What is Digg?138 Comments
- Bushlied, on 05/09/2008, -8/+29Sheeps to the Slaughter. So much for logic and reason. There comes a time when good men must revolt.
- wjreynolds, on 05/09/2008, -6/+23So much for "Support the Troops." Hope the next administration has the political will to so more than throw slogans around.
- mikelieman, on 05/09/2008, -5/+15"The vast majority of the jobs in the military are not combat jobs. They are support jobs."
Not anymore. We pay companies to hire in cheap foreign labor.
"This is yet another phony issue for liberal cowards to undermine the war effort."
What War? Did Congress declare War? I must have missed that Constitutional Requirement being fulfilled. Do you have a link?
This isn't a war. This was a financial opportunity. - mikelieman, on 05/09/2008, -1/+11I concur -- if you support the Bush Gang, and are of service age, why aren't you enlisted?
- TexMurphy, on 05/09/2008, -7/+16LoneRanger the army needs you, why not join? In fact the Army is so low on troops that they have to pull troops from Iraq to go to Aganistan (http://www.slate.com/id/2190661/). It does not matter what kind of job you have in the military. If a doctor says you are not capable of performing your duty, you should not go to an active war theater. I think you should stay at the FOXnews forums where people don't care about facts.
- Dumbledorito, on 05/09/2008, -6/+15Even if your strawman "liberals" existed, they wouldn't have to undermine the "war effort." The way every aspect of the war has been bungled, including the ever-shifting reasons for going into Iraq in the first place, are doing more to strengthen terrorism and degrade the United States' military and economy than any possible 5th column effort could.
Look to your own kind for why this whole mess got started, as well as why it's failing. - SOS84, on 05/09/2008, -1/+10My National Guard brigade in Pennsylvania (56th Stryker) is preparing to deploy as we speak and a full one third of my company are medically unable but are going anyway. For that matter, the whole brigade is unprepared as they are years behind in Stryker transition but are giving the green anyway.
- mcsenget, on 05/09/2008, -1/+9They also accept criminals now! The standards have to drop lower and lower..
- JMellissa, on 05/09/2008, -7/+14Here we go again. If the USA continues to do things that Rome did, it will (soon) end up just like Rome.
Veni Vidi Morti - Waiting2awake, on 05/09/2008, -0/+7Why would they? Isn't it easier just to do what you want and consequences be damned - because as the American population has shown clearly - there will be no consequences.
Now if there are enough American people that suddenly decide they are willing to take a stand maybe that will change, but without some punishment, heavy punishment, levied against those in power now.
What do you suppose the chances of that is?
That is why you'll need more than "hope".
Sorry. - crowbar77, on 05/09/2008, -0/+6Or the US could just leave iraq. You cant fight terrorism with an army, in fact you may have noticed you've actually strengthened it.
- treehugger87, on 05/09/2008, -0/+6A brief time-line for the uninformed:
December 7, 1941. The Japanese attack Pearl Harbor. American troops begin deploying to the British Isles, but it will be nearly a year before they see action against the Axis.
June 6, 1944. D-Day
May 7, 1945. VE-Day
September 2, 1945. VJ-Day
American involvement in Europe during World War II lasted less than 3 and a half years. The soldiers in Europe were treated like heroes and saviors by the people of allied countries. When they returned home, whole or with serious injuries, they were universally given support and care by the families and communities they returned to. Not to mention the GI bill provided all of these brave men and women the capitol to purchase a home, grant money for an education and a lifetime of medical support. Can you say that the troops being sent to Iraq are being given the same treatment? - oldgal, on 05/09/2008, -0/+6Then why are we using so many mercenaries who get paid more than the volunteer troops?
- kirado4, on 05/09/2008, -2/+8doesn't sound plausible.. read the whole story..
- tenchi71, on 05/09/2008, -0/+5Not all states take away that right forever. Most states don't allow felons to vote while in prison, some won't allow them to vote while on parole, and some even during probation. Usually, after they've done their time and are all clear, they regain that right. I believe that those states that do take away the right to vote permanently do so unconstitutionally.
- yojiffyskippy, on 05/09/2008, -1/+6The current college age crowd is too busy fighting their own battles on Xbox to get engaged in the real world. That's a perfect recipe for a government to do what it wants without fear of repercussion. "Revolution" is laughable.
- treehugger87, on 05/09/2008, -0/+5The Syrian nuclear reactor never existed. It is a propaganda fabrication of the Bush administration.
- Monarch818, on 05/09/2008, -2/+7Hell yeah I want a draft! Then Amerika will get their collective asses up and actually try and make the government get out of the Middle East!
- Waiting2awake, on 05/09/2008, -0/+5See the picture where there was a traffic accident in Bagdad between blackwater and the US army? I don't want to spoil it for you but it wasn't Blackwater employees that had to lay down their arms....
- aladrin, on 05/09/2008, -0/+5You've apparently never spoken english... 'Troops' is an extremely common term, and it's used properly here. There's this thing called a dictionary that might interest you:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=troops&x= ...
"4. troops, a body of soldiers, police, etc.: Mounted troops quelled the riot. " - inactive, on 05/09/2008, -3/+8Why is he getting dugg? Do you people WANT a draft?
- Dumbledorito, on 05/09/2008, -1/+6Not all generals say that; just the toadies that want to keep their jobs.
- bsmang, on 05/09/2008, -2/+7Lol, RRJ.. You think you can measure up to a girl scout? It doesn't matter that you're bigger and fatter than they are - they'll still out-think you.
- SOS84, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4You get this feeling because it is not too far from the truth. Being a veteran (11B) I have seen it for myself.
- txhammer3408, on 05/09/2008, -12/+16Why do we continue to send troops who are "unfit" into combat? Because we fail to realize that this occupation has seriously hurt enlistment and retention in the military. The only way we will resolve this trend is to institute a true draft of ALL fit males and females age 18 thru 25.
- inactive, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4He's a coward. That's why.
- jaobedoza, on 05/09/2008, -13/+17that's why US troops are dying out there!
- treehugger87, on 05/09/2008, -5/+9Why do I have the growing and continually sinking feeling that all of the combat-trained and militarily capable men and women in this country fit into two categories:
1. Being sent off to Iraq only to return less than whole, suicidal and unsupported by both their government and their people
2. Being recruited to work for Blackwater
At what time does Blackwater, a privately held company that we know far too little about and who operates above the law, become more powerful than our own military? When that day comes, if it hasn't already, what do the men who control this power have planned for America?
Bury me as alarmist conspiracy theorist, but does this seem less likely than lies and propaganda being spewed by the "conservative" talk show shills? - Waiting2awake, on 05/09/2008, -1/+5You sir have absolutely no idea of what you speak. Your fears are controlling you. Why are you so frightened?
- Waiting2awake, on 05/09/2008, -2/+6Does it matter even if that is the case? Need I remind you that this conflict is based on lies to begin with? That those that pushed this war, and supported this war, Lied to the American people(And the world).
- Zippo, on 05/09/2008, -3/+6Wow, yeah, there's a solid plan. Send unfit soldiers into a warzone - what could possibly go wrong?
- opticwind, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3Before everyone begins their rant, I believe this has something to do with the recent lowering of the "healthy" standards of the US military. I've read the new criteria and to be honest, you still have to be pretty healthy. Also, anyone at certain weights is not allowed to enter combat or be deployed.
- Julik, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3I was "unfit for deployment" when I got to my first base after I joined the military. I had cavities that needed to be filled before I was "fit for deployment". If they had told me your going to Afghanistan they would have scheduled everything I needed before I left, including my filling. I was in the Air Force, not the army or marines so we did not have as many people going over at the start, and most that were not Police were "unfit" when their number was called. But the few weeks before they got deployed they did all their firearms training and whatever else was required. Most of the Air Force members that went out there actually would get deployed to an Army base for a few weeks to train with the Army, then go over from there.
- MercedRocks, on 05/09/2008, -1/+4Pfft, so felons stop being citizens? After you've served your time don't you deserve to reenter society or are you forced to forever be a second class citizen?
We already take away their right to vote FOREVER and that's bad enough considering it disenfranchises a huge percentage of the black community. - inactive, on 05/09/2008, -3/+6Which is fine, but the story is pointing out that they are unfit for combat, which is most definitely newsworthy.
Or can't you even read? - inactive, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3Wouldn't the "troopers" be those inside the "troop"?
- inactive, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3well I would still prefer to go after specific instances of bias rather than generalizations. I also do not agree with the new definition of journalist where they feel its their job to interpret the news, not report the facts, they feel its their job to show only their side of the story, not the whole story. In part they are to blame for bias in the news, however the people that consume it non-stop are also to blame. If a newspaper/tv/radio couldnt sell anything they would either change format or go away. The mere fact that people all to frequently will completely accept bias when the bias leans towards their beliefs, but will point it out only when it doesnt is another part of the problem.
If you accept bias when it suits you, but reject it strongly when it doesnt, you are a hypocrite, and really part of the problem. Lets say that every news agency was biased the same way, would that make reporting better or worse? In my opinion it would make it worse, but by accepting some of the bias that is the message that is being sent - that its ok to bias it so long as you bias it this way. As a result articles get more and more biased and the public, even the ones that agree with the bias, becomes less and less informed about what is really going on.
Call bias anytime you see it, not just when you disagree with the story. Make it clear why you are saying its biased, quote specifics, show contradictions.
I personally will watch news from multiple continents, and spend an insane amount of time just so that I can get the full story, or as close to it as I can without actually being there. All too often I will see 2 different news agencies report on the same event and have completely opposite stories about it. They only present one side of it, without allowing for countering views. Only by seeing both sides, especially of a controversy, can you understand what its really over, and decide for yourself instead of having some "journalist" decide for you. - inactive, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3I wouldnt say nothing but biased, instead I would rather point to specific instances of bias and reveal them for what they are. There may be some merit to this story, however the initial part of it is somewhat misleading from what is said later on. Until the people stand up and say they wont accept this anymore, and point to *all* bias (not just the bias that is against their cause) the media has no incentive to stop, after all it sells papers/tv ads/etc right?
If you accept bias on one side, but denounce it on the other, you are actually part of the problem. You are just shifting the bias and misinformation that the media is known for these days to something you find less objectionable, when in fact it all should be objectionable.
How can you make an informed decision when you have nothing but biased information to go on? Further the job of a journalist is to report the facts, not interpret them, not opine on them, not shift them. This is something that is forgotten in the last 40 or so years, where journalists now seek more to influence people, to decide for their readers/listeners/viewers what is good and just and what is wrong and evil. That is the job of talk show hosts (who are more entertainment than journalists) or editors (who have the ability to write editorials, although they too are to blame for biasing some news articles, converting a news article into an editorial).
I get news from multiple continents, I get news from multiple sources, and I have seen much of it present only one side of the story, leaving out considerable points of view, fortunately I get news from enough sources (hey its almost a full time job!) that I can get the other side of the story, the opposing views, and try to figure out what really happened for myself.
I think one question that should be asked is why does the media think everyone is so stupid they cant think for themselves and the media companies have to think for them? Another question might be why do so many people let the media think for them instead of thinking for themselves? - inactive, on 05/09/2008, -3/+6The headline is misleading, there is no information either way on how many issues were corrected before deployment, it could be none, it could be all, more likely its somewhere in the middle. It also does not say what the disorders are, medically unfit includes anything from being stressed out because of divorce, or you found your girlfriend cheating on you, to missing limbs.
The shock factor of the headline and the fact that most media companies know the vast part of their readers wont read more than 1-2 paragraphs leads me to think there is some bias going on here. At the very least its irresponsible reporting in the name of sensationalism.
FTA:
The Pentagon records do not list what — or how serious — the health issues are, nor whether they were corrected before deployment, said Michael Kilpatrick, a deputy director for the Pentagon's Force Health Protection and Readiness Programs.
The two of these things makes me think that there may be some minor wounds (a friend who eventually did get into the airforce long ago was medically unfit because he stepped on a nail and there was a small hole in his foot, it had to heal first even though it didnt impair his walking ability they still classifed him that way, just on temporary basis). - jerger23, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3While this may not account for all of the 43,000; it is an accurate portrayal of causation for being non-deployable. It doesn't even have to be a molar problem or a cavity; if you are overdue for an annual dental cleaning/check-up, you are considered medically unfit for deployment.
- JorgeGT, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3Roman Empire falled due peace. All of their aconomy was based on war and adding new provinces for the Empire. But when they turned to peace, they started to decay, corrupt, and finally they dissappeared at the hands of other people who enjoyed the war. When they were a belligerant empire they were feared and respected all around the known world; "civis romanum sum" [I am a roman citizen] was like a passport in all places.
But then the "pax romana" came, they developed a very complex society who was tired of fight and die. They started a period of relax, religious development, cults, etc; the military was reduced, the borders were disattended, external provocations which would have resulted in a blood bath at the hands of the roman army were allowed, and rapidly the belligerant tribes of the exterior, who were born in stick huts, were walking over the almost modern cities of the empire.
Study history! - yojiffyskippy, on 05/09/2008, -2/+5Actually they are "unfit for deployment". And most of them are not "combat" troops. And you do realize that if a trooper requires a molar to be pulled then he is considered unfit for deployment and would be counted in that 43000. Even if he was getting it pulled tomorrow or when he gets to Iraq. You've probably never been to war so let me explain to you how it happens. Any troops that are declared "unfit for deployment" that can be made "fit for employment" before their scheduled deployment date are treated and many of them actually become "fit for deployment" before being deployed. Yet all of these troopers are being counted in this alleged number. BTW, this process is carried out for all units prior to deployment.
- ruptan, on 05/09/2008, -9/+12wow! what a jerk! After putting the felons in the military now this news...I wonder what is next for the military of America? Prostitutes in the military?
- BohicaTwentyTwo, on 05/09/2008, -4/+6If you wear glasses, you have to have two pairs of military issue glasses and one pair of gas mask inserts otherwise you are considered Unfit for Combat. If you didn't have a tooth cleaning within one year, you were also considered Unfit for Combat.
- yojiffyskippy, on 05/09/2008, -2/+4EBFoxbat is correct and they're also dying because the desk jockeys in the Executive branch are making them fight a "war" with one hand tied behind their backs. The rules of "engagement" are ridiculous!
- mikelieman, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2"you people"
We can just dismiss the rest of your rant right there.
I'm such an "Old School" paleo-con, that Bush looks like a Pinko-Commie. - inactive, on 05/13/2008, -0/+2no - empty the jails and give illegals citizenship first...
- banderwocky, on 05/09/2008, -1/+3scraping the bottom of the barrel now.
how many are mentally unfit? - skrowl, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2Fail based on premise.
"Unfit for combat" DOES NOT EQUAL "Unfit to be deployed"
You can deploy someone and then have them serve in a non-combat role. Not everyone in the military is involved in combat. - yojiffyskippy, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2You know Halo isn't the same as real war right?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 136 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is