More on Moore
This is worth a look about the inner working of Michael Moore's twisted mind
The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not “insurgents” or “terrorists” or “The Enemy.” They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow -- and they will win -Michael Moore
There are now links on the internet (which I won't point to due to their graphic nature) showing the execution of 12 Nepalese hostages by Moore's "Minutemen". For the record, Nepal is not a member of the coalition, they were just people trying to work and make Iraq a little better in the process.
As a National Guardsman, I was represented by the Minuteman insignia. I see any correlation between Minutemen and these terrorists, as a direct affront to not only my honor, but all who have worn the uniform.
Tuesday, August 31, 2004
Dick Cheny's Track Record as Sec Def
This is in response to my good friend Jim's contention that Dick Cheney oversaw the largest cut in military manpower in US history for personal gain through outsourcing to Halliburton. I'm am not a fan of contractors on the battlefield, but I see this as fiscal responsibility and allowing private industry to fill the gaps left by very difficult choices mandated by a pork barrel congress.
From Defenselink:
The DoD budget faced Cheney with his most immediate and pressing problem when he came to the Pentagon. President Bush had already said publicly that the proposed FY 1990 Defense budget of more than $300 billion had to be cut immediately by $6.3 billion, and soon after Cheney began work the president increased the amount to $10 billion. Cheney recognized the necessity of cutting the budget and downsizing the military establishment, but he favored a cautious approach. In making decisions on the FY 1990 budget, the secretary had to confront the wish list of each of the services. The Air Force wanted to buy 312 B-2 stealth bombers at over $500 million each; the Marine Corps wanted 12 V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor helicopters, $136 million each; the Army wanted some $240 million in FY 1990 to move toward production of the LHX, a new reconnaissance and attack helicopter, to cost $33 billion eventually; and the Navy wanted 5 Aegis guided-missile destroyers, at a cost of $3.6 billion. What direction to go with ballistic missiles also posed difficult choices. One option was to build 50 more MX missiles to join the 50 already on hand, at a cost of about $10 billion. A decision had to be made on how to base the MX-whether on railroad cars or in some other mode. Another option was to build 500 single-warhead Midgetman missiles, still in the development stage, at an estimated cost of $24 billion...
In subsequent years under Cheney the budgets proposed and the final outcomes followed patterns similar to the FY 1990 budget experience. Early in 1991 the secretary unveiled a plan to reduce military strength by the mid-1990s to 1.6 million, compared to 2.2 million when he entered office. In his budget proposal for FY 1993, his last one, Cheney asked for termination of the B-2 program at 20 aircraft, cancellation of the Midgetman, and limitations on advanced cruise missile purchases to those already authorized. When introducing this budget, Cheney complained that Congress had directed Defense to buy weapons it did not want, including the V-22, M-1 tanks, and F-14 and F-16 aircraft, and required it to maintain some unneeded reserve forces. His plan outlined about $50 billion less in budget authority over the next 5 years than the Bush administration had proposed in 1991. Sen. Sam Nunn of the Senate Armed Services Committee said that the 5-year cuts ought to be $85 billion, and Rep. Les Aspin of the House Armed Services Committee put the figure at $91 billion.
This is in response to my good friend Jim's contention that Dick Cheney oversaw the largest cut in military manpower in US history for personal gain through outsourcing to Halliburton. I'm am not a fan of contractors on the battlefield, but I see this as fiscal responsibility and allowing private industry to fill the gaps left by very difficult choices mandated by a pork barrel congress.
From Defenselink:
The DoD budget faced Cheney with his most immediate and pressing problem when he came to the Pentagon. President Bush had already said publicly that the proposed FY 1990 Defense budget of more than $300 billion had to be cut immediately by $6.3 billion, and soon after Cheney began work the president increased the amount to $10 billion. Cheney recognized the necessity of cutting the budget and downsizing the military establishment, but he favored a cautious approach. In making decisions on the FY 1990 budget, the secretary had to confront the wish list of each of the services. The Air Force wanted to buy 312 B-2 stealth bombers at over $500 million each; the Marine Corps wanted 12 V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor helicopters, $136 million each; the Army wanted some $240 million in FY 1990 to move toward production of the LHX, a new reconnaissance and attack helicopter, to cost $33 billion eventually; and the Navy wanted 5 Aegis guided-missile destroyers, at a cost of $3.6 billion. What direction to go with ballistic missiles also posed difficult choices. One option was to build 50 more MX missiles to join the 50 already on hand, at a cost of about $10 billion. A decision had to be made on how to base the MX-whether on railroad cars or in some other mode. Another option was to build 500 single-warhead Midgetman missiles, still in the development stage, at an estimated cost of $24 billion...
In subsequent years under Cheney the budgets proposed and the final outcomes followed patterns similar to the FY 1990 budget experience. Early in 1991 the secretary unveiled a plan to reduce military strength by the mid-1990s to 1.6 million, compared to 2.2 million when he entered office. In his budget proposal for FY 1993, his last one, Cheney asked for termination of the B-2 program at 20 aircraft, cancellation of the Midgetman, and limitations on advanced cruise missile purchases to those already authorized. When introducing this budget, Cheney complained that Congress had directed Defense to buy weapons it did not want, including the V-22, M-1 tanks, and F-14 and F-16 aircraft, and required it to maintain some unneeded reserve forces. His plan outlined about $50 billion less in budget authority over the next 5 years than the Bush administration had proposed in 1991. Sen. Sam Nunn of the Senate Armed Services Committee said that the 5-year cuts ought to be $85 billion, and Rep. Les Aspin of the House Armed Services Committee put the figure at $91 billion.
News Flash...Muslim Extremists Hate America
The prevailing message from the Democrats is now that the world is a more dangerous due to the war in Iraq, that the war has generated more hatred towards the US rather than less. Does anyone East of Hollywood with an IQ greater than 42 actually believe that the hatred we see exhibited in the streets of Baghdad today did not exist to an even greater extent 5 years ago?, Ten years ago.
Hatred and intolerance by Muslim extremists (and I emphasize extremists) is not a product of the US it has been there for thousands of years veiled by totalitarian governments. Maybe the Democrats are right. Maybe we should go back to the status quo, aid in the installation of ruthless dictators who would simply obliterate anyone they thought posed a threat to their hold on power and turn a blind eye to it.
When these states begin to harbor and support terrorists, we can ignore them until we are actually attacked in our streets, lob a few cruise missles in their direction, pat ourselves on the back for our decisive action then blame the incumbant party for allowing us to be attacked and demand compensation for everything that has ever gone bad in our lives, while we stick our head as far back into the sand as we can get it.
The prevailing message from the Democrats is now that the world is a more dangerous due to the war in Iraq, that the war has generated more hatred towards the US rather than less. Does anyone East of Hollywood with an IQ greater than 42 actually believe that the hatred we see exhibited in the streets of Baghdad today did not exist to an even greater extent 5 years ago?, Ten years ago.
Hatred and intolerance by Muslim extremists (and I emphasize extremists) is not a product of the US it has been there for thousands of years veiled by totalitarian governments. Maybe the Democrats are right. Maybe we should go back to the status quo, aid in the installation of ruthless dictators who would simply obliterate anyone they thought posed a threat to their hold on power and turn a blind eye to it.
When these states begin to harbor and support terrorists, we can ignore them until we are actually attacked in our streets, lob a few cruise missles in their direction, pat ourselves on the back for our decisive action then blame the incumbant party for allowing us to be attacked and demand compensation for everything that has ever gone bad in our lives, while we stick our head as far back into the sand as we can get it.
More Confusion on the Kerry War Record
This story probably wouldn't matter that much if the Senator from Mass. hadn't made his war record one of the central points of his qualifications to be president. Well, he succeeded. Unfortunately for him, his war record points more to his character than his accomplishments.
This story probably wouldn't matter that much if the Senator from Mass. hadn't made his war record one of the central points of his qualifications to be president. Well, he succeeded. Unfortunately for him, his war record points more to his character than his accomplishments.
Unilateral Action?
For all the talk of President Bush's unilateral policy regarding the war in Iraq, I find it most revealing that we in uniform are far better received in Germany than Republicans are in NYC. Democrats can hold fast to the faulty notion the the US is not supported by Europeans in the war effort if they like, but the truth of the matter is even though the German government has distanced themselves from the war (they have dealt with terrorism much longer than we have), the German people work very hard day in and day out to support our efforts.
For all the talk of President Bush's unilateral policy regarding the war in Iraq, I find it most revealing that we in uniform are far better received in Germany than Republicans are in NYC. Democrats can hold fast to the faulty notion the the US is not supported by Europeans in the war effort if they like, but the truth of the matter is even though the German government has distanced themselves from the war (they have dealt with terrorism much longer than we have), the German people work very hard day in and day out to support our efforts.
Soldiers as Political Fodder
Yesterday I wanted to distance myself from the presidential campaign. I wanted to take a couple of days and not even think about it regardless of the convention. I wanted to do this because I didn't want to develop a hatred towards Democrats and Liberals. I can't help but think that the overall idiocy of the demonstrations in NYC will ultimately drive more undecideds towards the Republican agenda. The hatred these people are displaying towards Republican delegates and Republicans in general is sickening. I can take all the taunting of delegates in Times Square, the harrassing of delegates until 5 A.M., and the picture taking of delegates in strip clubs, these are nothing more than a bunch of idiots giving the Democratic party and their agenda a horrible image.
What I can't take though is the thought process of the Democratic party leadership. Here the party pollsters admit a Bush gain in the polls and blame it on the "..Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ads (attacking Kerry's Vietnam service) have had an impact on the race," according to the Democracy Corps memo.
Those attacks combined with the Summer Olympics have combined to "shift the focus away from Iraq..."
I take this to mean that the best thing that can happen in James Carville's twisted mind is for more soldiers and Marines to die in Iraq and Afghanistan so they can get the public focused less on Olympics, the NFL and NASCAR, and more on the death and destruction. "Sorry for those guys that got blownup by the IED, but they are a necessary casualty in the War of the polls. C'mon guys hurry up and get the casualty count to a thousand. If you could do it before the end of the RNC, that would be great."
These are my soldiers, my comrades, and my friends. Anyone who would use them as political fodder, deserves to be exposed for the unmitigated arrogance and detatched ignorance that they maintain.
Yesterday I wanted to distance myself from the presidential campaign. I wanted to take a couple of days and not even think about it regardless of the convention. I wanted to do this because I didn't want to develop a hatred towards Democrats and Liberals. I can't help but think that the overall idiocy of the demonstrations in NYC will ultimately drive more undecideds towards the Republican agenda. The hatred these people are displaying towards Republican delegates and Republicans in general is sickening. I can take all the taunting of delegates in Times Square, the harrassing of delegates until 5 A.M., and the picture taking of delegates in strip clubs, these are nothing more than a bunch of idiots giving the Democratic party and their agenda a horrible image.
What I can't take though is the thought process of the Democratic party leadership. Here the party pollsters admit a Bush gain in the polls and blame it on the "..Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ads (attacking Kerry's Vietnam service) have had an impact on the race," according to the Democracy Corps memo.
Those attacks combined with the Summer Olympics have combined to "shift the focus away from Iraq..."
I take this to mean that the best thing that can happen in James Carville's twisted mind is for more soldiers and Marines to die in Iraq and Afghanistan so they can get the public focused less on Olympics, the NFL and NASCAR, and more on the death and destruction. "Sorry for those guys that got blownup by the IED, but they are a necessary casualty in the War of the polls. C'mon guys hurry up and get the casualty count to a thousand. If you could do it before the end of the RNC, that would be great."
These are my soldiers, my comrades, and my friends. Anyone who would use them as political fodder, deserves to be exposed for the unmitigated arrogance and detatched ignorance that they maintain.
Monday, August 30, 2004
Sunday, August 29, 2004
It Starts by Being Personal
I guess you can tell from the past few posts that I am starting to take the elections a little personal. It should be personal, that is what representative government is all about. What I find most irritating though is that the majority of those who criticize the President don't seem to be as interested in their representation in Washington as they are with assigning blame for everything bad that has happened. Senator Kerry has capitalized on this by publicizing all the bad things that have happened since January 2001 and laying it at the feet of the current administration. What this results in though is more of an anti-Bush sentiment than a pro-Kerry one. The Senator hopes this will translate into votes. Whether they are "Yellow Dog" (where somone would vote for an old yellow dog before they voted for the incumbent) votes or people who actually believe that he can actually be a better president than Bush is irrelevant as long as he gets the vote.
I guess you can tell from the past few posts that I am starting to take the elections a little personal. It should be personal, that is what representative government is all about. What I find most irritating though is that the majority of those who criticize the President don't seem to be as interested in their representation in Washington as they are with assigning blame for everything bad that has happened. Senator Kerry has capitalized on this by publicizing all the bad things that have happened since January 2001 and laying it at the feet of the current administration. What this results in though is more of an anti-Bush sentiment than a pro-Kerry one. The Senator hopes this will translate into votes. Whether they are "Yellow Dog" (where somone would vote for an old yellow dog before they voted for the incumbent) votes or people who actually believe that he can actually be a better president than Bush is irrelevant as long as he gets the vote.
Friday, August 20, 2004
Moral High Ground
It is time for the liberal left to acknowledge that the high moral ground they believe they occupy is nothing more than a soapbox from which to spout nonsensical anti-Bush rhetoric and one built on a very shaky foundation at that.This is the soapbox from which you hear that an unsubstantiated and non-specific statement that some Islamic radicals hated America was more than enough for the president to glean the unprecedented attacks of 9/11, but intelligence verified and supported by multiple agencies and countries was not enough to take action against Iraq. This is the same podium from which we hear of the president’s responsibility for the intelligence failure, but nothing of the Clinton administration’s systematic decimation of our human intelligence assets throughout the 1990s. This is where we hear of “obscene profits” by Halliburton, a company that reported a $820 million loss in 2003. It is from this soapbox that we have to endure a never-ending cavalcade of attacks on the president’s character but nothing about Kerry’s shameless use of the Navy’s “Thrice Wounded” policy to flee Vietnam after four months with wounds that required little treatment and no hospitalization.Spout what you will from this soapbox, but the leadership I desire for the military whose uniform I wear is not the one who says “I must find out where my people are going so I can lead them,” but the one who sets the clear, decisive, and moral course and says “Follow me.”
It is time for the liberal left to acknowledge that the high moral ground they believe they occupy is nothing more than a soapbox from which to spout nonsensical anti-Bush rhetoric and one built on a very shaky foundation at that.This is the soapbox from which you hear that an unsubstantiated and non-specific statement that some Islamic radicals hated America was more than enough for the president to glean the unprecedented attacks of 9/11, but intelligence verified and supported by multiple agencies and countries was not enough to take action against Iraq. This is the same podium from which we hear of the president’s responsibility for the intelligence failure, but nothing of the Clinton administration’s systematic decimation of our human intelligence assets throughout the 1990s. This is where we hear of “obscene profits” by Halliburton, a company that reported a $820 million loss in 2003. It is from this soapbox that we have to endure a never-ending cavalcade of attacks on the president’s character but nothing about Kerry’s shameless use of the Navy’s “Thrice Wounded” policy to flee Vietnam after four months with wounds that required little treatment and no hospitalization.Spout what you will from this soapbox, but the leadership I desire for the military whose uniform I wear is not the one who says “I must find out where my people are going so I can lead them,” but the one who sets the clear, decisive, and moral course and says “Follow me.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
