But Wait! There's More...
...Because stupid people travel in packs:
Now, while I will be the first to admit that I enjoy combatting not only Terrorism abroad, but Stupidity at home, to be honest: I'm starting to think that Jane Stillwater and her ilk are beyond redemption.
However, I can't help myself:
1. The article you mention ( the American Free Press has very little credibility with the Tanker Brothers when they refer to the recent action between Israel and Hizbollah as "Genocide in Lebanon") is typical of reporters who know nothing about the military, trying to explain the military. If they would have bothered to do any research, they would have discovered that the budget problems at Army installations have nothing to do with the Global War on Terror, but are an effect of the modernization of the US Military. At the installation level (that's "Forts" for y'all that don't know), the Department of the Army "split" the structure between the "Mission Side" (those the guys that wear green) and the "Installation Side" (the civilians who work on and run the "Forts").
The Army did this for a very good reason: so that Mission Commanders could concentrate on training their Units and Soldiers, and eventually deploying to combat. Other than Soldiers' dependents, Mission Commanders don't need to be worrying about things that don't deploy with the unit. This was done to make the Army more efficient, and is an awesome concept. It's still a very new concept, though, and as a result, the "bugs" are still being worked out. Because of the power of paperwork, there isn't an effective way to shift money from "Mission Side" to "Installation Side". The Army has money, and is doing an excellent job of adjusting the Mission/Installation concept as lessons are learned. My suggestion to you: research before you jump to conclusions.
2. The Army doesn't have problems paying salaries. As an E7, I haven't missed a single paycheck.
3. "Why are we still even fighting a war there? One that has gone on longer than World War II? I thought it was won back in 2003. That's what Bush said."
Jane, you need to update your talking points. There is no comparison between WWII and Iraq: WWII was a war of political ideology (Democracy vs. Nazism/Fascism/Socialism), while the Global War on Terror is a cultural conflict (Radical Islamo-Fascists attacked the West, citing cultural differences that, in their eyes, define us as "infidels"). HUGE difference.
War isn't fought on a timetable, it is fought on goals. Our goal is to win. We should not stop fighting until that goal is achieved. In 2003, President Bush said that the mission of the USS Abraham Lincoln had been accomplished, not the War on Terror or the War in Iraq. To claim otherwise, even when it has been proven over and over again, goes beyond "taking out of context", and is just plain "wordsmithing".
4. Cindy Sheehan hasn't done a damn thing for me except undermined my fight. Her son was a good Soldier. If you would adjust your glasses, however, you would note that, on my "Wall of Heroes", SSgt May and SSG Quinn have one thing in common: they were both Master Gunners. Casey Sheehan was not a Master Gunner.
5. I won't even bother with your looney claim about PM Olmert and President Bush. You cite no sources. I won't pour gasoline your already burning train wreck.
So, Jane, do you agree with your buddy"Magginkat"? Are my brother and I:
1. Hate Mongers?
2. Murderers "killing innocent people"?
3. Brainwashed?
4. Foolish?
5. Macho Nutcases?
6. Clowns?
7. Traitors?
8. Brain damaged?
9. A Nazi Propagandists?
I'm pretty sure the Tanker Brothers and Sisters who read this blog would be interested in your answer.
[Also, Jane: please remove me from your crazy unsolicited mass emailings. Remember, the legality of sending unsolicited spam is dubious, at best.}
| I just read an article in the Amercian Free Press that the Army is going bankrupt. I'd like to send you the URL but you don't have a cut-and-paste feature. It says that they can't even pay Army salaries. The Army needs a union! PS: I'm glad to hear you say that we are winning the war on Iraq. Just one question. Why are we still even fighting a war there? One that has gone on longer than World War II? I thought it was won back in 2003. That's what Bush said. And you need to think twice before bashing Cindy Sheehan. She's fighting for American soldiers. You might even consider putting her son's photo up on your wall of heros. And regarding the two Israeli "kidnapped" soldiers, how come Bush and Olmert planned this action way back in May? If it was so spontaneous? AND. Whatever happened to those two soldiers? We never hear anything about them any more. Why aren't they given top priority? Because Bush is NOT all about saving the lives of soldiers. Bush could care less about you. Freedom begins at home. |
Now, while I will be the first to admit that I enjoy combatting not only Terrorism abroad, but Stupidity at home, to be honest: I'm starting to think that Jane Stillwater and her ilk are beyond redemption.
However, I can't help myself:
1. The article you mention ( the American Free Press has very little credibility with the Tanker Brothers when they refer to the recent action between Israel and Hizbollah as "Genocide in Lebanon") is typical of reporters who know nothing about the military, trying to explain the military. If they would have bothered to do any research, they would have discovered that the budget problems at Army installations have nothing to do with the Global War on Terror, but are an effect of the modernization of the US Military. At the installation level (that's "Forts" for y'all that don't know), the Department of the Army "split" the structure between the "Mission Side" (those the guys that wear green) and the "Installation Side" (the civilians who work on and run the "Forts").
The Army did this for a very good reason: so that Mission Commanders could concentrate on training their Units and Soldiers, and eventually deploying to combat. Other than Soldiers' dependents, Mission Commanders don't need to be worrying about things that don't deploy with the unit. This was done to make the Army more efficient, and is an awesome concept. It's still a very new concept, though, and as a result, the "bugs" are still being worked out. Because of the power of paperwork, there isn't an effective way to shift money from "Mission Side" to "Installation Side". The Army has money, and is doing an excellent job of adjusting the Mission/Installation concept as lessons are learned. My suggestion to you: research before you jump to conclusions.
2. The Army doesn't have problems paying salaries. As an E7, I haven't missed a single paycheck.
3. "Why are we still even fighting a war there? One that has gone on longer than World War II? I thought it was won back in 2003. That's what Bush said."
Jane, you need to update your talking points. There is no comparison between WWII and Iraq: WWII was a war of political ideology (Democracy vs. Nazism/Fascism/Socialism), while the Global War on Terror is a cultural conflict (Radical Islamo-Fascists attacked the West, citing cultural differences that, in their eyes, define us as "infidels"). HUGE difference.
War isn't fought on a timetable, it is fought on goals. Our goal is to win. We should not stop fighting until that goal is achieved. In 2003, President Bush said that the mission of the USS Abraham Lincoln had been accomplished, not the War on Terror or the War in Iraq. To claim otherwise, even when it has been proven over and over again, goes beyond "taking out of context", and is just plain "wordsmithing".
4. Cindy Sheehan hasn't done a damn thing for me except undermined my fight. Her son was a good Soldier. If you would adjust your glasses, however, you would note that, on my "Wall of Heroes", SSgt May and SSG Quinn have one thing in common: they were both Master Gunners. Casey Sheehan was not a Master Gunner.
5. I won't even bother with your looney claim about PM Olmert and President Bush. You cite no sources. I won't pour gasoline your already burning train wreck.
So, Jane, do you agree with your buddy"Magginkat"? Are my brother and I:
1. Hate Mongers?
2. Murderers "killing innocent people"?
3. Brainwashed?
4. Foolish?
5. Macho Nutcases?
6. Clowns?
7. Traitors?
8. Brain damaged?
9. A Nazi Propagandists?
I'm pretty sure the Tanker Brothers and Sisters who read this blog would be interested in your answer.
[Also, Jane: please remove me from your crazy unsolicited mass emailings. Remember, the legality of sending unsolicited spam is dubious, at best.}
DIGG THIS
Del.icio.us
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home