*I will admit that I did not serve. I contracted a deadly disease from my brother during his training to go to Kuwait for the invasion. He is now 80% disabled (being appealed for 100%) and I have spent the last 3 years trying to get my health up to standards to be accepted.

Where is Wesley Clark?

Ouabam on January 30, 2007 at 6:31 PM

Drinkin a 40 and doing body shots with OBL.

I am damn tired of those on the left claiming anyone who has not served and supports keeping the F in VFW is a chickenhawk, while ignoring those who have served or are serving who also support the same mission.

Bush is not the enemy.

How about the hawkish veterans challenge the dove veterans to a countoff. I’ll give them a huge benefit of the doubt and say it would be a 50:1 ratio in favor of us winning now instead of bagging out.

But just to muddy the waters, I’m against escalation. Only because we should have sent enough to ensure quicker pacification in the first place. Let’s take the concept to absurd extremes. How safe and effective would 1 American soldier have been in Iraq? How safe and effective would the current number plus about 8% be? And how safe and effective would 25% above the current number, starting from day one, have been? I think all veterans and gamblers would agree, go big or stay home.

..Ah, yes. If I’d bothered to read the whole post, then everyone already knows who it is. And yes, I agree, wtf is he doing in another advert? Scraping the bottom of the barrel..

Limerick on January 30, 2007 at 5:01 PM

Awesome book have you read it? The psycology majors are working overtime on the Dems strategy. What the hell did they do clone goebles?! I swear the twists and turns of the facts are f’n scarey. They have a whole parallel universe waiting for us! They sucked this kid into working for them. I wonder how much he earns for betraying his brothers. I mean its really a shame for his hand and I respect his sacrafice but I just think he has it wrong.

RightWinged on January 30, 2007 at 6:08 PM

First off I’ll agree with you that the ad is unnecessary, and I’m not pleased with my party’s non-binding resolution crap either. It’s just showboating.
But let me tell you, I have as much love for my country as you do, regardless of my position on the war.
I did not agree with the President’s reasoning for going into Iraq but since we’re there I’m full tilt boogie in support. Do I agree with 20,000 troop reinforcements? No. It’s a band-aid and what we need is major surgery. I’m in favor of a much larger troop surge, somewhere around 50,000 for starters, but I’m not holding my breath.
I may be a minority in my party these days but there are still a number of us left who remember what it is to be a true Democrat.

RightWinged on January 30, 2007 at 6:08 PM

First off I’ll agree with you that the ad is unnecessary, and I’m not pleased with my party’s non-binding resolution crap either. It’s just showboating.
But let me tell you, I have as much love for my country as you do, regardless of my position on the war.
I did not agree with the President’s reasoning for going into Iraq but since we’re there I’m full tilt boogie in support. Do I agree with 20,000 troop reinforcements? No. It’s a band-aid and what we need is major surgery. I’m in favor of a much larger troop surge, somewhere around 50,000 for starters.

There is a measure of honor in your sense that a person with service experience deserves your respect and silence while they speak. Those are gracious words. Add to that, Joshua has the same 1st Amendment working for him as anyone else in this nation.

I think you’re statement was misunderstood to suggest that you automatically feel persuaded by someone such as Joshua Lansdale. Others understood that you remain in disagreement with his position in spite of the respect you offered him due to his service.

It’s all good.

Where is Wesley Clark?

Ouabam on January 30, 2007 at 6:31 PM

He’s conteplating another run…but will come back with:

“Ladies and gentlemen, I dind’t come close enough the last time to run again in 2008, but I will dedicate every ounce of intelligence I have left toward the fooling of the electorate to think that my party is the one for security and the fight on the WoT, when in fact we are the weasels; just look at me.”

csdeven on January 30, 2007 at 5:53 PM

Good for you. Not sure why the Viper is taking your position as something offensive. I didn’t serve in our military and I feel like it mutes me, too, sometimes.

In reality, we all get to speak our minds, even on military issues, whether we served or not. But when the left trots out some anti-war vet and thinks they can silence support for Bush on this, I say great. Let’s let only active duty military have a vote on it. Fair’s fair.

So, should the Republicans start running adds using veterans that support the surge? Somehow, I think that might be painted in a different light.

spmat on January 30, 2007 at 6:24 PM

No, then it would be called exploitation.

Bush 43 did not have the luxury of time nor the resource of 500,000 troops. Now these miserable, unhappy burn-outs have pulled out the old KGB playbook again and are throwing that word around to re-kindle their old, miserable, unhappy burn-out friends to hit the streets again and commit treason one more time. For the old times.

Support the troops in the essential struggle to defeat Islamofacism while it’s still a small enough problem to be able to defeat.

Where is Wesley Clark?

under a rock.

TugboatPhil on January 30, 2007 at 6:11 PM

Nicely put.