I does. I didn't ask the question to be arguementative...

 

RickyP -

 

I must apologize for the tone of my reply to your earlier post. I took your words as having the tone of being provocative, and I responded in kind.

 

I sincerely apologize for jumping to conclusions, regarding your post. I am probably too quick to pull the trigger on the subject of wars - and you can (obviously) put me in that category of people that see this one in an extremely bad light.

 

 

Frances

RickyP -

 

I must apologize for the tone of my reply to your earlier post. I took your words as having the tone of being provocative, and I responded in kind.

 

I sincerely apologize for jumping to conclusions, regarding your post. I am probably too quick to pull the trigger on the subject of wars - and you can (obviously) put me in that category of people that see this one in an extremely bad light.

 

 

Frances

 

No problem, your assumption would have been correct most of the time. When I asked the question I was really searching my own feelings. Afan's post got me to thinking. I guess I really can't think of a situation where it would be ok for my son to die in action unless it was protecting himself or his family.

 

I really don't know where I stand on the war. I can understand your stance and really can't make an arguement to the contray. I also understand why the war happened and supported the decision 100%. Kind of a catch 22.

Rickyp- you are like a lot of people today. I'm like so many people- conflicted in my feelings about the war. I, too, supported going to war, but as it has progressed, I feel that maybe decisions regarding the course of this war have been too political, thus leaving the troops over there flapping in the wind. What I wish is that this administration could accept responsibility for some wrong decisions and set forth a sensible plan to resolve this conflict. And I wish the politicians (okay, the Democrats) would allow them to correct their course without using it against them. It's time for Americans to pull together and put our collective minds to making a success plan without worrying about who gets credit or blame for it. After all- American lives are at stake here!

Rickyp- you are like a lot of people today. I'm like so many people- conflicted in my feelings about the war. I, too, supported going to war, but as it has progressed, I feel that maybe decisions regarding the course of this war have been too political, thus leaving the troops over there flapping in the wind. What I wish is that this administration could accept responsibility for some wrong decisions and set forth a sensible plan to resolve this conflict. And I wish the politicians (okay, the Democrats) would allow them to correct their course without using it against them. It's time for Americans to pull together and put our collective minds to making a success plan without worrying about who gets credit or blame for it. After all- American lives are at stake here!

 

That pretty much sums it up for me.

That pretty much sums it up for me.

 

I agree, most people(including congress) supported the war at it's start, now it's a political tool. People(politicians) need to get over themselves and focus on what's important, our troops, and where we're heading with all of this.

 

Saying this war is wrong does nothing(not aimed at any one unless you're a politician that has some pull), providing a solution,... Ohhhh there's an idea.

A lot of people supported the war because of what we were told by the administration (Iraq has mobile biological weapons labs, Iraq is trying to enrich uranium, Iraq tried to buy yellow cake uranium from Nigeria, Iraq was connected to the 9/11 attacks). Who wouldn't be supportive of war if all that were true? The real story is that none of that was true and as we have found out, any uncertainty or internal doubts among the U.S. intelligence apparatus were swept aside in Bush's headlong rush to topple Saddam Hussein. The public was whipped into a war frenzy with imagery of suitcase nukes being set off in U.S. cities. In addition, the possibility that the invasion could result in a never-ending guerilla quagmire with no way out was never even hinted at in the rah rah speeches that Bush made to drum up support for his war. There would not have been overwhelming support for starting a war just to establish a western-style democracy in the Middle East, especially if the risks of a protracted occupation were made clear.

 

While it's true that we are where we are and we have to make the best of it, it is also perfectly reasonable and justified to demand accountability for the decisions that were made and hold leaders accountable for the results.

Well said, H.

 

 

Frances

A good friend of mine who was just discharged from the Army after 10 years told me this story.

 

He was stationed in Mississippi and helped train the troops that would drive the convoy trucks in Iraq. He said that, like clockwork, when the time came for the troops to be deployed, a rush of gifts from family members would come in. Also, about the same time, a rash of robberies from military stores in the area, and thefts from other troops would also occour. The one constant was the item that troops going to war most need, and in Iraq apparently don't have enough of. Body Armor. My friend (who is a Seargent) indicated that some of this is overlooked or not reported by the officers, because the officers have no faith in thier superiors. They know the body armor more than likely will not be provided.

A good friend of mine who was just discharged from the Army after 10 years told me this story.

 

He was stationed in Mississippi and helped train the troops that would drive the convoy trucks in Iraq. He said that, like clockwork, when the time came for the troops to be deployed, a rush of gifts from family members would come in. Also, about the same time, a rash of robberies from military stores in the area, and thefts from other troops would also occour. The one constant was the item that troops going to war most need, and in Iraq apparently don't have enough of. Body Armor. My friend (who is a Seargent) indicated that some of this is overlooked or not reported by the officers, because the officers have no faith in thier superiors. They know the body armor more than likely will not be provided.

 

If this story is true (and I have no reason to doubt that it is), then this is truly a pathetic situation. I am not commenting on the faith (or lack thereof) in the superiors), but on our lack of body armor for the men and women going overseas. Regardless of party, position, or title, anyone that is slacking in the production, procurement, or distribution of body armor must be removed from that position of authority and responsibility.

 

That is absolutely unforgiveable.

 

 

Frances

If this story is true (and I have no reason to doubt that it is), then this is truly a pathetic situation. I am not commenting on the faith (or lack thereof) in the superiors), but on our lack of body armor for the men and women going overseas. Regardless of party, position, or title, anyone that is slacking in the production, procurement, or distribution of body armor must be removed from that position of authority and responsibility.

 

That is absolutely unforgiveable.

 

 

Frances

 

I've heard from a few different sources that the lack of armor is an issue. Also how things aren't being approved that many feel would be a big help, or that aren't being intigrated in a very timely manor.