Comments Posted By Richard Bottoms
Displaying 211 To 220 Of 362 Comments
Re-enlistments were consistently off the charts throughtout the compaign
Couldn't have anything to do with the huge re-enlistment bonuses or the threats to soldiers that they would be called back under stop-loss anyway if they didn't re-up so why not take the $20k?
Remember stop loss? When you sign up Uncle Sam has you for a full six years, active or IRR (Inactive Ready Reserve).
Unlike now where the services are flush with recruits the Army was so desperate they were calling back 40 year old grandmothers to fill the ranks.
You can question whatever you want, but the OP addresses that very point: Hysterical reaction to criticism that conflicts with your worldview. No Democrat could have been a soldier, we know this because chickenhawks like Rush and Hannity, and Beck tell us only Republicans are patriots.
Comment Posted By Richard bottoms On 14.10.2009 @ 15:09
Even a substantial minority of the Democratic Party wanted the United States military to lose Iraq. But you know that, and it doesn’t go along with your false little narrative, now does it?
That's because in our version of the universe, that's patently false and insulting to boot.
As far as wanting to lose, that might be better addressed to the former Commander-in-Chief and his Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld who might be able to answer questions about not sending enough armored vehicles to protect the troops, who ignored a mountain of evidence that our war fighting strategy was an utter failure, and who together laid no plans for how to manage a Iraq after our lightning victory.
Thousands more troops are dead or maimed than ever had to be because Rumsfeld was incompetent at his job and George W. Bush only replaced him at the brink of utter defeat in a war that has lasted longer than WW I & WWII combined.
We marched by the millions to say don't go, while the country was sold ties to Al Queada and weapons of mass destruction that were non-existent. We screamed for years that troop levels were too low we were ignored. It was pure hardheadedness and luck that the surge worked militarily.
Politically, none of the goals have been achieved and $1,000,000,000,000 has been wasted as surely as if it were shoveled into a furnace.
As a former soldier I am outraged at what has been done to the United States Army, the troops, and most importantly the military families ground done by back to back to back to back deployments. Meanwhile bloodthirsty chest beaters can't seem to find their way to the recruiting office.
Comment Posted By Richard bottoms On 14.10.2009 @ 13:13
Given that I see exactly these sorts of arguments from writers popular with “elites”, I find it hard to dismiss them out of hand.
If you hate everything about your country, can you love your country?
When I was a kid one of the highest aspirations one could have was to be educated, to be among the elite.
I personally don't want my country to be run by plumbers. Honest, hard working and a fine fellow to go have a beer with. Not the person to be negotiating bilateral defense treaties with Russia.
I don't want an average guy to be president (or woman for that matter). I want the smartest guy on the planet who is available for the job. Elite? Damn straight.
Comment Posted By Richard bottoms On 14.10.2009 @ 12:03
Truer words were never spoken, especially on the ideals part. What enraged me about Iraq wasn't going to war, if you can stomp your enemies why not do so. It was going to war and working so hard to lose it.
It may not have been rational, but it made me so mad in 2005 I tried to re-enlist with he notion of keeping one 18 year old from having to go in what was clearly by then a foolish and poorly fought war.
The single greatest thing LBJ did was sacrifice the Democratic majority in the South by signing the 1965 Voting Rights Act. It made me a Democrat for life.
And while I could never vote for a Republican, it doesn't affect how I feel personally about a person who is one.
I don't hate anyone. I do hate torture. I don't hate George Bush. I do hate getting 50,000 troops maimed and then providing a wretched system to care for them.
I support what you're doing for one main reason: OKC, because if the GOP follows your advice they will start winning elections again. On the other hand, if they keep falling further into the abyss of anger, I believe the results will not be good. For anyone.
Comment Posted By Richard bottoms On 14.10.2009 @ 10:35
CAN THE GOP HELP GOVERN WHILE IN THE MINORITY?
And for Republicans governing means "no". Except for handing out tax breaks to the rich.
Can’t the government just GTF out of our lives already?
Give me back my share of DARPA (the internet), NASA (microelectronics), the Tennesse Valley Authority (cheap electricity), the Interstate System (access to everywhere), University & College System (Pell Grants, cheap student loans, bio-medical research), the CDC (pandemic protection), the FDA (non-poisonous meat & vegetables, medicines that work), OSHA (workplaces that don't kill you), FDIC (baking protection) and promise not to ask for a dime after the next earthquake/flood/tornado/hurricane/epidemic and you can go govern yourself.
Comment Posted By Richard bottoms On 11.10.2009 @ 11:43
President Obama has given the Republican eight months to come up with an answer besides no. Or shouting "you lie" at him.
In fact the president is in trouble with people in his own party because we have believed for months the only thing the GOP wants to do is delay and reject any proposal the president makes on any subject. Their goal is to ensure that no Democrat can run in 2010 be able to point to health care as an achievement.
Period.
Obama's outreach was sincere and more than patient, to the point of hurting his own agenda. I think the White House has finally wised up and will move forward without waiting for votes from the "death panel" Republicans that will never come no matter what he does.
Comment Posted By Richard bottoms On 10.10.2009 @ 11:51
POST HOC CRITICISM OF OBAMA TRIP JUSTIFIED
I just don' see how the GOP celebrating a loss of prestige as a long term winner. We can add this the the rooting for GM to close shop and for the banks to fail as more along the lines as putting Obama's defeat ahead of any benefit to the citizenry.
At least the man tried.
Comment Posted By Richard bottoms On 2.10.2009 @ 13:51
MEANINGLESS PROGRESS WITH IRAN HAILED AS 'TRIUMPH OF DIPLOMACY'
Barring an invasion and complete takeover of Iran how exactly are we to find these unknown sites?
Reducing Iran's acknowledge stockpile of uranium and inspections now is a great first step and certainly something we have neither the manpower, material, or funds on hand to achieve by force.
Comment Posted By Richard bottoms On 2.10.2009 @ 12:37
HAVE WE ALREADY ACCEPTED THE FACT OF AN IRANIAN BOMB
Seeing how well the Iraq occupation is going 6 years on out, and how much debt we’re in to the Chinese, such an attack would be sure to bankrupt us wether or not it succeeded.
Which is why I don't think there's much of a chance that we can or will mount an invasion.
For those that do believe it necessary, who believe it is the fate of the world hanging in the balance how can this be any less than D-Day in commitment. All hand on deck with Jonah Goldberg and Glenn Beck leading the way.
Commit to stepping up to the plate is all I ask.
Comment Posted By Richard bottoms On 1.10.2009 @ 19:42
The Daily Beast's Michael Adler reports that the "steps to build confidence" announced today are more concrete than Obama revealed. Iran has agreed to ship enriched uranium to Russia for processing, leaving it without enough to make a bomb.
President Obama’s statement about a confidence-building measure from Iran this afternoon left out the key detail: In a breakthrough agreement at talks in Geneva, Iran has agreed to send 1,200 kilograms of enriched uranium to Russia for further processing, two diplomats told the Daily Beast, noting this would mean Iran no longer has enough uranium to make a nuclear weapon.
Did I miss something or is this not a big deal?
Comment Posted By Richard bottoms On 1.10.2009 @ 19:18
