Unease Spreading Among Active Soldiers
Despite the almost mystifying absence of an anti-war movement, there is mounting evidence of a deep unease among soldiers involved in the Iraq war. Soldiers know that there is double-talk coming from Washington and less afraid of saying so in public, as last weekÕs Rumsfeld confrontation in Kuwait showed. "More and more we are hearing from military families that their sons or daughters are coming home on leave and saying, `Mom, I don't know what I'm doing over there.' The soldiers on the front lines there understand U.S. policy is not working," Erik Leaver of the Institute for Policy Studies tells the Toronto Star.

The real impact of this war on young soldiers is not being reflected in the mainstream media. The National Coalition for Homeless Veterans reported last week that Iraqi war veterans are beginning to show up at shelters in California, raising fears of a repeat of the generation of homeless Vietnam vets. The New England Journal of Medicine last week showed medical advances have saved the lives of many soldiers in Iraq who would have died in previous wars. However, many of the 10,300 soldiers wounded so far are attempting to reintegrate into their country with much more horrific and debilitating injuries than veterans of any other previous war.

your a joke echo, keep your crap to yourself and get off on it in your own mind

That's precisely why they haven't released the results of the military vote. In 2000 Bush took that voting bloc handily and in 2004 ... well ... let's not talk about it and maybe america will just forget.

ROTF

Dop

Originally posted by Travh20
your a joke echo, keep your crap to yourself and get off on it in your own mind

Are you insinuating that this information is false?

I am insinuating the same thing I always do regarding this topic. Its a matter of precedence. echo and dop want us to believe all these things they say are unprecedented in the history of war. ALL soldiers feel "unease", all want better equipment, all get told they are going home only to be told to stay. the way the libs and the media make this all out to be something new is an embarassment, its as if they think we are idiots with no experience or grasp of military history. Its a bunch of left wing anti war propaganda and nothing more. All troops feel unease, even troops that believe in the war. all troops feel screwed over when the date they are supposed to leave comes and goes.

And this is perfectly acceptable, trav?

Trav

Why do you take the position that every opinion that differs from yours is coming from a liberal or left wing?

That's nonsensical ... the world is much more complicated than left-right ... there are tons of positions that lie between those 2 extremes.

Dop

bliblob, its not acceptable, I dont like the troops to feel unesy any more then they do, but the fact is unease is a common feeling among all troops in every war since the beginning of time. I am sure the men who stormed entrenched german machine guns on onmaha beach felt a bit uneasy when they learned of their assignment too.

Dop, I know there are many different positions, but that isnt the case here, this is an echo post, there is nothing but left wing bilge as far as the eye can see.

I remember the feeling of "Why am I here."
I was uneasy, NO.. I was scared a lot of times.
I became battle weary.

But, most of all, I remember laying my life on the line day after day and seeing news articles of panti-waist anti-war activists with so much to say about the bad war. I felt terribly alone sometimes fighting for what seemed like unapreciative people.
Then I remembered my family and friends back home. This gave me strength to go on. Go on for the people that were worth fighting and dieing for.

People not in the position have no idea what power are in words of encouragement to a fighting soldier. To wade in death and destruction and see your friends fall to the wayside for what people call things like the "Wrong" war when you can do nothing except try to stay alive another day is a bad feeling. This can cause uneasyness and worse.

Be careful what you say while our soldiers are in harms way!

Hell, no one in their right mind can call any war "the right war."

Those of us who think this is the "wrong war" are not judging the soldiers.

We are judging the decision to go to war and sacrifice these people.

Those who don't agree with this war think the soldiers should be somewhere safe. The reason we disagree is because we don't want people to die needlessly.

If the "right wing" believes in this war, they surely can't disagree with wanting these people to be safe. This discussion is not about the soldiers' worth. Both sides value our fighting men and women highly.

We have only one choice left if we want to end this thing in Iraq ...
the nuclear option. We are out of all other options. Otherwise, the following snippet is what we are up against.

The karma ball is in the neocon's court.

snip<------------ cut here ------------->snip

In helping the Iraqi people does not mean dealing for the Americans for a few contracts here and there. You must continue to isolate their strategy.

This conflict is no longer considered a localized war. Nor can the world remain hostage to the never-ending and regenerated fear that the American people suffer from in general.

We will pin them here in Iraq to drain their resources, manpower, and their will to fight. We will make them spend as much as they steal, if not more.

We will disrupt, then halt the flow of our stolen oil, thus, rendering their plans useless.

www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7468.htm

Dop

thanks for the enemy propaganda dop. you do a good job, I am sure they all really appreciate it.

Democracy at gunpoint. You will be free even if we have to kill off half of you to give the other half freedom.

There ya go ... if you disagree with trav you're the enemy.

Dop

no dop, when you post strategys of the enemy you are the enemy. good lord has this whole world gone insane? now I am supposed to honor and respect straight up treason as some sort of noble crusade? ya right. I call em as I see em. Dop and echo are traitors, plain and simple. they do not want us to win and will even activly help the enemy win by sabatoging our recruitng efforts or by posting their propaganda on the inrternet. your true american patriots guys, keep up the good work. I am sure George Washington would be proud.

One mans truth is anothers propaganda.

Just because you believe everything the government tells you doesn't meen it is true.

Intellegent people think for themselves and want ALL the facts before making a decision. Not just the facts that the government tells them.

the fact you assume and imply I believe everything the government tells me shows how wrong you are. does your propaganda machine ever stop running?

Originally posted by Travh20
no dop, when you post strategys of the enemy you are the enemy. good lord has this whole world gone insane? now I am supposed to honor and respect straight up treason as some sort of noble crusade? ya right. I call em as I see em. Dop and echo are traitors, plain and simple. they do not want us to win and will even activly help the enemy win by sabatoging our recruitng efforts or by posting their propaganda on the inrternet. your true american patriots guys, keep up the good work. I am sure George Washington would be proud.

And that's why I nominate you for "Dumbass of the year!"

dumbass of the year? hell, you already won the dumbass lifetime achievment award CX.

Originally posted by Travh20
dumbass of the year? hell, you already won the dumbass lifetime achievment award CX.

Hell, i'd take it for all the good things i did in life, all at the age of 16! I'd make reference to the dumbass in the title as well, for shits and giggles. I'd take it because it would be funny, because im a funny kind of guy who doesn't take everything said about him or his beliefs personal, unlike some people on this board. Your quote before the one highlighted in the msg above proved you were dumbass material, Trav.

QUOTE](Made By Trav20) no dop, when you post strategys of the enemy you are the enemy.[/QUOTE]

No that means he was smart enough to learn how the "enemy" plans its stragedies (can't spell that either!). Doesn't make him a traitor whereas:

no dop, when you post strategys of the enemy you are the enemy. good lord has this whole world gone insane? now I am supposed to honor and respect straight up treason as some sort of noble crusade? ya right. I call em as I see em. Dop and echo are traitors, plain and simple. they do not want us to win and will even activly help the enemy win by sabatoging our recruitng efforts or by posting their propaganda on the inrternet. your true american patriots guys, keep up the good work. I am sure George Washington would be proud.

Makes you a dumbass, Trav.

obviously you dont know dop very well. he is not posting that to show the US commanders some secret enemy stratagy he uncovered, he is posting it to undermine the war effort because in his mind it is wrong. Plain and simple.

Originally posted by Travh20
obviously you dont know dop very well. he is not posting that to show the US commanders some secret enemy stratagy he uncovered, he is posting it to undermine the war effort because in his mind it is wrong. Plain and simple.

Thats not true. No one person would willingly turn their back on their country, unless they stole top secret info on their country and handed it over to it's enemy, or don't agree with the barbarian in power as of now, because of his many illegal actions and countless violations of international law.

your right, anything goes as long as hatred and oppostiotion to Bush is the motivation. It doesnt matter if it helps the enemy, only that Bush is an A- hole.

Originally posted by Travh20
your right, anything goes as long as hatred and oppostiotion to Bush is the motivation. It doesnt matter if it helps the enemy, only that Bush is an A- hole.

Not quite. The person must have done many illegal things and murdered many innocent civilians. However, according to your logic, anyone who doesn't agree with the gov't is a traitor. So are you sayting that the many people who didn't agree with Hitler and tried to leave during WW2 were "traitors"? People want a leader they can trust, not someone who have conducted illegal criminal offences and someone who has killed many innocents in a war that CANNOT be won (war on terror), sort of like that war on drugs you guys had.

Originally posted by CX returns
Not quite. The person must have done many illegal things and murdered many innocent civilians. However, according to your logic, anyone who doesn't agree with the gov't is a traitor. So are you sayting that the many people who didn't agree with Hitler and tried to leave during WW2 were "traitors"? People want a leader they can trust, not someone who have conducted illegal criminal offences and someone who has killed many innocents in a war that CANNOT be won (war on terror), sort of like that war on drugs you guys had.




Wow, I never thought about it like that before. Do you think if those people in WW2 were considered "traitors", they would have been killed?

When you think about it, I guess other gov. parties(the ones that are'nt in power) are traitors too because that don't agree with the current government. If they did, then we would only have one party and wouldn't need elections because there would be only one party leader to the one party.

Just something to think about eh?

Here's one to think about. When President Clinton was in power, and many people questioned his policies, did that make them traitors? Was Ken Starr a traitor? How about the Congress that impeached him, even though they failed to convict?
One more to think about, have we got a traitor in the cabinet? Tommy Thompson recently suggested that he was surprised that terrorists have not attacked us through our food imports. He was suggesting a possible strategy for terrorists. What about the President who appointed him? Is he a traitor also?

The troops should be a little nervous considering they are starting to look like a bunch of maniacs -- notwithstanding all of them not participating in the murder, torture and rape.

Here's a pic of Cuba's new billboards that are going up ... isn't this just wonderful.

ya, thats great. castro I am sure has never done anything so vile. what exactly is your fucking problem dop? commies and terrorists are right, a guy with an (R) next ot his name is your mortal enemy. you need to wake the hell up

It's obvious you're not a student of military history trav.

Dop

whatever you say dop

Originally posted by Echo2
there is mounting evidence of a deep unease among soldiers involved in the Iraq war. Soldiers know that there is double-talk coming from Washington and less afraid of saying so in public, as last week�s Rumsfeld confrontation in Kuwait showed. "More and more we are hearing from military families that their sons or daughters are coming home on leave and saying, `Mom, I don't know what I'm doing over there.'

It seems that the troops are beginning to dimly [I use the term 'dimly' because so many of them are staunch supporters of the extreme RightWing political faction in this country] perceive that the so called "war" against Iraq is utterly meaningless.

At this point, the troops on the ground in Iraq cannot help but be sickeningly aware that Iraq posed zero threat to the US, because Iraq possessed no weapons capable of causing any harm to the US.

Given that fact, maybe Bush and Cheney's deep connections to the Oil industry is finally beginning to dawn on the men fighting the war......maybe they are finally beginning to recognize that their heads have been placed on the block for the sake of massive profits for the owners of the Big Oil and Big Defense industries who stand to profit untold BILLIONS from the 'war'.......

basically Trav's logic is simple

- Troop morale and well being is irrelevant because it has always been in the dumps.
- Any form of free debate over a war in progress hurts the troops
- Any form of free debate over a war in progress means you are colluding with the enemy
- The government is always right no matter what
- Never question anything
- Anybody who questions is helping the enemy

Trav - shame that communist Russia is gone - you would have been a rising star in the soviet way of doing things. But - heck, you could always try moving to North Korea - you are a perfect fit for exactly what they look for in somebody, beyond the lack of creature comforts - the state run system would seem like home for you.

Finally -- the majority of americans say the invasion of Iraq was wrong and no longer support it.

Give it a little more time and a few more body bags at Dover AFB and another 87 billion sent to Iraq and the threat of the draft and I fully suspect the number of people that support the Iraq war to be verrrrrrrrrrry small ... probably confined to a group made up of only Likud's, evangelicals, Seans, Anns, Rushes and all things FOX.

ROTFLMAO

Welcome back america.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?node=admin/registration/register&destination=register&nextstep=gather&application=reg30-politics&applicationURL=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14266-2004Dec20.html

login: bugoff54@hotmail.com
password: bugoff

Dop

hey, people can not like the war all they want.....but when they go out of their way to rally support, media, and money towards the anti-war effort....THATS what irks me, and im sure it irks trav too. Dont you see the conflict of interest there?....There is some things you just don't do(should't say that to liberals)

Here's my analogy.....

Football game: Team B vs. Team A

Team A is TIED for the worst record in the league, and if they lose the next few games they would get the first round draft pick next year.

I would think Liberals would WANT the team to lose so they could get a draft pick the next year....however that's just unsportsmanlike and wrong to me.

The thing is this....you can think you are doing your country a "favor" by rallying anti-war feelings....but in the end all its doing is giving the other side more steam. A negative effect on the country is a negative effect on the country....no matter how you slice it.(or spin it)

Decka

I know you mean well but unfortunately I have to inform you that protest is very healthy and indeed it was the defining act that finally brought an end to the Viet Nam conflict. Uh, that is, after we lost 58,000 troops.

Support this mess all ya want and feel free to suit up dude and get your butt over there shooting away at those no good Iraquis. Your contribution will be appreciated.

Dop

are you sure you won't call me a murderous war criminal dop? it seems to be the standard you give all who serve in the military.

And i know that protest will happen...alls im saying is that if you are big on political correctness, like you libbies are, then what you are doing is BAD for the country....it just seems out of character.

The troops that I label murderous war criminals are the ones that have killed women, children and elders in clold-blood in front of witnesses -- IOW ... there is little doubt of their guilt.

An example would be the ones that riddled the 2 cars with bullets and killed both unarmed families in the cars and they did it unprovoked. There are several witnesses to this war crime and the fact it happened can not be denied and neither can the conditions which seem to border closely on sport.

These types are sick mofos that need to face a world tribunal for war crimes.

The rest of the troops that stay within the bounds of common sense are just fine with me.

Dop

Protest is an essential part of our democracy.

There is nothing unpatriotic or wrong about expressing views that don't match others views.

There is nothing unpatriotic or wrong about saying troops are losing their lives for nothing. Not that I specifically believe that to be true - but if you do believe it to be true, then it is your duty to say so.

Our troops are not cry baby morons, they understand that people will have different views on the Iraq war, expression of views is not going to bring them to tears. They are certainly much more concerned about getting decent equipment.

Originally posted by DrewM
basically Trav's logic is simple

- Troop morale and well being is irrelevant because it has always been in the dumps.
- Any form of free debate over a war in progress hurts the troops
- Any form of free debate over a war in progress means you are colluding with the enemy
- The government is always right no matter what
- Never question anything
- Anybody who questions is helping the enemy

Trav - shame that communist Russia is gone - you would have been a rising star in the soviet way of doing things. But - heck, you could always try moving to North Korea - you are a perfect fit for exactly what they look for in somebody, beyond the lack of creature comforts - the state run system would seem like home for you.

I guess you have gone to long to read all the carp that has been said around here lately, like supporting an underground railroad to ferry deserters out of the country and anti recruitment campaigns to starve our military of volunteers so we have to pull out of iraq or start a draft. Its not just dissent drew, its sedition plain and simple. once you stop debating and start actively trying to undermine the war effort, you have crossed that line.

Originally posted by Travh20
I guess you have gone to long to read all the carp that has been said around here lately, like supporting an underground railroad to ferry deserters out of the country and anti recruitment campaigns to starve our military of volunteers so we have to pull out of iraq or start a draft. Its not just dissent drew, its sedition plain and simple. once you stop debating and start actively trying to undermine the war effort, you have crossed that line.
What the hell are you going on about, Trav?

Originally posted by Travh20
I guess you have gone to long to read all the carp that has been said around here lately, like supporting an underground railroad to ferry deserters out of the country and anti recruitment campaigns to starve our military of volunteers so we have to pull out of iraq or start a draft. Its not just dissent drew, its sedition plain and simple. once you stop debating and start actively trying to undermine the war effort, you have crossed that line.

I agree with you to an extent - no matter what a persons views they have no right to actively sabotage the situation in Iraq, but the question is what would constitute sabotage. It is within freedom of speech for anybody to run anti-recruitment campaigns. Afterall - the final decision is up to the person making the choice to join or not.

Really anti-recruitment campaigns would be wasted money - the 6 oclock news every night is a strong anti-recruitment campaign.

Originally posted by Decka
hey, people can not like the war all they want.....but when they go out of their way to rally support, media, and money towards the anti-war effort....THATS what irks me, and im sure it irks trav too.

When people go out of their way --as millions of Americans have-- to rally support, media, and money towards the anti-war effort, it is about the only thing left in this country that gives me even the slightest hope that it might live thru the despicable cancer of **hard Right Conservatism** it has been infected with.

Originally posted by Freethinker
When people go out of their way --as millions of Americans have-- to rally support, media, and money towards the anti-war effort, it is about the only thing left in this country that gives me even the slightest hope that it might live thru the despicable cancer of **hard Right Conservatism** it has been infected with.

Agreed - it is the American way to protest and debate. It is what makes America what it is. This is no act of sabotage.

We must remember that the war in Iraq - right or wrong, is not a war where we were attacked or threatened. The war in Iraq is a pre-emptive strike and occupation of another country that in no way attacked nor directly threatened the US. It was speculative about a potential threat - that was later proven to be incorrect.

But, now we are there, we have an obligation to follow through - we cannot pull out until the job is complete.

The anti-war effort may well be wrong in it's view - but an anti-war effort is not sabotage, it is an expression of freedom of speech.

I do agree that direct sabotage would be certainly terribly wrong, but debate is not sabotage - it is quite the opposite. Trav - can provide a real example of sabotage

go look up some of echo2's posts in the politics section drew

Huh? Why are you bringing in Echo? Face it, your logic is un-American.

Originally posted by Travh20
go look up some of echo2's posts in the politics section drew

I'd rather you provide examples of where exercising free speech equals sabotage. I doubt you will be able to find any examples.

If bush had listened to the millions of protestors 2 years ago, I know 1300+ parents that would still have kids living.

Now it's trivia time ...

Yesterday there were 22 troops killed when their chow hall was hit by rockets or missles or whatever.

Trivia question -- what got more time on main stream media (FOX, CNN, MSNBC)?

1) Our loss of 22 troops
2) Michael Jackson

Dop

Originally posted by DrewM
I'd rather you provide examples of where exercising free speech equals sabotage. I doubt you will be able to find any examples.

I never said it did. simply exercising rights means nothing.

Originally posted by Travh20
I never said it did. simply exercising rights means nothing.

Sure you did....to quote you anti recruitment campaigns to starve our military of volunteers so we have to pull out of iraq or start a draft. Its not just dissent drew, its sedition plain and simple. once you stop debating and start actively trying to undermine the war effort, you have crossed that line.

who does an anti recruitment effort help drew, the US military or the enemy?

Originally posted by Travh20
who does an anti recruitment effort help drew, the US military or the enemy?
Neither...

Originally posted by Travh20
who does an anti recruitment effort help drew, the US military or the enemy?

It's irrelevant who it helps - it's still freedom of speech. Any anti-recruitment effort is simply putting forth an opinion.

its not irrelevant. the days of college debate about this is over. we are in a war. the less soldiers we have the better off our opponents are. Why dothe libs still look at things in a vaccum? these things have effects on the war effort, they are not just using your free speech then going home and forgeting about it at night. THe libs are so selfish sometimes. they cant see anything beyond what may happen to them or their right to do something.

Originally posted by Travh20
its not irrelevant. the days of college debate about this is over. we are in a war. the less soldiers we have the better off our opponents are. Why dothe libs still look at things in a vaccum? these things have effects on the war effort, they are not just using your free speech then going home and forgeting about it at night. THe libs are so selfish sometimes. they cant see anything beyond what may happen to them or their right to do something.

You are dead wrong.

Joining the military is a choice. Anybody doing an anti-recruitment drive is putting forth an opinion - they are not stopping anybody from enlisting.

Iraq is not a war, it is a mess. The war ended in 2003.

The time for debate is never over. Debate is healthy and always relevant. Just because there are troops in a combat zone does not mean that everybody should stop debating the merits of them being in a combat zone. This is America and free debate is one of the things that separates this country from the type of countries found in the middle east.

If you are against free and heated debate then you don't understand America.

I dont think you understand the anti recruitment effort. It is in multiple stages. what happens when the anti recruitment effort is effective enough to force a draft? well, it turns out Echo2, and the thousands of other she claims are with her,, has also said she will help people get out of the country to avoid the draft. so if you force a draft through anti recruitment, then go to phase two to help people avoid the draft, then we got a big problem here. I know free speech is fine and dandy and the shining star of our society, but blindly backing it without any forward thought as to the consequences is as bad as what you claim I am doing is.

Originally posted by Travh20
but blindly backing it without any forward thought as to the consequences is as bad as what you claim I am doing is.
Well then, if you want to stop these anti-recruitment campaigns, I suggest you write your congressmen and get them cracking on a Constitutional amendment limiting free speech. Until that time, it is flagrantly illegal to stop any form of free speech.

haha very funny borg. I am no John Mcain. I dont want to limit free speech, I just want people to understand that some thought needs to go into using these rights given to them by the blood of a milion men. Waht good is free speech going to be when we have terrorists slashing our throats? National security trumps everything, becasue without it the constitution is a worthless scrap of paper

Waht good is free speech going to be when we have terrorists slashing our throats? National security trumps everything, becasue without it the constitution is a worthless scrap of paper
This "war" is not helping our national security. This war is not about protecting our freedoms. This is a pointless war. I have yet to see one shred of proof that anything we do in Iraq will help us and the war on terrorism, yet we've seen some that says that it's hurting us. This "war" could be considered breaking some laws of our government, our military is neither a police force, nor a country builder. Anti-recruitment efforts are not harming our national security, they're just keeping people from being killed in a pointless "war".

Trav, simply use all the means at your disposal to support the recruitment effort. As you know in any conflict you have 3 sides.
1.Those that support.
2.Those that are against.
3. Those that are neutral.

Originally posted by Travh20
haha very funny borg. I am no John Mcain. I dont want to limit free speech, I just want people to understand that some thought needs to go into using these rights given to them by the blood of a milion men. Waht good is free speech going to be when we have terrorists slashing our throats? National security trumps everything, becasue without it the constitution is a worthless scrap of paper
Without free speech, we are spitting in the face of those men who died to protect this country and our rights. It's absurd to say that we should limit rights in order to promote national defense -- without our rights, what is there to defend? Certainly not any great country. A formerly great country, but not a currently great one. Trav, if we throw away our rights, we're throwing away our heritage, and we might as well burn the Constitution any semblance of rights we have left. I understand where you're coming from, Trav: You believe that speech against a war demoralizes the troops, and these anti-recruitment campaigns keep citizens from becoming troops. Even if this is the case, I say: Such is the price for freedom. You may see it as treason and sedition, but I see it as simply an exercise in one's rights, without which, this country is nothing. Hold your rights dear to you, Trav, even if you think you'll never use them, because they are what keeps you from living in a police state.

Originally posted by Travh20
haha very funny borg. I am no John Mcain. I dont want to limit free speech, I just want people to understand that some thought needs to go into using these rights given to them by the blood of a milion men. Waht good is free speech going to be when we have terrorists slashing our throats? National security trumps everything, becasue without it the constitution is a worthless scrap of paper

Trav - you are a victim of propoganda I'm afraid.

Exercising free speech will never result in "Terrorists slashing our throats". Iraq is a longterm strategy - there is zero direct ties between any terrorist threat to the US and Iraq - beyond the probable increased threat Iraq has created.

My defense of an anti-recruitment drive is not because I specifically agree or disagree with such an effort - agreement to any particular side of an argument is irrelevant. People have the freedom to make their case and promote their views. If they convince enough people then maybe their case has some merit. If that results in a draft, then that is an issue to address at that time - but in no way should anybody say that expression of free speech can lead to something bad.

This is basically your argument - supress free speech because it would lead to something bad. This is a position with no merit. Disagree with a position but don't disagree with the right to have a position.

And just fyi - the blood of a million men gave the Europeans continued free speech, not the US population. One does not need to tread carefully when using free speech or look back to how free speech was obtained.

Anyone catch the FOX and CNN video clip of Rumsfeld saying the plane was shot down over Pennsylvania? Apparently he meant flight 93 ...

So another lie exposes itself...

what's the score now?

Saddam had wmds ... lie
Jessica Lynch story ... lie
Flight 93 ... lie

And they expect the american people and the troops to believe anything they say?

ROTF

Dop

when did I ever say to limit free speech? Echo can go ahead and do what she wants, its not her fault her good intentions blind her to wahts going on in the world. I told her if I ever find her or anyone helping draft dodgers or deserters I will turn them in. until then she is another shrill lib seeing red over the bush re election

You didn't say limit free speech directly - but everything you actually do say means limit free speech. Your logic has been rebuffed in those terms because limiting free speech is the only conclusion one could arrive at given your comments.

Things like


I am supposed to honor and respect straight up treason as some sort of noble crusade?

Dop and echo are traitors, plain and simple

the days of college debate about this is over

anti recruitment campaigns to starve our military of volunteers....its sedition plain and simple


To really believe what you say then you are against free speech. It's very healthy for people to be anti-war and to do whatever they can to promote their views. It's not a question of agreeing or disagreeing - it's a question of difference of opinion being how we arrive at better outcomes. If we call all difference of opinion treason then the country suffers. Putting forth an opinion - whether that be anti-recuitment efforts or whatever is not treason - it's American.

so I dont have the free speech to say these things? seems you are the one who does not understand free speech. Dissent to the dissenters is free speech too. why is it the liberals always think free speech is a one way street?

Originally posted by Travh20
so I dont have the free speech to say these things? seems you are the one who does not understand free speech. Dissent to the dissenters is free speech too. why is it the liberals always think free speech is a one way street?
::hand to forehead::

If you can show me where Drew even hinted that he'd like to limit your free speech, I'll eat my hat.

Originally posted by Travh20
so I dont have the free speech to say these things? seems you are the one who does not understand free speech. Dissent to the dissenters is free speech too. why is it the liberals always think free speech is a one way street?

You do have free speech. The difference is that you think exercising certain free speech equals being a traitor and certain free speech should be stopped. To compare - I have never said your views should be stopped - I simply disagree with them. There is a huge difference there that you seem to miss.

You = stop free speech

Me = disagree with you, but no mention that you should be stopped to express your views.

See the difference? It's as clear as day. Surely even you can understand the difference.

Originally posted by DrewM
You do have free speech. The difference is that you think exercising certain free speech equals being a traitor and certain free speech should be stopped. To compare - I have never said your views should be stopped - I simply disagree with them. There is a huge difference there that you seem to miss.

You = stop free speech

Me = disagree with you, but no mention that you should be stopped to express your views.

See the difference? It's as clear as day. Surely even you can understand the difference.

well, you see what I say as trying to "stop free speech" and I see what echo says as being seditious. we are both entitled to our opinions. While you can not point out where I ever said someone should be denied the right to free speech, I can go and find where echo clearly says she has no problem with treason

I can point out where you have said that people should be denied free speech - I have pointed it out to you several times already.

The thing is you have your views, which are well intended no doubt, but you don't think through what your views really mean. The only way to actually put in action your beliefs would be to control free speech. That's the bottom line.

Originally posted by DrewM
I can point out where you have said that people should be denied free speech - I have pointed it out to you several times already.

I am interested to se this

Originally posted by DrewM
The thing is you have your views, which are well intended no doubt, but you don't think through what your views really mean. The only way to actually put in action your beliefs would be to control free speech. That's the bottom line.

and the people who think undermining the war effort and costing us massive chaos in the middle east if we pull out because of lack of soldierst have thought their views through? I will say it again. This is not an academic debate, its life or death. Even FDR understood that. go look at some of the things he did in the 40's.

It doesn't matter if the views are thought through or not - absolutely irrelevant. The issue is (once again....yawn) that you believe certain expression of views are treason. ie - if opinions can be treason then you are against free speech.

The example of anti-recruitment drive - nobody is putting a gun to anybodies head and saying 'don't sign up' - it's simply an expression of opinion (free speech). People then choose themselves to sign up or not after reviewing both sides.

An academic debate is always relevant - no matter what the issue. Period.

I never once said not agreeing with the war was treason. go back through the anti recruitment rthread in the politics forum to see how it all played out, until then stop accusing me of things I never said or did

Originally posted by Travh20
I never once said not agreeing with the war was treason. go back through the anti recruitment rthread in the politics forum to see how it all played out, until then stop accusing me of things I never said or did

You are too funny. Show me where I have ever accused you of saying not agreeing with the war was treason. Where did you pull that from?

So "until then" keep going around in circles Trav. :@@:

If you are silly enough to say anti-recruitment drives etc etc are treason then don't be suprised when your logic gets torn to shreds.

Drew I missed you. ;)

Originally posted by DrewM
You are too funny. Show me where I have ever accused you of saying not agreeing with the war was treason. Where did you pull that from?

So "until then" keep going around in circles Trav. :@@:

If you are silly enough to say anti-recruitment drives etc etc are treason then don't be suprised when your logic gets torn to shreds.

so in the beginning of your post you say you have never said I said anti-recruitment was treason, and at the end you say if I am silly enough to say anti-recruitment drives are treason dont be suprised if my logic gets torn up. I guess its special liberal logic that make that make any sense.

and I am still waiting for this evidence I ever said anyone should not have free speech drew.

Anti-war

Anti-recruitment drive

Do you see the difference between these two very different phrases? Hold on while I get out the finger puppets. The only person who has ever mentioned anti-war is you when you suddenly pulled that out of your ass and started dreaming that I accused you of saying anti-war was treason. I never did.

And Trav - I have shown you why your views are anti-free speech over & over and over. I won't give you the evidence again and again in an attempt to satisfy your evidently low IQ. If you can't understand what was already explained - then forget it.

You are enough to make a saint weep.

you have shown me why YOU think my views are anti free speech drew. you havent shown where I have said that, because I havent. IF you think I am some nazi who wants to erase peoples freedoms fine. I am not though.

I don't think you are a Nazi. I think you just look at issues in black and white. You see anti-recuitment drives - think this helps the enemy - therefore you see treason.

treason is a heavy word - an offence to be stopped, an offence to be followed by Jail. Yet, an anti-recuitment drive is an opinion put forth for people to look at. Such a drive would be an expression of free speech. So - lets substitute different words to make your views clearer to you.

Lets replace the phrase "Anti-recruitment drive' with 'An expression of free Speech'

Lets replace the phrase 'Treason' with 'Must be stopped and should be followed by incarceration'

Now....lets put the 2 phrases together to find what Trav's views mean when it comes to this issue you see in such black & white terms.

Free speech must be stopped and should be followed by incarceration

oh boy, can I replace words in other peoples statements too? seems now drew has me saying "Free speech must be stopped and should be followed by incarceration"! man thats clever, I will have to try that.

anyone thats ever accused me of putting words in their mouth better look at this and see what words being put in your mouth really is

Trav - I agree it's unfortuanate that the only way to highlight to you what your views mean is to break it down into these simple terms.

But, if you don't like what your comments mean - then maybe it's an indication that your views are off the wall.

This is a discussion forum - you can't make a statement and then deny that the statement means anything. In attempting to highlight what your views mean you simply deny having any such views - to protect your argument from any form of assault.

All I have done is highlight what your statement means. You are free of course to tell me why your statement doesn't mean that.

You are of course free to paraphrase any statement to highlight what it means in real terms. That is all I have done with your words. I have not put any words into your mouth.

I found it interesting that USA Today polled the troops to see what percentage of the troops back the war and came up with 70%.

But what they don't tell you is the only troops that got to vote in the poll were the ones that are full-subscribers .... ROTFLMAO ... that means only the officers got to vote.

What e2 or e3 is going to subscribe to a newspaper when (s)he's already struggling to keep food on the table for the family back home.

This is some sad mofo stuff.

Dop

Originally posted by DrewM
Trav - I agree it's unfortuanate that the only way to highlight to you what your views mean is to break it down into these simple terms.

But, if you don't like what your comments mean - then maybe it's an indication that your views are off the wall.

This is a discussion forum - you can't make a statement and then deny that the statement means anything. In attempting to highlight what your views mean you simply deny having any such views - to protect your argument from any form of assault.

All I have done is highlight what your statement means. You are free of course to tell me why your statement doesn't mean that.

You are of course free to paraphrase any statement to highlight what it means in real terms. That is all I have done with your words. I have not put any words into your mouth.

thanks for telling me what I think drew, I really appreciate it.

You are welcome.

I'm not telling you what you think. I'm discussing what you said.

You make bold statements and then try every trick in the book to avoid any discussion on what these views mean, even denying any obvious meaning you don't like - so long as you don't have to revisit your statements.

You know, it's ok to say 'Ok Anti-recruitment drives are not treason afterall'

your not discussing what I said, your discussing what you think I meant

Yes, of course. I only have your words to go by. Provide more words of clarification, otherwise accept that your words as-is will be discussed.

You are free at any time to clarify what you mean with such strange statements as 'anti-recruitment drives are treason'

go to the anti recruitment thread in the politics forum to see what I said.

i already read it. This is this thread - not that one.

no rew, this whole anti recruitment thread and all the posts I was replying to are in the anti rectruitment thread in the politics forum. if you want to put what I said into proper context go there and read it

Lets face it - you make statements that you are either unwilling or unable to back up.

Originally posted by DrewM
Lets face it - you make statements that you are either unwilling or unable to back up.

WTF? dude, your whacked. should I repost the entire thread over here so you can read it? lets face it, you are content pigeon holing me into your idea of what I said then doing any research to put what I said into the proper context.

here, I will make it easy on you:

http://www.allforums.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8909

keep on avoiding the issue Trav - anything to have to avoid admitting your views are zany.

what the hell are you talking about? do some reading, see what was actually said. dont take your interpretation and assume it is right.

Trav,
You called me a traitor because I am involved in anti-recruitment. I volunteer my time so that young people can make an informed decision about joining the military.

I explain to young people what that contract they are being asked to sign really means. These are 17,18 an 19 year old kids with not a lot of life experience. They have a right to know the implications of the military contract before signing it.

It is treasonous to say anything that is anti military
or
It is treasonous to say anything that you don't agree with.

Anyway you add it up, you are saying that free speach is treasonous.

Here is a copy of what you wrote in the anti recruitment thread.

Originally posted by Echo2
Then I have been, by your definition a traitor for many, many years. Because I will never faulter from my belief that if a government cannot get it's people to volunteer to fight for their country then said government better look long and hard about what it is they are trying to accomplish by waging war and why they can't get their populace to defend said governments positions with their life.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Trav
Its not "my" definition of a traitor echo, its the US constitutions definition of a traitor. you know, that founding document you claim to be so in tune with? Then, you admit you are trying to get people out of volunteering and at the same time say the war is wrong because there are not enough people volunteering. the very act you are advocating is the reason you are agaisnt it? WTF? you make no sense.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Echo2
Slavery is immoral. It has always been imoral. You can wrap it up in pretty terms like "draft" and "extended enlistment" but it is still slavery. It is immoral and I will fight it with my last breath..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Trav
calling the military slavery is ridiculous. but then again, you are about as ridiculous a person as I have ever met so it seems about right. you need to go to a shrink I think. you think you are so noble and valiant but really your just a foolish old traitor who doesnt even know what the hell she is talking about. go ahead and continue with your seditious ways. it will catch up to you and you can carry on your resistance to Bush in the prisonw here you belong.

dont you have some kids to brainwash to your fucked ideaology echo?

Trav - it's ok if you believe that anti-recruitment is treason if you want, but at least admit that you also believe in controls on free speech, because as I have proven to you beyond doubt - believing that such an effort is treason means absolutely that you are against free speech. You seem to want it both ways - believe in free speech, yet call some free speech treason. Doesn't make any sense Trav.

If Echo is involved in anti-recruitment then that's his choice - he is not putting a gun to any young kids head and stopping them join up. He is exercising free speech and putting forth a view that the kids in question can either accept or reject. Information is healthy.

again, I implore you, go read the thread to see what her idea of "anti recruitment" is. it isnt simply telling kids about the war, its trying to get people who already signed up to blow off thier obligations. Its only a front for what she admits is an "underground railroad" of deserters and draft dodgers to come if her anti recruitment effor somehow stops people from volunteering. I know you still live in a vacuum, but some of us see that shits going down, and her shit is only designed to harm the effort.

I did read the thread.

I didn't say I support that type of activity, but that isn't the point. It's still an expression of free speech. Regardless of what you feel about it - unless you are against free speech - you can't call it treason.