digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate

Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.
See the original image at firedoglake.com

The Troops Hate Bush And Want Out of Iraq.

firedoglake.com — join the discussion on when will the Right turn on the troops.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Acewrap, on 12/11/2007, -51/+237I don't understand the phrase "when will the Right turn on the troops", didn't they already turn on them by sending them in to an illegal, immoral war in Iraq?

    Oh, that's right... They wear flag lapel pins so that's ok.
    • capiCrimm, on 12/11/2007, -63/+16well the troops that don't support our troops aren't worth listening too. They're a punch of pansies, ignore them.
      • bjornski, on 12/11/2007, -5/+38Maybe you're willing to take their place?
        • JimintheOC, on 12/11/2007, -7/+21Hell no that bitch hasn't the guts.
        • jon30041, on 12/11/2007, -2/+6I THINK he was being sarcastic.
          • fnaqzna, on 12/11/2007, -1/+1Wasn't he paraphrasing Rush Limbaugh?
          • EditorResponse, on 12/11/2007, -3/+2The troops love Bush and the United States of America. That is why they SIGNED UP during the war AND CONTINUE TO SIGN UP. To support G.W.Bush's vision. They all had a choice and decided to sign up, how stupid can the article be?
      • ivandir, on 12/11/2007, -2/+8He wouldn't be trolling on digg if he wanted to take their place.
      • adeptusliberus, on 12/19/2007, -1/+1If you love Bush and his war so much, how about driving down to your local recruiter and putting your name on the dotted line?
    • evo8ftw, on 12/11/2007, -49/+8Do us all a favor you keep your sheep mouth shut. ktbye
      • Acewrap, on 12/11/2007, -2/+10No.
        • evo8ftw, on 12/11/2007, -2/+3how many screen names do you have sunkist22?
      • daggah, on 12/11/2007, -3/+4If that's how you feel, then there are many other countries you'd be far more suited in. I hear Iran's nice this time of year? Seriously...why do you hate America?

        Oh, and Subaru > Mitsubishi.
    • damonic, on 12/11/2007, -12/+71The problem is that the people that profit from war, do not value peace.
      • ivandir, on 12/11/2007, -6/+5Actually they do value peace. It's just that it's a negative value for them.
        • zeromous, on 12/11/2007, -7/+4Oh my god I'm so impressed by your semantics! Seriously do people speak just to be heard?
    • masterm1nd, on 12/11/2007, -22/+7Apparently, you do not understand the concept or purpose of "the troops"
      • bjornski, on 12/11/2007, -10/+27Neither does this administration.

        Protecting profits and our "way of life" (read: dependence on oil) is NOT their purpose.
        • masterm1nd, on 12/11/2007, -20/+5If you think our troops are "stealing oil" and nothing more, then I guess you'd be right, or far left.
          • MarkOfTheDead, on 12/11/2007, -6/+10No, our government is "stealing oil" while our troops "intimidate people into complying" with military presence.
          • machinesbreathe, on 12/11/2007, -4/+4Nobody believes our troops are stealing oil. Everyone knows that.
            Please refrain from attaching any criticism of our foreign policy to the troops.
            It is narrow minded and erroneously generalizing in nature.
            They are the ones that are obligated to follow commands with no question, and no yellow ribbon or bumper sticker can ease anything more than ones shallow conscience knowing we are ceding our countries future into the self satisfying interests of a powerful few who respect neither life nor liberty.
          • Dumbledorito, on 12/11/2007, -3/+4Troops are for blowing up opposing forces. They are NOT, as has been shown over and over and OVER again, police and occupation specialists.
        • josefstalin, on 12/11/2007, -1/+2I'm in the Air Force and when I enlisted, I said an oath. The oath (a.k.a the Oath of Enlisment) said that I was to protect our way of life from ALL enemys foriegn and domestic, also the troops don't want to pull out of Iraq, theywant to stay their because unlike you, we had to take an antiterrorism class in boot camp, and we read excerpts from the Wahabi code that saysIf there is an Infedel on Hioly Land, they have to concetrate all of their power there
          • Monk22, on 12/11/2007, -1/+2ding ding ding!

            "we read excerpts from the Wahabi code that saysIf there is an Infedel on Hioly Land, they have to concetrate all of their power there."

            im glad someone sees the gameplan here.
          • erasedgod, on 12/11/2007, -2/+2Sorry, Stalin. That oath said "support and defend the constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic". I guess you Air Force guys don't take your oaths as seriously as the rest of us.

            Who exactly is subverting the constitution here? Said person definitely doesn't reside in Iraq.
    • phnx0221, on 12/11/2007, -10/+27"War is a quarrel between two thieves too cowardly to fight their own battle; therefore they take boys from one village and another village; stick them into uniforms, equip them with guns, and let them loose like wild beasts against each other." - Emma Goldman: Patriotism, A Menace to Liberty

      So these soldiers shouldn't be listened to because they're "pansies"?
      What exactly does that mean? Should I assume that by pansy, you mean that they don't have the courage to "man up" and go out there like the rest of the boys? Because they're all brothers, they went through everything together, they should stick together through the end? Regardless as to whether or not this is right, just, or humane, for them, or their "enemies"?
      The soldiers have been told to hate their enemy, to be suspicious of their enemy, to fight their enemy, and die for the cause of freedom. We're told to be "patriotic", and to "support the troops.". And they, and we, should just keep quiet when the questions start floating around as to what exactly it is that we're doing there, and why should these soldiers, or anyone else, have to die for it?

      • kolobcreek, on 12/11/2007, -15/+9I don't understand why you losers can't read. Troops != "military families"
        stop posting *****
        • bencefeher, on 12/11/2007, -17/+6Also directly FTA:
          *Nearly six out of every 10 military families disapprove of Bush's job performance and the way he has run the war.

          *Among those families with soldiers, sailors and Marines who have served in Iraq or Afghanistan, 60% say that the war in Iraq was not worth the cost.

          That means 60% of nearly 60% want out. Which means < 36% of the soldiers want out. NOT THE MAJORITY...dumb title.
        • jon30041, on 12/11/2007, -0/+6@bancefeher

          Those two statements are abut different topics. It's not 60% of 60%, it's 60% and 60%. The same people that don't like Bush (60% of military families) say that the war in Iraq is not worth it.
        • JoeVet, on 12/11/2007, -0/+3Apparently someone fail math in school and now has the the delusion that he is a great math thinker. How funny!
      • MarkOfTheDead, on 12/11/2007, -4/+11Agreed. I'd also like to see this freedom of ours they're over there fighting for. Last time I checked, my rights to free speech have diminished as well as privacy rights and rights to due process. I just hope I never get fingered as something I'm not, I can now look forward to being shipped off somewhere and kept in a cell because someone can't admit they made a mistake or lied.
    • Myonosken, on 12/11/2007, -2/+5"The troops hate bush"
      That's a bit of a blanket statement. I'm sure many question what is happening but I doubt half hate him. Don't forget, those in Iraq have a lot of information censored that comes in.
    • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 12/11/2007, -6/+8I'm sick to death of liberals pretending they care about us so they can score some cheap points in political battles, then turn around and patronize us, refer to us as childeren, call us stupid and uneducated, continually imply we are all baby killers, burn effigies of us, deface the monuments to those who have fallen, and their worship phony soldiers like Jesse McBeth. Liberals will give fakers like him who lie about being in the military all the face time in the world, and then ignore the rest of us who believe in the mission.
      • daggah, on 12/11/2007, -4/+7Yes, everyone in the military who opposes Bush are really just not in the military. Including me. I dunno what happened for the last 3 and a half years but I'm not really wearing an Air Force uniform right now and I really wasn't in Baghdad almost two years ago.
        • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 12/11/2007, -1/+3I didn't say that EVERYONE who has been to Iraq thinks the same way. Dissent soldiers and phony soldiers and fake stories (NRO) get a disproportionate amount of time in the media.

          Maybe someday you find out that liberals who think value opinion because you are against the war won't give one ***** about you the minute they no longer need you.

          You do know that they think you are a baby killer, right?
        • LukasSmith, on 12/11/2007, -1/+2Yeah its like senators get on tv with a handful of harvard students who are ILLEGAL. and then say this is why we should have amnesty for 20 million illegals. ahaha. God I hate liberals.
        • syowr, on 12/11/2007, -2/+2You complain that you "didn't say that EVERYONE" and in the same breath lump all "liberals" into one pile.

          Maybe someday you will find out that politicians who you think value your opinion, won't give one ***** about you the minute they no longer need you.

          ---fixed that for you to both make sense, since your sentence was gibberish, and to remove your obvious bias and make it reflect reality more accurately. I hate for you to look like a moran ...
          • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 12/11/2007, -1/+2"Maybe someday you will find out that politicians who you think value your opinion, won't give one ***** about you the minute they no longer need you."

            I am under no illusion they do.

            Not sure what "moran" is though, besides an Irish last name
    • DanThePainter, on 12/11/2007, -3/+4This story is flagged for possibly being inaccurate. Read this and see some reasons why:
      http://www.blogpi.net/hate-is-a-strong-word
  • sedek89, on 12/11/2007, -33/+113this won't change a thing. Bush doesn't care about the soldiers, and their opinion will be manipulated sooner rather than later
    • evo8ftw, on 12/11/2007, -42/+13keep drinking that kool-aid sheep
      • FTLJohnson, on 12/11/2007, -9/+20How did it feel to be a sheep back when you actually were in the majority of dumbasses that supported Bush? How did it feel to have the whole country slowly start to realize around you that you and everyone who supports Bush like you are just flat out wrong? I mean, you probably even had a bunch of people close to you totally change their viewpoints and realize how mistaken they had been. I'm genuinely curious, see, because I only vote on principles, meaning that I voted for Harry Browne and Michael Badnarik... I knew BEFORE Bush was elected that he would be a disaster. I said it about Bush, Gonzales, Katherine Harris, Mel Martinez... Pretty much every leader elected by churchgoing morons who NEVER actually research who they are voting for. I've never voted for Bush, nor voted for a Democrat, so I'm really wondering what a herd member like you feels when you realize that the rest of your herd left you.
        • evo8ftw, on 12/11/2007, -17/+7ftljohnson get a ***** clue
          • Wartyboskfapped, on 12/11/2007, -6/+10IOW you got nothing.
          • the6thReplicant, on 12/11/2007, -5/+8Yep, he's got nothing but sheeple sound bites.
          • MarkOfTheDead, on 12/11/2007, -5/+4Obvious Troll is the most obvious I've ever seen.
    • Hickeroar, on 12/11/2007, -4/+11The main error in this argument is that the author of the article is saying that the troops don't support the troops... The troops support each other just fine, they just don't appear to be supporting the president (assuming the article is correct).

      EVERY red blooded American should be supporting the TROOPS as a whole (minus the obvious rotten apples that have popped up from time to time) and keeping their opinion of the president and his decisions completely separate.
      • BrewBeau, on 12/11/2007, -3/+8That's not an error because the people who support the war feel that's the only way to support the troops. So, the author is saying the troops don't support "the troops", meaning the war.
      • Scaryclouds, on 12/11/2007, -0/+8I don't believe the author is saying that, he is pointing out the folly of saying not supporting the war = not supporting the troops. But if you followed that logic absolutely then that means the majority of the troops don't support themselves.
      • jamdogg, on 12/11/2007, -1/+2I think innocent men, women and children who are trying to live in a shattered country need more support than "the troops".
    • FTLJohnson, on 12/11/2007, -12/+7Really, are ALL the soldiers 'Black People'? I know Bush doesn't care about them, because Kanye said so...

      I feel like this could be one of those SAT questions...
      Bush does not care about black people
      Some soldiers are black people,
      therefore Bush does not care about soldiers.

      Is this statement correct? If not, explain. (although I doubt Bush could answer an SAT question now, all that coke probably fried his brain)
      • FTLJohnson, on 12/11/2007, -6/+2I now realize I should have ended that joke with something punchier, like smashing Bush's brain like an egg with a frying pan...
      • saifatlast, on 12/11/2007, -3/+3I dugg you up for effort.
    • thatsmyaibo, on 12/11/2007, -4/+11Stop pinning this solely on Bush and the Republicans. The Democratic members of congress voted this war in and are just as responsible. Politicians are corrupt in general and being so bipartisan is part of the problem this country faces. Stop with the one sided propaganda posts.
      • SpacePoet, on 12/11/2007, -4/+3No, you stop pinning blame where it doesn't deserve. This was Bush'Co's war, period. Nothing was going to stop him from it. Look how far they pushed the bs propaganda down our throats for months on end. If that didn't work, they just would have tried something else. People, beware, this is a new talking point, blame the Dems for Iraq. They want you to forget all those months of war drums, not to mention the fact that the Reps controlled all 3 branched of government.
        • thebaron2, on 12/11/2007, -0/+4Nothing but a funding cut - but apparently the newly elected Democratic congress, elected to STOP the war and bring the troops HOME, doesn't feel that it's a priority.

          There is PLENTY of blame to go around here.
          • ChoiceMad, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1Humanity is responsible for humanity . (For the dimwits--this is not sarcasm)
          • SpacePoet, on 12/13/2007, -1/+1They have tried, twice and the President and the Reps in Congress painted them as surrenderers and vetoed the bill. When the country is run by politics this is what you get. The Dems have a slim margin of influence, but it is still Bush's America (sadly).
    • Dewhead, on 12/11/2007, -1/+7the troops are made up of individual human beings who probably each have their own opinion so it is so stupid to say that all of one group or another feels exactly the same way. I personally know of many soldiers that believe 100% in their mission and I also know that just like the rest of us they have good days and bad days. I for one can go from loving my profession on one week to being sick of it and ready for a change on the next. The men and women who sign up to protect our country do so with the full knowledge that they might be in combat. God bless them.
    • dukeochutney, on 12/11/2007, -2/+3since when is american news media 'liberal'
      • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 12/11/2007, -4/+1Since the end of WWII, when the NYT was activly covering up for communist genocide and massive forced famines in Ukraine region of the Soviet "workers paradise" Union.
        • daggah, on 12/11/2007, -1/+4LOL, you're an idiot. Sure does make a lot of sense for the capitalist media to be liberal doesn't it?
      • obliviousfool, on 12/11/2007, -0/+2Replace "liberal" with "corporate" and that sticker actually makes a little sense!
    • rwvalentine, on 12/11/2007, -0/+2sedek89, that didn't even rhyme
      no kanye are you
  • openj, on 12/11/2007, -34/+23Everyone wants out of Iraq. You may be winning the bullets and bombs war, but you're losing ground in the moral war.
    Against people who flew planes into your buildings. Seriously. How sick is that?
    • Terr01, on 12/11/2007, -5/+18Well, that's not really who we're fighting, unfortunately. It's primarily about local politics and domestic power struggles over land and influence rather than small cells of international nutters with grudges.
    • firejack007, on 12/11/2007, -10/+4Quantify "everyone". You always have some troops that are bad apples and shouldn't have joined the military in the first place. Plus they should all know what the job is when they enlist. The vast majority of the troops want to finish the job.
      • centerblack, on 12/11/2007, -1/+10You don't have any more credibility or right to say "The vast majority of the troops want to finish the job" than the poster does to say "The troops hate Bush and want out of Iraq".

        I seriously doubt most soldiers are concerned with furthering our middle eastern agenda to secure more oil resources through the invasion and occupation of Iraq, coupled with the installment of a puppet government we expect to be sympathetic to our goals for the region. (We certainly didn't come for WMD's or Iraqi Freedom.)

        The vast majority of troops want to survive that ***** hole with both arms and legs intact, and keep themselves and their friends alive so that they can all come back to the US of ***** A and bang their girlfriends...
      • brentinkc, on 12/11/2007, -0/+2Please define the phrase "Finish the Job".
        • Albionshores, on 12/11/2007, -1/+1It is a military term for "can't wait for the tour to finish 'cos, even if I have to pretend I'm fruity, I aint comin' back to this place!"
    • Ivthypain, on 12/11/2007, -0/+4That would be Saudi arabia, Pakistan and possibly the CIA
  • rplantz, on 12/11/2007, -28/+9I think everyone wants out of Iraq. There isn't a Starbucks for MILES. GEEZE.
    • Terr01, on 12/11/2007, -6/+6Just you wait, it'll be in the Green Zone right next to the mobile oppression palace.
    • 01l0, on 12/11/2007, -2/+7There is a "coffee shop rivaling any Starbucks" inside the Baghdad Green Zone. * It is most likely run by KBR, but I could have sworn I read somewhere that there were already brand-name corporate chains operating there.
      http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=30344 ...
    • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1There are coffee shops in bigger bases. I think the one in LSAA Anaconda is Green Beans.
    • erasedgod, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1The only one I saw was in Kuwait. How horrible is that?
  • UltraPenguinX, on 12/11/2007, -25/+48BREAKING: The sky is blue
    • Livewire, on 12/11/2007, -5/+3Blue to you might be blood red in someone else's eyes, although they may still call it blue.
    • Zaggynl, on 12/11/2007, -2/+4More like grey and clouded, but that's me.
    • LukasSmith, on 12/11/2007, -4/+1Ok lets throw all these wild conspiracy theories out the window. BEcause none of you have any proof. This isnt a peter jackson movie. Bush is not saruman or the wicked witch. you can say say say all you want but until you have proof proof proof all this war seems to be is just a mistake. Not some vast conspiracy not some hairbrained scheme to rule Iraq. Besides have you ever realized that our military provides JOBS to people who desperatly need jobs. You think people join the military because they love America and thats it? Then why do military recruiters keep increasing the benefits of joining? Yea im sure there a few patriotic people there. But the rest just want a job. And they know as you should recognize that thier JOB may require them to die. And dont give me that just war crap. There has never been a just war because ultimatly who is justified to make that decision? Everyone has thier own agenda including the UN. This idea that a handful of western nations that rule the UN will create just war situations is rediculous. I mean I guess we could disband our military but then alot of those people will end up on the street mainly because thats where they started. Iraq was ruled by a truely evil person who shouldnt even have been allowed to exist who was ingnoring UN sanctions. I dont think you realize but Clinton was bombing Iraq. google it. The UN the useless creation that it is did absolutely nothing. There were Iraqi defectors like Chalabi and his Iraqi Congress in exile that lied and said Iraq would be easy and welcoming. There were other Iraqi defectors who lied about weapons. So who really was led into war? YOu want a vast conspiracy theres one. And you can actually back that one up.
  • lebsoljah, on 12/11/2007, -34/+13Most soldiers are grunts and their word has no value when sent to war
    • armyabn1, on 12/11/2007, -4/+25You are obviously not in the military nor have you ever been. Most soldiers are NOT grunts - there is usually a 10 to 1 ratio of support troops to ground pounders.

      Don't make up stupid, inaccurate stuff just so you have something to say on here and feel important.
      • mnmleon, on 12/11/2007, -3/+6you owned him.. nice work!
      • linuxrebel, on 12/11/2007, -1/+2army, been there been that, grunt and remf. Either way "This we shall defend" oo aa!
    • JimintheOC, on 12/11/2007, -3/+4Your a dumbass. Get your facts right. Dumbass.
      • lebsoljah, on 12/11/2007, -0/+0Whatever ... My words are expected to piss some emotional people off. Soldiers are grunts and they will do anything their leaders tell them to.
    • Frnnkdlxx, on 12/11/2007, -3/+7My cousin is not a grunt. He handles high technology in the telecommunications section. And he doesn't want to be there, didn't want to be there, and rejected the idea before we went in. Reported as being COMPLETELY offensive as well as stupid.
  • phenry50BMG, on 12/11/2007, -12/+28Given the current consensus for use of the term "hate", I think the title was a bit misleading.
    I have no doubt that the troops in Iraq have realized the quagmire they have been thrust into and are certainly ready to come home and quit policing/empire building for King George Bush and his neocon cronies. (One could easily fact check that statement with the number of troops who are supporting Ron Paul).
    Our troops are not expendable pawns in a global chess game. They are men and women with families and friends here who deserve to live their lives with all of their limbs and faculties intact. The fact that ***** like Bill Kristol and Sean Hannity want to throw them into a meat grinder to further an agenda that is not only unConstitutional but also unAmerican should cause one or two MILLION Americans to realize that these soldiers are people with family, friends, kids, etc. They aren't fodder to be thrown away for some ***** agenda.
    If you're willing to talk ***** and toss these lives away for your petulant agenda, step up and put your money where your mouth is! Nobody is stopping you ***** from joining the military that you are so happy to throw around the world like it's your own personal sporting team. ***** or get off the ***** pot!


    • linuxrebel, on 12/11/2007, -5/+3Amen brother, I'm freaking sick and tired of Republicrat excuses like "I'm not the Army type." Well let me clue some of these wimps in on something. The only person who isn't the army kind is called, the enemy.
      Maybe it's time to make full citizenship a reward for military service (say 7-10 years with recall and a REAL Honorable Discharge, not a 'daddy got me') Birth gives you legal residency, but ONLY, service gives you citizenship. Threw out history those who failed to serve also tend to rattle the sword the hardest. There may be some real value in choosing as King the best leader in battle.
      • rockdawg, on 12/11/2007, -0/+2"Nobody is stopping you ***** from joining the military that you are so happy to throw around the world like it's your own personal sporting team." No the title isn't misleading the soilder all of them won't out right defy there leader as can be expected. As for the quote from you IT better be ment for bush and the entire usa.
      • waynetheman, on 12/11/2007, -0/+5I was with you right up until "make full citizenship a reward for military service." If we're to have a standing army (despite its unconstitutionality), we should just adequately pay the troops... granting special benefits for anyone who joins (including, presumably, "illegals") is asking for abuse.

        But your stance on birth status is great. The only reason I hadn't completely agreed with getting rid of birth citizenship was because it could lead to illegal status for people who, through no fault of their own, had spent their entire lives in the U.S. Granting them legal residency instead of full citizenship seems to take care of that.
      • Wartyboskfapped, on 12/11/2007, -0/+3The Roman Empire did *exactly* this, and it was one of the factors leading to its demise. Read Gibbon.
  • blitzer, on 12/11/2007, -19/+47Soldiers are sent to war to die. And then not cared for when they get home.

    Pretty horrific gig if you ask me...
    • Hickeroar, on 12/11/2007, -5/+6Ron Paul ftw. He's done loads of ranting against the horrific treatment of vets.

      They get paid crappy when they're in and treated crappy when they're out. I wonder how many start wondering why they ever signed up...at least after the fact.
    • Scaryclouds, on 12/11/2007, -3/+10The most un-American thing one can ever do is disrespect a service member. It is absolutely UNACCEPTABLE how our veterans are treated especially our wounded vets. The federal government should be ashamed the lengths wounded veterans have to go through to receive proper compensation.
      • the6thReplicant, on 12/11/2007, -1/+3No the most un-American thing to do is to ignore and subvert the Constitution. That's what the Army and President vows to protect.

        Obviously, I agree with you, just not that bit.
        • NCSUspoon, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1For the love of God, is all you and others think about the subversion of the constitution? I mean really man! I can't read a single thing on digg without tripping over oozing anti-bush sentiment. I am really against Bush, as I am sure you are. But does it really bear brining up in every conversation? It's like those evangelical christians who bring up jesus in every conversation. "Did you see the patriots' game last night?" "Yeah man, Jesus was really with them in that game." No! It wasn't jesus, it was Tom Brady.
          So I say to you, No it wasn't Bush breaking the constitution. It is the penalty of war.
      • rmxz, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1Because they're "just following orders"?
        I agree that 99+% of service members deserve our respect. But you're overgeneralizing the other way.
    • rmxz, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1.
    • NCSUspoon, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1No one forced them to sign the dotted line. Not saying that it is acceptable behavior, but if you get in line with a profession whose main goal is to kill; I have a hard time supporting any mission you are sent on. Expescially when the mission goal are not even visible any more. The main goal of what me and my friends have affectionately called "Bush's War" seems to be 'stay alive long enough until the next election'.
    • Iamyourowner, on 12/12/2007, -0/+0Ahh its ***** war. What do you expect? What is the army for? They choose to sign up.
  • l00s3r, on 12/11/2007, -16/+28When I was in the Army I thought the government wanted to get me killed for no reason.
    • ufia, on 12/11/2007, -6/+17Who gave you permission to think, soldier? Drop and give me 20!
    • m3t00, on 12/11/2007, -0/+2When I was in the Army the only thing that mattered was keeping my friends alive. If the government wanted to kill us then they became the enemy. We did our best to stay alive.
    • rmxz, on 12/11/2007, -0/+4l00s3r: "get me killed for no reason"
      nah, they had a reason - probably oil or money or both.
  • Caspercreep, on 12/11/2007, -6/+2Ya don't say?
  • thebellmaster1x, on 12/11/2007, -9/+2What? But the neocons on Digg told me that wanting to have the troops leave is me not supporting the troops.
    So the troops don't support the troops?
    If I recall correctly, such a proof by contradiction, at least in mathematics, proves them wrong, yeah?
    • luftrofl, on 12/11/2007, -0/+5Neocons on digg?
      • acceptab1euname, on 12/11/2007, -1/+7Just look for the comments with more than 30 negative diggs. That's usually a good starting point.
      • chubbybubba, on 12/11/2007, -3/+3most are too busy with real jobs to be bsing in the comment section.
    • thebellmaster1x, on 12/11/2007, -2/+9IIHII? JamesSpaza? Ringing any bells?
  • Xizer, on 12/11/2007, -18/+3Hmm... let's see... what's keeping them over there? Oh, that's right... themselves. If the majority of the army doesn't want to be there, why don't they just revolt and leave? THEY are the force that is backing up what the leadership demands. The leadership is just a bunch of old guys sitting around desks. It's the guys with the guns who make what they command hold any weight.

    If most of the guys with the guns don't want to be in Iraq, they should band together and leave.
    • Habemus, on 12/11/2007, -3/+10>"If most of the guys with the guns don't want to be in Iraq, they should band together and leave."

      Most of the guys with the guns do want to be in Iraq, what makes you think otherwise? This poll was not of them -- RTFA. It was a poll of their families back home. The subject line here is inaccurate.
      • armyabn1, on 12/11/2007, -3/+4Amen.

        The soldiers in Iraq have seen the good that we are doing there now - regardless of why we went in the first place. Most of us (the vast majority) believe in this war. It's the American public who want us to come home - they have been misled by the media and an agenda-driven left. The US military has indeed had some setbacks, but we are doing an enormous amount of good there. Don't be fooled by the doom and gloom media or insanely inaccurate blogging of people who want the Bush Administration to look bad.
        • notoneofus, on 12/11/2007, -4/+5I can't speak to the POV of soldiers in Iraq, not being there myself.

          However, you said: "...people who want the Bush Administration to look bad."

          Do you think the Bush Administration looks good right now? By *any* stretch of the imagination?
        • the6thReplicant, on 12/11/2007, -2/+1Spoken like a true neocon: Blame everyone except yourself for the mess you've made. We should just call you mummy-boys for the amount of whining and finger pointing you guys do.

          Also can you please document me some of the "agenda-driven left" that you talk about? It's always good for a laugh.
        • Notasheeple, on 12/11/2007, -2/+1Bush can look plenty bad all by himself! He needs no help with that.
    • Scaryclouds, on 12/11/2007, -1/+7You have no idea how the military works, just shut up.
  • skippy17, on 12/11/2007, -6/+3McCain's response to knowledge
    http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/McCain_I_don_t_c ...
  • wafflesomd, on 12/11/2007, -17/+6Bush, Tasers, Ron Paul.

    $5 to who can guess the next retarded digg fad.
    • goingtoalpha, on 12/11/2007, -2/+7Seems like bacon has a shot.
    • Xizer, on 12/11/2007, -2/+2Feminism. I just glanced at my Dugg stories and I noticed something fishy going on... these were also all front page stories too.
      • p0s3r, on 12/11/2007, -4/+3Stop digging them just because they're on the front page you stupid retarded sheep.
    • Caspercreep, on 12/11/2007, -4/+1ummm....your face probably
    • MaTT2011, on 12/11/2007, -4/+6don't be jealous just because Digg users are conscious, thinking responsible citizens of the U.S. who wish to see it improved by dethroning war mongers like bush, ridding the country of an over-abused torture utility like tasers and wish to elect a responsible president in the form of Ron Paul.
      • Iamyourowner, on 12/12/2007, -0/+0Hahahahahahahaha.......that is all I have to say.
    • 01l0, on 12/11/2007, -2/+3The next fad will be Vince Foster conspiracy theories and the glorification of the beehive of right-wing extremism that President Hillary is going to stir up by being the first woman president, and a Clinton.
    • EVogel, on 12/11/2007, -0/+9How is a man who starts illegal wars and lies to his own country, a growing problem in our growing police state, and someone who believes that thinking differently might cause a change a fad? Are you blind to the world around you?
    • obliviousfool, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1Boy, it would be nice if Bush was just a "fad!" Thanks for the chuckle, moron.
  • thebellmaster1x, on 12/11/2007, -7/+8Oh, and concerning the thumbnail:
    I support our intelligence by boycotting Fox News.
  • goingtoalpha, on 12/11/2007, -9/+16So its official.
    EVERYONE in the middle east with a gun hates Bush.
    That's our President!
    • p0s3r, on 12/11/2007, -3/+3Citation please.
      • goingtoalpha, on 12/11/2007, -1/+2Humor and personal amusement are the sources I need when it comes to commenting on an article that is misleading and inaccurate.
    • Scaryclouds, on 12/11/2007, -0/+2That's my Bush!
  • Habemus, on 12/11/2007, -14/+60Buried -- inaccurate. The headline is "the troops hate Bush" but the poll was (only partly) of FAMILIES stateside who have a relative in the Armed Services. It was NOT a poll of the SOLDIERS themselves, every single one of whom volunteered for their service, and guess what? They are their own selves. They are not children -- they are adults with their own opinions even if their mommy back home suffers from BDS.

    Totally inaccurate headline. I would expect nothing less from the severely deranged and biased "firedoglake." The LA Times headline is much more accurate.

    Buried.
    • acceptab1euname, on 12/11/2007, -4/+3Just thought it'd be worth pointing out that just because you volunteer for military service does not mean you necessarily agree with the orders you're issued.
      • Pimptastic, on 12/11/2007, -0/+3damn straight. Hell I didnt like Clinton. But I still followed my orders.
      • m3t00, on 12/11/2007, -1/+3Morale is the factor leadership generally ignores until they get shot by their own troops. Good leaders know the troops need alcohol and pussy every now and then or things will just grind to a halt. Extending tours was a call made by politicians and armchair generals who are simply out of touch with reality.
    • Scaryclouds, on 12/11/2007, -2/+1We not counting Marines anymore?
    • Krasnovian, on 12/11/2007, -3/+5I'm in Iraq. The headline is accurate.
    • JacobVorpahl, on 12/11/2007, -0/+4I was in Iraq last year and I'm going again in 2009. The headline is not accurate.
      • erasedgod, on 12/11/2007, -1/+1Wow, that's one hell of a gap. Must be nice.
        • JacobVorpahl, on 12/14/2007, -0/+0I don't make the rotation schedule.
  • evo8ftw, on 12/11/2007, -10/+24Miss Leading Headline!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This article is about a survey of troops families not troops themselves also they are not even sourced.

    Bury this unless you are among the hate spwening truth burying sheep.
    • mal1964, on 12/11/2007, -3/+1I didn't steal your comment i swear
    • HerbSolo, on 12/11/2007, -1/+2Miss Leading? - Never heard of her.
      • amgamer23, on 12/11/2007, -1/+1The next Miss America pageant...it's the Miss Leading Headline pageant!
  • mal1964, on 12/11/2007, -3/+13this is family poll not troops, yes I'm sure a mom wants her son home that her right. the poll used the word" disapprove" not hate, propaganda spam!
    • mal1964, on 12/11/2007, -2/+2The survey, conducted under the supervision of Times Poll Director Susan Pinkus, interviewed 1,467 adults nationwide from Nov. 30 through Monday. It included 631 respondents from military families and 152 who have had someone in their family stationed in Iraq or Afghanistan. The margin of error for the entire sample is plus or minus 3 percentage points; for military families it is 4 percentage points, and for families with someone in the war zone it is 8 percentage points.
  • Tomson74, on 12/11/2007, -3/+12Wow this is a BS article. Burried.
    Amazing how many people fell for this crap
  • sillykalcifer, on 12/11/2007, -9/+3when you don't know what your dying for, of course you want to come home
  • nastronomical, on 12/11/2007, -14/+13Show me a Liberal that gives a damn about our troops! They take the cowardly traiters route and say...."I support them by bringing them home." get ***** Real! I guess your support only occurs when YOU agree with what they do! Liberals support our troops as much as they support freedom of speech. They only support it as long as THEY agree with it.
    • empraptor, on 12/11/2007, -3/+16I, for one, support freedom of speech - regardless of how dumb it makes the speaker sound.

      For example...

      Show me a neocon that gives a damn about our troops! They take the idiotic route and say... 'I support them by keeping them in the line of fire' get ***** real! I guess your support only occurs when YOU agree with what they do! Neocons support our troops as much as they support freedom of spech. They only support it as long as THEY agree with it.

      Now wasn't that a nice load of *****? I support your freedom to shovel that kind of crap into Digg. I also support my freedom to shovel that kind of ***** right back at you.

      And I do think it's in the average soldier's interest to be back home rather than increase risk of them being killed or committing suicide later on in their life.

      But that is not why I'm opposed to the war. The war is wrong. It was based on a lie, unnecessarily hasty in making, and it's a costly mess that has turned Iraq into a crappier place. The administration should have stepped back from whatever ideology it adheres to and it should have at that moment faced reality. We live in an objective reality in which Iraq has become a worse place to live. Talk about bright shining future for Iraq that was promised for 4 years and never delivered all you want - that does not change the objective reality one bit.
      • Demaskee, on 12/11/2007, -1/+5Wrong! What do you think us troops are paid to do? As a current service member who has done time in the middle east and will be returning shortly, I can tell you my job is to neutralize the enemy. It isn't glamorous or pretty, its usually extremely boring and at times terrifying. The separation from my family is is something I feel guilty for putting them through but quite honestly I can't see myself doing anything else. I've heard many peoples' opinions on what is and is not supporting the troops. Well here is one service member's opinion. Shut the hell up. You people might as well be day traders in 2000. The slightest hint of bad news and it's oh my god we have to pull out. People are going to get hurt and some will die. What the hell did you think war was, a game? This is for real. I give two ***** about you when I'm in the desert. I care about my guys and myself and ensuring we all come home intact. For you people crying this is a quagmire, let's get some perspective here. We lost more people in Normandy (1 Day) in WW2 then we have in the entire war in Iraq. There is a ***** of good stuff we are doing over there, not that you would know. If you want to support me do the following:
        1) Make an effort to learn all of what is going on in Iraq. The media isn't cutting it.
        2) Give the US Military and America the benefit of the doubt. We get a few bad apples here and there but the vast majority of service members are those you can be proud to have representing America.
        3) The war is not going to end tomorrow, if you want the war to stop then elect officials that fall in line with that. Every time you pronounce defeat in an attempt to tarnish a politician's reputation you do much worse to the troops. You see, the terrorists don't make the distinction. The rhetoric gives them hope which is waning as of late, they are looking for anything to keep them going. Articles like this don't help.
    • acceptab1euname, on 12/11/2007, -3/+4Yeah, just like those people running the VA hospitals did such a great job supporting the troops.
    • neozeed, on 12/11/2007, -0/+6Newsflash bucky, there isn't a right/left. You've been duped. Tell me how do you think things will change once Hillary is installed?
      Hmmm? She gets her funding from the same people....
    • BlacklabelSAR, on 12/11/2007, -3/+3Are you in Iraq "fighting for our freedoms"? You are calling at least 70% of the US population Liberal. My brother in law came back from fighting in Iraq. And do you think he wanted to stay there. Well he didn't ,you stupid *****. And none of his fellow troops did either. Oh, and he and all of his fellow soldiers HATE BUSH. So do you support THOSE troops?
      • OC73, on 12/11/2007, -2/+3Who cares whether troops want to be in a war zone? You think cops like patrolling ***** neighborhoods?

        When people sign up to serve, they don't say "Ok, I'll sign up, but only if I get to go to ______."

        The notion that troops have to like where they serve or they should be brought home is one of the dumbest arguments ever.
        • erasedgod, on 12/11/2007, -1/+1Yeah! Especially those NATIONAL GUARD soldiers.
      • Iamyourowner, on 12/12/2007, -2/+0They didn't want to stay there? No *****.
    • deftskier, on 12/11/2007, -1/+0I only support freedom of speech it is not "below viewing threshold," you my friend are buried.
      • machinesbreathe, on 12/11/2007, -0/+0Who are you? Nikita Krushef?
  • jask0, on 12/11/2007, -2/+2So, John McCain was wrong?
  • nastronomical, on 12/11/2007, -13/+8The troops want to win the fight. All they ASK IS THAT YOU SUPPORT THAT! They arent COWARDS LIKE YOU LIBTARDS! They are not foam at the mouth Keyboard warriors! They do the Job you arent man enough to rise to!
    • acceptab1euname, on 12/11/2007, -2/+5Who's foaming at the mouth, again?
    • ordig, on 12/11/2007, -3/+4I thought we won like four years ago. WTF are we still doing there?
    • the6thReplicant, on 12/11/2007, -1/+4By demonizing those that disagree with you instead of trying to convince their error via logical argument and production of facts you've just shot any chance of the troops doing what they need to do.

      See on one side you have an ideologically driven Administration whose foundation is based on Cold War rhetoric (where they have been proven by history to be 95% wrong) and supporting people solely based on their own self-interest (you know like helping Saddam Hussein and OBL - which again proves how wrong they are).

      Now we can have a debate on why this Administration is creating a climate within America that is less about the right of freedom and religion and more about enforcing a rule of law, where the law is dictated by the elite (both "left" and "right"). But then I think debate is not your game.
    • SpacePoet, on 12/11/2007, -1/+3Only a devious and disastrous leader would send his troops in with no goal, no plan, ill-equipped, and as occupiers under false pretenses. That would have given them a better chance 'to win' this non-war. This libtard would have done that if the war was just to begin with...
    • JedicodeWarrior, on 12/11/2007, -1/+1nastronomical, you're an idiot!
    • BlacklabelSAR, on 12/11/2007, -1/+2It looks like nastronomical is volunteering to serve in Iraq. Go get 'em Jethro.
    • Notasheeple, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1yeah, come to my house, I'll show you a keyboard warrior! "not man enough to rise to." That's just a stupid thing to say. Why do you think recruitment is at an all time low? It's because no one wants to go fight and die for oil anymore. Unfortunately You have the assumption that all the troops know what they are fighting for. Do you know what they are fighting for? Let me guess "We gotta git tha terrist" How many Hijackers from 9/11 were actually from Iraq? You don't know, that's what I thought. Liberal I am not. But you sir, are what we call "blind to the facts" because you still want to want to think of your dictator Bush as some kind of saint, that would never put your brothers and sisters on the front lines in harms way for no good reason. Uninformed people like you will be the downfall of us all if you and your kind don't wake up to the facts.
  • hadees, on 12/11/2007, -2/+11Um... actually the poll says military FAMILIES want out of Iraq.

    *Nearly six out of every 10 military families disapprove of Bush's job performance and the way he has run the war.

    *Among those families with soldiers, sailors and Marines who have served in Iraq or Afghanistan, 60% say that the war in Iraq was not worth the cost.

    *Nearly seven in 10 favor a withdrawal within the coming year or "right away."

    I guess that doesn't make as good a headline. I really hate this beat Bush at what ever cost mentality. It isn't healthy for our country. Bush is a moron but I wish everyone who considers themselves on the Right and Left could just be deported. I would rather have a bunch of illegal aliens become citizens then have to hear idiots talk about how their ***** don't stick. Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same coin and the only way out is for someone to start a moderate political party that can get the majority of the American peoples vote. Stop listening to the fringe.
  • petrodollar, on 12/11/2007, -11/+0The troops are dumb hicks. Even worse, they're poors. POORS! I laugh at their stupidity for swallowing guzzling neo jizz all these years.
    • pyronik, on 12/11/2007, -1/+4i really hope you get hit by a bus
    • VSpec1, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1Go play in traffic you stupid *****.
    • senorsam21, on 12/11/2007, -0/+3You ignorant piece of *****, I'm in Iraq now serving at Camp Victory. I'm smarter than you and am currently surrounded by people who are smarter than me (staff judge advocates and public affairs officers). I'm not sure about my comrades in arms, but I come from a middle class family from Washington state. None of us have been "swallowing guzzling neo jizz" for any length of time. So, you worthless piece of garbage, pray you don't say something like that in my presence or you will learn first-hand what the military trains us to do.
    • Notasheeple, on 12/11/2007, -1/+1Just because you went trough boot camp DOES NOT mean you are tough! "say that to my face" blah vlah blah
  • 13AH, on 12/11/2007, -11/+1I dugg this before I even read it
  • hangingchad, on 12/11/2007, -1/+9I don't understand how supporting our troops became synonymous with supporting George Bush and the Iraq War. You can support the troops without supporting the war or the president that sent them there. Supporting the troops mean giving them the proper respect and acknowledgment for a job well done no matter what the outcome of the war. Supporting our troops mean providing adequate care for those who have been injured. Supporting our troops means remembering all those who will never come back. Supporting our troops means realizing that these are people with lives and families and not number, statistics, or pawns to be used in the conquest for blood oil. For all those who still haven't gotten it through their heads that Bush has politicized the troops, ask yourselves this, would supporting our troops during the Vietnam war mean that we should have kept our troops their longer?
    • BlacklabelSAR, on 12/11/2007, -1/+1Stop making sense! The NeoCons want to equate "supporting the troops" with supporting Bush's failed foreign policies. And puppies. You love puppies dontcha? Well ya can't love puppies and not support the Bush Administration...everbody knows that. C'mon and get with the Fascism, it's trendy.
  • tundra721, on 12/11/2007, -3/+4way to generalize...
  • elliotys, on 12/11/2007, -4/+6I support the troops. But it doesn't matter what they think. We have never, nor should we ever, base our foreign policy on what troops think. I hate this war, I hate this president, I think his incompetence is criminal. However, the military is ran from the top down, with no questions asked, because that is the only way it can work. So while I am glad to see them understand the way they have been exploited, we should NOT make foreign policy choices based on what they think and feel. I am for withdrawal, but the troops views, understandably, are tainted by emotions (which I would have too if I were there). I may sound like a monster for posting this, but I feel it needed to be said.
    • MrBastian, on 12/11/2007, -0/+2Actually the troops can see first hand what happens over there.... do you think Bush has any idea what's like to live in Iraq? It's not like he cares anyways... I really think the opinion of the troops is important
    • BlacklabelSAR, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1Burn the Heritic! Blasphemer! He is making sense. We just can't have that.
  • redmann50, on 12/11/2007, -6/+2Bush could have done this way cool instead of trying to be devious..tell Americans, hey..I'm sick and tired of the sheiks walking around with all the oil money, lets ***** em up, lets blow up all dem sand *****, make the jew boys less paranoid, all while giving the soldiers the opportunity to do what they signed up for..you know..to kill folks in foreign lands..
  • mal1964, on 12/11/2007, -1/+4The person who post this is not trying to educate me, Just here to call me fool!
  • PShot07, on 12/11/2007, -3/+14This story is simply not true. I am currently enrolled in my University's AFROTC program and I have talked to quite a few troops who have been in Iraq. They claim the media is wrong and they still get thanked daily by native Iraqis for being there. Iraq is a better place according to those that have lived there over the past 10 decades. The troops I have talked to are happy for the Iraqi people and excited to go back (or go there for the first time) to help them. Also, despite what the press and/or democrats in congress say, the surge is working and America is winning (as if there was ever a doubt).

    Go ahead and bury this comment made by a future soldier in the armed forces. You have to be closed minded to take words that have been manipulated by the press instead of those straight from the mouth. Why do you people want America to lose? Don't you have any patriotism at all?
    • elliotys, on 12/11/2007, -1/+8While i fully believe what you say is true, it is important for you to understand that these are your personal experiences, and do not constitute a scientific survey. Furthermore we won the war (in Iraq). We have succeeded militarily. However, there is nothing that our military can do to end the 1300 year old Shia and Sunni civil war that has taken over the country, because it does not require a military solution. This is a political situation that needs diplomacy to solve it, if indeed we can solve it. Furthermore patriotism is standing up for what you believe in, as you have demonstrated with your above post. The people who want us out of the war are not unpatriotic, or un-american, but rather patriots by sticking up for what they believe in. The name calling needs to end. It benefits no one and distracts us from the real task at hand.
      • airforceteacher, on 12/11/2007, -1/+1Ok, would you take the opinion of someone actually in the military? Even if it disagrees with you? What about someone actually in the Middle East, right this moment?
        • erasedgod, on 12/11/2007, -1/+1Would you? We all have different opinions on this.
    • Notasheeple, on 12/11/2007, -1/+3loose what? An unjust war to "git tha terists" kid I hope you have done your home work and have read all the fine print. Don't sacrifice your life for a few wealthy elite. If this were a just war I would be right beside you, but don't refer to people as unpatriotic or un-American because they think the entire war is a sham that was sold to us on lies. We have already killed over a million Iraqis is that not "winning" to you? What is winning? Is it killing every living thing in the country? What do you want to win?
      • nwskipro, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1Wow and your not ***** up at all... Huh... This kid is standing up for what he believes in and that has nothing to do with your ***** dumb ass opinion. Don't criticize him for his choice to join our military, the same military that ensures you the freedoms you enjoy today. End of story.
    • DeadRepubs, on 12/11/2007, -2/+1Right-wing bull.
  • JimintheOC, on 12/11/2007, -7/+10More lying by the extrem left wing morons. Wake up idiots; the troops DO NOT hate the president. The vast majority of them over there in Iraq joined AFTER we invaded. I have been to Iraq twice, and I can tell you almost every last person that has been there wants the job finished, NOT cut and run.
    • ordig, on 12/11/2007, -4/+4Finished with what job? Saddam is gone.
    • hmcook87, on 12/11/2007, -2/+3saddam is gone yes, but the country is kinda screwed. america got itself into this mess, and they owe it to iraq to sort it out properly. as for the troops hating the president, i imagine there are a wide variety of opinions within the military, just like in society in general. saying "the troops hate the president" or "the troops love the president" is far to general.
    • JacobVorpahl, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1I can also concur that everyone that I went over with (at least that I had deep conversations with) thought we needed to stay and get the job finished. I'm not going to say they liked or hated the President, its more complex than that. They may not have been favorable of his policies, but they weren't clamoring "bring me home!", that's for sure.
    • Notasheeple, on 12/11/2007, -2/+3Finish what job? You don't even know why we are there! Let me guess " ta git tha terrist" right.
      • nwskipro, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1Of both of the soldiers or soon to be soldiers you have criticized, neither has indicated that they speak like any sort of white trash piece of *****. I don't see what the ***** your trying to do. Its ***** like you that make this worse. Of course a field soldier isn't going to know all the plans and reasons for them being where they are, but thats not for them to know. What they do know is that they feel like what they are doing is helping the lives of someone, somewhere. So get the ***** off of their back and keep your mouth closed unless you have anything better to say.
    • BlacklabelSAR, on 12/11/2007, -2/+3Define "finish the job". Will that definition include setting up permanent US bases, for reasons other than what was said when we went into Iraq?
      It reminds me of being a kid, and being grounded "until I worked my way out of it". That was ***** too.
    • DeadRepubs, on 12/11/2007, -1/+0http://www.republicansshouldntbreed.com/index.html - Inbred sodomized righty loons shouldn't breed,It creates more righttards.
  • jveezy, on 12/11/2007, -1/+2Don't forget that according to Bush himself, 52% constitutes a mandate.
    • TedLW30101, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1What is a less than 10% approval rating of a Democrat controlled Congress called?
  • firejack007, on 12/11/2007, -3/+5Oh really, the troops want out. I guess that's why they keep signing up to go back. They've been on 2,3 and even 4 tours that they have volunteered for. Dream on left. This is not Vietnam. It's even more laughable that stuff like this is passed around when we are on the downhill side of this theater of the war being over with. Plus we will always have some troops there in bases similar to what we are in Germany and Japan. We have a right. We won. Simple as that. You people and your legalities. When are you going to wise up that there is no such thing in war. There's only winners and losers. When Germany went into Belgium, there was no court saying, "sorry, you have to go back, Germany, your action is illegal." The British, French and Americans put them back.
    • hmcook87, on 12/11/2007, -0/+3actually there are plenty of legalities in war, regardless of wether or not america chooses to observe them. germany committed many crimes during world war 2, but at least they had the guts to declare war on their enemies, so legally speaking their occupation of poland, france etc was legit. Declaring war on a country means that you are allowed to kill its military personal and occupy its lands. you will notice that america never declared war on iraq.
    • BlacklabelSAR, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1I seem to hear you saying that "Plus we will always have some troops there in bases similar to what we are in Germany and Japan. We have a right. We won. Simple as that. You people and your legalities. When are you going to wise up that there is no such thing in war. There's only winners and losers."

      That doesn't sound like what Bush told America when we went into Iraq. Are you saying Bush lied? That's what it sounds like you are saying.
    • Dukeye, on 12/12/2007, -0/+1Hmmm, might makes right...a very evolved morality.
  • bigballerrob22, on 12/11/2007, -4/+8Bush, Tasers, Ron Paul, Blackwater, Fox News

    $5 to who can guess the next retarded digg fad.

    keep drinking that kool-aid sheep.

    ohh yeah and this definitely came from a reputable source...I don't sense any bias at all /sarcasm
    • Waiting2awake, on 12/11/2007, -2/+3OK, let me put this in a manner that will make it obvious...... 7 years ago, what was the attitude about the US from the World? Generally a very positive one. What was the US's financial situation? Once again generally positive. Now, what was the attitude of Americans, towards their own government? Yet again, generally positive.

      Now look at it. All that was wasted because of, what either has to be considered as the largest corruption within the Government of all time - or - such monumental incompetence that for the good of humanity none of these people should be allowed to run anything other than a lemonaid stand.
    • BohicaTwentyTwo, on 12/11/2007, -0/+3What? Diggers aren't following a fad, they are non-conformist rebels...Unless being a non-conformist is a fad.

      Don't be a sheeple, buy a Scion:
      http://www.littledeviant.info/

      Don't be a conformist, drink Mountain Dew:
      http://www.dewmocracy.com/
  • alchemist27, on 12/11/2007, -4/+2In other news, grass is green!
  • Darkside2984, on 12/11/2007, -6/+9Article is BS. Digg is fast becoming just another liberal weakhold...
    • hmcook87, on 12/11/2007, -1/+1so you'll be canceling your account then?
    • machinesbreathe, on 12/11/2007, -1/+0"Weakhold"...
      I hope you didn't spend all day cooking up that zinger!
  • scottymcc, on 12/11/2007, -3/+1I lost the post I was trying to reply to. Something about the Dems voting to go into Iraq..here's my response

    ehh...seems all congress voted on was to give the president powers to chase Al Quida(sp?). He used this to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. The democrats didn't exactly vote on going into Iraq.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQi7PaYKqTU
  • outopian, on 12/11/2007, -0/+2Oh my god. It's worse then I thought,.. secular progressionist's have even infiltrated the MILITARY!
    • machinesbreathe, on 12/11/2007, -0/+0Anti war is now anti-God? Boy, when did that happen.
      If you were a good little christian boy you would also have gleaned the insight that a progressionist is one that believes in the progress of humankind or society.
      So having been enlightend I askiif you prefer something other?
      • BlacklabelSAR, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1He was being sarcastic. But other than that, yes. Christianity, IN PRACTICE, has nothing to do with Jesus, and is instead violent.
        Any religion that claims to be THE ONLY valid religion is complete ***** designed to justify violence. "Those heathens don't know Christ. Kill them or convert them."
        Here is another example of Christianity in practice: http://www.breitbart.tv/html/2957.html
  • bobbknight, on 12/11/2007, -1/+2At least there was a link to the ever supportive conservative Los Angeles Times in the hodinky blog that this is linked to, can you say blogspam?
    The LA Times article gos on to mention that the president is suffering low ratings, it conveniently leaves out congresses even lower ratings.
    Oh well nothing like reporting truth by omitting truth.
    • Waiting2awake, on 12/11/2007, -1/+2And why is the congress' rating lower? Because they refused to stop Bush. That doesn't mean that Bush isn't an asswipe or that he and his elk aren't responsible for the pitiful state of America - just that "his elk" includes these democrats.
  • LoneRanger85, on 12/11/2007, -6/+5Bush loves the troops and the troops love Bush. The troops are not treasonous little weasels like the digger kids are.
    • machinesbreathe, on 12/11/2007, -1/+3Treasonous weasels... What? As opposed to boorish automatons?
      Actually, ou're right. In fact, Bush loves the troops so much, he might give them another tour of duty on top of the past three if he's feeling generous.
      The troops wives will will grow despondent and move on, and their children will never know them if they even return at all. Proof positive of just how much Bush loves and identifies with the working American family.
    • hmcook87, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1"treasonous little weasels"? are you saying that criticizing the president is somehow treason? what is this, north korea? also from the number in your name im guessing you're around 22 years old... not much older than the "digger kids" you seem to be trying to distance yourself from.
    • BlacklabelSAR, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1You are so deluded. "Bush loves the troops and the troops love Bush." Did you modify that line from the Teletubbies? Oh and dissent is the highest form of patriotism, dumbass. Dissent is what the country was founded on. You would already know this if you knew your history. Loving the United States is about loving the ideals it was founded on. It is NOT about worshipping a certain administration. But maybe you do not love the ideals the US was founded on. Maybe instead, you love Bush's America, which is a completely different animal than what the Founders intended and made clear by their writings. You probably would have also been a big fan of McCarthy, if you even know who that was.
      BTW if you were born in '85, I have 20 years on you. So stop embarassing yourself by showing everyone how uninformed you are.
      • Dukeye, on 12/12/2007, -0/+1LoneRanger loves to pick on the Digger kids he hates so much. Yet, he keeps on comin' back...
  • DS2600, on 12/11/2007, -4/+12Been to Iraq 4 times in the past 3 years, yes I do support it. By the way, the majority of the troops I talk to (since I am one, live and work with them on a daily basis) for the most part agree with the war, even the ones that don't like Bush. Odd. Just a thought.
    • juanchopancho, on 12/11/2007, -2/+2Obviously, if you're putting your life on the line chances are you're going to rationalize the cause as worthy and good. Basic survival. It's much more difficult for a human being to put one's life on the line if they believe the cause is criminal and unjust. But I digress. Words are cheap. If one supports this "national security" policy they should join the ranks and serve. AND at the end of the day if you believe you're defending the constitution and freedom you are putting your life on the line for dissent and dirty liberals which chickenhawks love to hate.
    • JacobVorpahl, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1That's not exactly true. A lot of the troops in the ranks now have joined up AFTER the war started. That means they agreed with it even before they signed up and didn't need to rationalize potential future action as good and just to make themselves feel better. They independently agreed with it. I'm a good example of that. I joined up in 2004 over a year after the war kicked off. I've been over once and I'm going again in '09. I supported the war before, during, and after my enlistment/deployment. I'll still support it in 2009 because I actually, INDEPENDENTLY agree with it. No rationalizations needed.
    • Notasheeple, on 12/11/2007, -1/+1They do support it.......support what? If you want to stop islamofacism you need to go door to door and burn every copy of the Koran you can find. Then kill everything that moves, after you do that will you "win" the war? What is victory to you and your brothers at arms?
      • alsahir, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1Victory to us is a stable (or even relatively so) Iraq that does not turn into an "Islamofascist" state. We are not fighting the war on terrorism, we are fighting the war in Iraq. The two may be related, but the blood spilled in Iraq is related to that country and its goals. Those who serve in Afghanistan would almost certainly tell you the same.

        What is victory? An achievable end. Soldiers tend to think in concrete terms. We are still in Germany more than 6 decades after that war ended. We are still in Korea and Japan and Kuwait. Could it be said that there was no final victory? Probably (certainly yes in Korea and Kuwait's cases), but to a soldier, there was an end. A point at which we could say that the objective had been achieved. Will we still have bases in Iraq after this is all over? Who knows that is a political question. If we do though, does it mean that the war is not over? History says no. The war is done even if some are still there. When there is stability, it will be an end for the soldiers.
        • Notasheeple, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1Well, I respect your statement and it is well said. I also support the troops and wish none of them harm and do realize their sacrifices, and am great-full for that. But with all due respect sir, stability is in the eye of the beholder and cannot be defined by one outcome or the other. The people of Iraq have been fighting for a long time, and is practically another world with different customs, faiths, and laws. If you think that our goal is to make them be like us, by forcing them to do it, then I hope you realize that it will not work. Is there real terrorist threats? Yes. Do we need to be aware of this and where it comes from? Yes. Should we try to prevent it? Yes. Should we police the world, spending trillions of dollars, trying to make other countries conform to our way of life? I say no. If this U.N. is so good, why are they not doubling their efforts in Iraq?
      • alsahir, on 12/11/2007, -0/+0I don't much care for the UN, nor do I believe that it is in any way effective. I do not expect them to become like us. I expect them to work it out for themselves. I am familiar with the ME and with Muslims. Iraq is lines drawn on a map after WWII. The people there do not have our sense of national pride for the most part. They may even split up into several areas. This would be fine as far as I am and those soldiers who concern themselves with the specifics are concerned as long as they are stable. I don’t necessarily care about a unified Iraq in its current state. I do care about stability and the people there. They are different from us, but they have many things in common. They have the same basic desires for safety, a decent life for their children, the chance to make something of themselves and the ability to get on with their lives. They do not wish to fear their government as they did under Hussein, nor do they wish to live under effective foreign rule (understandable as I would not either), nor do they wish to live under the fear of a repressive terror regime. If we can help them establish a system of government that is stable and then leave, I would consider that victory. I do feel that the people need to have a say in what that form of government is, at least at first. Their choice should be up to them though, whether they choose a representative democracy like ours, a parliamentary system, or even a monarchy or dictatorship (dictators are not always bad). They may not want democracy and I am cool with that. But they do need to be able to choose not to have it if that is what they wish. Jordan is a wonderful example of a stable and thriving ME system of government (a monarchy in their case). The Iraqi people could do a lot worse than copy them.

        As for being the world police, I do think we need to reign ourselves in. In the case of Iraq though, I take a soldier's view. We started a fight in 1990 that we won for all intents and purposes. We beat the daylights out of the Iraqi Army. In order to get us to stop beating his army, Hussein signed a peace agreement that had certain stipulations. In other words, he said I will do (insert requirements here) if you will stop beating on me. We agreed and the war was halted. It was not over though because the terms of the peace treaty took time to work out. One of the major terms agreed to was inspections of *anyplace* in Iraq that we or the UN felt needed to be inspected for WMD’s. I know they are a joke now, but it was deadly serious then. Hussein had them because he used them against his own people and against the Kurds. It is in fact for their use that he and several others were sentenced to death. In the mid-late 90's, Hussein decided that he did not wish to comply with the terms of the peace treaty anymore. He threw the inspectors out of his country. Now, when you agree to do certain things if the other person will stop doing certain things, your stopping should trigger their restarting. Clinton did not wish to go to war, but that does not change the fact the as President, Clinton insisted that the terms must be upheld. Bush decided to go to war (and why he did not use this ironclad reasoning will forever be beyond me as it doesn't matter if Hussein had flushed all of his WMD's down the toilet because he broke the agreement, but I digress) and so there we are. As a soldier I can accept that reasoning. As a soldier who knows what life was like before in Iraq under Hussein and has seen what life is like now, I can tell you unequivocally that it is better now than it was then.
    • BlacklabelSAR, on 12/11/2007, -1/+1If you are a Marine, or in any other way claim to defend the U.S. Constitution, you might want to start at the White House. Otherwise, I am sorry that you and your friends are being used to further the interests of Corporate America. Meanwhile back on the home front, the U.S. Constitution is being assailed by the same people that sent you to Iraq under false pretenses. I hope you come home safe and soon.
  • sd2001, on 12/11/2007, -3/+12Like DS2600, I am an 8 year veteran and I can attest to the fact that the headline and article is a complete misleading fabrication. Buried.
  • Dracomantis, on 12/11/2007, -4/+3The troops want out of a war? maybe they should not have joined the ARMY......
    • hmcook87, on 12/11/2007, -0/+2i think most people who join the army want to actually protect their country.... not just go round invading places. also the iraq situation is not really a "war" in the traditional sense.... its really just several groups of people killing each other.
    • erasedgod, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1Yeah, stupid National Guard soldiers trying to help their country. What the hell were they thinking?
  • DuffyDirect, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1from what i've seen of youtube/liveleak videos of soldiers, their "world" and idea of america or life or w/e is so vastly different from mine that I honestly don't connect with them as being citizens of the same country. In college there was this marine guy in one of my classes and hes the same age as all of us and whatever, but he was just completely different from everyone. Quiet, sat up straight, serious about everything, testy/snarky, etc. No one could really identify with him, and it was quite awkward, actually...

    Honestly, considering how much more of a life I have over the internet than in America, I feel as though I'm of a global citizenry more than an American one... I mean, in my mind (especially from science fiction and crap) international peace keepers and stuff are "better" than the American military. i dont know. maybe im just talking 7 am nonsense, but i do sincerely hope that diplomatic solutions can stop all this violence so that the world can focus its attention on education/job training so that we can start inventing awesome-er computers and building super speed trains and stuff.
    • DS2600, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1While I see what you're saying about the "Marine guy" being different and identifying with others, and I agree with much of your post concerning the global citizenry, better computers and what not, and even your viewpoint on diplomatic solutions, there is a time for a focus on working out peaceful solutions and a time for more aggressive solutions.
      • Waiting2awake, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1Really? And what has this aggressive behaviour gotten? Hmm? Violence begets violence. Extremism begets extremism. Any aggressive behaviour, begets more aggressive behaviour. This simple can be proven time and time again.

        I am afraid that the military is for defensive purposes. What is happening not, is not and is only making more enemies for America....When very clearly, those that are hurting America most, are within it.

        At least in my opinion.
        • KyleGoetz, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1Ya, tell me about it. Shoulda just let the British roll over us in the 18th century. And shoulda let Napoleon take over Europe. And shoulda let Hitler take over Continental Europe. And shoulda let Xerxes take over Europe. And Alexander.

          Do you get the picture? Sometimes you have to meet violence with violence or you will be subjugated. The Iraqi conflict is not one of those situations, though.

          And your assertion that aggressive behavior begets more aggressive behavior is wrong. I'm pretty sure that the US's ***** aggressive-as-hell nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki didn't lead to more aggression on Japan's part. And D-Day didn't meet with much more German aggression and, in fact, led to the /end/ of German aggression.

          But I agree with your sentiment that our current actions in the Middle East are harmful to American interests.
        • Waiting2awake, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1@Kyle...

          I would suggest, respectfully, that you look into those effects - and find out that *gasp* they were the effects of other aggressiveness.

          The art of propaganda is primarily concerned with starting a cut off point in which we discuss of look at the events. We can say - "See what would we do about Hitler's aggressiveness?" without ever realizing that the seeds of that were sown by our own aggressiveness. But we will never, ever, discuss those because that would make us "terrorist sympathizers" or some other such nonsense designed to stop the free flow of information.

          Just as the other side, will say we started it, who wants to bet that Germany had every single reason under the sun for their actions - because of what "others" did to them - and the discussion would have never contained what they had done, in order for "others" to do it to them...

          It really isn't rocket science - it all comes down to this. The only time violence, or aggressiveness can be tolerated is when it is used strictly as a defensive measure, and even then with heavy hearts because society has been broken and we must take great care to show those that would attack us, that we are of no threat - but we will defend ourselves.....



          Th
  • AdaAstra, on 12/11/2007, -1/+6Load of crap. I have friends in the Marines and Guards and this is absolute BS.
    • erasedgod, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1I'm sure I know more Marines than you. I don't know anyone who cares anymore. We're just doing it for the money.
  • Demaskee, on 12/11/2007, -3/+8Well I'm one troop who supports Bush and our missions overseas.
    • Notasheeple, on 12/11/2007, -1/+1What mission?
      • Demaskee, on 12/12/2007, -0/+1Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom, HOA, Korean Defense.
  • dugman74, on 12/11/2007, -3/+9Yes, the troops are against the war in mass numbers.

    This easily explains the hundreds of thousands who have reenlisted while stationed in Iraq.

    You people are all retarded.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 75 of 75 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.