NationStates Jolt Archive

NOTE: I got this in an email, so I don't wanna hear any nonsense about my not attributing to some source. Personally, I think this gentleman is right on the money. If you don't like it, I'm sure you will find some way to express your "outrage" verbally.


An Open Letter to Cindy Sheehan From the Proud Father of a U.S. Marine By Brantley Smith Posted On August 17, 2005


Ms. Sheehan,

By your actions over the past two weeks it is clear that you missed an important aspect of Civics 101: With rights come responsibilities. You certainly have the right to voice your opinion against the war in Iraq and the President's policies. You even have the right to camp outside the President's home in Crawford and demand he meet with you. Your status as a mother who has lost a child in the war also gives your words and actions a credibility and a larger audience than otherwise would be the case. Now that your supporters have given you a broad forum from which to be heard, making you a national figure, it's time you considered your responsibilities to all of us.

I have a daughter set to deploy to Fallujah in two weeks and I have a serious concern with how your irresponsible and short sighted actions might impact on her. She is, after all, a volunteer, like your son, and she is going in harm's way because she believes it is her responsibility to protect your rights and freedoms.

Well meaning people like you always seem to forget the law of unintended consequences and in your vanity and arrogant self-righteousness never bother to think through what it is you are trying to do versus what you may actually accomplish. I am here to inform you, Ma'am, that you will not change the policy of our government by sitting outside Crawford making a spectacle of yourself in the name of your rights to free speech; what you will do is provide more propaganda for our enemies and cost the lives of even more brave and selfless American warriors. How long do you think it will be before you become a star on Al Jazeera? For all I know, it may have already happened.

One thing is certain, though, and that is that your actions and words will further embolden a ruthless and evil enemy and more American blood will be shed and some of it will be on your hands. I pray that my daughter will not be one of them. If she is, then I will hold you and those like you partly responsible. Yes, my daughter's fate will depend mostly on her own courageous decision to serve, but only the most naive among us can deny the impact our own words and actions here in America have in a world grown smaller by the revolution in communications technology.

I am sure you believe that you are serving some great cause by putting our servicemen and women in more danger and that you can, by your irresponsible exercise of free speech, help end a policy you disagree with. Your emotion may be compelling but the reality is that you will not set in motion any process that will change or undo what has been done. The war will go on because to end it now would dishonor the sacrifice of all of our fellow countrymen who have died in the cause of fighting terrorism. Rational Americans will not allow that. Too much is at stake. Unfortunately, shallow and irrational ones, such as yourself, will continue to put the lives of our sons and daughters in danger by aiding and abetting an enemy who sees propagandizing in the mass media as its main weapon in a war it could otherwise not win standing on its own wretched and evil justification of radical Islam, or by force of arms.

You, Ma'am, have joined forces with an evil you neither understand nor apparently have tried to comprehend. You direct your anger toward our country while the enemy plots to kill and maim the innocent. You make a mockery of responsible free speech while thousands of young men and women fight desperately to preserve your safety. Instead of honoring your son's sacrifice you are inspired to comfort an evil enemy.

You clearly do not understand the challenge we face as a nation and have not tried to put it in historical perspective. It is a sad fact that it is those of your thinking that have led us to where we are today. Decades of appeasement to these haters of everything we hold dear has cost thousands of American lives from Beirut to New York and in dozens of other forgotten places. Remember Lockerbie? The Achille Lauro? The USS Cole? We as a people were dragged into this war, much like December 7th, 1941, and we must fight and win it wherever the enemy hides and against whomever would support him.

Make no mistake about Iraq. It is both a legitimate and crucial campaign in this much larger, global war of radical Islam's making. These people hate us for who we are, not what we have done. We did not bring this on ourselves, as many would have us believe, by our policies and actions abroad. We brought this on ourselves in 1775 when the Founding Fathers embarked on a course of freedom, tolerance, and liberal democratic and social ideals.

These haters of all we hold dear strive to destroy forever a government "of the people, by the people, and for the people" that Abraham Lincoln hoped would never "Perish from the earth". They would replace it with an oppressive world theocracy unlike anything modern history has ever seen for its ruthless disregard for personal freedom and liberty. If more appeasement is your answer for an alternative policy, spare us. We have suffered enough from cowardice and inaction.

An historical analogy screams to be let out here. It is one of two men, both named Chamberlain. Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, a school teacher turned soldier in the American Civil War, found himself in the crosshairs of history on a warm July day in 1863 on a small hill in Pennsylvania. Commanding the 20th Maine Regiment on the extreme Union left at Gettysburg he was in a most perilous position. Should he fail to hold against a strong Confederate attack, the Union could be lost. You see, he was serving in an increasingly unpopular war at home against a resurgent enemy, and for a President fighting for his political life. Colonel Chamberlain, stoic but determined, refused to yield. His small regiment held against an onslaught of Confederate attacks, an action many historians believe turned the tide of the war. He was later awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. The other half of this analogy focuses on Neville Chamberlain, Prime Minister of Great Britain in the years preceding World War II. His story is widely known. Through his policy of appeasement and a lack of moral courage, he handed Adolf Hitler much of Europe. Which side of history have you chosen, Ma'am?

Your son died in the service of freedom and my daughter will go in harm's way to protect and preserve it. Honor their sacrifice, Ma'am, by exercising it responsibly.

I will pray with you and I will grieve with you but I will not stand by silent while you needlessly and arrogantly endanger the life of my daughter and her comrades in arms. Please bless us with your silence and go home.

Brantley Smith Proud father of a United States Marine Tullahoma, TN.

*yawn*

It's very unoriginal in its "dissent is bad, you're putting them in danger by voicing your dissenting opinion blah blah blah" tripe.

Wow, and this would be version... what?

"dissent is bad".stalin would 100% agree

*yawn*

It's very unoriginal in its "dissent is bad, you're putting them in danger by voicing your dissenting opinion blah blah blah" tripe.
So it doesn't matter to you that it could very well be true?

Wow, and this would be version... what?
And that matters, how??

Wow, and this would be version... what?here are some versions...Mr Smith really writes a lot of Letters...to a lot of Web sites.

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=%22Brantley+Smith%22+marine&prssweb=Search&ei=UTF-8&fr=moz2&fl=0&x=wrt

stalin would 100% agree
Just because some dead dictator might agree does not make the point in-valid. :P

Eutrusca, this is a variant on your theme which has been so worked over Mozart couldn't make another. Was there really a need? Corny/Frangland, maybe DCD, all the usual suspects will say 'yay' and me, The Nazz, Dobbsworld and the other set of suspects yawn.

here are some ther versions

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=%22Brantley+Smith%22+marine&prssweb=Search&ei=UTF-8&fr=moz2&fl=0&x=wrt
And this invalidates the points made in the letter how??

And that matters, how??
Because when you post these, these letters all seem to be the same and they have the same catch lines and they spot the same essence. The only difference is generally in the tone and name.

Eutrusca, this is a variant on your theme which has been so worked over Mozart couldn't make another. Was there really a need? Corny/Frangland, maybe DCD, all the usual suspects will say 'yay' and me, The Nazz, Dobbsworld and the other set of suspects yawn.
"Anarchic Christians" is an oxymoron.

Because when you post these, these letters all seem to be the same and they have the same catch lines and they spot the same essence. The only difference is generally in the tone and name.
And this invalidates the points made how???

I bet this letter was really written by GWB and he is currently conspiring with Osama Bin Laden to have Cindy Sheehan car-bombed.

"Anarchic Christians" is an oxymoron.

Actually it isn't. Acts 2 42-47, bunch of commies they were.

"Anarchic Christians" is an oxymoron.
And that invalidate his point how?

I bet this letter was really written by GWB and he is currently conspiring with Osama Bin Laden to have Cindy Sheehan car-bombed.

I'm also Santa Claus, and will be delivering Ebola instead of presents this year...

So it doesn't matter to you that it could very well be true?It Could be true..

"My name is Mr smith...and I am for real."

lets hear it again: "My name is Mr smith...and I am for real.."

lets hear it again: "My name is Mr smith....and I am for real...."

lets hear it again: "My name is Mr smith....and I am for real."

lets hear it again: "My name is Mr smith..and I am for real.."

It Could be true.
He could be for real...

Then again almost anyone "could be for real"

Do I think it is?
You know the asnwer....

to the origional post;

Hooah.

And this invalidates the points made how???

The only point that would be sensibly contested is how using the armed forces in a foreign land who has neither the means nor will to land their own forces/weapons on your home soil contributes to safeguarding the rights within your own borders.

And I note the usual rubbish about "They hate us for our freedoms" being used. The Netherlands is still quite a secure country in all of this hoo haa. And they do have quite a fair bit of freedom. Maybe it is because they haven't had the habit of militarily involving themselves around the globe in their quest to fight the "Red threat" that left people generally disenchanted and hateful of the US?

So it doesn't matter to you that it could very well be true?

But... it's not true.

So it doesn't matter to you that it could very well be true?

Apart from it being complete and utter hogwash, no, and neither should it to her. It's not her fault they're there, dying. It is that of the person at whom she has directed her criticism, and to use the danger the soldiers have been put in by this person as an excuse to stifle criticism over him having done exactly that is just ludicrous.

So ... in essense, she should put up and shut up, eh?

Not in my America, pal.

Rather ironic that this thread would be started by someone whose signature includes the line "I will not sacrifice my children upon the altar of your ideology!"

This woman didn't want to sacrifice her child upon the altar of your ideology, either, but it happened. She wants to make sure it doesn't happen to anyone else. Is that really so hard to understand?

As for the idea of quashing dissent, this is (supposedly) a government "of the
people, by the people, for the people" -- and this makes it every citizen's civic duty to speak up, even if the opinion portrayed isn't popular with our military.

For those who're wondering, this is an original production of gop team leader (http://www.gop.com/About/), where the rest of the site looks nowhere near as bad as their about page.

One thing is certain, though, and that is that your actions and words will further embolden a ruthless and evil enemy and more American blood will be shed and some of it will be on your hands.I call Chutzpah.

An analagous situation- we see news of a traditional 9-day funeral procession. Are we emboldened or is the journalist called "unamerican" because he's "emboldening the terrorists" by giving us grief?


And this invalidates the points made how???
And this invalidates the points made in the letter how??
And that matters, how??Please tell me this is trying to be ironic. It's really very funny.
(Yes, I realize they're making pretty much the same comment, and when there's a noticable variation you make one. You're a clever bastid, you are, but it's quicker and easier to point it out this way)

And that invalidate his point how?
Now did I say it invalidated his point? Nope! Next! :D

It Could be true..

"My name is Mr smith...and I am for real."

lets hear it again: "My name is Mr smith...and I am for real.."

lets hear it again: "My name is Mr smith....and I am for real...."

lets hear it again: "My name is Mr smith....and I am for real."

lets hear it again: "My name is Mr smith..and I am for real.."

It Could be true.
He could be for real...

Then again almost anyone "could be for real"

Do I think it is?
You know the asnwer....
Do I care?
You know the answer ....

Hmmm I think I am going to respond a similar way I have seen against sheannan

“This guy is disrespecting his daughter … he is using her position for political gain and failing as a father. If he truly respected his daughters life he would be trying to make sure she was as safe as possible instead of just trying to glorify his daughters risk without doing something to minimize it

How dare he disrespect his daughter in such a manner”


Hmmm turnaround is fair play

So ... in essense, she should put up and shut up, eh?

Not in my America, pal.
Um ... where did I say that? :confused:

"Anarchic Christians" is an oxymoron.
Leo Tolstoy might argue with that.

Um ... where did I say that? :confused:

You didn't .... the letter you posted did.

Now did I say it invalidated his point? Nope! Next! :D
So you were just making fun of his name for pure flame-baiting humour?

Gee, I thought you would have learned by now. :rolleyes:

Rather ironic that this thread would be started by someone whose signature includes the line "I will not sacrifice my children upon the altar of your ideology!"

This woman didn't want to sacrifice her child upon the altar of your ideology, either, but it happened. She wants to make sure it doesn't happen to anyone else. Is that really so hard to understand?

As for the idea of quashing dissent, this is (supposedly) a government "of the
people, by the people, for the people" -- and this makes it every citizen's civic duty to speak up, even if the opinion portrayed isn't popular with our military.
No, she just used a decision ( actually, 2 decisions, since her son re-enlisted ) her son made to further her own ideology after his death, which to me means that she's dishonoring his memory, but everyone here knows my position on this.

I couldn't give a rat's ass whether "the military" thinks a postion is popular or not. The Constitution takes care of that for me, which just happens to be the very thing every member of the military is sworn to uphold. Interesting, yes? :)

So you were just making fun of his name for pure flame-baiting humour?

Gee, I thought you would have learned by now. :rolleyes:
Nice try, but no cigar. Those tricks don't work with me anymore. :D

You didn't .... the letter you posted did.
Hmmm. A brief read of the letter reveals the following: "You certainly have the right to voice your opinion against the war in Iraq and the President's policies. You even have the right to camp outside the President's home in Crawford and demand he meet with you."

That doesn't square real well with what you say the letter says.

to the origional post;

Hooah.
:)

Hmmm. A brief read of the letter reveals the following: "You certainly have the right to voice your opinion against the war in Iraq and the President's policies. You even have the right to camp outside the President's home in Crawford and demand he meet with you."

That doesn't square real well with what you say the letter says.

It then goes on to say 'you are giving the evil enemy propaganda material' which you regularly call treachery when we deal with Jane Fonda.

This woman didn't want to sacrifice her child upon the altar of your ideology, either, but it happened. She wants to make sure it doesn't happen to anyone else. Is that really so hard to understand?


Cindy didn't do shit.

Casey sacrificed himself. His mom had nothing to do with his decision.

Leo Tolstoy might argue with that.
He's dead. :)

He's dead. :)

But I'm willing to second him :p

It then goes on to say 'you are giving the evil enemy propaganda material' which you regularly call treachery when we deal with Jane Fonda.
In my mind, there's a vast difference between simple propaganda and giving actual aid and comfort to the enemy. If the dishonorable Ms. Sheehan visited the terrorists and helped put together a car bomb, then I would have the same problems with her as I do with the dishonorable Hanoi-Jane. :)

I never knew all of Islam declared jihad against the US all the way back in 1775. I wonder what took them so long to attack us.

But I'm willing to second him :p
An hurculean task at best. I hope you're up to it. :)

No, she just used a decision ( actually, 2 decisions, since her son re-enlisted ) her son made to further her own ideology after his death, which to me means that she's dishonoring his memory, but everyone here knows my position on this.
So, lemme get this straight. Son wants to protect his country. Bush ships him off to Iraq instead, a country that certainly posed no threat. He dies in vain, the mother objects, and she is the one dishonoring him? No. Bush was the one who dishonored him when he sent the young man to Iraq.

I couldn't give a rat's ass whether "the military" thinks a postion is popular or not. The Constitution takes care of that for me, which just happens to be the very thing every member of the military is sworn to uphold. Interesting, yes? :)
Including Article 1, section 8, clause 11, which grants Congress and only Congress the power to declare war. Granted, nearly every president since Lincoln has run roughshod over that bit of the Constitution (including Democrat favorite Clinton), but that does not make it acceptable to do so. (Activist judges? No...activist presidents!)

Interesting, yes? :)

An hurculean task at best. I hope you're up to it. :)

Not really, you never rebutted my argument so me for t3h w33n!

I never knew all of Islam declared jihad against the US all the way back in 1775. I wonder what took them so long to attack us.
Huh? :confused:

Explain thyself, oh evil one! :)

In my mind, there's a vast difference between simple propaganda and giving actual aid and comfort to the enemy. If the dishonorable Ms. Sheehan visited the terrorists and helped put together a car bomb, then I would have the same problems with her as I do with the dishonorable Hanoi-Jane. :)
She visited them but did she actually help them construct any sort of weapon?

Canada City']Cindy didn't do shit.

Casey sacrificed himself. His mom had nothing to do with his decision.

You act like you know them personally. I am by no means a scholar in the art of writing, but I do speak from the heart. I am currently on active duty as a United States Marine and I take this very personally. I have lost friends in this war, and from what I can tell noone here has. When you have seen the elephant you can make statements like, "he's dead :) ." Until then, don't come to me with this free speech bs and realize that there's more to life and death than you know. War is not pretty. People die. That's the way of things. Why would anyone advocate the death of more of my brothers and sisters in arms. Those that do have no right to the freedom that those young men and women have given them, yet they have it because we don't fight for some Americans. We fight for all of them. Never forget that without young Americans giving their all we wouldn't have the rights we do today.

So, lemme get this straight. Son wants to protect his country. Bush ships him off to Iraq instead, a country that certainly posed no threat. He dies in vain, the mother objects, and she is the one dishonoring him? No. Bush was the one who dishonored him when he sent the young man to Iraq.
I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain to you the functions and limitations of a military organization in a democracy. Let's just say the man voluntarily joined the military, voluntarily re-enlisted in the military, and was given orders as a soldier, which he obviously obeyed as having been lawful orders duly issued by his chain of command, at the apex of which is the office of the President.

I decided I'd pick the letter apart. I'm bored. Sue me.


By your actions over the past two weeks it is clear that you missed an important aspect of Civics 101: With rights come responsibilities.

Oh where can I begin .... he may be right, but the rest of his letter proves him a hypocrite.

You certainly have the right to voice your opinion against the war in Iraq and the President's policies. You even have the right to camp outside the President's home in Crawford and demand he meet with you. Your status as a mother who has lost a child in the war also gives your words and actions a credibility and a larger audience than otherwise would be the case. Now that your supporters have given you a broad forum from which to be heard, making you a national figure, it's time you considered your responsibilities to all of us.

This coming from the same basic ideaology that says "Hollyweird" and all celebrities should just stfu.

I have a daughter set to deploy to Fallujah in two weeks

Yeah, right ... and I'm a Ranger.

I have a serious concern with how your irresponsible and short sighted actions might impact on her.

You must have a very sad opinion of the US Military if you believe the words and actions of Cindy Sheehan will have any impact on your "daughter". I mean ... come on ... you'd think the military would train people better than that.

She is, after all, a volunteer, like your son, and she is going in harm's way because she believes it is her responsibility to protect your rights and freedoms.

Then why is she going to Fallujah? Last I checked, Iraq wasn't a danger to the US in any capacity.

Well meaning people like you always seem to forget the law of unintended consequences and in your vanity and arrogant self-righteousness never bother to think through what it is you are trying to do versus what you may actually accomplish.

Oh goodie ... daddy has an insult and a lecture for us ... let's watch ....

I am here to inform you, Ma'am, that you will not change the policy of our government by sitting outside Crawford making a spectacle of yourself in the name of your rights to free speech

You mean excercising her First Amendment (something your daughter is sworn to defend from all enemies, foreign and domestic) right to peacefully assemble and protest is a bad thing? My goodness. You seem like a domestic enemy ... your daughter should shoot you.

what you will do is provide more propaganda for our enemies and cost the lives of even more brave and selfless American warriors. How long do you think it will be before you become a star on Al Jazeera? For all I know, it may have already happened.

Oh for the love of .....

I wasn't so aware we Americans gave a rat's ass what the terrorists think. I wasn't aware we needed to walk on eggshells around them and pander to their fear mongering by keeping our mouths shut. Perhaps we should put our women in burkhas while we're at it ... don't wanna offend the terrorists, after all. We certainly don't want to give them any reason to come out of their hidey holes and show themselves, either.

One thing is certain, though, and that is that your actions and words will further embolden a ruthless and evil enemy and more American blood will be shed and some of it will be on your hands.

First of all, you just said your daughter volunteered to have her bloodshed. You spitting on her now? Second of all, no blood will be on Cindy Sheehan's hands. The military will train your daughter, not Cindy Sheehan.

I pray that my daughter will not be one of them. If she is, then I will hold you and those like you partly responsible.

Misguided moron.

Yes, my daughter's fate will depend mostly on her own courageous decision to serve, but only the most naive among us can deny the impact our own words and actions here in America have in a world grown smaller by the revolution in communications technology.

No ... we're all aware. It appears to be you who aren't. After all ... you posted this on the Internet instead of handing it to Cindy Sheehan yourself, in person. What's the matter ... you scared of her?

I am sure you believe that you are serving some great cause by putting our servicemen and women in more danger and that you can, by your irresponsible exercise of free speech, help end a policy you disagree with.

Actually ... we all learned a long time ago that Bush doesn't care about the people. She knows she's not doing any good, but god damnit, at least she's trying.

Also "irresponsible exercise of free speech" means only what it means to the individual. I imagine, though, that anything beyond the words "God Bless America! God Bless George Bush!" would be "irresponsible" in your eyes.

Your emotion may be compelling but the reality is that you will not set in motion any process that will change or undo what has been done. The war will go on because to end it now would dishonor the sacrifice of all of our fellow countrymen who have died in the cause of fighting terrorism. Rational Americans will not allow that.

I'm reasonably sure, by this paragraph, that you have no idea what it means to be a rational American.

Too much is at stake. Unfortunately, shallow and irrational ones, such as yourself, will continue to put the lives of our sons and daughters in danger by aiding and abetting an enemy who sees propagandizing in the mass media as its main weapon in a war it could otherwise not win standing on its own wretched and evil justification of radical Islam, or by force of arms.

Buhahahahahaha ... they always resort to petty insults and hollow nationalism, don't they?

You, Ma'am, have joined forces with an evil you neither understand nor apparently have tried to comprehend. You direct your anger toward our country while the enemy plots to kill and maim the innocent. You make a mockery of responsible free speech while thousands of young men and women fight desperately to preserve your safety. Instead of honoring your son's sacrifice you are inspired to comfort an evil enemy.

Yeah ... right. :rolleyes:

You clearly do not understand the challenge we face as a nation and have not tried to put it in historical perspective.

Neither do you, pal ... neither do you. This "put up and shut up" attitude of yours is nothing short of fascism.

It is a sad fact that it is those of your thinking that have led us to where we are today. Decades of appeasement to these haters of everything we hold dear has cost thousands of American lives from Beirut to New York and in dozens of other forgotten places. Remember Lockerbie? The Achille Lauro? The USS Cole? We as a people were dragged into this war, much like December 7th, 1941, and we must fight and win it wherever the enemy hides and against whomever would support him.

Oh quit it. I guess this guy forgot about 7/7. I'm reasonably sure nobody was appeasing anybody by then.

Make no mistake about Iraq. It is both a legitimate and crucial campaign in this much larger, global war of radical Islam's making.

How so? From what I can tell ... no WMDs, no ties to alQaeda, no danger to the US, no threat to anybody but Kurds. Maybe you're Kurdish ...

These people hate us for who we are, not what we have done. We did not bring this on ourselves, as many would have us believe, by our policies and actions abroad. We brought this on ourselves in 1775 when the Founding Fathers embarked on a course of freedom, tolerance, and liberal democratic and social ideals.

Oh yeah ... nothin' sucks worse than tolerance and freedom. Damn those Founding Fathers!

These haters of all we hold dear strive to destroy forever a government "of the people, by the people, and for the people" that Abraham Lincoln hoped would never "Perish from the earth". They would replace it with an oppressive world theocracy unlike anything modern history has ever seen for its ruthless disregard for personal freedom and liberty.

But that's what you're doing now, buddy! Stop trying to deny me my freedoms, you fuckin' fascist!

If more appeasement is your answer for an alternative policy, spare us. We have suffered enough from cowardice and inaction.

So ... you writing a letter anonymously on the internet while Cindy Sheehan is camping out in the Texas summer trying desperately to make a difference and fighting a hopeless cause and I'm supposed to think *she* is the coward?

<historical innacuracies snipped>

Your son died in the service of freedom and my daughter will go in harm's way to protect and preserve it. Honor their sacrifice, Ma'am, by exercising it responsibly.

Our military personnel will better serve to protect us if they were here. All they're doing now is protecting Halliburton's interests. I will not honor that. Deal with it.

I will pray with you and I will grieve with you but I will not stand by silent while you needlessly and arrogantly endanger the life of my daughter and her comrades in arms. Please bless us with your silence and go home.

Save your hollow and misguided prayers for someone who gives a shit.

Brantley Smith Proud father of a United States Marine Tullahoma, TN.

Yeah ... right.

I figured this might be pertinent:

It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived. (George S. Patton)

We need to acknowledge and honor the sacrifices of those who died serving in the name of Freedom and Democracy and the United States Constitution. Yes. But it is also necessary to recognize the fact that they were serving to uphold these values, whether or not they are seemingly twisted by political leaders. The same rights that Cindy Sheehan is making use of are protected by the sacrifice of her son and the efforts of thousands serving in the Armed Forces. Let us not forget that the cost of liberty is eternal vigilance.

You act like you know them personally. I am by no means a scholar in the art of writing, but I do speak from the heart. I am currently on active duty as a United States Marine and I take this very personally. I have lost friends in this war, and from what I can tell noone here has. When you have seen the elephant you can make statements like, "he's dead :) ." Until then, don't come to me with this free speech bs and realize that there's more to life and death than you know. War is not pretty. People die. That's the way of things. Why would anyone advocate the death of more of my brothers and sisters in arms. Those that do have no right to the freedom that those young men and women have given them, yet they have it because we don't fight for some Americans. We fight for all of them. Never forget that without young Americans giving their all we wouldn't have the rights we do today.
"I have lost friends in this war, and from what I can tell noone here has."

I have.

You are to be commended for your service.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain to you the functions and limitations of a military organization in a democracy. Let's just say the man voluntarily joined the military, voluntarily re-enlisted in the military, and was given orders as a soldier, which he obviously obeyed as having been lawful orders duly issued by his chain of command, at the apex of which is the office of the President.
First, I would take issue with necessarily calling the orders "lawful" (Article 1, section 8, clause 11 again). I will grant there is precedent for making those orders, a precedent which anyone who really cares about the Constitution should want to see struck down. But I digress.

My other issue with this is, just because it's an order that has to be obeyed doesn't mean that order stems from a good decision. Sending troops to Iraq was a very bad decision, one that perverts the volunteerism of those who want to defend their country into a political war machine and dishonors them as soldiers.

"I have lost friends in this war, and from what I can tell noone here has."

I have.

You are to be commended for your service.


Thank you and I sympathize with your loss. I am merely doing a job that I love for a nation that seems not to love me. It always has been and always will be the nature of things in America. The nations people have short memories and little resolve. It seems to me that many have forgotten what happened four years ago. I'm sure they say they haven't, but let's face it, actions speak louder than words.

She visited them but did she actually help them construct any sort of weapon?
Who? Sheehan or Fonda? So far as I know, neither one has done that. It was simply an illustration.

First, I would take issue with necessarily calling the orders "lawful" (Article 1, section 8, clause 11 again). I will grant there is precedent for making those orders, a precedent which anyone who really cares about the Constitution should want to see struck down. But I digress.

My other issue with this is, just because it's an order that has to be obeyed doesn't mean that order stems from a good decision. Sending troops to Iraq was a very bad decision, one that perverts the volunteerism of those who want to defend their country into a political war machine and dishonors them as soldiers.
Now we are into the relm of personal opinion.

It seems to me that many have forgotten what happened four years ago. I'm sure they say they haven't, but let's face it, actions speak louder than words.
Funny, I would think that the people who wanted to go after ObL instead of Iraq would be the ones who remembered what happened 4 years ago.

The nations people have short memories and little resolve. It seems to me that many have forgotten what happened four years ago. I'm sure they say they haven't, but let's face it, actions speak louder than words.

And that might hold an ounce of water if only for the fact that Iraq had nothing to do with what happened four years ago! :rolleyes:

Huh? :confused:

Explain thyself, oh evil one! :)


These people hate us for who we are, not what we have done. We did not bring this on ourselves, as many would have us believe, by our policies and actions abroad. We brought this on ourselves in 1775 when the Founding Fathers embarked on a course of freedom, tolerance, and liberal democratic and social ideals.

Apparently Islam has had it out for us since 1775.

Now we are into the relm of personal opinion.
Dude, we started in the realm of personal opinion. That's all your quoted e-mail is, that's all your posts are, that's all my posts are. This entire thread has been either personal opinion or facts to back up those personal opinions. What kind of cop-out is that?

Oh quit it. I guess this guy forgot about 7/7. I'm reasonably sure nobody was appeasing anybody by then.


7/7 had nothing to with foreign policy. More a sort of general hatred for western culture and england within the british muslim community.

Its also fairly well accepted that 7/7 was because the british government had pandered far too much to british muslims for over a decade, and provided a haven for radical clerics. Had they cracked down on the mosques and imam's after the satanic verses affair, it probably never would have happened.

Thank you and I sympathize with your loss. I am merely doing a job that I love for a nation that seems not to love me. It always has been and always will be the nature of things in America. The nations people have short memories and little resolve. It seems to me that many have forgotten what happened four years ago. I'm sure they say they haven't, but let's face it, actions speak louder than words.
Ever since Korea, the issues have been less than clear-cut. This means that there are going to be those who claim that "we don't belong there." I personally wonder if these people are advocating that we just sit on our doorsteps and wait to take corrective action when they try to force their way into our homes.

There are many, many people who support you and your brothers and sisters regardless of whether the war you're fighting is a "good" war or a "bad" war. During Vietnam, many of the oh-so-intellectual crowd had trouble differentiating between the message and the messenger. Fortunately for the current breed of democratic warrior, most of the American public can at least now tell the difference between those who decide what battles are to be fought, and those who win them. Unfortunately, some on here cannot. They are to be pitied or ignored.

Visit Carolina when you get back. People here respect our military personnel.

Dude, we started in the realm of personal opinion. That's all your quoted e-mail is, that's all your posts are, that's all my posts are. This entire thread has been either personal opinion or facts to back up those personal opinions. What kind of cop-out is that?
I was thinking the same thing lol

I decided I'd pick the letter apart. I'm bored. Sue me.
[ Sues Keruvalia for making him read that long-ass post! ] :D

Visit Carolina when you get back. People here respect our military personnel.


What tripe, no one is suggesting this is the troops fault. I don't believe I've ever seen anyone here blaming the troops. (except for the ones that were involved in torture) We are all painfully aware this was the Bush administrations fault. Bush is to blame, not the troops. Nice try Eutrusca, but we all know you far too well by now to expect you to be genuine on this subject.

Well meaning people like you always seem to forget the law of unintended consequences and in your vanity and arrogant self-righteousness never bother to think through what it is you are trying to do versus what you may actually accomplish. I am here to inform you, Ma'am, that you will not change the policy of our government by sitting outside Crawford making a spectacle of yourself in the name of your rights to free speech; what you will do is provide more propaganda for our enemies and cost the lives of even more brave and selfless American warriors. How long do you think it will be before you become a star on Al Jazeera? For all I know, it may have already happened.

"Dissent is bad because it makes it look like we actually allow disagreement. It is bad to be opposed to something you are opposed to because someone else might use that against the people you are trying to help. Therefore, you should never express dissent. All it does is give fodder to our enemies."

I guess the colonials never should have expressed dissent with England. After all, it gave support and courage to the French, whom they were always fighting.

Your emotion may be compelling but the reality is that you will not set in motion any process that will change or undo what has been done.

"My daughter is fighting for your rights, but they don't matter. No matter what you do, you have no effect on the policy in our country because the policy is not decided by the people."

You clearly do not understand the challenge we face as a nation and have not tried to put it in historical perspective.

"Obviously, since you don't agree with me, you haven't even thought about it. After all, I am infallible."


Hell, I don't even fully agree with Sheehan and I can see the arrogance in this letter. All it basically says is, "No matter what you say, I am right and you are wrong. Since I am right, you are a dangerous person. "

Dude, we started in the realm of personal opinion. That's all your quoted e-mail is, that's all your posts are, that's all my posts are. This entire thread has been either personal opinion or facts to back up those personal opinions. What kind of cop-out is that?


To quote your post which initiated this exchange:
First, I would take issue with necessarily calling the orders "lawful" (Article 1, section 8, clause 11 again). I will grant there is precedent for making those orders, a precedent which anyone who really cares about the Constitution should want to see struck down. But I digress.

My other issue with this is, just because it's an order that has to be obeyed doesn't mean that order stems from a good decision. Sending troops to Iraq was a very bad decision, one that perverts the volunteerism of those who want to defend their country into a political war machine and dishonors them as soldiers.

To elaborate on my "personal opinion" comment:

Your first paragraph isn't personal opinion. In your second paragraph you address the following issues which are largely subject to personal opinion:

1. "Sending troops into Iraq was a very bad decision."

2. this decision "perverts the volunteerism of those who want to defend their country."

3. this decision "perverts [ them ] into a political war machine."

4. this decision "dishonors them as soldiers."

Clear enough for you now ... dude?

Just when you think Sheehan's publicity is starting to fade, someone aids and abetts the enemy by reinvigorating it. ;)

Just when you think Sheehan's publicity is starting to fade, someone aids and abetts the enemy by reinvigorating it. ;)
The Mom we love to hate. :D

Ok I will admit that I like flaming stupid Americans.
But how the hell can any parent with half a brain cell not agree with what Cindy Sheehan is saying in principle? Bush & Blair decided to go into Iraq after the UN said "NO", I don't Know why Blair said yes, but Bush's probably wanted to go back to Iraq not for WMD's but to finish the job for his daddy, yes and the oil. The states went YEARS with out doing anything about terrorism until 9/11. At that point when it finally became personal your leaders finally pulled there heads out of there collective asses and woke up to the fact that terrorism is a global problem. Now I agree with Afghanistan, but why not go after other countries that help terrorists like Saudi Arabia, packistan, or Libya (you know the home of the great evil Bin Ladin!!)?
This Idiot war in Iraq has nothing to do with American freedom. And until some ca prove to me that it does I will continue to say "way to go" to Ms Sheehan and others like her, and think and say that Bush, Blair and their like are nothing but a bunch of moronic shit heads that are pissing away their countries greatest resources away for nothing!!!!
:upyours:

I don't get why people think that an individual HAS to support the President in order to support the soldiers. I participated in campaigns in Afghanistan, and the subsequent invasion of Iraq. Morale in Afghanistan was high, because we were killing Taliban and Al Qaeda forces. Iraq is another story...

I have seen the "Sheehan" agenda argued from both sides. Many on the far right believe she's abetting an enemy. I ask how? That because she protests and criticises the context, and execution of the Iraqi War that troop morale has fallen??? I will say from personal experience and feeling, that Morale fell a hell of alot more, when that video of Bush aired with him joking about finding WMD's under his desk. THAT was not in the least bit appreciated by the brave men and women serving. This whole issue is a conflagration that has been overly analyzed by both sides. She's a grieving mother, who wants to know why her son was killed, albeit I don't hold to her ideals on many issues, I understand her pain, and support her right to freely redress her grievences with Bush.

*yawn*

It's very unoriginal in its "dissent is bad, you're putting them in danger by voicing your dissenting opinion blah blah blah" tripe.

call it what you will, it's right on the money. Sheehan is helping the enemy and making the job harder for America to finish. If this hadn't occurred to her, she may be forgiven. If it had, she is a traitor and should be punished thusly.

Ok I will admit that I like flaming stupid Americans.
But how the hell can any parent with half a brain cell not agree with what Cindy Sheehan is saying in principle? Bush & Blair decided to go into Iraq after the UN said "NO", I don't Know why Blair said yes, but Bush's probably wanted to go back to Iraq not for WMD's but to finish the job for his daddy, yes and the oil. The states went YEARS with out doing anything about terrorism until 9/11. At that point when it finally became personal your leaders finally pulled there heads out of there collective asses and woke up to the fact that terrorism is a global problem. Now I agree with Afghanistan, but why not go after other countries that help terrorists like Saudi Arabia, packistan, or Libya (you know the home of the great evil Bin Ladin!!)?
This Idiot war in Iraq has nothing to do with American freedom. And until some ca prove to me that it does I will continue to say "way to go" to Ms Sheehan and others like her, and think and say that Bush, Blair and their like are nothing but a bunch of moronic shit heads that are pissing away their countries greatest resources away for nothing!!!!
:upyours:

justification for Iraq: Saddam's ousting

Ok I will admit that I like flaming stupid Americans.
But how the hell can any parent with half a brain cell not agree with what Cindy Sheehan is saying in principle? Bush & Blair decided to go into Iraq after the UN said "NO", I don't Know why Blair said yes, but Bush's probably wanted to go back to Iraq not for WMD's but to finish the job for his daddy, yes and the oil. The states went YEARS with out doing anything about terrorism until 9/11. At that point when it finally became personal your leaders finally pulled there heads out of there collective asses and woke up to the fact that terrorism is a global problem. Now I agree with Afghanistan, but why not go after other countries that help terrorists like Saudi Arabia, packistan, or Libya (you know the home of the great evil Bin Ladin!!)?
This Idiot war in Iraq has nothing to do with American freedom. And until some ca prove to me that it does I will continue to say "way to go" to Ms Sheehan and others like her, and think and say that Bush, Blair and their like are nothing but a bunch of moronic shit heads that are pissing away their countries greatest resources away for nothing!!!!
You don't indicate which of which country you are a citizen. It's rather difficult to respond to someone who attacks my own Country when they're so unwilling to reveal their own, but perhaps you have good reason.

This is a free Forum where you are entitled to believe what you want to believe, truth and lie alike. So you are able to say "way to go" to whomever you like. Just as I am free to say that the dishonorable Ms. Sheehan is dishonoring her own son's memory. ( shrug )

call it what you will, it's right on the money. Sheehan is helping the enemy and making the job harder for America to finish. If this hadn't occurred to her, she may be forgiven. If it had, she is a traitor and should be punished thusly.

Really Frangland.. so you support fighting a war to give people "freedom" all the while wanting to take it away from your own people? Lets be serious here.

The Mom we love to hate. :D

Clearly but, hasn't it occurred to you that fighting amongst ourselves constantly about this in the press is just What the Terrorists Want? Division in America is a sign of their mass media attempts succeeding? Going by this letter that sort of thing is seen as aiding the enemy... maybe its better to leave sleeping skeletons lie in the closet.

justification for Iraq: Saddam's ousting

I suppose you've made some obesiance to the law 'you break, you fix' at least. Bit late though, you had far better reasons to do it in 91.

To elaborate on my "personal opinion" comment:
No need, as I readily admitted it was personal opinion. My point is that it's not different from the rest of the thread for it being so.
Dude, we started in the realm of personal opinion. That's all your quoted e-mail is, that's all your posts are, that's all my posts are. This entire thread has been either personal opinion or facts to back up those personal opinions. What kind of cop-out is that?

call it what you will, it's right on the money. Sheehan is helping the enemy and making the job harder for America to finish. If this hadn't occurred to her, she may be forgiven. If it had, she is a traitor and should be punished thusly.

Is she not allowed to express her opinion through her rights to protest, as an American citizen? If America had this belief that you've put forth, we wouldn't exactly be a democracy anymore. I'm personally against the war. Does that mean that if I protest it, I should be punished? It's my opinion, and I'm entitled to it because I'm an American.

You don't indicate which of which country you are a citizen. It's rather difficult to respond to someone who attacks my own Country when they're so unwilling to reveal their own, but perhaps you have good reason.

This is a free Forum where you are entitled to believe what you want to believe, truth and lie alike. So you are able to say "way to go" to whomever you like. Just as I am free to say that the dishonorable Ms. Sheehan is dishonoring her own son's memory. ( shrug )

I am proud to say that I am a Canadian, at that Yes I did support the decision to go into Afganistan, and that I was Verry proud of our PM when he told Bush NO to Iraq even tho it has cost our country. And just how is Ms. Sheehan dishonoring her own son's memory, when as I see it she want's answers as to why Bush threw her sons life away?

Is she not allowed to express her opinion through her rights to protest, as an American citizen? If America had this belief that you've put forth, we wouldn't exactly be a democracy anymore. I'm personally against the war. Does that mean that if I protest it, I should be punished? It's my opinion, and I'm entitled to it because I'm an American.
And no one is contesting that right for you to do so.

[ Sues Keruvalia for making him read that long-ass post! ] :D

Will you settle out of court for a muffin and some juice?

I am proud to say that I am a Canadian, at that Yes I did support the decision to go into Afganistan, and that I was Verry proud of our PM when he told Bush NO to Iraq even tho it has cost our country.

Hey there fellow Canuck! I agree 100% with what you've just said, as do MOST Canadians. Jean was not the greatest PM of all time, that's for sure, but I sure felt proud the day he said NO to Bush too. :)

Keep up the good fight!

Hmmm. A brief read of the letter reveals the following: "You certainly have the right to voice your opinion against the war in Iraq and the President's policies. You even have the right to camp outside the President's home in Crawford and demand he meet with you."

That doesn't square real well with what you say the letter says.

A more extended read of the letter reveals the writer saying, basically, "If you speak out against the government, the terrorists win."

He gives her her rights early in the letter, but then lambasts her for exercising them. He even tells her she's in league with evil for exercising them.

Not a nice thing to do. He's a domestic enemy to the Constitution of the United States and I believe it's every soldier's job to do their duty and annihilate him.

Will you settle out of court for a muffin and some juice?
Hell yeah. The month is almost half over and I could use the food! :D

I will not sacrifice my children upon the altar of your ideology!
yes but it sounds like you would suport throwing them on the alter for your (add word of choice when it comes to bush) presidants ideology!

I bet this letter was really written by GWB and he is currently conspiring with Osama Bin Laden to have Cindy Sheehan car-bombed.

Nah, GWB couldn't have written it; the grammar's too good. ;)

Actually it isn't. Acts 2 42-47, bunch of commies they were.

Wrong. They voluntarily sold their possessions, and voluntarily broke the bread and shared it. Voluntary charity is not communism.

"The Sheehan person," I like that. Let's objectify her so we don't have to think of her as a human being.

And no one is contesting that right for you to do so.
And yet, you contest Sheenan's right to do so. How odd.

Wrong. They voluntarily sold their possessions, and voluntarily broke the bread and shared it. Voluntary charity is not communism.

Everybody lived together holding property in common. That is not charity. That is communism. If they gave all that money to the poor that would be charity. They shared it among their fellow Christians creating a common economy.

Wrong. They voluntarily sold their possessions, and voluntarily broke the bread and shared it. Voluntary charity is not communism.
Well, actually it is. Communism in the original sense, not what everybody and his grandmother thinks communism is, the regimes installed by Stalin or Mao.

Eutrusca: The letter is long, patriotic and full of fallacies. But i will just pick out three that hit my eye just glancing through it.
Please explain why it is neccessary to protect american rights in the Iraq.
Please explain how speaking out against the occupation is endangering american troops. (And not in a wish-wash way of "emboldening the enemy", which everyone can state but not prove.)
Please explain why "We brought this on ourselves in 1775 when the Founding Fathers embarked on a course of freedom, tolerance, and liberal democratic and social ideals." is a valid reason to invade Iraq and ignore, e.g., Zimbawe or North Korea.

7/7 had nothing to with foreign policy. More a sort of general hatred for western culture and england within the british muslim community.

Its also fairly well accepted that 7/7 was because the british government had pandered far too much to british muslims for over a decade, and provided a haven for radical clerics. Had they cracked down on the mosques and imam's after the satanic verses affair, it probably never would have happened.

To answer your points in reverse:-
(2) No, it isn't "fairly well" accepted - it's a disputed claim by certain right wing media and politicians and
(1) Yeah, of course, it's nothing to do with foreign policy, they just hate western culture, thats why there are all those radical muslim terrorists currently bombing Germany and Sweden and Norway and Denmark and Portugal and Holland and France and Greece and...need i go on?

Oh dear.

I have two family members in the Military over in Iraq. Working on bomb disposal/Mine Clearing and Ammo Technician respectively, so two people in clear danger, I also have friends in the US Marines and someone rather dear to me has 3 brothers in the infantry.

Firstly, I think both sides are flat out wrong, we have one side wanting to give Ms Sheehan the Medal of honour for being a "true Patriot" and the other side wants her shot. Extreme Right Vs Extreme Left I think Extremism is flat out wrong whichever side of the fence you sit on, neither side is willing to compromise its "I'm right, your wrong" which is why I love Centralists because they can see both sides of an argument.

Now for the subject at hand, my views I think a lot of people are having a Knee jerk reaction to Camp Casey on both sides. The Right sees her as an "America hater" and the left sees her as a shining beacon and embodiment of "War is bad". She is neither. She lost her son, she is angry, she is hurt and she wants some kind of justice, even if it is just an illusion of justice. She is not Anti-war, she is not Anti-soldier she is Anti-BUSH and many, many people seem to be confusing the three.

Eutrusca, you served right? Tell me why did you enlist, if you don't mind me asking?

I can't speak for you but for most soldiers though it's to protect there loved ones, the ones they care most about. They fight and indeed sometimes die for them. I do think Miss Sheehan missed that point, Casey signed up to protect her and those like her.
BUT with that said, she is understandably pissed off that Bush has taken that loyalty to there loved ones and used to lead America into an Illegal war and no one can say Iraq was a "just war" like WWII. But its happened, I was against the Iraq war but I'd hoped that if it DID happen that it would be fought right, it wasn't Bush sent 100,000 men into Iraq to "Secure and occupy", this was no where NEAR enough. Bush Snr crossed into Iraq with 500,000 strong and that was just quick in and out mission. The Iraq war has been fought with sheer incompetence on the Part of President Bush, he has ignored Military advisors for his little war, sent away national Guard troops who's primary experience is dealing with internal problems and thoroughly raped your economy. No body can say this war has been fought the right way. This is what happens when the President takes control of the military directly but I digress.

Ms Sheehan is Anti-bush, she is not Anti-war, she is not Anti-soldier I've not heard Ms Sheehan say anything derogatory about those fighting in Iraq only those that put them there. The only Anti-war and Anti-Soldiering I've heard are from people who take her words out of context and use them to attack the Military rather than the government. Yes she had a meeting with Bush once, but who here hasn't walked away from an argument and after having time to think on it gone "Damn…I wish I said that" later?

Now, lets address the Lefts notion of "No Military, no war, Yay lets all love each other", it’s a lovely dream, it is, but we need the Military. We need a standing army to protect us, to act as a deterrent "but if we have competent diplomats, we don't need an Army" and what will your Diplomats bargain with? And let's not forget the far lefts
"It would be up to the Militia, as it should be. A Standing Army is just an excuse to fight for no reason, not to mention a money vacuum for funds that could be better used providing health care, housing and social support."

Now I love the romantic notion that the people will rise up and drive out the invading army. A militia against a trained force is meat waiting for the butcher. The insurgency in Iraq is a form of Militia. How many thousands have died opposing American forces there? Ten thousand? Twenty? Hard to say isn’t it? Odds are pretty good it's more than 1800. Oh we'll be forced out of Iraq eventually due to economic and nationalist forces but if we REALLY wanted to we could obliterate Iraq. We could turn it into a literal wasteland if America ever decided to turn on the "Full war machine". We could annihilate everyone, militia and non-militia alike and not bat an eyelid. No nukes or WMD involved. Just the complete audacity to end the existence of a nation and its people.

Now... currently... there is no nation on earth that could do so to us without resorting to a WMD Armageddon scenario. No nation, which could on a whim or after careful planning, cause the complete destruction of every city, settlement, and house in the US. Why? Because we have the most advanced, well equipped, and experienced army in the world. And yes, it is an army that has at late been used for illegitimate and corrupt ends. But just because it's been misused of late does not mean that there is no use or need for one.

However! In the interests of lateral thinking how's this? We completely disband every soldier (never mind the unemployment) and decommission all weapons (never mind the workers who produce them) in return for the foreign policy that we will resort to pre-emptive and multiple use of nuclear weapons to protect our interests?

What makes this so tragic isn't that her son died. That happens. War. Peace. It happens. Sons die. But that he died because of circumstances that were so forced and contrived. This war was done all wrong. It utilised deception and fear to convince the majority that this was a war that HAD to be fought. A WW2 for our time; But it was botched so terribly that you can only see it for what it is... a sham.

The Administration even don't seem to have a common theme to parrot... Security! Humanitarianism! Security! Oil! Humanitarianism! WMD... never mind! Security! Oh and never forget the wonderful 'Saddam was a bad man.' They don't even have the consideration to be consistent with their lies.

In Vietnam there was the belief that the soldier was the one ultimately responsible for war. If the soldiers wouldn't fight then there would be no war. It was easy for people back home to say that it was the soldiers' fault that there was a war going on. If they'd just stop fighting then it would be over. And yes, soldiers killed people. That's happened since Trog's tribe wiped out Ooog's tribe. Some soldiers went beyond accidental death and committed atrocities, and the protestors of Vietnam thought that if these few soldiers butchered and killed then obviously ALL soldiers must be guilty of atrocity.

Soldiers enlist for a variety of reasons, from patriotism to nationalism to economic benefits to a desire to see the world on the cheap to a desire to fulfil the Hollywood pipe dream of going out and 'kicking ass'. Regardless, these soldiers can't simply pick up their guns and decide to go to war. The decision of when and where comes from above, passing through military hierarchy from elected officials. The decision of where and when and how to fight are not made by the soldiers. They are made by the chain of command, which possesses strict powers to crush those foolish, enough to try and act without sanction.

When I say I support the troops, but not the war, it means that I do not blame the troops for the killing, the cost and the hatred towards Americans that this war has produced. Have they killed Iraqis? Yes. But I do not hold them responsible any more than I would condemn the finger of a murder that pulled the trigger. They are there. They must do as they are told. And they might very well get killed doing it. And to be an objector means your career and possibly your life is done. You'll have a dishonourable discharge on all your records. You may go to prison for a long time. I do not hold soldiers to the expectation that they should destroy their livelihoods when others chose to put them in harms way. And I do not support them without condition. The soldiers who committed the Abu Gharib prison atrocity I wish punished to the fullest extent of the law, but not all soldiers simply for being thrust into this situation.

Whom I do blame are the people who orchestrated this. Who made the decision. The brain cells that sent the impulse to the finger that pulled the trigger. Those I criticise. Those I condemn. Those I would chastise. Through time's lenses we saw the political undermining that made Vietnam such a protracted tragedy. We can see coincidences and patterns, some which have not yet been repeated. After all, it took years before a draft was instituted in Vietnam. It may take years before a draft is instituted in Iraq. Regardless, it is the political brain that must be called to task for the illegitimacy of this war. It is the heads of state, which must face the brunt of our questions and yes, be removed if their abuses exceed our National Trust.

Do I think the president should have seen her? Yes. I do even if it is just to keep up an appearance that he is the compassionate man he claims to be, but what do we get? "Its important for me to get on with my life"

"Support the troops, hang the bastards that sent them there"

Clearly but, hasn't it occurred to you that fighting amongst ourselves constantly about this in the press is just What the Terrorists Want? Division in America is a sign of their mass media attempts succeeding? Going by this letter that sort of thing is seen as aiding the enemy... maybe its better to leave sleeping skeletons lie in the closet.

This country was founded upon the principle that human beings should be able to dissent - should be able to be adequately represented - and should be able to express that dissent.

One can hardly logically make the suggestion that a country with a system founded upon and with the right of the people to dissent in mind, we should simply pretend to agree with everything our government is doing to present some false sense of solidarity.

That is no different from saying, "Sure you don't think that jumping off the bridge is a good idea, but if we don't all do it, people will know we disagree! Therefore you should forget about your misgivings, stop trying to convince others from jumping to their death, and jump!"

The right and responsibility to dissent isn't suddenly discarded when the government leaders declare a war. Hell, by your logic, 1984 could become a reality - all the government needs is to keep the country in constant warfare, and everyone will be nice and happy and no one will protest anything.

This country was founded upon the principle that human beings should be able to dissent - should be able to be adequately represented - and should be able to express that dissent.

One can hardly logically make the suggestion that a country with a system founded upon and with the right of the people to dissent in mind, we should simply pretend to agree with everything our government is doing to present some false sense of solidarity.

That is no different from saying, "Sure you don't think that jumping off the bridge is a good idea, but if we don't all do it, people will know we disagree! Therefore you should forget about your misgivings, stop trying to convince others from jumping to their death, and jump!"

The right and responsibility to dissent isn't suddenly discarded when the government leaders declare a war. Hell, by your logic, 1984 could become a reality - all the government needs is to keep the country in constant warfare, and everyone will be nice and happy and no one will protest anything.

I agree.

I was using the same 'logic' in the letter that said Sheehan was aiding and abetting the enemy because of the presumed media coup the terrorists were getting out of it. Well, if so, then dragging this subject up like this and raging against fellow Americans would presumably be just as bad if not worse.

I agree.

I was using the same 'logic' in the letter that said Sheehan was aiding and abetting the enemy because of the presumed media coup the terrorists were getting out of it. Well, if so, then dragging this subject up like this and raging against fellow Americans would presumably be just as bad if not worse.

Ah, good then. I thought you were agreeing with the statements in the letter.

I have *snip*

Well said!

NOTE: I got this in an email, so I don't wanna hear any nonsense about my not attributing to some source. Personally, I think this gentleman is right on the money. If you don't like it, I'm sure you will find some way to express your "outrage" verbally.


An Open Letter to Cindy Sheehan From the Proud Father of a U.S. Marine By Brantley Smith Posted On August 17, 2005


Ms. Sheehan,

By your actions over the past two weeks it is clear that you missed an important aspect of Civics 101: With rights come responsibilities. You certainly have the right to voice your opinion against the war in Iraq and the President's policies. You even have the right to camp outside the President's home in Crawford and demand he meet with you. Your status as a mother who has lost a child in the war also gives your words and actions a credibility and a larger audience than otherwise would be the case. Now that your supporters have given you a broad forum from which to be heard, making you a national figure, it's time you considered your responsibilities to all of us.

I have a daughter set to deploy to Fallujah in two weeks and I have a serious concern with how your irresponsible and short sighted actions might impact on her. She is, after all, a volunteer, like your son, and she is going in harm's way because she believes it is her responsibility to protect your rights and freedoms.

Well meaning people like you always seem to forget the law of unintended consequences and in your vanity and arrogant self-righteousness never bother to think through what it is you are trying to do versus what you may actually accomplish. I am here to inform you, Ma'am, that you will not change the policy of our government by sitting outside Crawford making a spectacle of yourself in the name of your rights to free speech; what you will do is provide more propaganda for our enemies and cost the lives of even more brave and selfless American warriors. How long do you think it will be before you become a star on Al Jazeera? For all I know, it may have already happened.

One thing is certain, though, and that is that your actions and words will further embolden a ruthless and evil enemy and more American blood will be shed and some of it will be on your hands. I pray that my daughter will not be one of them. If she is, then I will hold you and those like you partly responsible. Yes, my daughter's fate will depend mostly on her own courageous decision to serve, but only the most naive among us can deny the impact our own words and actions here in America have in a world grown smaller by the revolution in communications technology.

I am sure you believe that you are serving some great cause by putting our servicemen and women in more danger and that you can, by your irresponsible exercise of free speech, help end a policy you disagree with. Your emotion may be compelling but the reality is that you will not set in motion any process that will change or undo what has been done. The war will go on because to end it now would dishonor the sacrifice of all of our fellow countrymen who have died in the cause of fighting terrorism. Rational Americans will not allow that. Too much is at stake. Unfortunately, shallow and irrational ones, such as yourself, will continue to put the lives of our sons and daughters in danger by aiding and abetting an enemy who sees propagandizing in the mass media as its main weapon in a war it could otherwise not win standing on its own wretched and evil justification of radical Islam, or by force of arms.

You, Ma'am, have joined forces with an evil you neither understand nor apparently have tried to comprehend. You direct your anger toward our country while the enemy plots to kill and maim the innocent. You make a mockery of responsible free speech while thousands of young men and women fight desperately to preserve your safety. Instead of honoring your son's sacrifice you are inspired to comfort an evil enemy.

You clearly do not understand the challenge we face as a nation and have not tried to put it in historical perspective. It is a sad fact that it is those of your thinking that have led us to where we are today. Decades of appeasement to these haters of everything we hold dear has cost thousands of American lives from Beirut to New York and in dozens of other forgotten places. Remember Lockerbie? The Achille Lauro? The USS Cole? We as a people were dragged into this war, much like December 7th, 1941, and we must fight and win it wherever the enemy hides and against whomever would support him.

Make no mistake about Iraq. It is both a legitimate and crucial campaign in this much larger, global war of radical Islam's making. These people hate us for who we are, not what we have done. We did not bring this on ourselves, as many would have us believe, by our policies and actions abroad. We brought this on ourselves in 1775 when the Founding Fathers embarked on a course of freedom, tolerance, and liberal democratic and social ideals.

These haters of all we hold dear strive to destroy forever a government "of the people, by the people, and for the people" that Abraham Lincoln hoped would never "Perish from the earth". They would replace it with an oppressive world theocracy unlike anything modern history has ever seen for its ruthless disregard for personal freedom and liberty. If more appeasement is your answer for an alternative policy, spare us. We have suffered enough from cowardice and inaction.

An historical analogy screams to be let out here. It is one of two men, both named Chamberlain. Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, a school teacher turned soldier in the American Civil War, found himself in the crosshairs of history on a warm July day in 1863 on a small hill in Pennsylvania. Commanding the 20th Maine Regiment on the extreme Union left at Gettysburg he was in a most perilous position. Should he fail to hold against a strong Confederate attack, the Union could be lost. You see, he was serving in an increasingly unpopular war at home against a resurgent enemy, and for a President fighting for his political life. Colonel Chamberlain, stoic but determined, refused to yield. His small regiment held against an onslaught of Confederate attacks, an action many historians believe turned the tide of the war. He was later awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. The other half of this analogy focuses on Neville Chamberlain, Prime Minister of Great Britain in the years preceding World War II. His story is widely known. Through his policy of appeasement and a lack of moral courage, he handed Adolf Hitler much of Europe. Which side of history have you chosen, Ma'am?

Your son died in the service of freedom and my daughter will go in harm's way to protect and preserve it. Honor their sacrifice, Ma'am, by exercising it responsibly.

I will pray with you and I will grieve with you but I will not stand by silent while you needlessly and arrogantly endanger the life of my daughter and her comrades in arms. Please bless us with your silence and go home.

Brantley Smith Proud father of a United States Marine Tullahoma, TN.

she has the right to say what she will, no matter what he might think. She has the right to ask the president why her son died, and if a national spectacle is made over it, then maybe that's a good thing, because we all have a right to know why this war has happened. By the way, how can asking the president why her son died endanger his daughter? Sounds like his reasoning is just a little bit off.

she has the right to say what she will, no matter what he might think. She has the right to ask the president why her son died, and if a national spectacle is made over it, then maybe that's a good thing, because we all have a right to know why this war has happened. By the way, how can asking the president why her son died endanger his daughter? Sounds like his reasoning is just a little bit off.

Seems to me that bad planning, insufficient armor and an unclear reason for war would endanger his daughter more...

If one woman is enough to cause the troops to question the rationale for war and therefore lose morale...perhaps the war is on shaky ground anyway

Is she not allowed to express her opinion through her rights to protest, as an American citizen? If America had this belief that you've put forth, we wouldn't exactly be a democracy anymore. I'm personally against the war. Does that mean that if I protest it, I should be punished? It's my opinion, and I'm entitled to it because I'm an American.

There is a difference between "against the war" and "helping the enemy"

Against the war: "The war was wrong and we should have never gone there."

Helping the enemy: "The freedom fighters will win and you will see that our president is wrong."

'NOTE: I got this in an email, so I don't wanna hear any nonsense about my not attributing to some source'
Is it now accepted that I can tell you I received something by email and you mustn't question its veracity? That's good, I can invent rubbish too.

'Personally, I think this gentleman is right on the money. If you don't like it, I'm sure you will find some way to express your "outrage" verbally'
Could someone explain to me why outrage against the letter is "outrage"? Is it a lesser outrage? Is it a false outrage? Is only the lazy 'right' allowed genuine outrage?

'An Open Letter to Cindy Sheehan From the Proud Father of a U.S. Marine By Brantley Smith'
Does anyone know if this is a real person and that he's telling the truth?

'By your actions over the past two weeks it is clear that you missed an important aspect of Civics 101'
First insult of the letter, in the first sentence.

Let's see what this concerned parent accuses Sheehan of.

'your irresponsible and short sighted actions

your vanity and arrogant self-righteousness

never bother to think through what it is you are trying to do

making a spectacle of yourself

you will.... provide more propaganda for our enemies and cost the lives of....brave and selfless American warriors

a star on Al Jazeera

your actions and words ........ embolden a ruthless and evil enemy .... American blood will be shed .... it will be on your hands

I pray that my daughter will not be one of them...I will hold you and those like you partly responsible

the most naive

putting our servicemen and women in more danger

irresponsible exercise of free speech

shallow and irrational ones, such as yourself, will continue to put the lives of our sons and daughters in danger

aiding and abetting an enemy

You have joined forces with an evil

you neither understand nor apparently have tried to comprehend.

You direct your anger toward our country

You make a mockery of responsible free speech

Instead of honoring your son's sacrifice you are inspired to comfort an evil enemy.

dishonor the sacrifice of all of our fellow countrymen

You clearly do not understand the challenge we face

not tried to put it in historical perspective

It is a sad fact .. those of your thinking ..has cost thousands of American lives

wherever the enemy hides and against whomever would support him.

you needlessly and arrogantly endanger the life of my daughter and her comrades

silence and go home'.

Powerful stuff. Also full of hatred for the 'opposing view'.
If this person could make himself available, I think Sheehan could make a decent case of libel against him.

Now, let's see how this concerned parent sees himself and those he supports.

'Proud Father

I have a serious concern

She is, after all, a volunteer, like your son..she is going in harm's way..she believes it is her responsibility to protect your rights and freedoms.

I am here to inform you

I pray that my daughter will not be one of them

I will hold you and those like you partly responsible.

my daughter's fate will depend mostly on her own courageous decision

Rational Americans will not allow that.

thousands of young men and women fight desperately to preserve your safety.

We as a people were dragged into this war

and we must fight and win

Iraq...a legitimate and crucial campaign ..in this much larger, global war of radical Islam...These people hate us

We did not bring this on ourselves...by our policies and actions abroad.

1775 when the Founding Fathers...freedom, tolerance, and liberal democratic and social ideals.... "of the people, by the people, and for the people" ..Abraham Lincoln...never "Perish from the earth

They would replace it with an oppressive world theocracy .. its ruthless disregard for personal freedom and liberty

We have suffered enough from cowardice and inaction.

I will pray with you and I will grieve with you but I will not stand by silent

Please bless us

Proud Father'

So there we have it. An honest, balanced and thoughtful email, sent to a fair minded member of this forum, by a sefless and concerned father of yet another hero, expressing his valid concerns about a woman who seems to have given up her right to be alive.

Ms. Sheehan,

You certainly have the right to voice your opinion against the war in Iraq and the President's policies.
Amen. That is all that is necessary to know.

Unfortunately, the rest of the letter goes on describing her as "evil", and tries to rationalize the war in Iraq by stating that "these people hate us for who we are, not what we have done." And dropping bombs on "these people" and putting bullet holes in them, will somehow instil in them love and compassion for their captors, and instil in them a burning desire for "personal freedom and liberty", which Americans enjoy unless their name happens to be Sheehan or Moore, or any other American who would be considered "unpatriotic" or "traitors" for speaking out against the Bush Doctrine?

Please bless us with your silence and go home.
In the end, Mr. Smith in his "arrogant self-righteousness" doesn't really believe in "freedom of speech", nor does anyone else who agrees with the content of this "hateful", misguided letter.

Yay for propaganda! :rolleyes:

Haven't people understood that this war never had and *still* hasn't *anything* to do with "protecting freedoms" or the like?

What about the Patriot Act, which grants the government every rights over you if you were "suspected of being a terrorist" which is so vague that it can be just because you spoke against the government? This so-called "war against terrorism" has been the primary raison for these laws. What freedom?



"When government surveillance and intimidation is called 'freedom from terrorism' or 'liberation from crime,' freedom and liberty have become words without meanings."

<big snib>

Wow. :eek: Well put! I like you! :)

I don't get why people think that an individual HAS to support the President in order to support the soldiers. I participated in campaigns in Afghanistan, and the subsequent invasion of Iraq. Morale in Afghanistan was high, because we were killing Taliban and Al Qaeda forces. Iraq is another story...

I have seen the "Sheehan" agenda argued from both sides. Many on the far right believe she's abetting an enemy. I ask how? That because she protests and criticises the context, and execution of the Iraqi War that troop morale has fallen??? I will say from personal experience and feeling, that Morale fell a hell of alot more, when that video of Bush aired with him joking about finding WMD's under his desk. THAT was not in the least bit appreciated by the brave men and women serving. This whole issue is a conflagration that has been overly analyzed by both sides. She's a grieving mother, who wants to know why her son was killed, albeit I don't hold to her ideals on many issues, I understand her pain, and support her right to freely redress her grievences with Bush.

This is something I was wanting to read about since the Iraq invasion. Is morale high or low and the difference between Iraq and Afghanistan? There was proof and a good mandate to go into Afghanistan. Iraq there was a clear reason to go, we were made to believe (WMD), which to this point has been proven to be a fallacy. There is nothing worse then your commander-in-chief using you as a pawn and making your job seem like a joke.
I support the troops in Iraq, because I believe they are doing a good job in rebuilding Iraq. The question though remains what kind of administration is it that plays with the lives of its cherised armed forces?

And people are listening to a Marine, why?

USMC= Uncle Sams Misguided Children

note: i'm navy, so maybe that's why i make fun of jarheads. but remember, everyone can make fun of the air force. without ammo, they'd just be another expensive flying club.

Thank you and I sympathize with your loss. I am merely doing a job that I love for a nation that seems not to love me. It always has been and always will be the nature of things in America. The nations people have short memories and little resolve. It seems to me that many have forgotten what happened four years ago. I'm sure they say they haven't, but let's face it, actions speak louder than words.
HEY! There are still people in this country who love our men and women in uniform!(I'm one of them) I salute you!!

Canada City']
Helping the enemy: "The freedom fighters will win and you will see that our president is wrong."

Well damn ... I say that to my kids every morning over breakfast ...

Not the freedom fighter thing, but I do make sure they know that Bush and his whole family is evil .... EVIIIIL!!

HEY! There are still people in this country who love our men and women in uniform!(I'm one of them) I salute you!!

No kiddin' .... nothin' sexier than a person in uniform ..... mmmmmm! Especially Navy dress whites .... yummy!

Oh wait ... I've said too much ... shh!

And people are listening to a Marine, why?

USMC= Uncle Sams Misguided Children

note: i'm navy, so maybe that's why i make fun of jarheads. but remember, everyone can make fun of the air force. without ammo, they'd just be another expensive flying club.LOL

note: i'm navy, so maybe that's why i make fun of jarheads. but remember, everyone can make fun of the air force. without ammo, they'd just be another expensive flying club.

Isn't the navy without ammo just an expensive sailing club and freight company?

Isn't the navy without ammo just an expensive sailing club and freight company?
LOL

or maybe a floating restaurant.

Hmmm. A brief read of the letter reveals the following: "You certainly have the right to voice your opinion against the war in Iraq and the President's policies. You even have the right to camp outside the President's home in Crawford and demand he meet with you."

That doesn't square real well with what you say the letter says.
After that, it then claims that her protesting is helping the enemy and she should be held responsible for any further attacks on American soldiers.
And then at the end it says: "Please bless us with your silence and go home."
Which pretty much implies that she's not to protest anymore. But I guess you're selective eyesight didn't quite see those bits.

Forrest I want to once again state that you and yours have my utmost support, respect and undying gratitude!

I am happy to see you respond to this woman who is having difficulty seeing thru her grief. I wish she could take her grief and turn it into pride for her lost child and their accomplishments. People forget what a devistating effect the lack of support had on those in Veitnam during and after the war. Our fighting personel need our support and respect for without them it would be our streets that would be the centers for violence and invading forces.

... for without them it would be our streets that would be the centers for violence ....You mean more violence ???...cos we already have too much.

Forrest I want to once again state that you and yours have my utmost support, respect and undying gratitude!

I am happy to see you respond to this woman who is having difficulty seeing thru her grief. I wish she could take her grief and turn it into pride for her lost child and their accomplishments. People forget what a devistating effect the lack of support had on those in Veitnam during and after the war. Our fighting personel need our support and respect for without them it would be our streets that would be the centers for violence and invading forces.
Thank you, OB. I appreciate that muchly.

BTW ... have you ever considered changing your nation's name to "Omega the Black, Great Young Nubian?" That way, the acrostic would be O.B.G.Y. N. :D

You mean more violence that we already have???
Jeeze. Now you're going to blame every purse-snatching and rape on President Bush ... I can see it coming! Do you think the man should be omniscient and omnipotent??? :(

Do you think the man should be omniscient and omnipotent??? :(I think Bush needs Viagra-for-the-brains :D

I think Bush needs Viagra-for-the-brains :D
You want his brain to have a long-term erection??? :eek: :D

snip
A cookie to the best, most well-thought out post of the day goes to Animarnia. Well done!

From the letter:
irresponsible exercise of free speech
What is responsible exercise of free speech? Telling everyone that you support whatever the current admin is doing? Whoah, great democracy you got there. The 'Think what you like but agree with me' tennet of free speech, huh? Missed seeing that in the constitution. Must be a subclause.

This Cindy Sheehan thing will go on well after the war in Iraq has ended...and this won't be for a long time. Personally I think that both Sheehan and the other guy raise some vaild points..however both are giving into their emotions and as a result infliciting the rest of us with a level of absurdity that you would expect of these peoples president. The proud father says he will blame Sheehan if his daughter dies as Sheehan is fueling the evil his precious angel is fighting. To both of them....people die in war. It sucks and of course everyone wishes it wouldn't happen but how about people focus on how to bring a stop to all the misunderstanding and hatred Afghanistan/Iraqi situtation have created and make a positive difference.

From the letter:

What is responsible exercise of free speech? Telling everyone that you support whatever the current admin is doing? Whoah, great democracy you got there. The 'Think what you like but agree with me' tennet of free speech, huh? Missed seeing that in the constitution. Must be a subclause.
Well, I've held off saying this because I know I'm gonna be lambasted for it, but the fact of the matter is: there are ways to express your dissatisfaction with the way things are without resorting to divisive "protests," noisy demonstrations, verbally violent outbursts, and mud-slinging.

I realize that most of the left in this Country don't agree with that, since they feel the need ( for whatever reason ) to vent their spleen everytime someone opposes their treasured agenda. But there really is such a thing as civilized civil discourse, and if you lose ... then you lose without more vituperation and mudslinging, a lesson politicians and polemicsts at all points on the political spectrum should take to heart.

... says he will blame Sheehan if his daughter dies as Sheehan is fueling the evil his precious angel is fighting. .Mr Smith is a Moron

" the Sheehan person" ?!?


Oh, no dehumanization going on there, no.

Mr Smith is a Moron
Tsk! I thought you were one of the ones who delighted in lambasting those of us who refer to the dishonorable Ms. Sheehan as a total idiot. :D

Tsk! I thought you were one of the ones who delighted in lambasting those of us who refer to the dishonorable Ms. Sheehan as a total idiot. :Dand I f you had died in Vietnam...whos fault would it be?

The War Protestors?

Mr Smith is a Moron
If that is his real name...

*sigh*