Wednesday, April 04, 2007

Riddle Me this, You Conservative Bloggers

Vice President Cheney always bad mouth anyone who talks against the war in Iraq... he's always making the talking points in favor of this President .

I guess you would say, that's what a Vice President is suppose to do.

Now let me ask you this; How can this Vice President say that we are sending the troops the wrong message, when we speak out against the war in Iraq or if we speak out against this President?

Riddle me this--- what kind of message is this Vice President sending the troops in Iraq and at Walter Reed, when he never even bothered to make a trip there to visit our wounded?

Can you name or show me any evidence, where this Vice President is shown at Walter Reed with our wounded?

What say you?


The Correct View said...

You are being too hard on Mr. C. He meant to go to the troops at Walter Reed. He even had his bags packed. However, they did not want to let him that close to live ammo and guns because they were really not comfortable with the idea that he may take one of them hunting....
PS....hit my blog and let me know what you think of my idea. I NEED READERS, me.

LETS TALK said...

Thanks for stopping by tcv, it's crazy how many overlook the fact that this man talks only to the rich, when give a speech.

He talks to his conservative base and many Republican's that still listen, in reference to defending any remarks about Bush and the Iraq war.

He seems to be to "VP" to visit the men and women that are dying for his cause.

It's mind blowing, that he cant bring himself to visit the wounded.

Tom Harper said...

Cheney supports the troops in all the ways that count: bumperstickers, yellow ribbons and slamming the patriotism of anyone who disagrees with the Iraqi war.

Visiting wounded veterans? Come on, they're wounded. Cheney doesn't have any use for them.

LETS TALK said...

You're so right Tom, he doesn't have any use for them.

The service members that can keep his promise to secure Iraq's oil, for the big oil companies, are the ones able to fight for his cause, they are his backbone--the one's that count.

Snave said...

Sorry about the following, but I have to rant here.

I think Cheney merely views our military as a means to his end, which is control of as much of the oil in the Middle East as possible. Control of the major energy source on Earth means control of more of the Earth, which is the neoconservative agenda... empire, unchallenged control of the world militarily and economically... world hegemony.

I think his approach somewhat differs from Bush, in that I believe Bush has fundamentalist reasons for warring in the Middle East, as well as for control of oil. I think they are both loons, but more so Bush because of his religious delusions.

I also see Bush as viewing our military as a kind of toy, or as pieces on a giant Risk gameboard. Because I believe he has no ability to empathize, he doesn't understand what it is like for families to lose loved ones as they fight for his "mission".

I love our military. Why the members I speak with on blogs think that it is impossible for me to support the troops without supporting the "mission" is something I just can't wrap my head around. I know several or our local guardsmen who have done at least one tour in Iraq, and one of them to whom I have spoken is fed up with the whole business. The military seems like it is an absolutist system by necessity, in which everything must be seen in black or white terms, but I wish more troops who have been there could speak out publicly about the Iraq war, particularly those who don't care for what they have seen.

I think the "mission" has been changed many times, and that it has also been accomplished enough times that we can call Iraq a "victory" and leave. We deposed a dictator who I think WAS evil, we ascertained there were no WMD in Iraq, and we installed a form of Democracy there. We have worked at rebuilding some of the country's infrasructure, and we have worked at training the Iraqis to police themselves. I never agreed with us invading that country, and in some ways I think the Iraqi people may actually be worse off in some ways than when an evil dictator was running things... I don't know what they want... something like Saddam, or a puppet American government?

To those who say we can't leave until we achieve "victory", I am not sure how well-based in reality that opinion is, given the nature of the sectarian violence in Iraq. I don't see how a problem such as that can be solved militarily, or a "victory" achieved. We may have solved a few problems in Iraq, we have certainly created others. Anyway, I think we have done just about all we can do there, so it's time to start bringing our troops home. We can keep our military busy by beefing up security at airports, inspecting incoming ships, patrolling our borders and rebuilding our infrastructure here at home. We need new hospitals, roads and schools as much as the Iraqis do, after all.

As far as leaving Iraq, I don't believe we will ever really leave entirely. The building of the permanent bases there says to me that we will have troops there for a long time, at least enough soldiers/Marines to man each of the bases we decide to maintain. I envision it as something akin to claiming territory in a country which doesn't like us, as we have done with Guatanamo in Cuba. Winning hearts and minds is another thing I don't think we can do militarily, and as long as we maintain a military presence in Iraq in order to control their oil, winning Iraqi hearts and minds is probably out the window.

While I think there have been a few positive aspects to our being in Iraq, I think they are far outweighed by the negative. I think we need to get Bush/Cheney out of office so that if troops are withdrawn from Iraq they aren't sent into Iran.

Also, riddle me this: whatever happened to trying to catch Osama Bin Laden? Is he no longer an effective-enough bogeyman to keep Americans afraid? Why have we seen so much less of him in the news? Is he dead or alive? Does he exist? How much can a nation be cowed by fearmongers like Dick Cheney before it says "enough is enough"?

My god, I hope our country can wake up.

LETS TALK said...

I agree with you snave, what a well put together comment or post, as I shall call it.

I was reading tom Harper's post about, "Will Bush Really Veto the Iraq Accountability Act?"

Boy, what information he brought to that post about what this administration is really up to, in reference to this mess in Iraq and why we want leave.

I wonder what Iraqi's would say, if asked; are you better off now, then you were 5 years ago?

I like your riddle and raise you one; What ever happen to Bush and the BCCI Bank?

Snave said...

Haha! Good one, LT! Like many good American sheeple, I had forgotten all about that one!!!

LETS TALK said...

There's so much dirt within this White House right now, I guess we had better change it's name.

Snave said...

I think maybe the best name for it right about now would be the Out House.

LETS TALK said...

Very nice there snave, the Out House.