Is this story more good news from Iraq?

[av8torntn]

And once you make it this far with the constitution.
Amendment X


The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

 

[diesel96]

Article 1 of the US constitution may help you. Here it is by your posts I can tell you probably have never read it. http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.table.html#articlei
Article 1 does list all the powers of the federal government. I just read it again and saw where it gives the government the power to declare war. Maybe you could show me your New Orleans section or FEMA section or poverty section or education section. The Constitution is very specific on the powers of the government so it should be easy for you to show me the New Orleans article.

It also gives the Gov't the power to end war.



And you were the one complaining about the source of the information. So this would be right out of the liberal handbook of double standards.Yes the same as we support the troops but not the war, our troops are to stupid to do anything else but we support our troops, or we support our troops but we do not want their vote to count in the presidential election because they tend to vote more republican. The same handbook that says the constitution says we have free speech but it must be wrong about the right to bear arms. So yet another double standard from a liberal. I of course am no longer surprised by anything I see on here from you. I do find it odd that you would want to use the constitution to make your point.

Resorting to false claims to make a point only weakens your view. "Troops are to stupid" and "we don't want their vote to count"or it's"wrong to bear arms". Even with these silly accusations, try to stay on topic with those who don't agree with you'
You want double standards,look at your own Republican Senators. And of course, I'm no longer surprised to see you and your Conservative brethrens claiming ownership to the Constitution.

 

[av8torntn]

Since you are from Florida I thought you would remeber the democratic party bring up a lawsuit to block the votes from the troops over seas from counting during the Gore Bush election. They also tried to block the law to allow extra time for those same votes to be counted two years later when it came up in the US House. Luckily they failed.



Funny how you want to stay on topic. You have even talked about the Indian tribes on this thread. On another thread about gun control you took an oppurtunity to take a shot at our troops.

Let us not forget Rep. Rangle(d) was the one who said only the uneducated and poor join the military so we need a draft. Let us also not forget Sen. Kerry (d) said if you study hard you will do well and if you do not you will go to Iraq. There are to many democrats to list that want to take away or severly limit the right to bear arms, so how was anything I said a false claim? Do not worry I already know the answer I did not.

You do the same thing all of your liberal brothers do. When confronted with facts you cry that someone is trying to intefere with your free speech. When confronted with a news report you cry that it is right wing. When I post a link from a very liberal new caster saying the same thing (it was even in video form so you would not even have to cipher it) and you just ignore it.

I suppose the government has the power to surrender to the terrorists like you want. I was just pointing out that your reason for wanting it(because you want the federal government to be your babysitter) is just a silly reason and also out of their area of responsibility. I suppose you will now say the US constitution is a right wing document. Remember you brought up the constitution and poverty and New Orleans and education and FEMA and of course now you want to tell me to stick to the topic of the thread.


As far as your liberal double standard world goes we could start an entire thread on that but it is much funnier that you do not see it.

 

[diesel96]

Since you are from Florida I thought you would remeber the democratic party bring up a lawsuit to block the votes from the troops over seas from counting during the Gore Bush election. They also tried to block the law to allow extra time for those same votes to be counted two years later when it came up in the US House. Luckily they failed.

Funny you mention the Gore/Bush Election Debacle results in Florida.

Rep. Katherine Harris(Sec. Of State), and guess who else? GW's Brother Jeb....."Fair and Balanced"?
Main articles: Florida Central Voter File and Florida election recount
As Secretary of State for the State of Florida, Harris presided over the contested 2000 US presidential election in Florida. There were allegations of conflicts of interest and partisan, unethical behavior by Katherine Harris during the 2000 campaign. Harris had been named as Bush's Florida campaign co-chair the year before.
In addition, by Harris' decree, ChoicePoint — a private firm — was hired prior to the election to identify and remove thousands of names from the state voters list on the condition that these people were convicted felons. Many of these would-be voters were turned away at the polls or even prior to reaching the polling places. It would later be discovered that approximately 97% of the people removed from the list — and thus denied the right to vote in the election — were not felons at all. The majority of these voters were African-American, and as African-Americans predominantly vote Democratic, the situation suggested foul play.[13] In any case, the thousands of votes affected by Choicepoint's error were far in excess of the number of votes (537) by which George W. Bush won the state. Whether or not there was deliberate action to prevent likely Gore supporters from voting is subject to intense debate, as is Harris' role in the process.
Harris certified that the Republican candidate, then-Texas Governor George W. Bush, had defeated the Democratic candidate, Vice President Al Gore, in the popular vote of Florida and thus certified the Republican slate of electors. Her ruling was challenged and overturned on appeal by Florida's Supreme Court; this decision, however, was itself reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore. That Court ruled (5-4) that Gore's request to extend Florida's statutory deadline for ballot re-counts had no merit, because no Florida law at the time provided for that option. This ruling nullified the state court's decision, upholding Harris' certification. The decision foreclosed any further court challenges by Gore and resulted in Bush's margin of victory in Florida being officially tallied at 537 votes. Therefore, Florida's electoral votes — and the Presidency — went to George W. Bush.
Harris later wrote Center of the Storm, her own memoir of the 2000 election controversy, in which she presents her side and takes issue with her critics. She was also heavily featured in the documentary Unprecedented: The 2000 Presidential Election.
nal tally and deadline before any hand-counted votes came in, and that she would not consider those but allowed late overseas votes (civilians and troops)


Funny how you want to stay on topic. You have even talked about the Indian tribes on this thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by area43
Hey look what we did to the indians. Have you've talked to any of them lately. Their still pissed.

really[/i] think that's a viable option?

I didn't bring up the Indians....Why don't you complain to area43 and Jones.

On another thread about gun control you took an oppurtunity to take a shot at our troops.

Resorting to lying and making false accusations. A Conservative defense mechanism.

Let us not forget Rep. Rangle(d) was the one who said only the uneducated and poor join the military so we need a draft. Let us also not forget Sen. Kerry (d) said if you study hard you will do well and if you do not you will go to Iraq. There are to many democrats to list that want to take away or severly limit the right to bear arms, so how was anything I said a false claim? Do not worry I already know the answer I did not.

You obviously don't read or comprehend posts I've written on Gun Control...Until you do, don't sterotype me and all non-republicans as wanting to take your gun away .

You do the same thing all of your liberal brothers do. When confronted with facts you cry that someone is trying to intefere with your free speech. When confronted with a news report you cry that it is right wing. When I post a link from a very liberal new caster saying the same thing (it was even in video form so you would not even have to cipher it) and you just ignore it.

I believe you were crying after I presented you with the facts reguarding your NY post.com post:#57

av8torntnRe: Is this story more good news from Iraq?
Some commentary that seems fair.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/09042007...ion.htm?page=0

The surge report has not even been released yet from Gen Petraeus. Early reports show 15 to out of 18 benchmarks have not been met. Keep in mind the surge report, will be written by the Gen responsible for sucess and graded by GW....Where is the checks and balances of the factual nature of this report?



I suppose the government has the power to surrender to the terrorists like you want. I was just pointing out that your reason for wanting it(because you want the federal government to be your babysitter) is just a silly reason and also out of their area of responsibility. I suppose you will now say the US constitution is a right wing document. Remember you brought up the constitution and poverty and New Orleans and education and FEMA and of course now you want to tell me to stick to the topic of the thread.

Excuse me,YOU brought up the Constitution first and then started flailing bogus accusations.

post#59

Re: Is this story more good news from Iraq?
I know you seek failure in Iraq. I know you do not believe in the constitution and you think the federal government should pay for your health care and something else in New Orleans. You want to complain about the money the federal government is spending but you also want them to be your baby sitter. You should know by now that national security is a role I believe is suitable for the federal government.

 

[av8torntn]

This is getting better than comedy central. You want to bring up the GAO report. So if I followed your rules I could just dismiss it as being funded by the left wing congress. I will choose to take this guys stand on it.


http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/059muaol.asp

You talked about the Indians on #55 but someone may have used your screen name.

On the gun control thread on your post #19 you said we are failing in Iraq. As someone who has been there I can tell you there are no politicians fighting there. There are however Soldiers, Marines, Airmen, and Sailors there. I take this as a shot at our troops much the same as someone who says they do not support the war but they support our troops. Yet another liberal double standard.


I do not care how you feel on gun control. The last major national gun control laws were passed by a democratic congress with a democratic president.


So are you saying now that you do not believe in the constitution? It may be that you only want the free speech part.

I take it by the article you posted that you are now crying because they did not want convicted felons to vote in the federal election. The article also says she wanted to allow the votes to count from our troops overseas. I thank you for helping to make my point.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

The sad truth for this thread is that it's supposed to be about good news comming from Iraq but instead everything that is presented is basically pissed on by Liberal scum bags. Exactly who's side are you guys on anyway?

 

[av8torntn]

My apologies BAU. I should not have allowed myself to be baited into something so far off topic. I will try and correct myself.

 

[av8torntn]

Here is a link where you guys can read the "retired generals report" for yourself. I am quite sure this will be taken out of context by both sides.



http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/09/military_jonesreport_070906w/

 

[tieguy]

Here is a link where you guys can read the "retired generals report" for yourself. I am quite sure this will be taken out of context by both sides.



http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/09/military_jonesreport_070906w/

Interesting article. I'm curious though as to how retired generals are able to keep up with conditions in Iraq. Do they still have access to intelligence?

 

[diesel96]

The sad truth for this thread is that it's supposed to be about good news comming from Iraq but instead everything that is presented is basically pissed on by Liberal scum bags. Exactly who's side are you guys on anyway?

Big A, keep it clean dude..I got a few choice words for the Neo-Cons also, but I choose to use discretion on this web site.(And that goes to all who approve Big A's inadequacy's).
I'm sorry you and those who share you views are unable to differentiate the levels of liberalism ,moderates and Democrates. You seem to have a hang up on anyone who doesn't agree with you is a far left liberal anarchist (who I despise also). At least I give the benefit of the doubt for Republicans that aren't way off the charts to the right. It's unfortunate Contempary Republicans allowed a small wing of far right neo-cons hijack your entire party and control the bulk of what Traditional Republicans used to stand for.



av8torntnRe: Is this story more good news from Iraq?
This is getting better than comedy central.

I'm glad to see you have a sense of humor at the expense of your own party.
Anyway..to end this trivial spat,I was not taking a shot at you...I was merely responding to a paragraph the author made in the NY Post article.Don't take it personal.

 

[cheryl]

...everything that is presented is basically pissed on by Liberal scum bags. Exactly who's side are you guys on anyway?

Name calling is a violation of our terms of service. Instead of making a personal attack against people with opposing views you should try reinforcing your argument.

From the Brown Cafe Terms of Service:
Discussion can be animated, which is fine, but we do not welcome personal attacks, on- or off-site. It is inappropriate to say anything on a discussion forum about any individual or entity that you would not be prepared to say to them face-to-face.


It is fine to disagree with a different viewpoint, but please limit this to challenging the idea and not make your comments a personal challenge or make derogatory personal comments about individuals, their ideas or their situation. The latter is considered to be a flame and will not be tolerated.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

Big A, keep it clean dude..I got a few choice words for the Neo-Cons also, but I choose to use discretion on this web site.(And that goes to all who approve Big A's inadequacy's).
I'm sorry you and those who share you views are unable to differentiate the levels of liberalism ,moderates and Democrates. You seem to have a hang up on anyone who doesn't agree with you is a far left liberal anarchist (who I despise also). At least I give the benefit of the doubt for Republicans that aren't way off the charts to the right. It's unfortunate Contempary Republicans allowed a small wing of far right neo-cons hijack your entire party and control the bulk of what Traditional Republicans used to stand for.



av8torntnRe: Is this story more good news from Iraq?
This is getting better than comedy central.

I'm glad to see you have a sense of humor at the expense of your own party.
Anyway..to end this trivial spat,I was not taking a shot at you...I was merely responding to a paragraph the author made in the NY Post article.Don't take it personal.

I don't care which sect of the party you think you represent. When you constantly undermine the efforts of our own troops, your country, and your elected officials (whether your voted for them or not), you only add fuel to the speculation that you are an America hating Liberal, lefty, commie, or my personal favorite.."progressive" <----LOL!, or any other title you chose to accept as long as it benefits your particular arguement.

And I'm getting dinged for name calling? I'm not sure I approve of being called a "NeoCon" since the term was coined by a Socialist named Michael Harrington. The word was supposed to be used to describe people that called themselves Liberals but were actually ex-Liberals. Now THAT is offensive. LOL!

 

[toonertoo]

I got a novel idea. This thread was originally "is this more good news from Iraq". I say lets leave it that way.
And anyone else is more than welcome to start a thread, "more bad news from Iraq"
And then we are free to look at the good news or the bad, or both.
I personally enjoy the good news as the bad is well reported.

 

[av8torntn]

Interesting article. I'm curious though as to how retired generals are able to keep up with conditions in Iraq. Do they still have access to intelligence?

Well it is all the way down in apendix c but it shows who they had access to. After reading it (it took two days I am no longer on my sweet run and I have to pull 11 hour days again) I can see lots of good news, but there are some things that do not seem as good that I am thinking will make the news. I thought I would link it here directly for the people who do not think the Iraqis are doing anything.

 

[wkmac]

As to Tie's question, for one I'd think these guys are probably still connected just as many retired UPS managers still have connections but to the day to day folks and do keep abreast of some things. I know from time to time one of our sort supervisors calls a retired UPS manager for advice and suggestions and he stays connected in the process. I would think it would be similar to some degree with the military.

I also thought that being they were on a Blue Ribbon panel reporting to the Senate if I understood correctly, that this would grant them some level of access. Col. Hunt who is a contributor to Fox News wrote a scathing condemnation of Rumsfeld several months back because we had a special ops team on the pad about to depart of the outback of Pakistan after hard intel told us Osama and company were present and wtihin minutes of the birds taking flight, Rumy scuttled the mission. I'd guess Col. Hunt has connections that from my POV he semed to break this story in some sense. As the least I respected his expertise in bringing me this information.

You also didn't hear a lot of press on that story either and the most I've heard on the subject except from Col. Hunt was via Bill Moyer's Journal but then he's a commie-pinko so who takes him serious. For the most part, the corp. press sat silent on this from what I can see. IMO Rumy should have his head taken off for that decision and this again IMO proves that the political heads at the top aren't completely committed to doing everything it takes to take these guys down (Al Queda) and down hard. This then leads one to question the Iraq situation because all the smoke and mirrors get in the way. Unless your driven by a cult of personality or loyalities to a specific political agenda which you believe right or wrong is tied to a political party, you can't help but have a feeling of mistrust and even when good stories come out you always are looking for the other shoe to drop so to speak.

I think in any situation like this there will always be in reality both good news and bad and just knowing the average American joe or jane, there's a whole ton of good going on at the individual soldier level that never gets seen or heard of. We as average folk not driven by cause or agenda have our faults but we have a soft spot for the underdog and our compassion will always flow through when that happens because we lack no overriding motive other than to see people have a good and fair shot at life.

I think news in general is mostly focused on the bad as look at your local news and see on a day basis how many positive, feelgood stories you see day in and day out in the news. Iraq is much the same way. I think it's fair to say that some of the best things in Iraq we'll either never hear of or at best have to dig deep to find them. The American men and women in uniform are just awesome in my book and are the best of the best. No argument from me on that. What saddens me however is to see a foreign policy dictated by civilians who IMO are driven by agendas both political and socio-economic advantagous to their personal short and longterm careers.

We all know whether we admit it or not that day in and day out at UPS, decisions at some managment levels is made not to the benefit of the bigger UPS but to the career advantage of the specific manager who made the decision. Biggest one I see often is the cut routes to increase your Sporh. Now that will work to make you look good but the adverse to the company is those extra and even overloaded drivers are out longer, come in later to the local sort, some pushing up to air pull times and even missing the airtrailer forcing a shuttle of chase dispatch. When this uncanned volume hits the airport facility, they must take extra handling steps to process adding extra cost to the company not to mention the local sort running longer to porcess and then having to dispatch an extra driver. These late arriving package cars also bump up agianst feeder pull times forcing the load to dispatch late or holding the driver right up to the last minute giving him no room for error on his feeder run. If he/she is late to the intermediate hub then the delay cost continue to roll through the network like a tsunami until it finally crashes along the network or at the destination center. In the meantime, our "look at me I'm good" center manager looks like a hero because his Sporh is on the money. The Div. manager doesn't care because in turn he looks good too. Does it matter all the cost and extra work his decision caused the company? I guess not because it happens all the time.

Why are we so naive to believe it only happens in private business and never happens at the public level and then to decry efforts when someone would dare question to obtain clarification and even some duty of oversight on the matter? What happens when a package driver posts here and questions the very practice above I just laid out. You get the same reaction and name calling just on a different scale because at the end of the day if you look at the "Big Picture" other than a local benefiit to the numbers, you can't justify the call you made when compared to the ripple effect cost to the company at large. Name calling come into play when the person is unable to defend the position with any rational explaination IMO.

Our founding fathers felt it our duty to question the gov't and thus the 1st amendment of free speech and free press, both the first wall of defense in tyrannical or abuse of power gov't. Only a thief in the night objects to the home buglar alarm and cries foul when the police car crusies by. You see boys, it does go both ways! I don't question the goodness and the heroics of our men and women in uniform because that's a given. What I do question again is the civilian policy behind the scenes that dictate how our men and women in uniform are used and deployed in our national defense as spelled out by the constitution.

Tooner has a valid point that the thread was about good news stories from Iraq but like UPS, is there also a suggestion we put brown colored glasses on and then go about and pretend all is just hunky dory when something comes up to suggest otherwise? Something tells me Tooner has more than once thrown those brown glasses to the crub and voiced an opposing thought to a UPS thread title that was about being rosy and sunny! Or has Tooner posted to a union thread in the same vein? I'm not picking on Tooner because we've probably all done it at one point or another. The best way to be informed in order to make a good decision is to hear from all sides and this includes things you don't like seeing. Yep, you can learn from that as well. I just don't think it prudent to stick our heads in the sand and only see the things we want too. There are some suggestions that things are getting better on some fronts in Iraq. No argument and I'm glad it is. The best possible world is for our guys to come home and Iraq has a stable, secure and open society and gov't. The question is how far are we willing to pay in lives and tax dollars to try and make that happen when the people involved are steeped in religious traditions that run contary to free and open society. Look at our own western European Christian traditions of the past and then think of what we do in society today that is accepted as the will of the majority and try and think of many of those things being thrust upon our forefather's world. And I'm not talking about the extremes in society either. Our forefather's would have reacted insome cases with violence and this in no different than Iraq or other mideast soceities. It took us 100's of years to move away from that and we think they will do so overnight? Does this mean they are superior to the white man and you guys are really trying to prove that to the world and that's really what this exercise is all about?

 

[av8torntn]

Here is Gen Petreaus letter to the troops that has been on the new a couple of days now.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/RCP_PDF/PetraeusLetterSep7.pdf

 

[av8torntn]

Great job SSG Malmberg.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/09/ap_silverstar_070920/

 

[toonertoo]

I throw my brown colored glasses to the curb constantly, but with all the bad in UPS posted on here, and many by me, It is a great company, but it has flaws, as does the war, and the government running it. But I dont belittle the good, and I dont condemn anyone for their thoughts. I just think we need to hear more good, and no I dont post on any other threads. I feel how I feel, and that feeling is that with all the bad in Iraq, when we have spent billions, and we have people who have lost their lives fighting for something "we" told them to go and do, I will support them til the end. Then we can say this was wrong, or that was flawed. Now is not the time for that. All I said was this is a good news thread, lets do that, and let another thread be for bad news. I think that is fair. Im not as well read as many, and I was not offended by you singling me out, it means I gave my opinion and someone saw it and remembered it. And thats what this communication is for, so dont worry about my little feelings.

 

[brazenbrown]

I throw my brown colored glasses to the curb constantly, but with all the bad in UPS posted on here, and many by me, It is a great company, but it has flaws, as does the war, and the government running it. But I dont belittle the good, and I dont condemn anyone for their thoughts. I just think we need to hear more good, and no I dont post on any other threads. I feel how I feel, and that feeling is that with all the bad in Iraq, when we have spent billions, and we have people who have lost their lives fighting for something "we" told them to go and do, I will support them til the end. Then we can say this was wrong, or that was flawed. Now is not the time for that. All I said was this is a good news thread, lets do that, and let another thread be for bad news. I think that is fair. Im not as well read as many, and I was not offended by you singling me out, it means I gave my opinion and someone saw it and remembered it. And thats what this communication is for, so dont worry about my little feelings.

I certainly don't think you have little feelings with your gracious post that makes plenty of sense

There is plenty of bad news spread about by the media, way more than any good news. War is not sunshine and roses and it's much easier to see the bad in it if you're not looking for the good because war in itself is not something we do by choice.

This thread is supposed to be about the successes in Iraq and there have been more of them lately.

So if you support America defeating the terrorists then you owe it to your families to support the troops who in turn make us safer and are deserving of our support because they're finest military in the world.

They deserve to feel the proud support of the American people.

So, I concur with Tooner let's make this the thread what it was intended to be, to celebrate our boys & girls in the military and their accomplishments!!

 

[diesel96]

I feel how I feel, and that feeling is that with all the bad in Iraq, when we have spent billions, and we have people who have lost their lives fighting for something "we" told them to go and do, I will support them til the end. Then we can say this was wrong, or that was flawed. Now is not the time for that. All I said was this is a good news thread, lets do that, and let another thread be for bad news. I think that is fair. Im not as well read as many, and I was not offended by you singling me out, it means I gave

I'm sorry, I know some of you feel I'm not welcome on this thread, but this is a open forum and feel ANY thread should not be deemed infallible. Now IMO, many if not the majority are convinced NOW is the time "we" tell them to stop, scale down and come home. NOW is the time we say this is wrong and flawed. Why wait and to what end have more of our young men/women have to die or get maimed as a result of an afterthought. The desire for removing our troops out of harms way in a conflict thats not making America safer, IMO says more about "supporting our troops" than leaving them in a meat grinder in Iraq. We all agree we have the finest military in the world, and "surrender" is not in it's vocabulary. But were not in a Conventional war and our borders are not being breached (except for illegals). We've learned alot since 2003 and sent our military in due to false intel to disarm Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. However it eventually became clear it turned into weapons of mass deception. But all was not loss, we toppled Hussien's reign, and eventually captured him in a mole hole, empowered a make shift Gov't , but underestimated the unwillingness of combant factions not relinquishing compromises and control and not recognizing the established US backed Iraq Gov't. We've accomplished about all we can do as far as irradicating Hussien and WMD's, so why are we still there? Does Alan Greenspan (ex Chair of the Fed) ring truth in his own words?
Are we hanging around to set up camp for Oil? At least this administration should be up front with the American People. Greenspan also mentioned that the Clinton's were more like Traditional Republicans then todays batch of Conservative Right Swingers.(Sorry starting to stray).
Unlike what some of you think, we love to hear positive news, coming from Iraq, each positive story means one step closer to ending this thing. Even hearing no news is a good thing. Why, cause that means no body died. Amen..God bless our brave young men and women and come home safe.