Dear Mr. Obama

[Big Sarge]

Ya'll, here's a great video message to Mr Obama. It shows how a lot of us feel who have spent time in Iraq.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4fe9GlWS8

[Radar]

McCain got a D rating on Veterans issues from the Iraq and Afghanistan veterans of America. Barack Obama got a B+. Also the 10,000 IAVA were allowed to deliver a report to Barack Obama, but McCain turned them away.

The guy in your video represents a tiny minority of veterans. Most vets are against McCain, especially those who served in Vietnam and Iraq.

[Yznhymr]

Originally Posted by Radar

McCain got a D rating on Veterans issues from the Iraq and Afghanistan veterans of America. Barack Obama got a B+. Also the 10,000 IAVA were allowed to deliver a report to Barack Obama, but McCain turned them away.

The guy in your video represents a tiny minority of veterans. Most vets are against McCain, especially those who served in Vietnam and Iraq.

I'm a Desert Storm vet. These scores are backwards. Obama would actually get an F from me. McCain is an admirable hero.

[Radar]

You are in the minority. McCain voted against increased veterans benefits every chance he got.

http://ivaw.org

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com

http://www.iava.org

http://votevets.org

[Big Sarge]

Radar,

I served 2 combat tours. I know how the soldiers I served with feel. We strongly support the war against terror in Iraq because we know we forced AQ to expend their manpower and money in their own backyard, thus keeping them from executing attacks on our homes.

Basically, my knowledge is first-hand while you are relying on anti-war group rhetoric.

[Radar]

It turns out you aren't the only Iraqi vet, and the majority are against the war in Iraq.

I am also a vet and the MAJORITY of all combat vets, especially those who went to Iraq, are against the war in Iraq and the so-called "war on terror" because they know Al Queda had nothing to do with Iraq, that they aren't defending America by being in Iraq, and that the American government lied to the American people about Iraq posing a danger.

Most vets, myself included, would die defending America if it were attacked, but would be furious at their government if it sent them into battle unnecessarily, illegally, and against a non-threat. Most would rather have their blood shed only when absolutely necessary and when it is in the defense of America. This is the very least America owes to American service men & women.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Sarge you served two tours, one kosovo and I guess the other in Iraq, so you know what happened there, and I believe you know how your peers feel about the war.

But when you say, "we know we forced AQ to expend their manpower and money in their own backyard, thus keeping them from executing attacks on our homes.", you're repeating pro-war rhetoric. I believe, you believe it, but that doesn't make it fact.

How in hell would you "know" what AQ would or would not do? Or even what their capability to do, is? All you "know", is what they did seven years ago, with the capabilities they had then. It appears even our Military Intel and the CIA, isn't quite sure of what AQ can do, or even who AQ consists of.

If you use the Bush/Pentagon method of labeling all the "bad guys" AQ, it ups their strength and numbers on paper, but it's a lot more complicated than that. There's a shitload of different groups that hate us(U.S.) for various reasons, and even more that want to use us as the bogey man to achieve their own ends.

Fortunately for us, and the rest of the world, these groups can't seem to work together for more than a short time... probably because they are in a constant internal power struggle, of/with people that have different objectives.

Personally, I think we should have been finishing the job in Afghanistan, instead of fucking around in Iraq, but I also realize we broke it and have a responsibility to try and fix it, as much as the people of Iraq will allow us to. But like I said, that's just my

[Big Sarge]

I don't claim to be the only OIF vet on the site. Once again my opinions are based upon my own experiences and membership in such groups as the VFW and the IWVO. Radar, it looks like we have very different opinions & neither of us will change the others mind

Bruce - I'll send you a pm

[Undertoad]

Two minutes at the Military Times site turned up this poll. For our fellow critical thinkers:

Active duty poll, end of 07 (you would certainly expect more favorable numbers today):

http://www.militarycity.com/polls/20...epoll_iraq.php

9) Should the U.S. have gone to war in Iraq?
Yes

46.1%

No

34.2%

No opinion

10.9%

Decline to answer

8.9%

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

If you use the Bush/Pentagon method of labeling all the "bad guys" AQ, it ups their strength and numbers on paper, but it's a lot more complicated than that. There's a shitload of different groups that hate us(U.S.) for various reasons, and even more that want to use us as the bogey man to achieve their own ends.

They labeled themselves AQ. bin Laden labeled them AQ in an audio tape, if you believe he's alive and made audio tapes. bin Laden said Iraq is where the battle is, if you believe he's alive and made audio tapes.

Thousands upon thousands of hardass foreign fighters entered Iraq just for the chance to blow up some infidels. Not AQ? I guess -- AQ doesn't hand out membership cards. But also, we are not at war with AQ. We're at war with radical Islamists (but we can't SAY we're at war with radical Islamists). When they design to kill us, anything that discourages them or kills them, without making more of them, is a good thing.

Fortunately for us, and the rest of the world, these groups can't seem to work together for more than a short time... probably because they are in a constant internal power struggle, of/with people that have different objectives.

And because a lot of them have been killed.

[classicman]

Radar

This whole Iraqi vet claim of yours is new to me. Please elaborate on your "service there. When/why were you there?

I'd have thought that would have made it to your bio - somewhere above the casino craps dealer certainly.
I would bet my last dollar that a "Award Winning Libertarian Activist" (Your Quote - see profile) Would have certainly made a stand and refused to fight in this this this.... how did you put it? link oh yeah "illegal invasion of Iraq."

[Radar]

I didn't say I was an Iraqi combat vet. I'm a vet, but not a combat vet, and I got out of the Navy just before the 1st gulf war. I said he's not the only Iraqi combat vet and that most Iraqi combat vets are against the war in Iraq.

Pay attention to what I'm actually saying.

You are correct in your assumption that I'd have enough honor, integrity, and courage to refuse the unlawful order to take part in an invasion of Iraq when they posed no danger to our own company and there was no formal declaration of war. Unlike those who went to Iraq, I actually took my oath seriously.

For the record, anyone who claims Americans blatantly unconstitutional (aka illegal) invasion of Iraq by American soldiers from 1991 to the present is anything but completely illegal is a blithering idiot.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

They labeled themselves AQ. bin Laden labeled them AQ in an audio tape, if you believe he's alive and made audio tapes. bin Laden said Iraq is where the battle is, if you believe he's alive and made audio tapes.

Thousands upon thousands of hardass foreign fighters entered Iraq just for the chance to blow up some infidels. Not AQ? I guess -- AQ doesn't hand out membership cards. But also, we are not at war with AQ. We're at war with radical Islamists (but we can't SAY we're at war with radical Islamists). When they design to kill us, anything that discourages them or kills them, without making more of them, is a good thing.

A shitload of what the Pentagon were calling "AQ", battling us in Iraq, said they are not AQ, they are Iraqis. They then joined with the U.S. Coalition in defeating the other ones the Pentagon had labeled AQs.

Using "AQ" as a blanket title for Islamic radicals is OK, as long as people realize it's not a stable, cohesive, easily targeted group. In reality, the radical Islamists are dozens, maybe hundreds, of groups in constant flux. They're making and breaking alliances constantly, with each leader trying to accomplish his own agenda. The only thing they really have in common is using hate-the-Infidels as a recruiting/rallying point.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by Radar

Pay attention to what I'm actually saying.

Its hard to take the little bit of something useful out of all the propaganda, sorry.

[Radar]

I'm straightforward, honest, and clear about everything I say. Perhaps you're having a tough time because you can't discern truth from propaganda. I always tell the truth. If you mistake anything I say for propaganda, it shows a problem with your perception, not with my message.