Very well said

While I don't support the conclusion that America withdraw from Iraq and/or Afghanistan - almost at all costs, I certainly agree that Senator Reid needs to either "poop or get off the can". If the Congressional Democrats (under the dynamic duo leadership or Reid and Pelosi) were given a mandate with their elections last year, then surely they are squandering the credibility they had at the outset.

I believe it demeaning to the military when it hears dispariging remarks from members of Congress that essentially state, "I support the troops but not the war" (click here

As I've mentioned previously here:

"...[S]ervice members are feeling the tension created by the confusing concept of 'support the troops but not the war'. The purpose of the troops is to implement (by force if necessary) the will of the people who are represented via a democratic republic collectively termed the U.S. Congress. If the troops are told the war is not to be supported by members of Congress, it invalidates their purpose and demeans the sacrifices that they have made and continue to make.

"Therefore, Congress (who represents the people) NEEDS to clearly define the purpose of the troops and then let the military execute the mission to achieve the purpose. War is serious business and has little room or tolerance for political correctness, although many place PC on the same level as inalienable human rights which it is not. This seriousness requires that the military run the war and not the politicians from either side, which they finally did grant in allowing GEN Petraeus the additional troops he requested in June.

"My impression, though, is that it's politically 'convenient' to this Congress to wail and moan about 'pull outs' because it portrays the image of caring for the troops, while truthfully these actions confuse the purpose and demean those troops that are serving. And this is the a part of the tension that service members feel when listening to the elected officials - especially the cast of characters wanting to be the next president - debating withdrawal timelines. The purpose seems to be 'withdrawal' and prompts the typical troop to ask, 'Do you really care or are am I a means to your political ends because the almighty poll told you so?'"

by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 3 quicklinks, 9 diaries, 1551 comments) on Monday, October 1, 2007 at 8:50:43 PM
 

I like this part

The purpose seems to be 'withdrawal' and prompts the typical troop to ask, 'Do you really care or are am I a means to your political ends because the almighty poll told you so?'"

People refer to me as "heartless" if I say that they are using the war for political gain. But if they aren't ending the war, that's the impression I get. 

by Kevin Gosztola (195 articles, 103 quicklinks, 64 diaries, 779 comments) on Monday, October 1, 2007 at 9:22:49 PM
 

Well said!

Very well said, Kevin.  Articulate, thorough, and with a goodly amount of the emotion that these times require.  At my stage of life I have books to write, but I'm compelled to take my stand in my own satirical way, although lately the satire has ebbed in favor of full assault on both political parties.

So, keep on pounding at the gates.

Rrrandy Wurst, for President in 2008

(wurstwisdom.com) 

by Rrrandy-Steve (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 16 comments) on Tuesday, October 2, 2007 at 7:57:50 PM