehan's son were killed just four days into the Afghanistan invasion after 9/11, I guarantee she would not be staging this protest. We had clear enemies in OBL, El Quaida (sp?), and the Taliban regime that protected them, and we clearly had the right to retaliate for the attacks against us. We knew why we were at war. In contrast, our actions in Iraq have to be sold to us as a bundle – as part of the GWoT and national security – and troops are sent based on half-truths and unthruths.

[mreye]

I don't think her demands for a private meeting with Bush are all that unreasonable.

 

Would you meet privately with this person?

 

You get America out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine and you'll stop the terrorism.

 

That lying bastard, George Bush, is taking a five-week vacation in time of war. You get that maniac out here to talk with me in person.

 

The other thing I want him to tell me is 'just what was the noble cause Casey died for?' Was it freedom and democracy? Bull***t! He died for oil. He died to make your friends richer. He died to expand American imperialism in the Middle East.

 

It’s okay for Israel to occupy Palestine, but it’s – yeah – and it’s okay for Iraq to occupy – I mean, for the United States to occupy Iraq, but it’s not okay for Syria to be in Lebanon. They’re a bunch of f***ing hypocrites!

 

I was raised in a country by a public school system that taught us that America was good, that America was just. America has been killing people, like my sister over here says, since we first stepped on this continent, we have been responsible for death and destruction. I passed on that bull***t to my son and my son enlisted. I’m going all over the country telling moms: This country is not worth dying for.

 

9/11 was their Pearl Harbor to get their neo-con agenda through and, if I would have known that before my son was killed, I would have taken him to Canada. I would never have let him go and try and defend this morally repugnant system we have.

 

Protesting is not enough! We must take radical action against the fascists in our own country! Bring it down! Bring it all down! [begins dancing furiously]

 

link and link

[Kid Gleason]

Heh...heh...ummm...she does seem a little unstable it would seem...eh?

[Texsox]

She has met with him once, although with a group of other parents.

 

The President cannot be forced into stuff because of a demonstration like this. It isn't a path I would like to see any President embark on.

 

I believe I support our Troops by being vigilant and letting my government know when I believe a cause is worth the loss of human lives and when it is without. Our government's greatest strength is the voice of every American. Soldiers die because we allow it. Sometimes for good, just, and honorable reasons, other times for much less. I support any citizens non violent protest.

[The Ginger Kid]

She has met with him once, although with a group of other parents.

 

The President cannot be forced into stuff because of a demonstration like this. It isn't a path I would like to see any President embark on.

 

I believe I support our Troops by being vigilant and letting my government know when I believe a cause is worth the loss of human lives and when it is without. Our government's greatest strength is the voice of every American. Soldiers die because we  allow it. Sometimes for good, just, and honorable reasons, other times for much less. I support any citizens non violent protest.

 

I agree. Bush could meet with her a thousand times and it's still not going to change the fact that her little boy is dead. She's angry and who can blame her? I can't begin to understand that kind of loss and with two cousins serving in Iraq, hope I never have to.

[Rex Kickass]

I think she's wrong. And he's wrong. Nobody's right here.

 

Neither is Bill O'Reilly who equated her protest to treason.

[KipWellsFan]

I think she's wrong. And he's wrong. Nobody's right here.

 

Neither is Bill O'Reilly who equated her protest to treason.

 

Bill O'Reilly has an obsession with the topic of treason.

[mreye]

I think she's wrong. And he's wrong. Nobody's right here.

 

Neither is Bill O'Reilly who equated her protest to treason.

O'Reilly's a jackass. Everybody's a traitor! :rolly

[LowerCaseRepublican]

O'Reilly's a jackass.

Who knew that we agree yet again.

[The Ginger Kid]

I think she's wrong. And he's wrong. Nobody's right here.

 

Neither is Bill O'Reilly who equated her protest to treason.

 

I've never understood the rationale that says protesting military action is tantamount to treason. Based on that logic, all military action should be supported.

[KipWellsFan]

O'Reilly said yesterday that he never directly equated her actions to treason but whatever. O'Reilly seems surprisingly a lot more reasonable than that other anchor John Gibson.

[mreye]

Who knew that we agree yet again. 

Oh God! Delete, edit!

[JUGGERNAUT]

You would most liken GW2 with GW1, Vietnam, Cambodia, & Korea.

These are all wars fought to defend the weak from tyranny & injustice on foreign soil. Sure there are American interests ($$$) involved but that doesn't change what the war is really about.

 

So the question to ask is did JFK, LBJ, RN, or GB1 ever have a 1-on-1 with a grieving mom? I don't think they did.

 

Do I think Bush should? Yes. Why? Because America is more polarized today then we were back then. It would give Bush the chance to present an argument not directed towards her but the doves in general.

 

I'd be happy to write the speech for him:

 

It's been nearly 4 years now since 9/11. There has not been a major terrorist attack in the US since then. Do you know why? Because dedicated & honorable men & women like your son have given their lives to fighting terrorism across the globe. As ghastly as Iraq is I want you to imagine a world in which Iraq is still under control of Saddam Hussein. How strong would Al-Queda be today in such a world? How many major attacks would the world have seen with such a strong Al-Queda?

 

Why did Al-Queda attack us on 9/11? Was it because we are trying to spread free-trade practices across the globe? Was it because we believe women have as much right to run a company as men do? If we choose to do nothing & go about business as usual would that have changed their reasons for attacking us on 9/11? Would a do nothing stance have led to even greater attacks?

 

These are the questions the commander in chief must ask before weighing the consequences of action. I believe I have made the right choice. I am fully aware the cost is high in terms of both blood & money but to do nothing risks even greater costs.

 

History is on my side. What history tells us is that terrorism whether it is born of Nazi Germany or Al-Queda continues to manifest itself if left unabated. The do nothing stance led to millions of lives lost at the hands of Nazi Germany before America entered the war. It still confounds me today how Germany could lose WW1 & rise to power in such a short time later to wage WWII. That's how I saw Saddam Hussein & Iraq. They attacked Kuwait & threatened the world's oil supply in GW1. They were defeated but the sanctions did little to prevent a new rise in power. The OFF scandal is a testament to that. We might have jumped the gun on the WMD intelligence but what's the alternative? To wait until we have irrefutable proof that Iraq has WMD's? By that time he would have had enough power to threaten not just Kuwait but all members of OPEC.

 

Is it just about oil? No. But it's important to understand that in the world we live in today oil is life. Most of the cities in this world owe their electricity to oil & other fossil fuels. Our civilization can no more survive without electricity than it can without water. Your son died because he was dedicated to protecting both freedom & life. He protected those who are not yet capable of defending themselves. It won't wash away your grief but it should fill you with pride.

 

<hug the mom for best effect ;>

Edited August 17, 2005 by JUGGERNAUT

[Texsox]

You would most liken GW2 with GW1, Vietnam, Cambodia, & Korea.

These are all wars fought to defend the weak from tyranny & injustice on foreign soil. Sure there are American interests ($$$) involved but that doesn't change what the war is really about. 

 

So the question to ask is did JFK, LBJ, RN, or GB1 ever have a 1-on-1 with a grieving mom?  I don't think they did.

 

Do I think Bush should?  Yes.  Why?  Because America is more polarized today then we were back then.  It would give Bush the chance to present an argument not directed towards her but the doves in general. 

 

I'd be happy to write the speech for him:

 

It's been nearly 4 years now since 9/11.  There has not been a major terrorist attack in the US since then.  Do you know why?  Because dedicated & honorable men & women like your son have given their lives to fighting terrorism across the globe.  As ghastly as Iraq is I want you to imagine a world in which Iraq is still under control of Saddam Hussein.  How strong would Al-Queda be today in such a world?  How many major attacks would the world have seen with such a strong Al-Queda? 

 

Why did Al-Queda attack us on 9/11?  Was it because we are trying to spread free-trade practices across the globe?  Was it because we believe women have as much right to run a company as men do?  If we choose to do nothing & go about business as usual would that have changed their reasons for attacking us on 9/11?  Would a do nothing stance have led to even greater attacks?

 

These are the questions the commander in chief must ask before weighing the consequences of action.  I believe I have made the right choice.  I am fully aware the cost is high in terms of both blood & money but to do nothing risks even higher costs. 

 

History is on my side.  What history tells us is that terrorism whether it it born of Nazi Germany or Al-Queda continues to manifest itself if left unabated.  The do nothing stance led to millions of lives lost at the hands of Nazi Germany before America entered the war.  It still confounds me today how Germany could lose WW1 & rise to power in such a short time later to wage WWII.  That's how I saw Saddam Hussein & Iraq.  They attacked Kuwait & threatened the world's oil supply in GW1.  They were defeated but the sanctions did little to prevent a new rise in power.  The OFF scandal is a testament to that.  We might have jumped the gun on the WMD intelligence but what's the alternative?  To wait until we have irrefutable proof that Iraq has WMD's?  By that time he would have had enough power to threaten not just Kuwait but all members of OPEC.

 

Is it just about oil?  No.  But it's important to understand that in the world we live in today oil is life.  Most of the cities in this world owe their electricity to oil & other fossil fuels. Our civilization can no more survive without electricity than it can without water.  Your son died because he was dedicated to protecting both freedom & life.  He protected those who are not yet capable of defending themselves.  It won't wash away your grief but it should fill you with pride.

 

 

 

Nice speech. And if I believed the premise was true, that attacking Iraq scared away terrorists from this country, I would even believe it. If we are so effective fighting terrorism by attacking Iraq, then why am I taking my shoes off to ride an airplane? Why have we accepted random searches on public transportation? Why have we given the government even more powers to spy on us?

 

The problem with looking at Germany is they are a country, with clear chains of command, national boundaries, and other factors that make a war possible. Terrorists are McVeigh, bin Laden, etc. You can't remove the tumor by removing the chest. There is crime in America, bombing the place will not solve the crime problem. Terrorists are criminals, not soldiers.

 

I agree we have done some nice things for the Iraqi people. After we bankrupt our country re-building the stuff we tore down, they will have a nice country.