Next post
You know, I think liberals were right when they said Iraq is just another Vietnam. We’ve got liberals insulting our troops right and left, with politicians clamoring for defeat while crying “QUAGMIRE!” and simultaneously smearing our troops with this kind of garbage — just like in Vietnam.
Presidential hopeful Barack Obama was warned by a friendly voter Monday to avoid public spats with his Democratic rivals – but remarks he made later could add fuel to the criticism against him.
Maggie North of Claremont told Obama he risks becoming part of the usual political scene if he keeps being drawn into well-publicized disputes with rivals. He and chief rival Hillary Rodham Clinton have jabbed at each other over foreign policy, the war on terrorism and the use of nuclear weapons.
…
But during a later appearance before about 800 people in Nashua, Obama made a comment likely to further the spats he was warned about.
Answering a question on how he would refocus U.S. troops out of Iraq to better fight terrorism, he said, “We’ve to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure over there.”
Earlier this month, Obama drew criticism when he said he would send troops into Pakistan to hunt down terrorists even without local permission, if warranted.
John Kerry did it and won the Democratic nomination. Maybe Obama thinks it will work for him, too. After all, every Dem thinks crap like that of our troops, because they hate them. It’s just that most of them are seasoned politicians who are smart enough not to say it out loud (most).
However — that anyone would say something like that, let alone say it to gain political profit, about our troops in Iraq is despicable in my book. There is nothing lower than insulting, smearing, and debasing the sacrifice of the men and women over there risking their lives for Obama to act like a donkey’s ass. They protect his right to slander them, yet this is how he repays them?
There really is nothing lower.
Huck says: Well, the question is whether or not our troops are air-raiding villages and whether or not civilians are killed as a consequence. Is it “slander” to suggest that civilians get killed in the crossfires of war? And is it untrue that our troops participate in air-raiding villages in the hunt for Al Qaeda and other insurgents there?
Are you denying that U.S. troops haven’t been tried and convicted by U.S. military courts of killing Iraqi civilians? Are you denying that U.S. troops participate in air raids of supposed Al Qaeda hideouts in Iraq and that civilians sometimes die in such raids?
There is nothing slanderous about this. Perhaps you think this is an unfortunate, but necessary reality of war: air raids will happen and civilians will be killed. But that’s different than saying Obama slanders the troops by recognizing what happens. And for you to think that this doesn’t happen, especially when every honest reporter of the war, whether conservative or liberal, acknowledges that it does, is to have your head in the sand about war.
War is not pleasant business. It is brutal. And, even though we try to minimize it, civilians are gonna get killed.
Unless you can provide evidence that U.S. troops haven’t engaged in air raids in Iraq in which civilians have been killed, your “outrage” at Obama’s “slander” of our troops is nothing more than pure partisan puffery.
gredd says: Um, Obama made the accusation, burden of proof is on him.
Huck says: gredd – Are you kidding me? Obama didn’t make an accusation, he stated a fact. Where have you been? We read almost weekly about U.S.-led aerial and ground attacks on Al Qaeda/insurgent hideouts. Some would argue that it’s a critical part of the effort to win the war. And we also know that civilians, unfortunately, get killed in these raids. If you would, just answer me this one question: Do you deny that the U.S. engages in air raids in Iraq in which innocent civilians get killed?
gredd says: Huck, that’s not what he said!! He said we’re deliberately targeting civilians. That’s what he has to prove. He completely leaves out who we’re targeting so it gives one the impression we’re just flying over towns and dropping bombs. He did a stupid liberal thing of opening his mouth and talking far left. The left did it with Vietnam, and they’re doing it today with Iraq.
Huck says: gredd – You’re just flat out wrong. Here’s what he said again, as quoted by Cassy: “We’ve to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure over there.” He never said we’re deliberately targeting civilians. He said were air-raiding villages and killing civilians when we do so. And he said this in the context of not having enough troops to do more than air-raid villages when we get intelligence that there is an Al-Qaeda or an insurgent stronghold in such a village. That’s the “get the job done” part. So, it’s clear that he’s saying the way we go after the bad guys, air-raiding villages, which is a product of not having enough troops, results in the collateral casualties of innocent civilians. That’s quite clear, and any person who gives an honest reading of what Obama said would agree. But forget Obama. Just between me and you. Again, I ask you (and please answer me this time instead of deflecting), does this not happen? Do we not air-raid villages where there are suspected Al Qaeda and/or insurgent hideouts and are not civilians sometimes killed in the process? It’s a simple question.
If the answer is yes, then no one can rightly say that Obama is lying.
John says: Wow gredd… Huck smacked you around pretty good!
6 Comments