Victory!
313 RepliesJump to last post
"...the fact that HE welcomed..." "....that WE simply, in a POST..." "...GIVE them..."
For reasons that perhaps some psychologists should study
Dr Sanity http://drsanity.blogspot.com/
[quote=mikebutler222]
As always this repeat of the wack-a-mole debate is stale. Rather than continue the cycle, let me sum up. Anyone who wants the last word is welcome to it, and perhaps we can then end the repeated hijacking of a financial services professional’s bulletin board towards hyperventilating politician discussions.
For reasons that perhaps some psychologists should study, many of the critics of Bush’s decision of going into Iraq aren’t satisfied simply reviewing the facts and weighing in on the decisions made, they have to couch it all in “that’s what they SAID was the reason for going, but they wanted to do it from day one were just looking for a cover story and their REAL reason was…(fill in favorite conspiracy theory)”. This is what makes it hard to take them seriously.
That approach allows them to side-step all the uncomfortable details like;
the fact that the previous administration (Democrat at that) had made regime change in Iraq official US policy
that the previous administration (Democrat at that) had reluctantly used military force to get Saddam to live up to the inspections he had agreed to at the end of the Gulf War
that they had warned about Saddam’s desire to attain WMDs (again) and how he’d eventually use them if we allowed him to escape sanctions and inspections and how grave a danger he was to the US and the world at large
how most everyone from both parties that had access to the intelligence report came to the same conclusion that given Saddam’s refusal to allow full inspections his history with WMDs his links with terror organizations, that fact we welcomed active and retired terrorists (killers of Americans) that he we simply, in a post 9/11 couldn’t take the risk that he’d slip the noose, produce WMDs (if he wasn’t already) given them to terrorist pals (the enemy of my enemy and all that) and have them surface here in an attack.
None of the countries they mention in their “Oh yeah? Then why didn’t we invade (insert nation here)” arguments fit anywhere near the criteria that Saddam’s Iraq fit in the quinella of the threat to the US, the region and the world.
[/quote]
I'll give this mike: You are the master of the disingenuous backhanded insult. Other than that, you can spout on all you'd like twisting the words of those with whom you do not agree. At least I own up to my malapropic tendencies. For example, malapropic isn't a word. You, on the other hand see words that aren't there. I write the word inept, you see the word conspiracy. And you totally don't get sarcasm.
As colorful as our debates are, it's frustrating when the other side gets hung up on non points, deconstructs the written words, and then uses that out of context rewrite to twist what was written. However, you are good at it.
You've got to be the only person in the country who pats FEMA on the back and tells them "Job well done" Sounds like you are an ex government hack.
And, you didn't read the book. Stop embarrassing yourself.
"As always this repeat of the wack-a-mole debate is stale. Rather than continue the cycle, let me sum up. Anyone who wants the last word is welcome to it,"
What do you want to bet that he says something else on this thread?
Mr. A
http://drsanity.blogspot.com/
Yet another "Fact filled" blue underlined thingy!
The problem with the internet is that no matter how wackie your ideas are, you can find people that will agree with you and you will find even wackier wack jobs wacking away!
Mr. A
[quote=mranonymous2u]
http://drsanity.blogspot.com/
Yet another "Fact filled" blue underlined thingy!
The problem with the internet is that no matter how wackie your ideas are, you can find people that will agree with you and you will find even wackier wack jobs wacking away!
Mr. A
[/quote]
You mental midget, that was a link in response to MikeB asking if any psychiatrists have analyzed the left. If you hadn't deleted the relevant parts, that would be obvious, but then again that is a tactic of the LEFT..... deleting and twisting. And yes that is a pejorative LEFT.
What moron you are. Hope Santa brings you a new tinfoil hat for Christmas.
[quote=babbling looney]
For reasons that perhaps some psychologists should study
Dr Sanity http://drsanity.blogspot.com/
[/quote]
You are right again I left off SO much of the post and only included the part that fit my own uses.
You never fail to give me a crinkley mouth!
Mr. A
Here's another example of the media left bias trying to show how bad off our military is:
From the Hartford Courant:
Nothing was stranger for Mary Jane Fernandez than the events of last Christmas, which had her 24-year-old son, newly returned from the war in <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Iraq, downing sedatives, ranting about how rich people were allowed to sit in recliners in church, and summoning the Waterbury police to come arrest him.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
This Christmas may top that.
Despite being diagnosed with severe post-traumatic stress disorder and rated 70 percent disabled by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Damian Fernandez has been called back to duty and told to prepare for another deployment to Iraq.
Two weeks ago, Fernandez, who was discharged from active duty in the Army last year and was working to settle back into civilian life, abruptly received orders to report to Fort Benning, Ga., on Jan. 14.
When the FedEx letter from the Army arrived Nov. 28, he calmly told his mother and girlfriend, "I got my orders," staring hard at them with vacant eyes.
That night, he snapped. He told his girlfriend, Riella Darko, that he wanted to die and asked her to take him to the emergency room of St. Mary's Hospital, where he was placed on a suicide watch. He has since been transferred to a locked ward in the Northampton VA Medical Center in Massachusetts.
His callback orders have not yet been rescinded. Even if they are, his mother said, simply being told he must go back into combat has set back his recovery.
"I don't understand why the military would put him through this," Mary Jane Fernandez said. "He was just starting to come back to reality a little, and now he's lost again."
Fernandez is one of 8,262 soldiers who have left active duty but have been ordered back under a policy that allows the military to recall troops who have completed their service but have time remaining on their contracts. About 5,700 of those called up have already been mobilized, with Fernandez among about 2,500 ordered to report in the coming weeks.
The practice of recalling inactive soldiers involuntarily is itself controversial, with some members of Congress and veterans' advocates calling it a backdoor draft.
All soldiers have an eight-year military service obligation, but typically are released from duty after two to six years. The Army, strained by the war, announced in mid-2004 that it would begin tapping a pool of about 100,000 soldiers who had time left on their service obligations, to fill vacancies in Reserve and National Guard units.
The fact that some of those being summoned have been ruled disabled by the VA or the military, with service-connected PTSD and other medical problems, is raising alarm among veterans' advocates and families. In Fernandez's case, the 70 percent disability rating indicated the serious degree to which doctors had judged his mental state to be impaired.
Steve Robinson, director of government relations for Veterans of America, said he knew of a number of other war veterans with PTSD who had been called back to Iraq.
"If you have a war-related injury that you're being compensated for," he said, "to be sent back into a situation that might exacerbate the problem just doesn't make sense."
Mary Jane Fernandez said she already has notified the Army about Damian's chronic PTSD, and is stunned that he has not been excused. She said a friend of Damian's, who also has severe PTSD, has opted to go back to Iraq because "he misses killing people," the friend told her. A veterans' counselor familiar with the case confirmed that account.
Mary Jane said she cannot picture Damian, whose symptoms include paranoia and hallucinations, back in a war zone.
"I don't trust him taking out the garbage, let alone watching someone's back on the battlefield," she said.
Army and Defense Department officials acknowledged to The Courant earlier this year that they were redeploying soldiers with PTSD -- even though medical standards for enlistment in the armed forces disqualify recruits who suffer from PTSD. The practice of recycling troops with PTSD into war has drawn criticism from some combat- stress experts, who say that re-exposure to trauma increases the risk of serious psychiatric problems.
Last month, Assistant Secretary of Defense William Winkenwerder Jr. issued a new policy that steps up psychological screening of troops, after a Courant series detailing gaps in mental health care brought pressure from Congress for improvements. Among other things, the policy deems PTSD a "treatable" condition, but directs that troops with psychiatric disorders should be sent to war only if they are stable and "without significant symptoms" for at least three months prior to deployment.
"I used to have to track him down on his cell all the time," said Mary Jane, who shares a two-family house with her son. "Now, I never have to call him because I know where he is -- upstairs."
Damian had spent most of the last 18 months upstairs, playing video games or drinking himself to sleep, Mary Jane and Riella said. He attended community college classes for a few weeks, but abruptly quit after an incident in which he mistook a noise outside for a gunshot and flew into a panic because he could not find his gun, they said.
A simple "What do you want for dinner?" can ignite his temper.
"He throws things a lot. We have holes in just about every wall," Riella said.
Mary Jane, who is widowed, said she worries that the war has "broken" her only child. When he first came home from Iraq, his car stereo -- a prized possession -- was stolen. He was despondent for weeks, she said.
"He asked me, `These are the people I fought for?'" she recounted, choking up.
Although Damian has not spoken much about his experiences in Iraq, he told Mary Jane and Riella about a day a school bus exploded on a bridge, and children's body parts fell from the sky.
"He said he accidentally stepped on a kid's insides -- the liver or something," Riella said.
After Damian fell apart last Christmas, Mary Jane said she convinced him to go to the VA to get help. He was diagnosed with PTSD and placed on an antidepressant. This September, he was admitted to a three-week inpatient program at the Northampton VA. His discharge records say: "Suicidal ruminations resolved. Otherwise unchanged from admission."
The recall orders drove him back to the same facility.
Mary Jane and Riella said that while Damian had worried about being sent back to Iraq someday, he had begun to relax in recent months. That changed when the letter arrived.
"He feels guilty that if doesn't go back, he'll be deserting his buddies," Mary Jane said of her son, who received commendations for prior tours in Korea and Africa. "But if he does go back, he's afraid he won't be able to do his part.
"He's all torn up now."
Non-Assurances
Because the Army has no policy exempting soldiers with PTSD from returning to war, counselors at the New Haven Vet Center have been unable to offer Damian assurances he will be excused. Mary Jane said one counselor suggested that Damian's best bet might be to stay "locked up" in the hospital through January.
Still, Donna Hryb, team leader at the Hartford Vet Center, said she would be surprised if the Army deploys a soldier as severely impaired as Damian.
"It would be counterproductive for the unit and for him," she said.
Hilferty, the Army spokesman, acknowledged that redeploying soldiers with "severe" psychological problems could jeopardize other troops' safety. He noted that the Army is not calling back soldiers who have served in combat within the last 12 months, to allow them time between deployments. Hilferty also said officials are working to better monitor soldiers' "readiness."
And it's only going to get worse if they don't institute some sort of draft (as if there is more than one type).
Thanks for the article.
BTW, the Courant endorsed GWB both times.
Mr. A
And it's only going to get worse if they don't institute some sort of draft (as if there is more than one type).
Sure there is. They could also draft women as well as men. The could also draft older people to do support jobs and free up the younger draftees for the more strenuous and dangerous occupations.
By the way the guys and gals that I know who are in the military are adamantly opposed to a draft because they don't want to have to work and fight side by side with unwilling and undertrained draftees.
"Sure there is. They could also draft women as well as men. The could also draft older people to do support jobs and free up the younger draftees for the more strenuous and dangerous occupations."
Good points.
"By the way the guys and gals that I know who are in the military are adamantly opposed to a draft because they don't want to have to work and fight side by side with unwilling and undertrained draftees."
You know what they say, "... the Army you have, not the Army you want!"
Mr. A
[quote=csmelnix]
Here's another example of the media left bias trying to show how bad off our military is:
From the Hartford Courant:
Nothing was stranger for Mary Jane Fernandez than the events of last Christmas, which had her 24-year-old son, newly returned from the war in <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Iraq, downing sedatives, ranting about how rich people were allowed to sit in recliners in church, and summoning the Waterbury police to come arrest him.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
This Christmas may top that.
Despite being diagnosed with severe post-traumatic stress disorder and rated 70 percent disabled by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Damian Fernandez has been called back to duty and told to prepare for another deployment to Iraq.
Two weeks ago, Fernandez, who was discharged from active duty in the Army last year and was working to settle back into civilian life, abruptly received orders to report to Fort Benning, Ga., on Jan. 14.
When the FedEx letter from the Army arrived Nov. 28, he calmly told his mother and girlfriend, "I got my orders," staring hard at them with vacant eyes.
That night, he snapped. He told his girlfriend, Riella Darko, that he wanted to die and asked her to take him to the emergency room of St. Mary's Hospital, where he was placed on a suicide watch. He has since been transferred to a locked ward in the Northampton VA Medical Center in Massachusetts.
His callback orders have not yet been rescinded. Even if they are, his mother said, simply being told he must go back into combat has set back his recovery.
"I don't understand why the military would put him through this," Mary Jane Fernandez said. "He was just starting to come back to reality a little, and now he's lost again."
Fernandez is one of 8,262 soldiers who have left active duty but have been ordered back under a policy that allows the military to recall troops who have completed their service but have time remaining on their contracts. About 5,700 of those called up have already been mobilized, with Fernandez among about 2,500 ordered to report in the coming weeks.
The practice of recalling inactive soldiers involuntarily is itself controversial, with some members of Congress and veterans' advocates calling it a backdoor draft.
All soldiers have an eight-year military service obligation, but typically are released from duty after two to six years. The Army, strained by the war, announced in mid-2004 that it would begin tapping a pool of about 100,000 soldiers who had time left on their service obligations, to fill vacancies in Reserve and National Guard units.
The fact that some of those being summoned have been ruled disabled by the VA or the military, with service-connected PTSD and other medical problems, is raising alarm among veterans' advocates and families. In Fernandez's case, the 70 percent disability rating indicated the serious degree to which doctors had judged his mental state to be impaired.
Steve Robinson, director of government relations for Veterans of America, said he knew of a number of other war veterans with PTSD who had been called back to Iraq.
"If you have a war-related injury that you're being compensated for," he said, "to be sent back into a situation that might exacerbate the problem just doesn't make sense."
Mary Jane Fernandez said she already has notified the Army about Damian's chronic PTSD, and is stunned that he has not been excused. She said a friend of Damian's, who also has severe PTSD, has opted to go back to Iraq because "he misses killing people," the friend told her. A veterans' counselor familiar with the case confirmed that account.
Mary Jane said she cannot picture Damian, whose symptoms include paranoia and hallucinations, back in a war zone.
"I don't trust him taking out the garbage, let alone watching someone's back on the battlefield," she said.
Army and Defense Department officials acknowledged to The Courant earlier this year that they were redeploying soldiers with PTSD -- even though medical standards for enlistment in the armed forces disqualify recruits who suffer from PTSD. The practice of recycling troops with PTSD into war has drawn criticism from some combat- stress experts, who say that re-exposure to trauma increases the risk of serious psychiatric problems.
Last month, Assistant Secretary of Defense William Winkenwerder Jr. issued a new policy that steps up psychological screening of troops, after a Courant series detailing gaps in mental health care brought pressure from Congress for improvements. Among other things, the policy deems PTSD a "treatable" condition, but directs that troops with psychiatric disorders should be sent to war only if they are stable and "without significant symptoms" for at least three months prior to deployment.
"I used to have to track him down on his cell all the time," said Mary Jane, who shares a two-family house with her son. "Now, I never have to call him because I know where he is -- upstairs."
Damian had spent most of the last 18 months upstairs, playing video games or drinking himself to sleep, Mary Jane and Riella said. He attended community college classes for a few weeks, but abruptly quit after an incident in which he mistook a noise outside for a gunshot and flew into a panic because he could not find his gun, they said.
A simple "What do you want for dinner?" can ignite his temper.
"He throws things a lot. We have holes in just about every wall," Riella said.
Mary Jane, who is widowed, said she worries that the war has "broken" her only child. When he first came home from Iraq, his car stereo -- a prized possession -- was stolen. He was despondent for weeks, she said.
"He asked me, `These are the people I fought for?'" she recounted, choking up.
Although Damian has not spoken much about his experiences in Iraq, he told Mary Jane and Riella about a day a school bus exploded on a bridge, and children's body parts fell from the sky.
"He said he accidentally stepped on a kid's insides -- the liver or something," Riella said.
After Damian fell apart last Christmas, Mary Jane said she convinced him to go to the VA to get help. He was diagnosed with PTSD and placed on an antidepressant. This September, he was admitted to a three-week inpatient program at the Northampton VA. His discharge records say: "Suicidal ruminations resolved. Otherwise unchanged from admission."
The recall orders drove him back to the same facility.
Mary Jane and Riella said that while Damian had worried about being sent back to Iraq someday, he had begun to relax in recent months. That changed when the letter arrived.
"He feels guilty that if doesn't go back, he'll be deserting his buddies," Mary Jane said of her son, who received commendations for prior tours in Korea and Africa. "But if he does go back, he's afraid he won't be able to do his part.
"He's all torn up now."
Non-Assurances
Because the Army has no policy exempting soldiers with PTSD from returning to war, counselors at the New Haven Vet Center have been unable to offer Damian assurances he will be excused. Mary Jane said one counselor suggested that Damian's best bet might be to stay "locked up" in the hospital through January.
Still, Donna Hryb, team leader at the Hartford Vet Center, said she would be surprised if the Army deploys a soldier as severely impaired as Damian.
"It would be counterproductive for the unit and for him," she said.
Hilferty, the Army spokesman, acknowledged that redeploying soldiers with "severe" psychological problems could jeopardize other troops' safety. He noted that the Army is not calling back soldiers who have served in combat within the last 12 months, to allow them time between deployments. Hilferty also said officials are working to better monitor soldiers' "readiness."[/quote]
How is this an example of a biased left media? Or am I missing your sarcasm?
I have to assume that he is being sarcastic.
Not that there's anything wrong with that!
Mr. A
[quote=mranonymous2u]
“Sure there is. They could also draft women as well as men. The could also draft older people to do support jobs and free up the younger draftees for the more strenuous and dangerous occupations.”
Good points.
"By the way the guys and gals that I know who are in the military are adamantly opposed to a draft because they don't want to have to work and fight side by side with unwilling and undertrained draftees."
You know what they say, "... the Army you have, not the Army you want!"
Mr. A
[/quote]Even though that goes against traditional ideas of military service, it sounds like a good idea to me!
It might cause folks to really think about what foreign engagements are important and which are not. And...when we do take them on we will commit our fullest effort to winning.
That, IMHO, is why Iraq is a mess now. (Yes I do agree it's a mess, I don't agree with those who say we are losing and should pull out.) We clearly had the right troops and technology to take the country and depose Hussein. Where we've fallen short is in having sufficient personnel and the right strategies to help get the civil unrest under control and the new government on its feet.
[quote=joedabrkr] [quote=mranonymous2u]
"Sure there is. They could also draft women as well as men. The could also draft older people to do support jobs and free up the younger draftees for the more strenuous and dangerous occupations."
Good points.
"By the way the guys and gals that I know who are in the military are adamantly opposed to a draft because they don't want to have to work and fight side by side with unwilling and undertrained draftees."
You know what they say, "... the Army you have, not the Army you want!"
Mr. A
[/quote]
Even though that goes against traditional ideas of military service, it sounds like a good idea to me!
It might cause folks to really think about what foreign engagements are important and which are not. And...when we do take them on we will commit our fullest effort to winning.
That, IMHO, is why Iraq is a mess now. (Yes I do agree it's a mess, I don't agree with those who say we are losing and should pull out.) We clearly had the right troops and technology to take the country and depose Hussein. Where we've fallen short is in having sufficient personnel and the right strategies to help get the civil unrest under control and the new government on its feet.
[/quote]
Reason being: There was no plan for post Victiory Iraq.
We should take Clinton’s lead and just eliminate the military all together. With the UN in charge - who needs defence?
Just when the party was almost over, Apprentice brings in a new bag of potatoe chips!
Apprentice, the military elimination plan was laid out by none other than Dick Cheney. He figured that smart bombs could replace stupid infantry men (their idea, not mine)!
What cheesed the miltary off at Clinton was:
1. He wasn't Ronald Reagan.
2. He wanted the military to stop being juvenile about gays.
3. He was handed Somalia (complete with news crews PLACED on the beach as the soldiers arrived) while he was President Elect, and it turned out that people really do die in wars, things really do go wrong when there are bullets flying around the place. Why that became Clinton's fault, I'm not entirely clear on.
4. The military has a high percentage of knuckleheads in it! Face it! The idea of military training is to overcome the "common sense" reaction and instill a borg mentality in it's place.
5. (sim to above) Put on top of this the fact that the military had long been the "employer of last resort" and Clinton came on board with Dick Cheney's plan in place to excize those people who were 5 to 19 years into a 20 year hitch and to make it much harder to get INTO the military. Cheney did the deed and Clinton took the heat.
Mr. A
Sorry - I should have kept my thoughts to myself. This has been a long and exhausting string on the message board.
Merry Christmas - and I wish you a successful 2007!!!!!