Tuesday, August 09, 2005

Pavlov's Dogs of War Revisited

Posted by pete in response to "Gutsy, Gutless, Gutter"...


Cindy Sheehan had the exact opposite story last year. SHe praised the President about their conversation. Now she changed her story entirely?

For being retired Navy I am disappointed in your views in your writing. I served in the US Army, and even if I didn't agree with what the President was doing, I would support him either way, and keep any liberal thoughts to myself...

---

pete:

Despite the right wing smear campaign aimed at Cindy Sheehan, I've read nothing that indicates her position on the war has changed in the past year. But that doesn't really matter. Her present position, as far as I am concerned, is a legitimate one.

As to my views: I am no longer a naval officer, I am a private citizen. Mister Bush is not my commander in chief. He is commander in chief of my military, and I vehemently disapprove of what he has done with it. He has, in essence, transformed it into a mercenary force, one he has used to carry out the private political agenda of his rich, neoconservative cronies. This administration is turning (has turned?) the United States of America into a Barbecue Republic--a militaristic, theocratic oligarchy masked by a thin veneer of representation. I would think myself a coward to sit back and say nothing about the most heinous abuse of power by an American president in my lifetime for fear of being labeled "unpatriotic" or disloyal to my former service.

I'm consistently curious how you and others label my views as "liberal." I don't know you, but a quick scan of your blog site suggests that you spend so much time differentiating right from left that you can't differentiate right from wrong.

I see no virtue in supporting a group of bad men who started a bad war and ran it badly, and consider it my duty as a citizen to oppose them to the best of my ability.

15 comments:

  1. Blonde nod to you, sir!

    Excellent post, Jeff.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks. Not my intention to hammer Pete (though I suspect he may see it that way.)

    Actually, he gave me reason to say some things I've been meaning to anyway.

    Jeff

    ReplyDelete
  3. Excellent post. BTW, it's pretty lame for Pete to label you as a liberal. If Pete wants to call Bush critics "liberal", then that's the majority of Americans. Bush's polls are diving toward Nixon's Watergate numbers.

    Karen

    ReplyDelete
  4. Well, Karen, Pete's an I word.

    Unfortunately, there's lots of I words like him.

    ReplyDelete
  5. k.koo4:32 PM

    Great post. Someone passed me a link to "The Harring Report." I was wondering if you could give me your comments on this -- is this for real?

    http://www.williambowles.info/iraq/2005/iraq_us_dead.html

    Regards,
    K.Koo

    ReplyDelete
  6. "you spend so much time differentiating right from left that you can't differentiate right from wrong" -- well put.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "I see no virtue in supporting a group of bad men who started a bad war and ran it badly, and consider it my duty as a citizen to oppose them to the best of my ability."

    Well said! Have I ever mentioned how much I despise the "I don't agree with him but I support him" crowd? He would "keep any liberal thoughts to [himself]?" Wasn't that what good Germans did in the 1930s?

    Keep on keeping on, Jeff!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thanks gang. K. Koo, as best I can tell, that Harring Report is NOT true--even though it sounds like something they'd pull.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thanks gang. K. Koo, as best I can tell, that Harring Report is NOT true--even though it sounds like something they'd pull.

    ReplyDelete
  10. O-K. Thanks a lot :)

    ReplyDelete
  11. I'd just like to know what the heck Pete thought he was defending as a member of the United States Army. I thank him and appreciate him for his service TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION and the variety of rights it bestows on us American citizens - including the right, no, the OBLIGATION!! to fight our government when it is out of control, immoral, and trampling the rights of American citizens as well as citizens of the world. Indeed, when it is trampling the very Constitution we hold so dear.

    Does Pete not see the irony in the Neo-cons arguing that we needed to bring democracy to Iraq and the US Military was fighting and dying to give Iraqis the very rights Pete is now demanding we abdicate?

    The military isn't set up to defend the President - or Commander in Chief, if you prefer. In fact, you should hear what a plethora of the military have to say - to THINK - about Bill Clinton. I promise it wasn't "My President, right or wrong." In fact, what a good litmus test for these March-in-locksteppers - what would be they be doing and saying if this was the Clinton Administration doing all this?

    And now these fucking Chicken Hawks have the AUDACITY to smear the grieving mother of a fallen soldier??? How fucking dare they! Bush is building for himself one hell of a legacy and the shame of it is of historical proportions.

    Pete, you tell me, as an American citizen who loves her country, how I don't fight this with every fiber of my being? And as an American citizen, how can you not, too?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous12:49 AM

    I'd just like to know what the heck Pete thought he was defending as a member of the United States Army. I thank him and appreciate him for his service TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION and the variety of rights it bestows on us American citizens - including the right, no, the OBLIGATION!! to fight our government when it is out of control, immoral, and trampling the rights of American citizens as well as citizens of the world. Indeed, when it is trampling the very Constitution we hold so dear.

    Does Pete not see the irony in the Neo-cons arguing that we needed to bring democracy to Iraq and the US Military was fighting and dying ng pecahan Rp. 100.000,00, ia bertanya kepada hadirin, "Siapa yang mau uang ini?" Tampak banyak tangan diacungkan. Pertanda banyak minat.
    "Saya akan berikan ini kepada salah satu dari Anda sekalian, tapi sebelumnya perkenankanlah saya melakukan ini."Ia berdiri mendekati hadirin. Uang itu diremas-remas dengan tangannya sampai berlipat2. Lalu bertanya lagi,"Siapa yang masih mau uang ini?" Jumlah tangan yang teracung tak berkurang.
    "Baiklah," jawabnya, "Apa jadinya bila saya melakukan ini?" ujarnya sambil menjatuhkan uang itu ke lantai dan menginjak2nya dengan sepatunya. Meski masih utuh, kini uang itu jadi amat kotor dan tak mulus lagi. "Nah, apakah sekarang masih ada yang berminat?" Tangan-tangan yang mengacung masih tetap banyak.
    "Hadirin sekalian, Anda baru saja menghadapi sebuah pelajaran penting. Apapun yang terjadi dengan uang ini, anda masih berminat karena apa yang saya lakukan tidak akan mengurangi nilainya. Biarpun lecek dan kotor, uang itu tetap bernilai Rp. 100.000,00.
    Dalam kehidupan

    ReplyDelete
  13. Ah, yes--the Constitution. Funny how military types tend to see Republicans as the "pro-military" party.

    Thanks for stopping by, GMC

    ReplyDelete
  14. Very glad to have found this blog - great post!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Ariadne:

    Glad you liked it. Thanks for stopping by and posting.

    Jeff

    ReplyDelete