posted
Just to clarify the 'Support the Troops' sentiment..
Appahrently, we are................
(note, this poll taken before the two staunch military defense experts issued their statements this week essentially stating that every arguement for the War is in fact an arguement against as far as the real circumstances are concerned)
It's time for a change in direction!!
Posted on Sat, Oct. 29, 2005
Military's support of war in Iraq falls in N.C.
Survey: More than 56% disagree with handling of conflict
FRED KELLY
Staff Writer
A majority of current and former military members surveyed this week in North Carolina disagree with how President Bush is handling the war in Iraq, according to a poll released Friday.
More than 56 percent of military members surveyed in an Elon University poll said they disapprove or strongly disapprove with how the president is running the war.
Nearly 53 percent disapprove or strongly disapprove of Bush's overall job performance.
The results are startling because military members almost always overwhelmingly support wars and the president, said poll director Hunter Bacot.
"Members of military are mirroring the general public's" attitude toward the war, he said. "That is very telling."
North Carolina is home to bases for the Marines, Army and Air Force. Their troops have been deployed often in Iraq and Afghanistan.
More than 51 percent of military members said they did not know if the war was worth fighting. Roughly 29 percent said the war was not worth it and 19 percent said it was.
Waning enthusiasm for the war among troops and their families is understandable since the president has not clearly "articulated what constitutes victory," said Richard Kohn, a professor of military history at UNC Chapel Hill.
The Bush administration also has not indicated when troops will leave Iraq, and many are serving multiple tours of duty because the military lacks manpower, he said.
"Our military citizens are bearing the brunt of this war," Kohn said. "(Civilians) read about it, but are not impacted.
"Military folks see this. There is a silent but growing sense of resentment."
The general public is also unhappy with the president's performance, the poll says.
Some 57 percent said they disapprove or strongly disapprove of his handling of the war in Iraq. That is up from 43 percent in March.
About 51 percent of those polled said the United States should not be in Iraq, compared with 43 percent who agreed with its involvement.
This week marked the death of the 2,000th U.S. soldier since the war began. Seventy-three were from the Carolinas.
The milestone impacts public opinion because for many it recalls the Vietnam War, Bacot said.
"There are enough people around who remember (watching) Walter Cronkite and the bodybag count," he said.
[ 21. November 2005, 02:16 AM: Message edited by: Mo ]
Posts: 8337 | From the other shore | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
LymeOjai
Unregistered
posted
I'm new to this sort of thing, I just joined LymeNet because my sister has been diagnosed with LD. I happened to read this post with some interest since I'm on active duty in the military.
I found the information quoted in this post to be the exception to what I believe is true, so I researched the actual newspaper article.
My question, to you Mo, is this:
Why did you leave out two paragraphs of the newspaper article in your post? Did you miss the lines by not doing a proper copy and paste? Did you leave them out to simply make your point more emphatically? Did you leave them out because they told a more clear story about the poll that was taken?
I'm supplying the missing two paragraphs and the postscript to the Charlotte Observer, October 28, 2005 along with my own comments. I hope this isn't too long for this forum. If so, please let me know and I'll try to be more brief in the future.
Missing paragraphs and postscript:
quote:Elon University surveyed 539 adults by telephone this week, including 80 who identified themselves as active military members, reservists, retired military personnel or veterans. The margin of error for the full sample is plus or minus 4.3 percentage points.
The margin of error is higher for the group of 80.
quote: Post Script supplied by the newspaper:
quote:An Elon University telephone survey taken this week asked 80 current and former military if the war in Iraq was worth fighting. Here are the results:
quote:Not Worth It 28.8 percent (23) Worth It 18.8 percent (15) Don't Know 51.3 percent (41) Refused to answer 1.3 percent (1)
These are the only survey statistics provided to the public through the newspaper's website.
So the conclusions I've drawn are:
1. Of a total of 539 adults contacted by telephone in or around the city of Charlotte North Carolina, 80 identified themselves as having some current or past connection with the military.
These 80 people were not all active duty military members. We're not sure if there were 79 active duty military or 1, but it was some number between the two. According to the DOD's 2003 Demographics Profile of the Military Community, there were approximately 101,584 individuals on active duty stationed in the state of North Carolina in 2003. Assuming this number is relatively the same in October of this year, between .00001 percent (1 person) or .078 percent (79 people) (8/100s of a percent) of the active duty military stationed within the state of North Carolina answered the surveyor's questions. I'm not convinced that qualifies as a statistically significant number.
The data set that was provided by the newspaper indicates that 41 of the 80 responded that they did NOT KNOW if the war in Iraq was worth fighting. They didn't say they didn't think it was worth fighting, they said they didn't know (I personally read that to infer that they just didn't care to answer the question, just my opinion).
2. The author of the article, Fred Kelly, made statements in his article that are NOT supported by the data;
quote: More than 56 percent of military members surveyed in an Elon University poll said they disapprove or strongly disapprove with how the president is running the war.
The information in the newspaper article, left out of your post, indicates that a maximum of 44 people, that agreed to respond to the survey on the telephone and had some current or past association with the military, stated they do not know if the war in Iraq is worth fighting. Let's assume that the paper just didn't provide the entire data set of survey questions and that 56% of the 80 folks did say that they did not approve of the president's running of the war. That 56% amounts to 44 people, again not statistically significant when related to the overall population of +/- 101,000 uniformed personnel.
3. I doubt that anyone would argue that President Bush's approval relative to Iraq has improved, but I also doubt that anyone can show any former president's approval rating increase during a time of war, with the possible exception of FDR.
However, to make claims representing the active duty military, to include those members of the reserves and guard called to active duty, is quite another matter. At least if you're going to make specific claims concerning the military, make sure you present the entire evidence, not just the selected statements that substantiate your position.
quote: Military personnel were more likely to say the U.S. should still be in Iraq than the rest of the population. Fifty percent said the U.S. should still be in Iraq, with 41 percent of those with a military affiliation saying the U.S. should not be in Iraq.
Please note that the university poll distinguishes between military personnel and those with a military affiliation. There's a difference and broad statements concerning the opinions of the American military member should not be inferred by the writing of a newspaper columnist. They have been known to have their own agenda.
In closing, two points:
I'm not sure who takes these polls. I know that no one outside my family has ever asked my opinion, nor the opinions of those under my command, at least to my knowledge. Believe it or not we do have opinions. I just wish civilians would resist the temptation to put words in our mouths.
Lastly, Mo, you prefaced your post with;
quote: It's time for a change in direction!!
I see nothing in the article or in the poll provided by the university that suggests they are suggesting anything of the kind. You certainly are entitled to your opinion on the current administration, but you shouldn't use these types of newspaper articles as proof that your opinion is anything more than what it is - an opinion.
IP: Logged |
Actually, the 539 were military members..the 80 interviewed by telephone were active.
I'm not sure what your point is, but it is considerable to have these numbers registering in dissent, and even of the 80 polled in addition - over 50% at 'I don't know'.. considering the fact that the military by and large is traditionally staunchly behind the Commander in Chief and the Pentagon in it's views regarding ANY given conflict.
They will tend to err more toward the White House as a rule. That is at the heart of their training, as it shouls be in a perfect World.
Considering the military is trained and poised to follow orders, as is their mission.. any considrable level of dissent is significant.. much less more than half.
The arguement that pressing questions and demanding justification of this Iraq War is aginst the troops is the point in my bringing up this poll. It clearly is NOT.
With 2000 dead and more than 15,000 seriously wounded.. I think it is important to point out that the military themselves are not so sure about this War.
Even if the numbners were at 25%, that would be significant.
If you are expecting a poll of solely the frontlines.. well, frankly I think that us unrealistic and unfair to our troops, as obviously they have survival on their minds and cannot question things as survival is the main priority. Are you saying it requires front line dissent? Because that is completely out of line and expecting way to much from the soldiers this minute fighting for their lives, IMO.
I am very concerned over what seem to be blatent oppression of military welfare and concerns, more anger and desire to immediatly supress than consideration.
Have you read Murtha's statements?
he is a highly revered, staunch supporter of the military, and an expert in operations..whom the White House has trusted throughout his career -
he has stood up in opposition of the path of this War in advocacy for the troops.. also stating they cannot stand in opposition in the numbers they would if they could.
he has stated that it is not the idea of making a plan to pull out (and let the Iraqis now fight for their Democracy should they choose to sieze it)
..he has stated that it is the triple tours, concern about no healthcare for their families.. the deaths and injuries, suffering of experience, and the attacks targeting the military occupation that has weakened our military -- on top of the fact that we have increased terrorism and they know is is failing..
our troops need to be deployed in a more strategic manner at this point.
--- and no, I did not purposely leave anything out. The piece is addressing the entire poll results. ..and I do not see what real difference the info you added makes, quite frankly. In fact, 51% of the active saying 'I don't know' is also of great significance IMO. I never put much stock in polls myself, tho some here do.. and the military is not often polled on this issue. Again, if the numbers were half this, it would be significant.
I think your post is just smoke and mirors, and a kick in the gut to US troops regarding the situation - in utter avoidance of facing the issue for them at all - simply an attempt to shoot the messenger, which is deplorable, IMHO.. for no better reason than pride in your opinion.
People need to look outside of their pre-concieved boxes and stop seeing soldiers and Iraqis from a two-dementional view - but more as human beings.. for the soldiers' sake.
Mo
[ 21. November 2005, 03:20 AM: Message edited by: Mo ]
-------------------- life shrinks and expands in proportion to one's courage -- anais nin Posts: 8337 | From the other shore | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
LymeOjai
Unregistered
posted
Actually, the 539 were military members..the 80 interviewed by telephone were active.
No, actually, the 539 were not military and the 80 were not active. Please reread either the newspaper article or the poll itself.
The exact quote from the poll itself is:
Elon University surveyed 539 adults by telephone this week, including 80 who identified themselves as active military members, reservists, retired military personnel or veterans. The margin of error for the full sample is plus or minus 4.3 percentage points.
considering the fact that the military by and large is traditionally staunchly behind the Commander in Chief and the Pentagon in it's views regarding ANY given conflict.
My contention is that the military is still behind the Commander-in-Chief.
I think it is important to point out that the military themselves are not so sure about this War.
Even if the numbners were at 25%, that would be significant.
On what basis do you make the statement that the military itself is or isn't anything.
Just because a poll taker from a small liberal arts university in N.C. speaks with 80 people over the telephone who claim to have some military affiliation doesn't tell me a whole lot about what the military thinks.
Are you saying it requires front line dissent? Because that is completely out of line and expecting way to much from the soldiers this minute fighting for their lives, IMO.
I'm saying it takes some real proof of what the military thinks, not what a civilian would like to imagine, especially if it fits their perception of what the world is or should be.
Please don't assume to put words in my mouth concerning front line troops, I am one.
I am very concerned over what seem to be blatent oppression of military welfare and concerns, more anger and desire to immediatly supress than consideration.
If you're so concerned about the oppression of military welfare, I suggest you put your efforts into getting the uniformed personnel the benefits they deserve for their service. Try lobbying for higher pay, better living conditions, better health benefits, retirement benefits, etc.
Have you read Murtha's statements?
Yes I've listened to his speech and read the transcript. I agree with much that the Col has to say and I respect his right to say it, he's earned it.
our troops need to be deployed in a more strategic manner at this point.
Based on whose strategy? As far as I know, both houses of the U.S. Congress as well as the Commander-in-Chief, those whom the constitution has given the responsibility, have established the strategy we are undertaking in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is my contention that that strategy is working.
..and I do not see what real difference the info you added makes, quite frankly. In fact, 51% of the active saying 'I don't know' is also of great significance IMO.
The difference is that you neglected to include the real numbers of the poll. The facts are that only 80 people of a total sample size of 539 indicated a military connection.
Your statement, In fact, 51% of the active is not an accurate statement. 51% of the 80 who claimed a military background, active, retired, reserves, or veteran stated they did not know.
Additionally, the 80, according to the poll, were either active duty military, retired military, reservists or veterans. This is way too broad a spectrum of possibilities to give the poll any real credence in reference to what the active duty military thinks or doesn't think.
51% of any group saying I don't know is just what it says, I don't know. To place any significance on that is not a reasonable justification for the statements,
quote:Military's support of war in Iraq falls in NC
quote:It's time for a change of direction.
Again, if the numbers were half this, it would be significant.
Significant in whose opinion?? Statistically significant, NO!
I think your post is just smoke and mirors, and a kick in the gut to US troops regarding the situation - in utter avoidance of facing the issue for them at all - simply an attempt to shoot the messenger, which is deplorable, IMHO.. for no better reason than pride in your opinion.
I appreciate your opinion of me, especially since you have absolutely no idea who I am. My kicking the US troops in the gut is a personal affront and I do not appreciate your eagerness to go so quickly to the personal attacks.
My utter avoidance of facing the issue for them at all being deplorable is as you state your opinion, although I see no humbleness in your statement.
However, it has been my experience when one does not care to face the issue honestly and thoughtfully, it is much easier to resort to the type of statements you included at the bottom or your post.
People need to look outside of their pre-concieved boxes and stop seeing soldiers and Iraqis from a two-dementional view - but more as human beings.. for the soldiers' sake.
I do not see either my fellow soldiers or the Iraqis in a two-dimensional view, I want to assume you just didn't use your spell-checker on the word dementional.
I see my fellow soldiers as my brothers and sisters and I will again see the insurgents in Iraq through my cross-hairs.
As I said before if you're really worried about the well being of your countrymen serving in uniform, spend more of your time lobbying for their benefits and less time attempting to convince yourself and others of your preconceived ideas of what is good for us.
Either way, I can assure you, we'll be just fine with or without you.
IP: Logged |
posted
As far as I know, both houses of the U.S. Congress as well as the Commander-in-Chief, those whom the constitution has given the responsibility, have established the strategy we are undertaking in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There have been public outcries not only by Murtha, but other moderates, and former War supporters who are increasingly upset because this administration IS NOT even discussing strategy or answering any questions on the issue.
Their strategy is unclear, (and actions unconstitutional.)
That's what Murtha was/is still saying as he brought up questions on behalf of the military, and he simply brought a stronger voice to issues that have been a concern for a very long time.
The republicans cannot smear this man as they have all others with legitimate questions. His statements should be adressed and his call to take a long hard look at things reflects the American public, and the military's best interests.
Quoting Murtha (Washington Post):
"The soldiers can't speak for themselves. We sent them to war and, by God, we're the ones that have to speak out."
I'm sorry, but I do not think you are any more qualified to say what the military and their families think and feel about this War in Iraq than I am.
Which is my point.
Of course, feelings of frustration will not, cannot be voiced among the majority of troops on active duty, you must know that. How can they question publicly? They are quite focused I'm sure.. on survival their mission. Some may have no question at all! The point is there must be accountability and answers from those in their charge (the administrators) With what they face everyday, there must be more than rhetoric to justify the commanding strategy.
Murtha has stated over and over again that his statements represent those servicemen.
He is not the only Veteran speaking on point about the Iraq War strategy failing and harming the troops, as well as creating much more danger in the Middle East and regarding islamic extremism. There is a large movement among Veterans.
They are advocating for the troops.
At this point I do think it is a swift kick to our soldiers to minimize their situation and accept only rhetoric on Iraq. That's what it sounded like you were doing, simply discrediting the poll and not addressing the rest of it.. simply stating all is going well.
.. it is significant to have military personell even 'unsure' much less in disagreement.. not to mention all the veterans standing up, including Iraq War veterans..
I have family in the military as well, and they are always all about 'following the Commander in Chief' PERIOD .. as it should be IMO - when they are doing their job managing our forces.
- so who is responsible for holding that Commander and his administration accountable for what THEY are doing?
Like Murtha said when Cheney attacked his character in response to these questions.. this stonewalling is coming from men with five deferrments who never served!! They cannot even address the issue and look at strategy and military welfare in this 'conflict'??
For years we have heard that it is not supporting the troops to raise issues with this administration's handling of this War.
I contend that is a statement which is actually deleterious to their welfare.. and was used regularly as a sort of 'muzzle'to avoid pointed questions.
If this War and this strategy were going well, then it should at least stand up to a reasonable discussion in Congress, and address by the administrators as to what is going on, as well as an exit strategy.
The White House, Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Republicans in Congress last week when the isue was on the table all but plugged their ears, became defiant, and accused even Murtha of being a 'coward' .. the White House comparing him to Michael Moore. Giving these issues RESPECT is not to much to ask when we are at War.
THAT is what is being advocated for the troops. That the issue is examined.
It has been extremely unnerving that those in 'command' have refused to do that for so long.
The fact it is not being discussed with any flexability or forsight and this administration is 'my way or the highway' regarding this as our men and women are dying, coming home without limbs, lives..ect.. is unacceptable.
The insurgency is in direct opposition of American troops -- Iraqis were promised by Bush "We come as liberators, not occupiers" just as they were promised when the British Empire invaded..
and they were there for 15 years until the resistance continued so long and became so strong and bloody that they drove them out.
That is the way this course is looking right now, especially to those in the region, and to continue to say "just wait until _ _ _ _ " os not good enough for Iraq OR our troops.
Citizens have every right and obligation and Congress the responsibility to press for realistic answers.
Peace,
Mo
[ 21. November 2005, 01:33 PM: Message edited by: Mo ]
Posts: 8337 | From the other shore | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
LabRat
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 78
posted
I keep trying to post but soon as I start reading mo's unbiased view of the war on terror, (from the left's point of view), I fall asleep.....
That gal must be part owl!
Posts: 1887 | From Corpus Christi, Texas | Registered: Oct 2000
| IP: Logged |
LymeOjai
Unregistered
posted
Mo,
Your original post is entitled,
Topic: Over 56% of Milatary do not approve of Iraq management....
I'm not sure how we got away from this topic but I thought I might try to bring the subject matter back to your original post. I'll try to keep my input brief and if we're going to exchange ideas and opinions it would be helpful if we kept our comments within the stated topic.
I'm somewhat disappointed that you chose to ignore my questions/comments and decided to use this space to expound on your own agenda, i.e., Colonel Murtha's comments, Cheney's response and your own political views of the war on terrorism.
I see that there are other posts that address these issues and I'll gladly provide my opinion on those issues, if I find that I have an opinion worth sharing.
My only desire was to make clear my opinion on the newspaper article you used as basis for your original comments. You have decided to ignore my input and that doesn't lend itself to much of a dialog. It just allows for soapbox oration.
To begin with the newspaper article title is:
Military's support of war in Iraq falls in N.C. Survey: More than 56% disagree with handling of conflict
In your post it appears that you were intent on using this newspaper article to establish the point that the military does not approve of President Bush's strategy on the war on terror.
I was simply making the point that the results of the poll completed by Elon University did not accurately represent the opinions of the active duty military community. Furthermore, you misrepresented the facts in your follow-up post in regards to who was being represented in that polling sample.
I at no time, in either my original post or in the two follow-up posts, presumed to attempt to represent the actual opinions of even one of my active duty brothers and sisters, let alone 56% of them. I simply was trying to establish the fact that neither you, nor the newspaper article, nor the university should presume that they could either.
Finally, your sermon concerning my kicking the U.S. troops in the gut, in utter avoidance of facing the issue for them at all being deplorable is so far off the subject that I'm at a loss as to how to respond.
I guess if you chose to not respond to this post, I'll understand. I've had these discussions with my civilian friends in the past so I'm used to being ignored (yes I do have one or two civilian friends).
My post, I do not see, as my own agenda but the 'meat' of the issue.
Point taken, as I think I stated, I don't think we should put too much stock in the poll itself. I'm not a fan of polls..
What I have gone into is not a tangent, however, it's more the heart of the matter. It's right in line IMO. You don't have to respond to any of it if you'd rather not, of course.. there is another thread on it anyway.
Morale is excellent on the ground in Iraq, and who would have it any other way??? That's utterly necessary!
My point was to lift the onice that supporting the troops means supporting this War... that not supporting the administration without question or accountability means we are not supporting them..
This is simply not true. In fact, supporting the administration's management of the troops, considering all.. there is a strong arguement that what is hurting our military has been the management of this 'War' and continuing on this path.. Murtha spends allot of time with the returning wounded.
WE are the ones who sent them to War, and WE are the ones that need to stand up when there are clear problems.
I also stated, and will reiterate.. I felt that you were ignoring the meat of the issue in discrediting the particulars of this poll, and that was what I referred to as a 'kick in the gut'.
If you were not ignoring it, then I apologoize.
I am insenced and tired of the politicians, administrators, War supporters who do entirely ignore that, no matter the topic.. They don't address it at all.
As I said, I have family in the military...so please be careful not to draw lines, and maybe if you gave me the benefit of listening, we might at least understand eachother.. if you are open to that.
(not saying you are not, just that that is my experience here by and large with posters of 'differing stances'.. I guess I am a bit punch drunk of late - resulting over the years, and I acknowledge that and am aware and will try and drop that part of it)
Mo
[ 22. November 2005, 01:01 AM: Message edited by: Mo ]
Posts: 8337 | From the other shore | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's par for the course. If you have people that distort the truth on the facts of the war, they're certainly going to distort everything else....even polls. It's this kind of agenda that intends to sabatoge the US mission in Iraq, and that leads to comforting the enemy which results in more Americans dead. Nice job.
Posts: 600 | From Las Vegas, NV | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
lymie tony z
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 5130
posted
IMO MO's constant rantings about STAYING ON TOPIC only apply to others...not MO...
Especially when soundly chastised by other posters with different opinions and proof to back their stuff up...
Even more so when she is called on some of the stuff she posts here. She'll always sidestep, and change the subject while stating she is not...
If you can't dazzle em with brilliance baffle em with bull****. Oh well, go away for a week and come back to the same ole same ole....
-------------------- I am not a doctor...opinions expressed are from personal experiences only and should never be viewed as coming from a healthcare provider. zman Posts: 2527 | From safety harbor florida(origin Cleve., Ohio | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
LabRat
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 78
posted
Mo, thanks for dropping the ``chicken foot'', from your post. It gives you a more mature consideration and at least for me, a lower aggression level. I probably didn't say that right. What I meant to say was, you look better without it!
Posts: 1887 | From Corpus Christi, Texas | Registered: Oct 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tony, what I've asked is that folks stay on subjects rather than on members.. in keeping with the rules.
You seem to still be having some trouble with that.
hey LaBraticus..
OK...I'll trade my 'chicken foot' peace sign for this:
(see, maybe you should have left well enough alone)
Mo
Posts: 8337 | From the other shore | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
lymie tony z
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 5130
posted
Hey look Mo... I can remember talking with you thru email...maureen isn't it?
I have nothing personally against you...I'm sure you're a concerned individual and maybe even someone I would enjoy sharing a single malt with...
It's just that you come off as quite a superior/know it all type in your posts...
When others prove a statement you made was wrong you accuse them of attacking you personally; not having anything to back them up; or ignoring their post entirely and never ever admitting you could be wrong....
You remind me of someone who just may be suffering from neurolyme symptoms...and I say that with all sincerety and concern for your healt...which drinking will not help as you I'm sure are well aware.
Fact...you post stuff (for discussion) but then turn around and discount any opinions other than your own. Then turn around and post that you don't believe in what you posted in the first place...dduuhhhh? HuH?
You seem to constantly drag the present administration over the coals on a lot of topics posted here....they're not to blame for everything.
You even have a poster here recently telling you exactly how it is...and you still refuse to believe him.....
You just have no clue....being at "ground zero" although outrageous does'nt come close to qualifying your views about terrorism or war...just on being a victim.
If your parents or family or whoever you say is or has been in the military under constant 24/7 assault....they should tell you what it's REALLY all about.
Fact...you only bring up vietnam and such when it suits you to draw some conclusion...like hey if we would have had the support their my dear we would'nt have had to come home to disgrace...we would have won....but instead folks like you did..... And don't give me that crap about how you support our troops....cuz I've read your past posts and present ones....
If you really supported our troops then petition for more troops over their to get the job done right...to secure the syrian and iranian borders and any other border the terrorists come from...
We are NOT an OCCUPATION type nation...although you constantly refer to our leaders as Facists....
We the people would never stand for that and you should know better...
Listen to what this man and others are telling you... You're wrong...about a lot of things...you just can't seem to see it...or refuse to....
And I doubt will ever admit it.......of course thats just MHO....... oooHHaaaaaaa!
-------------------- I am not a doctor...opinions expressed are from personal experiences only and should never be viewed as coming from a healthcare provider. zman Posts: 2527 | From safety harbor florida(origin Cleve., Ohio | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, this drunken neuro-lymie is just happy to see an officer and a gentleman on deck who has slot of insight as well as respect for other's.
It's been nice having a discusion around here.. usually there's something good to be gotten out of that no matter the differences -- tho discussions have been too few and too far between lately with the types of posters around these days.
I'm done responding to you, Z.
Mo
Posts: 8337 | From the other shore | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
lymie tony z
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 5130
posted
MO you've ignored me several times in the past......gee...it has'nt stopped me yet...I know you read it...too bad you don't understand it.
I follow the rules around here just as well as you do...no matter how you gloss it over your remarks are oft times insulting for a lot of reasons.
I know it, others know it, you know it...and the officer and gentleman would come to know it if he has'nt already figured it out...
I suspect he has and is playing.
So you're not going to respond to me....ooooooohh
pretty soon their will be no one to respond to...
Ya can only beat a dead horse soo long...then ya gotta bury it...or let the buzzards eat it.
And no, I'm not calling you a dead horse or a buzzard.
-------------------- I am not a doctor...opinions expressed are from personal experiences only and should never be viewed as coming from a healthcare provider. zman Posts: 2527 | From safety harbor florida(origin Cleve., Ohio | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mo: Just to clarify the 'Support the Troops' sentiment..
Appahrently, we are................
(note, this poll taken before the two staunch military defense experts issued their statements this week essentially stating that every arguement for the War is in fact an arguement against as far as the real circumstances are concerned)
It's time for a change in direction!!
Posted on Sat, Oct. 29, 2005
Military's support of war in Iraq falls in N.C.
Survey: More than 56% disagree with handling of conflict
FRED KELLY
Staff Writer
A majority of current and former military members surveyed this week in North Carolina disagree with how President Bush is handling the war in Iraq, according to a poll released Friday.
More than 56 percent of military members surveyed in an Elon University poll said they disapprove or strongly disapprove with how the president is running the war.
Nearly 53 percent disapprove or strongly disapprove of Bush's overall job performance.
The results are startling because military members almost always overwhelmingly support wars and the president, said poll director Hunter Bacot.
"Members of military are mirroring the general public's" attitude toward the war, he said. "That is very telling."
North Carolina is home to bases for the Marines, Army and Air Force. Their troops have been deployed often in Iraq and Afghanistan.
More than 51 percent of military members said they did not know if the war was worth fighting. Roughly 29 percent said the war was not worth it and 19 percent said it was.
Waning enthusiasm for the war among troops and their families is understandable since the president has not clearly "articulated what constitutes victory," said Richard Kohn, a professor of military history at UNC Chapel Hill.
The Bush administration also has not indicated when troops will leave Iraq, and many are serving multiple tours of duty because the military lacks manpower, he said.
"Our military citizens are bearing the brunt of this war," Kohn said. "(Civilians) read about it, but are not impacted.
"Military folks see this. There is a silent but growing sense of resentment."
The general public is also unhappy with the president's performance, the poll says.
Some 57 percent said they disapprove or strongly disapprove of his handling of the war in Iraq. That is up from 43 percent in March.
About 51 percent of those polled said the United States should not be in Iraq, compared with 43 percent who agreed with its involvement.
This week marked the death of the 2,000th U.S. soldier since the war began. Seventy-three were from the Carolinas.
The milestone impacts public opinion because for many it recalls the Vietnam War, Bacot said.
"There are enough people around who remember (watching) Walter Cronkite and the bodybag count," he said.
Hello, My name is Karen and my son is presently serving his country in Afganistan b/c his Commander in Chief told him too! His job "is to protect the shores of these United States". He and his buddies are very proud to serve and his family is beaming with pride. If you have a problem with Bush, take it up with him. WHY must you drag our boys into YOUR FIGHT. They are fighting for YOUR RIGHTS, and dying. I'm not seeing you there covering this story. Write Washington but by God do NOT turn this into a Viet Nam were the soldiers become the bad guys! got any kids????? Bet they're NOT serving and wouldn't. Easier to complain. Again fight Washington but leave our boys alone! A MOM
-------------------- desperate Posts: 3 | From Belleville, NJ USA | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Heartfelt thanks to you and your son and family for the sacrifices you make for our country. Noone can understand unles they are in your shoes what that sacrifice means.
It is not fighting 'our boys' to hold the Commander in Chief and his administration accountable for their management of the Iraq War.. and to expect honesty in War times.
I'm sorry you do not agree with that, but many demading accountability believe they are doing so in honor of the troops, not against them.
I have no doubt they fight with the intent of protecting America.
I do not wish to effect your views in any way, nor do I denounce them. I reject the idea that I am against the troops.. that is simply untrue.
I do not have a son in Iraq, but other family.
My son is not of age yet, and by God if this thing is not settled and questions answered by the government, not dismissed.. we are considering leaving the country.
I know this will recieve lots of venoumous response from a few of the folks here.. I will not subject him to a draft if this War is not better planned, justified, and excecuted by the HIGHER officials. And if this becomes what Bush says it will...a War that will take a generation -- without much better adress of the issues, that will not be in the best interests of America and certainly not the troops. We will leave for our own safety from Terrorism, as well as the War concerns.
The boys (and girls) on the ground are tremendous in their work, hands down, no doubt..stupendous!! We owe them everything we can give, including dissent if called for. But how they are doing and the great sacrifice and honor they hold is not the issue raised..
I feel as strongly about this situation as you do, it seems..and I am as American and as patriotic as anyone here. I feel we owe the troops as citizens of America to look at the administration carefully at this time, as the troops are in their charge as this is justified based on their actions/inactions alone.
Mo
[ 18. December 2005, 03:12 PM: Message edited by: Mo ]
Posts: 8337 | From the other shore | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Has anything changed over here? LOL, no, same old nonsense and so boring. Back to what I was doing.
Posts: 600 | From Las Vegas, NV | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
LymeOjai
Unregistered
posted
Karen,
I hope your son is doing well. Just remember, he will never have to apologize to anyone for the work that he is doing.
I have been on one deployment to Afghanistan. I'm being deployed to Iraq again next year. We'll win this thing and, in my opinion, we'll do so a lot quicker than most people think.
There are a lot of opinions about the war on terrorism being written here and other places, but I don't think anyone means harm to any of our troops, if I did I wouldn't be corresponding with any of them.
Mo,
I'm really surprised by the sentiments you expressed in this last post;
quote:My son is not of age yet, and by God if this thing is not settled and questions answered by the government, not dismissed..we are considering leaving the country.
From what I've read of your posts, you're a good mom and a loyal American. It's really a shame if you would consider leaving the U.S. if the war on terrorism doesn't go exactly as you would have it.
Leaving America will not keep you or your family out of harms way. This war is a war of global religious dominance.
Our enemy does not intend to stop if he's able to defeat America (which will never happen), his goal is to dominate the entire world.
We won't be able to run away from this thing. Where ya going to go - Canada? Too cold, colder than N.Y. I think. Besides you'd miss all of us "Right-Wing" nuts and military flag wavers.
I'm not a parent so it's hard for me to judge, but I know my mom wasn't too hot on my joining the "green machine", but it was my decision. Taking your son away from the problem will not prevent him from deciding for himself.
I'm all of 35 years old so I don't know much, but I know how it feels to be a young man watching his country being attacked.
I'm not politically correct, but I know how it feels to want to be part of the retribution for those attacks.
I hate this war, I hate combat even more . It's loud, dirty, scary and bloody, but I believe it's worth it.
Look, I was being dead honest.. and I think both ends of the spectrum get blinded by emotion sometimes..
Nevertheless, I am very concerned.. not because I don't respect and honor service, my sis and bro-in-law are my personal heroes.. both serve.
As I know you must gather from my posts, it's the higher admin's conduct that I have deep concerns over. I have stated most of the reasons why.
I also am profoundly effected by the attack on the US, and I also think this War on Terror is absolutely necesary, but strongly disgree with the way our administrators are handling it, and the political angles they are taking as well.
My fear is the draft..if things do not change course, shift in some way, I believe we are on a path where (at this rate with current volunteer resources) the military may well become fractured.. and an all volunteer army will not be enough resource if we indeed stay in the region and on the course we are on now.
I'll tell you... should my son want to join the green machine, I would support him. I'm nothing if not his advocate, and if it were his wish I would only encourage that he look at the current situation, and make his own decision. (as I'm sure you know, active duty in wartime requires strong conviction) I also do not push any of my views on him..at all..I'm careful not to do that and want him to think for himself. ..he is an interesting fellow because he is exposed to two sides of the family that have very diferent views. He's like Sweden..and mainly thinks allot and talks on both sides - as is age appropriate I think. He has some interesting insights all his own.
If there is a draft..
I could not stay. There is just no way. If there is drafting and my son does not want to go..if he is not totally in line with the cause, I'll do what I have to (in this situation, this War, this admin - mind you)
and not because I do not love my country, and not because I do not believe we should personally sacrifice for our country.. I love this place!!
and it wouldn't be because the War isn't going the 'way I want' it to -- but because I do not believe in the current higher management of relations and the War on Terror in the Middle East.
I also am very concerned about future attacks on America.
So............. that's about the size of it.
Frankly, I think being forthright is the best I can do.. what I have a real problem with is the fact that most of the higher ups (aside from the Generals, of course).. but Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and dozens more in Congress ect ..I have big problems with the fast that so many exist who push this War and yet would never send their own.. and have multiple deferments and/or desertions themselves when it was their time to serve!
Jesus, I can only imagine how things are there, and I know you do not WANT it, and I again thank all of you, every one for fighting for America the way that you do. Sincerely and deeply.
Ojai -- let me ask you.. do you think there is an impending draft?
Mo
[ 19. December 2005, 12:54 PM: Message edited by: Mo ]
Posts: 8337 | From the other shore | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
LymeOjai
Unregistered
posted
Mo,
No, I don't think the draft will be necessary. We currently have the strongest, professional military in the world. I can't see why we would need to reinstitute the draft even in the foreseeable future.
The USMC forces that I've been associated with are not complaining that much about second and third tours (of course there's b**ching and moaning, but anytime a group of grunts stops bi**hing and griping, something is really wrong). This is what we do for a living, it's expected.
Don't get me wrong, the lines of volunteers for tours of duty both to Afghanistan and Iraq are very short, but once the orders are cut, it's let's go and get this thing done.
Seriously, I would like to see more incentives for recruitment into the combat arms and higher re-enlistment bonuses. I'd personally like to see second and subsequent tour pay incentives.
I would like to see a higher percentage of the federal budget going to pay and benefits for the military. All of these things would help in recruitment, re-enlistment and the morale of current enlistees. Of course all of these are selfish views, but that's okay too.
In my opinion if the draft is ever brought back it will be well after GW leaves office. I think this thing will be over, at least in Iraq, in a very short amount of time. The utilization of the draft for completing the Iraqi mission will not be necessary.
I'm not that sure about the situation in Iran. I've never been to Tehran, but if I were a betting man (and I am), that's where I'd see us going next, lots of nasty terrorists, lots of good targets, lots of reasons to go there.
If there is a draft..I could not stay. There is just no way. If there is drafting and my son does not want to go..if he is not totally in line with the cause, I'll do what I have to (in this situation, this War, this admin - mind you)
Nobody in his or her right mind ever wants to go over there, it really sucks. Nobody speaks English, nobody knows how to make good cornbread or beans, it's either too hot or too cold, people keep shooting at us and there's no daytime television.
You're just thinking like a mom. Moms never want to see their children harmed. I've talked to lots of moms, including my own, who are scared to death for their sons and daughters. I just don't think we can pick and choose our causes. The country has decided to defeat the enemy, the commander-in-chief has picked the location and now someone has to carry out the mission. Fortunately moms don't have to make the decisions as to who goes and who doesn't.
My real problem with leaving to avoid the draft, regardless of the reason, is that sooner or later you'd have to face the fact that you left and others had to go in your place. I'm not sure I could live with that and thankfully I don't have to.
and I think both ends of the spectrum get blinded by emotion sometimes..
I must disagree, I never get emotional, I am not authorized to do so.
I was working for a Lt Col who administered my first re-enlistment oath 11 years ago. He told me that if the Marine Corps had wanted me to be emotional, they would have issued me emotions. They have not seen fit to do so.
The Lyme Disease Network is a non-profit organization funded by individual donations. If you would like to support the Network and the LymeNet system of Web services, please send your donations to:
The
Lyme Disease Network of New Jersey 907 Pebble Creek Court,
Pennington,
NJ08534USA http://www.lymenet.org/
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[lick]](graemlins/facelick.gif)
Mo
![[bonk]](graemlins/bonk.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Mo
![[kiss]](graemlins/kissing.gif)
oooHHaaaaaaa!![[shake]](graemlins/shake.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic