What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Do you believe the 2012 Mayan Prophecy? view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - The Mayan Calendar predicts the end of time: 2012. See the trailer for 2012, opening November 13.
110 Comments
- Nick2830dc, on 10/26/2007, -5/+34Because people care more about Halo and the Iphone than about whats happening in the real world.
- Fallout911, on 10/14/2007, -10/+27Why is this not on the first page?
- epicstruggle, on 10/14/2007, -5/+21Thats not all he said, but unfortunately the MSM wont cover the rest:
http://www.democracy-project.com/archives/003494.h ...
He spends nearly half the speech to criticizing the Media for inaccuracies and failure to update stories once more is known. Take a look at the whole thing and not just the sensational Iraq quote. - Nick2830dc, on 10/14/2007, -6/+20Sanchez and people like him, who are not afraid to speak out and tell the truth, restore my faith in the US. Sanchez says "While the politicians espouse a rhetoric designed to preserve their reputations and their political power, our soldiers die," I couldn't agree with him more.
We as a country, in my opinion, need to stop just worrying about how and if we can be victorious and how we can leave as quickly as possible. We destroyed these peoples' (Iraqi) lives and we have the nerve to tell them to get hold of their own problems. We created the environment in Iraq for these problems to manifest themselves as they have. We owe them at least a plan that involves perhaps the UN but definitely other countries to help restore peace and get them on the road to their eventual recovery.
We speak about morals and ethics in this country everyday. But talk is cheap and the world and future generations will judge us on our actions. - Caffeinate, on 10/14/2007, -3/+15" The U.S. mission in Iraq is a "nightmare with no end in sight" "
This statement certainly wins the "No *****" award of the week. - christor, on 10/16/2007, -2/+12And the makes the other half, in which he describes the war as a gigantic *****-up that has become an endless nightmare, irrelevant how?
- heystoopid, on 10/14/2007, -2/+11Nice to see the US Army has yet still to learn the lessons of Vietnam 1949 to 1975 !
What price stupidity and idiocracy for the occupant in the White House ? - OrigamiRonin, on 10/14/2007, -1/+10Now we'll probably be subjected to a media campaign to discredit the General. Should be in full swing over the next couple of days.
- dagnew, on 10/14/2007, -4/+12The article states, "Asked why he waited until nearly a year after his retirement to voice his concerns publicly, he responded that it was not the place of active- duty officers to challenge lawful orders from the civilian authorities."
I guess the general never heard of the Geneva Conventions or the United Nations Charter. Lawful my ass. - inactive, on 10/13/2007, -0/+7The entire speech here: http://www.militaryreporters.org/sanchez_101207.ht ...
- Dumbledorito, on 10/13/2007, -5/+12Welcome to what was being said about invading Iraq in 1993.
- Maninthemiddle, on 10/14/2007, -2/+8One can agree or disagree with his assessment of Iraq - and his highly negative primary point of media malfeasance. But where is the reporting on his scathing attack on the press?
The point may be - is not the media being fallacious in its reports by ignoring his attack on the press - nearly 40% and the lead point - of his speech? - LucasKane, on 10/14/2007, -3/+8Abu Gharid definitely didn't help, guy
- SuperMoses, on 10/14/2007, -1/+6This guy is right on the money. He's not a GOP nutjob, he clearly hates the partisan politics going on in Washington and in the MSM.
"The death knell of your ethics has been enabled by your parent organizations who have chosen to align themselves with political agendas. What is clear to me is that you are perpetuating the corrosive partisan politics that is destroying our country and killing out servicemenvers who are at war."
What he should have added was that it was this same behaviour by the MSM that got them into war in the first place. - igorvolsky, on 10/14/2007, -5/+10Sanchez made similar comments back in June... “I think if we do the right things politically and economically with the right Iraqi leadership we could still salvage at least a stalemate, if you will — not a stalemate but at least stave off defeat.” http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/04/sanchez-iraq/
- ralph12c41, on 10/16/2007, -0/+5How many of you agenda driven folks have bothered to read the Generals entire remarks?. The real story and one which we should all be concerned about are his comments regarding the press...as an example this excerpt " THE BASIC ETHICS OF A JOURNALIST THAT CALLS FOR:
1. SEEKING TRUTH,
2. PROVIDING FAIR AND COMPREHENSIVE ACCOUNT OF EVENTS AND ISSUES
3. THOROUGHNESS AND HONESTY
ALL ARE VICTIMS OF THE MASSIVE AGENDA DRIVEN COMPETITION FOR ECONOMIC OR POLITICAL SUPREMACY. THE DEATH KNELL OF YOUR ETHICS HAS BEEN ENABLED BY YOUR PARENT ORGANIZATIONS WHO HAVE CHOSEN TO ALIGN THEMSELVES WITH POLITICAL AGENDAS. WHAT IS CLEAR TO ME IS THAT YOU ARE PERPETUATING THE CORROSIVE PARTISAN POLITICS THAT IS DESTROYING OUR COUNTRY AND KILLING OUR SERVICEMEMBERS WHO ARE AT WAR."
This is the real story. We have a corrupt, lazy, agenda driven press/media and they failed all of us again by not reporting the most significant aspect, or if you will the entire story. We all need to wake up and make fixing the press our focus since it hurts us all. - jakeson2, on 10/14/2007, -0/+5Since this general was in charge when much of the crazy things happened at Abu Graub prison, I guess you can now place much of the current assessment of failure on himself.
- hiphoc, on 10/14/2007, -5/+10Morals and ethics to me means not waiting till over 3000 soldiers and 1,000,000 Iraqis are dead to speak out. These generals follow a flawed plan into war. Then 1 trillion dollars later they get a conscience. But hey, never late than never. I wonder if this guy will be called a "Fake soldier"?
- SmokedL, on 10/14/2007, -2/+71. It's not a popularity contest.
2. The validity of an opinion is not automatically negated because you dislike the person that uttered it.
3. Agreeing with a statement does not imply liking the person that uttered it.
4. There is nothing wrong with agreeing with statements that are made by someone that you despise for other opinions or actions.
I really wish all the blindly partisan people out there, wherever in the political spectrum they fall, could grasp these simple concepts. Judging the merits of a statement based on whether or not the person making it is on "your side" is lunacy. Sadly, it's also frighteningly common. - shykofsky, on 10/13/2007, -1/+5Very clear, gutsy speech.
- sensoukami, on 10/14/2007, -7/+11He was never "running the war" dude. You're getting the chain of command screwed up.
- JoeVet, on 10/14/2007, -0/+4Rumsfeld is much more culpable for the actions at Abu Graib.
- JoeVet, on 10/14/2007, -0/+4And what of the one who ordered the prison scandle....Rumsfeld.
- christor, on 10/14/2007, -3/+7This is so unbelievably ignorant. When the former commander talks about how badly the war is going - that's big news. When he lashes out at the media, it's still interesting but obviously less newsworthy. He's no better a media critic than anyone else. While it's useful to get his opinion on how the media's conduct affects his work, and I for one am interested in what he has to say on this score, it's nowhere near as important as what he says about our progress in the war itself.
But to suggest that focusing on this part of the speech is a purposeful effort by "liberals" to flush information down the memory hole is both paranoid and stupid. We do have a problem in our society today with the concealment from the public of important information, but you know damn well that it's not any imaginary liberal conspiracy doing the concealing. Stop being a shill and think for yourself for a minute. - allan17, on 10/14/2007, -2/+6Sanchez also says the US needs to stay in Iraq. How do you feel about that?
- Jude007, on 10/14/2007, -2/+6The USA administration has already achieved it's goals, in that the war against Iraq is actually designed to give themselves big payouts. There is no end goal of victory rather the continued persistance of the war as the status quo. That way the US government buys more over inflated goods and services from certain providers, the US government borrows more money at interest from the fed, thereby increasing the amount of money repaid to rich bankers and the revenue from raping Iraq resources is maintaned. Every day is like a lottery win.
- ByteGuerilla, on 10/14/2007, -1/+5Because you posted right after it was submitted
- neeyo, on 10/14/2007, -2/+6This, and other stories, can be found in this months issue of "Duh!" magazine.
- jakeson2, on 10/14/2007, -2/+6Evidently no one remembers the Muslim riots in France and the Norwegian and danish areas. It could be here if you leftists win. And soon!
- ZenMojo, on 10/13/2007, -2/+6Changed his mind. Good for him!
- JoeVet, on 10/14/2007, -0/+3Yep, Christor is right......you are unbelievable ignorant. Yes, when the commander on the ground says that the administration is a ***** up, that is news and well worth paying attention. Everyone likes to bash the press so not much news there.
- onisamsha, on 10/14/2007, -4/+7You left out the medias inattentive, repeat-verbatim-what-the-president-says reporting injustices leading up to the war....
Maybe if they'd done they're job then, they wouldn't have (in your eyes) been able to ***** up the reporting of the war now, since we never needed to go to Iraq in the first place and wouldn't have wasted all this money and blood on something that had nothing to do with 9/11. - allan17, on 10/15/2007, -6/+9Sanchez also said the US needs to stay in Iraq. Or are we choosing to ignore that fact?
- sensoukami, on 10/14/2007, -1/+4Dude, that is too funny as it is one of the first time I've ever been called a "flaming leftist liberal". Made me laugh. I supported Ronald Reagan, argued with half of my high school during the Cold War (most people were blaming America, I was defending them) and have been a die hard free market capitalist for as long as I can remember. Not everyone or everything fits into nice simple little boxes marked "left" and "right" ya know? Ever stop to think that people who genuinely understand things like capitalism and democracy and freedom might just disgusted by unspeakable level of greed, dishonesty, incompetence, and abuse of power by the current batch of "phony conservatives" running the show? (and I say in a comment a little lower down, I was in error re: General Sanchez. My bad)
- sensoukami, on 10/14/2007, -0/+3You are correct, I was in error. I had my generals mixed up. My apologies.
- sensoukami, on 10/14/2007, -2/+5On the subject "that he's one of the people who got us into this? "
Really? Did he order the invasion on false pretenses? Did he set the force level for occupation to be too low? Did he fail to put together a post-invasion reconstruction plan? Did he lay off the entire Iraqi army leading directly to a huge upsurge in the insurgency? No, no, no, and no. So how precisely did he "get us into this"? - Caffeinate, on 10/14/2007, -0/+3I'll be honest - there is so much failure in Iraq, that there is plenty of blame to spread around. Rumsfeld certainly, Bush definitely, Cheney and the Halliburton money-grubbing crew absolutely, and everyone else that pushed us to war in an attempt to make big bucks off of it. Is this General specifically responsible? I actually don't think so, anymore than I think Abu Ghraib can be placed solely at the feet of the soldiers doing the torture. The decisions come from somewhere. It makes me very angry when I see people blaming the military for everything that goes wrong in Iraq, because the military wouldn't even be there in the first place if it weren't for our "leaders". "Leaders" get the glory when things go right, and they take responsibility when things go wrong - that is what the position of leadership is all about. Our "leaders" though, make it a point to blame everybody else but themselves when things go wrong, and never take responsibility for anything. Our soldiers wouldn't have been over there in the first place were it not for them, and they wouldn't have been torturing people for "intelligence" if it were not for our leaders ramming that through despite opposition from many in the military. It is very easy to order something that you don't have to do yourself, and if you are pathologically incapable of accepting any responsibility for your actions. Those closer to the situation, and that might have to do it themselves or give a direct order to do so, though, actually resisted many of the methods of torture that Rumsfeld, Bush and the gang authorized.
- christor, on 10/14/2007, -1/+4Well, the link you cite says 40%, not 50% - but who cares. I hope it's ok with you if the rest of us stop to wonder a bit when the former commander of US forces in Iraq describes the entire enterprise as hopelessly flawed. Are you saying this part, the part about how the war is an endless nightmare of death and destruction, shouldn't be discussed because Sanchez also said some other things?
- CDRaff, on 10/14/2007, -2/+5Do we really need another person to tell us that it is a mess. I can see with my own eyes that it is a mess. It is very easy to say "This is a mess!", it is much harder to say "This is a solution".
I really do not think that "pulling out" quick and totally is the answer either. As much as we do not like it we are in this mess and we need the stones to say, "We made a mistake and we will fix it." Bush may have lied, but that does not mean that our congress at the time could not have actually researched the issue and made a different decision on the matter. - bsmeteronhigh, on 10/13/2007, -0/+3I think we need a new term for Republicans and Democrats that would convey how something can be exactly the same on the inside, yet appear somehow different on the outside. Any thoughts?
- JoeVet, on 10/14/2007, -0/+2That butter bar usually starts with an earned degree, not a bought one.
- Caffeinate, on 10/14/2007, -0/+2I don't know why people dugg you two down. You were telling the truth. Must have been some Bush supporters - they are allergic to the truth.
- Shantry99, on 10/13/2007, -0/+2I'd add democrats to the mix.
- SuperMoses, on 10/16/2007, -0/+2Thanks for showing me that video which came from a pro-nazi website.
Btw, the video was showing Muslim protests not riots. The riots in France were nothing compared to the LA riots. - Caffeinate, on 10/14/2007, -0/+2It is impossible to get the ones that are truly responsible, Rumsfeld and no doubt Lord Cheney and Darth Incompetus. They are completely incapable of taking personal responsibility for anything, no matter how horribly it might harm a person. They don't think the rules apply to them, and they don't believe that they are ever wrong. Even if they were charged, they would just whine and cry that people are witch-hunting, then promptly round up as many scapegoats as necessary to take the blame for them. As long as Bush is in office, it is impossible for anyone to succeed in Iraq because they are too busy making backroom deals to profit off of it. They would torture their mothers if they thought there might be some power and profit in it don't think they care about destroying careers and people in the military.
- BohicaTwentyTwo, on 10/15/2007, -0/+2Does anyone have an address for Sanchez? I'd like to send him my copy of DERELECTION OF DUTY by H R McMaster. Maybe he would learn something about military commanders allowing politicians to subvert their authority.
I wouldn't be against sending a copy to Petraeus, but considering COL McMaster is already on his general staff, I don't its as much an issue. - inactive, on 10/15/2007, -4/+6Sanchez: "AS A NATION WE MUST RECOGNIZE THAT THE ENEMY WE FACE IS COMMITTED TO DESTROYING OUR WAY OF LIFE. THIS ENEMY IS ARGUABLY MORE DANGEROUS THAN ANY THREAT WE FACED IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY." (bold in the original)
Another quote that's not going to be found in the MSM much. Nor is it going to be popular here on Digg. But true nonetheless. - bsmeteronhigh, on 10/13/2007, -1/+3When the republicans did all they could to dismantle the FCC and oversight it provided by way of the equal time provisions we have a fifth estate of journalism more concerned with ratings than with the truth. The airwaves belong to the people. Broadcasters used to operate in the public interest. Now they operate solely in the interest of politicians seeking airtime for commercials during re-election season. (At the lowest price on the rate cards, by the way.)
- spankaccount, on 10/15/2007, -0/+2Because "The evidence of a drop in violence in Iraq is becoming hard to dispute."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ... - Caffeinate, on 10/14/2007, -1/+3That is exactly what these GOP Bush supporter nutjobs are saying. They don't want to discuss the fact that Sanchez said it is a disaster, they want to call attention to other meaningless crap so that they can then say "You liberal lefties don't support the troops!" despite the fact that this has nothing to do with left and right, it has to do with facts.
Never mind that none of them have ever held a gun in war before or been to West Point. I'd say a General who says the situation is hopelessly flawed has a lot more credibility than Bush shills and Bush administration profiteers. He isn't the only one that has said it, either, he's just the next in the line of experienced generals and military affairs experts that have outright said this war is a catastrophic mess. They know it, you know it, and most of the people discussing this know it. I don't know who these Bush shills think they are fooling, but it isn't the generals, the people in the military or the American people. I think the only ones they are trying to fool is themselves. -
Show 51 - 100 of 110 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