Duhs, a Ditto, a Doy, and a "DOH!"
Military fears critics will hurt morale
By Rowan Scarborough
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
November 21, 2005
Pentagon officials say they are increasingly worried that Washington's political fight over the Iraq war will dampen what has been high morale among troops fighting a tenacious and deadly enemy.
note by Republicus: No, really? Duh.
Commanders are telling Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld that ground troops do not understand the generally negative press that their missions receive, despite what they consider significant achievements in rebuilding Iraq and instilling democracy.
note by Republicus: Duh. The boots on the ground there hear their work being described as a "debacle" and they're thinking, "What the hell are they talking about?"
The commanders also worry about the public's declining support for the mission and what may be a growing movement inside the Democratic Party to advocate troop withdrawal from Iraq.
note by Republicus: Duh.
"They say morale is very high," said a senior Pentagon official of reports filed by commanders with Washington. "But they relate comments from troops asking, 'What the heck is going on back here' and why America isn't seeing the progress they are making or appreciating the mission the way those on the ground there do. My take is that they are wondering if America is still behind them."
note by Republicus: Duh.
Mr. Rumsfeld appeared on several Sunday talk shows yesterday to express concern about the effects of the political discussion on U.S. forces.
"We also have to understand that our words have effects," he said on "Fox News Sunday." "Put yourself in the shoes of a soldier who thinks that we're going to pull out precipitously or immediately, as some people have proposed. Obviously, they have to wonder whether what they're doing makes sense if that's the idea, if that's the debate."
He repeated similar words on other shows, saying on CBS' "Face the Nation" that war critics should "think about the troops that are there and how it sounds to them."
He also exhorted the audience on ABC's "This Week" to "put yourself in the shoes of the American soldiers."
But Lawrence Di Rita, spokesman for Mr. Rumsfeld, said commanders are not telling the Pentagon that morale is sinking, although they have long-standing concerns about the press.
"The commanders often have expressed their incredulity at the difference between the progress they are seeing in Iraq and the manner in which that progress is obscured, in Washington, by the disproportionate focus on the challenges, in lieu of the many reasons to feel proud and satisfied at all that is happening," he said.
note by Republicus: Ditto.
The political fight over Iraq has heated up in recent weeks as the White House says Democrats who supported ousting dictator Saddam Hussein essentially saw the same intelligence relied on by President Clinton, when he ordered bombing of Iraq in 1998, and by Mr. Bush. No major stocks of banned weapons of mass destruction (WMD) have been found since the 2003 invasion.
But Democrats are not only questioning the war because of the failure to find banned weapons.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, has labeled the war a "grotesque mistake."
note by Republicus: DOY! Here is what Pelosi said in the run-up to the war: "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Last week, a respected Democratic voice on national security, Rep. John P. Murtha of Pennsylvania, called for withdrawal from Iraq because he thinks the war is not winnable. The U.S. death toll exceeds 2,000 and continues to rise as Saddam loyalists and al Qaeda in Iraq terrorists execute attacks and bombings.
The WMD charges, the call for withdrawal and the nervousness among Republicans are all being monitored by the almost 160,000 American troops in Iraq.
"They are not oblivious to this stuff nor are they isolated," said the senior Pentagon official, who asked not to be named.
note by Republicus: Duh. And neither are the "insurgents."
Still, officers in Iraq contend that troop morale is good to excellent.
"I have not heard of any morale problems related to the political debates," said Lt. Col. Steven Boylan, a spokesman in Baghdad.
Lt. Col. David Lapan, a Marine spokesman in the violence-wracked Anbar province, said, "We haven't conducted any surveys so obviously we can't speak to the morale of every Marine, sailor and soldier out here. However, based on comments from commanders and leaders who interact daily with troops at all levels, I'd say morale remains pretty high."
On the other hand:
Retired Army Col. Douglas Macgregor, an author of books on military transformation, said he is hearing something different from returning troops.
"Soldiers see no viable mission, no plan and no strategy," Col. Macgregor said. "No one trusts any of the Arabs in the Iraqi army, only the Kurds. Soldiers want to survive to go home and are fighting to keep each other alive. There is no Iraq. There is Kurdistan, which the soldiers all love. Then, there is the Sunni Arab center and the Shi'ite south that most think is an autonomous province of Iran."
note by Republicus: "DOH!"
Audrey Hudson contributed to this report.
By Rowan Scarborough
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
November 21, 2005
Pentagon officials say they are increasingly worried that Washington's political fight over the Iraq war will dampen what has been high morale among troops fighting a tenacious and deadly enemy.
note by Republicus: No, really? Duh.
Commanders are telling Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld that ground troops do not understand the generally negative press that their missions receive, despite what they consider significant achievements in rebuilding Iraq and instilling democracy.
note by Republicus: Duh. The boots on the ground there hear their work being described as a "debacle" and they're thinking, "What the hell are they talking about?"
The commanders also worry about the public's declining support for the mission and what may be a growing movement inside the Democratic Party to advocate troop withdrawal from Iraq.
note by Republicus: Duh.
"They say morale is very high," said a senior Pentagon official of reports filed by commanders with Washington. "But they relate comments from troops asking, 'What the heck is going on back here' and why America isn't seeing the progress they are making or appreciating the mission the way those on the ground there do. My take is that they are wondering if America is still behind them."
note by Republicus: Duh.
Mr. Rumsfeld appeared on several Sunday talk shows yesterday to express concern about the effects of the political discussion on U.S. forces.
"We also have to understand that our words have effects," he said on "Fox News Sunday." "Put yourself in the shoes of a soldier who thinks that we're going to pull out precipitously or immediately, as some people have proposed. Obviously, they have to wonder whether what they're doing makes sense if that's the idea, if that's the debate."
He repeated similar words on other shows, saying on CBS' "Face the Nation" that war critics should "think about the troops that are there and how it sounds to them."
He also exhorted the audience on ABC's "This Week" to "put yourself in the shoes of the American soldiers."
But Lawrence Di Rita, spokesman for Mr. Rumsfeld, said commanders are not telling the Pentagon that morale is sinking, although they have long-standing concerns about the press.
"The commanders often have expressed their incredulity at the difference between the progress they are seeing in Iraq and the manner in which that progress is obscured, in Washington, by the disproportionate focus on the challenges, in lieu of the many reasons to feel proud and satisfied at all that is happening," he said.
note by Republicus: Ditto.
The political fight over Iraq has heated up in recent weeks as the White House says Democrats who supported ousting dictator Saddam Hussein essentially saw the same intelligence relied on by President Clinton, when he ordered bombing of Iraq in 1998, and by Mr. Bush. No major stocks of banned weapons of mass destruction (WMD) have been found since the 2003 invasion.
But Democrats are not only questioning the war because of the failure to find banned weapons.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, has labeled the war a "grotesque mistake."
note by Republicus: DOY! Here is what Pelosi said in the run-up to the war: "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Last week, a respected Democratic voice on national security, Rep. John P. Murtha of Pennsylvania, called for withdrawal from Iraq because he thinks the war is not winnable. The U.S. death toll exceeds 2,000 and continues to rise as Saddam loyalists and al Qaeda in Iraq terrorists execute attacks and bombings.
The WMD charges, the call for withdrawal and the nervousness among Republicans are all being monitored by the almost 160,000 American troops in Iraq.
"They are not oblivious to this stuff nor are they isolated," said the senior Pentagon official, who asked not to be named.
note by Republicus: Duh. And neither are the "insurgents."
Still, officers in Iraq contend that troop morale is good to excellent.
"I have not heard of any morale problems related to the political debates," said Lt. Col. Steven Boylan, a spokesman in Baghdad.
Lt. Col. David Lapan, a Marine spokesman in the violence-wracked Anbar province, said, "We haven't conducted any surveys so obviously we can't speak to the morale of every Marine, sailor and soldier out here. However, based on comments from commanders and leaders who interact daily with troops at all levels, I'd say morale remains pretty high."
On the other hand:
Retired Army Col. Douglas Macgregor, an author of books on military transformation, said he is hearing something different from returning troops.
"Soldiers see no viable mission, no plan and no strategy," Col. Macgregor said. "No one trusts any of the Arabs in the Iraqi army, only the Kurds. Soldiers want to survive to go home and are fighting to keep each other alive. There is no Iraq. There is Kurdistan, which the soldiers all love. Then, there is the Sunni Arab center and the Shi'ite south that most think is an autonomous province of Iran."
note by Republicus: "DOH!"
Audrey Hudson contributed to this report.
posted by John | 6:22 AM
4 Comments:
Oh, gawd. Another black knight, back for another beating. Don't tell me, "just a flesh wound" from the last battle, huh? I already de-limbed you. What are you going to do, bite me? Okay. Hide the children. "I love the smell of napalm in the morning..."
"You still don't get it do you John. DUH."
That's original.
"The Pres, Vice Pres, Sec of State, Sec of Def, NSA lied to us..."
Of which administration? One more time:
President Bill Clinton: One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.
"That IS our bottom line." What, "IS?" Oh, I get. Yeah, nice try.
President Bill Clinton: The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."
"If we fail to respond today."
"Imminent threat," anyone?
President Bill Clinton: Their (i.e. the United States military in Operation Desert Fox) mission is (IS) to attack Iraq's NUCLEAR, CHEMICAL, and BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS PROGRAMS and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors. Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors OR THE WORLD with NUCLEAR ARMS, POISON GAS, or BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS...I HAVE NO DOUBT today that, left unchecked, Saddam Hussein WILL use these terrible weapons (i.e. WMD) again...The best way to end that threat once and for all IS with a NEW IRAQI GOVERNMENT.
Vice President and 2000 presidential aspirant Al Gore: Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has PROVEN IMPOSSIBLE TO DETER and we should assume that it WILL CONTINUE FOR AS LONG AS SADDAM IS IN POWER.
Clinton National Security Adviser Sandy Berger: (Saddam Hussein) WILL rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, and SOME DAY, SOME WAY, I AM CERTAIN HE WILL use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983.
"...to take us into a completely unnecessary war."
Michigan Senator Carl Levin: The war against terrorism will not be finished AS LONG AS SADDAM IS IN POWER.
"...No wmd..."
Massachusetts Senator Edward M. Kennedy: We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein IS SEEKING AND DEVELOPING (W)EAPONS OF (M)ASS (D)ESTRUCTION.
"...no threat to U.S."
*North Carolina Senator and 2004 vice-presidential aspirant John Edwards: I think Iraq is the most serious and IMMINENT THREAT to our country.
"DUH, only idiots think there was a reason a purpose and a noble cause fighting in Iraq."
Massachusetts Senator and 2004 presidential aspirant John Kerry: ALL U.S. intelligence experts agree that Iraq is seeking nuclear weapons.
Do you often vote for "idiots" to lead this country, Jeff? I don't.
West Virginia Senator John D. Rockefeller IV (WVA): There IS UNMISTAKABLE EVIDENCE that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop NUCLEAR WEAPONS.
Nevada Senator Harry Reid: Saddam Hussein, in effect, has thumbed his nose at the world community. And I THINK THE PRESIDENT IS APPROACHING THIS IN THE RIGHT FASHION.
California Senator Dianne Feinstein: If one believes Iraq is a real threat, AND I DO, and if the United Nations fails to act, then THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE IS MILITARY ACTION LED BY THE UNITED STATES.
"- DUH."
Yup. DUH.
"The soldiers don't hear shit about whats happening here..."
from post: Commanders are telling Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld that ground troops do not understand the generally negative press that their missions receive, despite what they consider significant achievements in rebuilding Iraq and instilling democracy.
They say morale is very high," said a senior Pentagon official of reports filed by commanders with Washington. "But they relate comments from troops asking, 'What the heck is going on back here' and why America isn't seeing the progress they are making or appreciating the mission the way those on the ground there do. My take is that they are wondering if America is still behind them."
The WMD charges, the call for withdrawal and the nervousness among Republicans are all being monitored by the almost 160,000 American troops in Iraq.
'They are not oblivious to this stuff nor are they isolated," said the senior Pentagon official, who asked not to be named.'"
So the Pentagon officials AND the field commanders are freakin' lying, right Jeff?
"Your ignorance of reality is just stunning- DOH. This never was about lack of support for the troops, thats a fucking cop out."
You can't disengage "support" for the troops from the success of their mission. That's being weasly.
"It is and always will be about the truth, and the lack of it told by this admin. Wake the fuck up- DUH."
Okay. Tell me the truth:
1) Do you believe that the United States of America should be subservient to UN edicts?
I don't want an essay, just a simple yes or no. (he does)
2) Do you believe that taxes are too low? Yes or no. (he does)
3) Do you think Bush "stole" the election of 2000? Yes or no (he does)
4) Do you think the Religious Right is truly "dangerous" enough to be equated with the Taliban? Yes or no (he does)
5) Is that aluminum-foil hat on too tight? ("Abso-LOOLY, Adrian, yo.")
Al Qaeda has been decimated. Bin Laden is--and has been-- bloodhounded by every major intelligence agency in the world and is probably hiding in a cave a la Saddam in his spider-hole--if not dead or playing Sony Playstation in some relative's palace basement in Saudi Arabia and watching Foxnews on Satellite.
But yes, I would think there are plots of terrorist mischief galore out there, with or without Bin Laden's guidance.
Everyone is surprised--the administration no less--that we havent been hit again.
And I'm at Ground Zero.
What is so funny and sad at the same time John is that you actually think you are having and winning an argument here. There is nothing to argue about. Everyone with a working brain knows the truth. Only gullible egomaniacs like yourself and Cheney/Bush think you are still fooling(winning) people. It's over man, you argue with no one but yourself now, and claim to win, or "delimb". Yes you are clearly missing some appendage John, but I don't think it's a limb..
By now everyone knows that all of the Bush speechwriters use Newspeak liberally. This is the fine art of making white appear to be black, war to be peace, incompetence appear to be clever leadership, torture to be simple college pranks, corruption appear to be bookkeeping mistakes, with death and destruction appearing to be joyous preparation for a wonderful eternal world of the future.
Everyone knows that a loyal sycophant of Bush, helped to make him President by the clever use of innuendo, slander, misdirection, deceit and outright lies.
And everyone knows, but no Republican will admit, that this practice continues on a daily basis with the Bush people. Swiftboating, outing, leaks, denials, misinformation, fake journalists, hack media, self-promotion advertising, carefully staged photo-ops, swift and harsh punishment to critics, demotions and discharges for whistle-blowers, praise and medals for concealers of wrong-doing, appointing incompetent people to high positions, continually selling fear, and interminable speeches are the ingredients of the Bush administration to sucker gullible Americans into believing that he will make everything better, safer, easier and healthier.
Everyone knows, but few Republicans admit, that the choice of Bush appointees reflects his egomaniacal views. Who but Bush would have given Ashcroft control of civil rights? Who but Bush would have even thought of Mr. Bolton as a "diplomat" and appoint him to an institution that he had publicly stated should disappear.
Who but Bush would have given sanguinary Donald Rumsfeld complete control over the lives (and deaths) of millions of Iraqis? Who but Bush would have put a rogue-like personality like Wolfowitz in charge of vast sums of money?
Who but Bush would let a fast-talking scam-artist like Karl Rove figure out his world strategy? And, who but Bush, when Rove was under scrutiny for outing a CIA agent and should have been fired, would have given him charge of the reconstruction of New Orleans? Talk about putting a fox in charge of the hen-house!!
Or, who but Bush would have entrusted the lives of millions of Americans to the incompetent mismanagement of a crony who knew only how to manage show horses?
And, who but Bush would have allowed Millennium Corporation to escape unscathed and unpunished from corruption in Iraq but gave them more contracts, without bidding, for "reconstruction" in the Gulf Coast?
Who but Bush would nominate his secretary for the highest court of our land, in order to resolve sticky constitutional issues. His secretary never did any trial work or constitutional reflection, but whose prime qualifications were that she was a good Christian?
Why not pardon Karl Rove and immediately appoint him to the Supreme Court the next time Congress is out on vacation? Americans are so accustomed to his outrageous nominations and his Republican Senators are so willing to go along with anything he proposes that he probably could get away with it.
Does he want to see how far Bush's outrageous choices can go before someone starts civil rebellion? When he imposes his religious beliefs on the nation is he trying to start a civil war? When he creates the largest deficit in history saying it is great financial strategy, does he think all Americans are stupid?
When Bush is spending billions of American tax dollars weekly in a foreign country to "reconstruct it", especially after he had previously declared that such reconstruction was foolish, is he being stupid or egomaniacal?
When he flouts the law by holding citizens incommunicado indefinitely, at whim, will no lawman arrest him? When he kidnaps people and sends them to secret jails, without any records, to be tortured, will no one step forward and lock him up? When he creates secret jail in foreign countries for the purpose of torturing people, will no one in his party, except McCain, denounce him in harsh tones?
Today he shows his contradictory nature. He will "pardon" a turkey, showing his great compassion, while holding the record for the most prison executions of any governor. He showed his great compassion for Terri Schiavo and his great respect for life while at the same time sending over 2,000 of our soldiers to die to uphold his lies about reasons for being in Iraq.
He showed his competence and care by strumming a guitar while enjoying an extended vacation and getting on with his life while people were drowning from broken levees that he neglected to look at.
His antipathy for poor people has been noticed frequently, and his high regard for the welfare of rich people has also been noticed, but yet there are people who regard this as trivial and continue to give him their approval.
His friendship with corrupt corporate executives, letting Ken Lay walk about for years without a word of disapproval, was trumped by his zeal to jail the dangerous felon Martha Stewart and show the world that he was "tough on crime."
Speaking of Bush speeches, how many people have noticed that they are beginning to be carbon copies. Whole sentences and phrases are repeated, evidently because Karl Rove thinks they are effective or because Bush has run out of ideas.
When a politician gets so desperate to win approval that he begins to copy himself it is time to call for a new politician. Or perhaps some gullible people want hear the same refrain repeated in every speech as it reassures them that White Supremacist Fundamentalism and Crony Capitalism are doing very well.
They want Bush to reassure them that the deaths of 2,100 of our "brave boys" were "worth it" as he continually asserts. Bush would think losing 3,000 or 6,000 or 60,000 of our "brave boys" was worth for getting the oil of Iraq for Millennium, for building permanent huge military bases, and for constructing a huge embassy from which spies, agents and "diplomats" will insult oil-rich countries until they stimulate a good pretext for some neocon to invade.
They want Bush to tell them, daily, that the war in Iraq is going along smoothly and that he has some sort of plan. They disregard the fact that he has never announced any entrance plan, given any "moral" reasons to declare war, or had no exit strategy.
Bush followers still believe there were weapons of mass destruction with an imminent threat to the U.S. They refuse to believe that a President can lie to the entire nation. They buy his reason for invading Iraq, which is that God told him to do it, and that Saddam was EVIL. But as long as he is killing Muslims that seems to be okay with Bush fundamentalist supporters.
How long does it take even gullible people to realize that staying on a failed course is not logical determination but pig-headed egomania? How many more people must die before some Senator or Judge takes Bush by the scruff of his neck and throws him out of power?
Many innocent Muslims have died. They were devout, attended Mosques and prayers as prescribed by their faith, read their sacred book, listened to sermons and spent the rest of their lives working to support their families. They did absolutely nothing to deserve murder. 3,000 Americans died but the Iraqis had nothing to do with it. Yet ten times the amount of dead Iraqis does not seem to compensate Bush for 9/11, the luckiest disaster that ever befell an egomaniacal president.
He wants more dead to boost his "legacy" as a mighty warrior, as a courageous hero, as a great flag-waving cross-holding patriot above all others.
There is no praise sufficient to fully satisfy Bush, unless he can get some usually addressed to his God. All Hail, the Messiah and Emperor.
"You are too far gone for rational thought anymore, I'm so sorry thats happend to you." Jeff
Projection.
Just be thankful that I've got another turkey to carve up today.
Post a Comment
<< Home