>>>You don't see anyone holding vigils and protests to meet with bin Laden, or al-Zarqawi do you?

I mean seriously WTF?

Just besides the fact that they live in a different country and are secretive figures in an already shadowy underworld.

You are also comparing your dear leader to the two.

Nice job.

I resent the implication that G.W. Bush is being compared to bin Laden or al-Zarqawi. While he hasn't the obvious criminal intent of these 2 characters, he is also not nearly as bright. I see few parallels between them and he.

"She is a left wing goon who talks propaganda, not despondency like a mourning mother would. She's not doing this for her son Casey anymore--she hasn't been for a long time now."

So mourning mothers only act despondent, aaron? mourning mothers are often pissed, as sheehan is. especially when their sons' death was unnecessary.

Um Yeah, Dump, you guys are missing a key point. Aaron is not comparing President Bush to bin Laden and Zarqawi, Cindy Sheehan is. Aaron is using a form of argument called "reductio ad absurdum " (look it up) to show how ridiculous Sheehan's claim is.

Tom, I've said it before and I'll say it again...if this is how Cindy Sheehan deals with loss she needs to seek help, not be egged on.

"Tom, I've said it before and I'll say it again...if this is how Cindy Sheehan deals with loss she needs to seek help, not be egged on."

So you're supposed to supress your anger, and bite your lip when you think an injustice has been done? that's how you're SUPPOSED to deal with loss?

maybe you should open up your own grief counseling center, rich.

So you're supposed to supress your anger, and bite your lip when you think an injustice has been done? that's how you're SUPPOSED to deal with loss?

Did I say that? Show me where I said that.

If you really want me to get all pop-psychology about this, fine. Anger is a "secondary emotion" stemming from "primary emotions" like hurt, sadness, grief, etc. If, and I maintain that it is an "if", Cindy Sheehan is acting this way because of her grief, she is not allowing herself to feel the pain of her son's death but is instead "externalizing" it into anger at a scapegoat figure - people do this because in anger there is a sense of control, whereas in sadness there is a feeling of vulnerability. However, this is an unhealthy way of dealing with any emotion and Cindy Sheehan will not be able to be at peace with her son's death until she processes her emotions in a healthy way.

Happy?

yeah, that's actually a pretty good answer. you at least sound like you know what you're talking about. though, you're diagnosing from afar, and anger usually is one of the first emotions involved with grieving. with sheehan it seems her anger has come at around a year after her son's death, so i don't know if you can say her anger is due to the grieving process of her son. she very well could just be pissed that bush sent her son into an unnecessary war.

Well we agree then, that's what I was saying before, and you said no, she's grieving so we should be more understanding. If she's just protesting because she's against the war then she is, in fact, exploiting her son's death for politics and publicity.

"Well we agree then, that's what I was saying before, and you said no, she's grieving so we should be more understanding. If she's just protesting because she's against the war then she is, in fact, exploiting her son's death for politics and publicity."

No, i said she's a mother who lost her son, we should have more respect.

"If she's just protesting because she's against the war then she is, in fact, exploiting her son's death for politics and publicity."

If this is true, any mother who lost a son in a war loses her ability to protest that war?

Are MADD exploited people killed by drunk drivers?

exploiting...

If she wants to protest that's just fine, this is America (not Iran), but I don't think you can deny that she is putting her son's death at the center of the whole ordeal. Either it's because she is having trouble grieving properly, or she is using the fact that her son died for publicity/politics. I don't understand what the third option you're alluding to is.

And as I said before, respect for someone is based on that person's personal conduct, not whatever may have happened to said person.

"but I don't think you can deny that she is putting her son's death at the center of the whole ordeal...."

Lets face it, If she hadn't lost her son you would marginalize her as someone who knows nothing of grief or making the ultimate sacrifice, and you would dismiss her out of hand. But since she has lost a child you choose to marginalize her by saying she's putting her sons death in the middle of it. Well, NO SHIT SHERLOCK. Because that's EXACTLY what she's pissed about. Losing her son. For a stupid, useless, and unneccessary endeavor predicated by the POTUS. She's pissed about losing her son, being pissed often goes hand in hand with greiving, especially when you think someone is to blame for your loved one's death. Whether you feel Cindy Sheehan's blame is misplaced is a matter of opinion. I will give her credit though, she found a way to make her voice heard. And if Bush wasn't aware of her greivance before, he certainly is now. The thing with a lot of you people on this site is, you're not content to disagree with someones opinion, you've gotta villify them by any means necessary, and yet you complain when Michael Moore conducts himself in the same way. Someone with a political agenda criticizing someone else for having a political agenda is laughable.

So you admit that she has a political agenda?

Intellectual dishonesty on your part, Sir.

"Lets face it, If she hadn't lost her son you would marginalize her as someone who knows nothing of grief or making the ultimate sacrifice"

Thank you, TRF, for bringing that truth to light. I'm sure there are many quotes we can use from the right (about previous anti-war protests) that backs that statement up.

"You don't see anyone holding vigils and protests to meet with bin Laden, or al-Zarqawi do you?"

Cindy is not protesting against capturing the group responsible for 911. She is protesting against an invasion of a country that had nothing to do with 911.

Cindy Sheehan, with every day that passes, gets another puppet string attached to her as she takes on another piece of the irrational IAC, cANSWER line that wasn't there 2+ weeks ago...knowingly or not. EVERY day, she takes on yet another piece of it that had nothing to do with what she was initially there for....and nothing that she said yesterday. NOW, it's that Bush is the biggest terrorist in the world. Yesterday it was "if only the US would pull out of Iraq......................and Israel out of Palestine, there would be no terrorism". THAT's got nothing to do with her son and her grief...THAT's the IAC/cANSWER line. Of course, you're probably a card-carrying member.

Wonder which puppet string is gonna get attached tomorrow....maybe she'll call Afghanistan and Iraq a "racist war" like the puppet master says.

Well....I think I might start a pool to see what her string for the weekend will be. Any takers? There's still:

End Colonial Occupation in Haiti!

Support the Palestinian People's Right to Return!

Stop the Threats Against Venezuela, Cuba, Iran & North Korea!

U.S. out of the Philippines!

U.S. out of Puerto Rico!

Stop the Racist, anti-Immigrant and anti-Labor Offensive at Home, Defend Civil Rights!

Military Recruiters out of our schools & communities

Not to mention "Jobs not war", "End the occupation of Afghanistan", "No draft no way", "Healthcare, not warfare", "Education, not occupation", "Stop the war against black, latino, arab, and muslim communities", "Stop the war on women, lesbian, gay (homosexual, not 'happy'), trans, and bi people", "Housing, not bombs", "Jobs, not war"

Take your pick....I'm going with the next puppet string being........."Military recruiters out of our schools and communities"

You?

"NOW, it's that Bush is the biggest terrorist in the world."

I believe this was said in april.

(look it up)

Hey Tard, of course I know it.

More often then not it is all you jokers got.

You seem to think her disagreeing with you makes her a bad person.

She is upset her son died in a war based on false intel, and she disagrees with you.

And that is all you guys got besides going after her personally.

Cindy Sheehan, with every day that passes gets another American to support her. Face it, Sarge. America is NOW waking up to this war with all of the revelations that have appeared recently. Cindy Sheehan is symbollic of this awakening. That is why it's hitting a chord with the majority of Americans.

Sarge, I'll go with "healthcare over warfare" for 5 bucks.

Hey, I never said she was the most focused activist out there.

I'd be pissed too if I lost a kid in this stupid fucking war though.

Tom Shipley, "So mourning mothers only act despondent, aaron? mourning mothers are often pissed, as sheehan is."

She was pissed BEFORE her son died. Look at her comments, she "begged him not to go" and she "wanted to put him in the car and drive him to Canada". She hated Bush long before he gave his life.

"especially when their sons' death was unnecessary."

Interesting comment, considering most of Sheehan's supporters are firmly in the "pro-abortion" camp. Talk about unnecessary deaths.

"She was pissed BEFORE her son died. Look at her comments, she "begged him not to go" and she "wanted to put him in the car and drive him to Canada". She hated Bush long before he gave his life."

So, which is it guys? Did she change her opinion 180 degrees, or not? I think it would help this discussion considerably if there was was only one position from the right-wingers on this particular point.

"So, which is it guys? Did she change her opinion 180 degrees, or not?"

It's both... anything they can attack her on that avoids the substance of how and why we went to war will do.

Tom Shipley:

Bingo!

I don't need to attack her on anything. No TV media to my knowledge does her statements the justice of being mentioned. Even O'Reilly on Fox (the anathema of the moon bat) has labeled her an 'extreme leftist', but not quoted any of the material she's written and said, not mentioned any of her words. You'll only find that online.

If most people knew all of what she is saying, you'd find next to no support for her outside of DKos, DU and the like. Markos Moulitas of DKos being the one who called the 4 men who were murdered in Fallujah 'mercenaries' and claimed 'they got what they deserved' as the bodies were dragged through the streets and hung from a bridge.

Cindy Sheehans comments are often vulgar and vile, at times certain comments seemingly insane, completely in contradiction to widely accepted, simple fact. I, personally, find her rhetoric to be physically disgusting.

On that note, I read an article recently, and I think it relates to this on some level if anyone is interested.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/945wyssb.asp

Allow me to clarify what I mean by 'seemingly insane'. She is (above, quoted in the article) claiming we are waging a 'nuclear' war in Iraq. Irregardless of your feelings on ANY issue, it is very simple fact we are not using nuclear weapons in Iraq, nor 'contaminating' the area with any biological, radioactive or chemical pollution in any way, shape or form. It is simply not true, and the vast majority of all rational people will readily conceed this simple and well-known fact.

I can only (and care not to extensively) speculate why she says what she says. But at the end of the day, she either means what she says or is flat-out sinisterly lying. If she means what she says (I feel, the more respectable of the two in terms of moral character) there is clearly a detatchment from reality here. Spawning from where, I do not know. There could be many explanations. But it is not only 'not true', it is extremely serious, destructive, and coincidentally quite salacious.

I do not know and, in the context of this discussion I do not think it truly matters why she says what she says. I hear again and again about her 'moral authority'. But a person who, for whatever reason malignantly or even benignly, cannot seperate hysterical fallacies charged with emotion from basic common facts, is not an 'authority' on anything. At best, it's someone who needs time to heal and collect herself before anyone should hold her to or put any weight upon what she is saying.

MJohnson:

"Depleted Uranium"?

"So, which is it guys? Did she change her opinion 180 degrees, or not?"

Unless someone here can read mind we don't know but she did change her story.

"I now know he's sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis," Cindy said after their meeting. "I know he's sorry and feels some pain for our loss. And I know he's a man of faith."

"That was the gift the president gave us, the gift of happiness, of being together," Cindy said.

Unless, you think those quotes and the quotes she's made since are the same.

They arent exactly praise, notice the use of the word "some".

Funny, I could have sworn it was Cindy Sheehan herself who had a stroke, not her mother. Many victims of stroke are more coherent than Sheehan obeviously is.

Steve:

I congratulate you!

I was expecting the right-wing to be blaming the stroke on Cindy. Maybe tomorrow, huh?

Jay H:

I think I should post this again. Here's another familiar face that "changed his opinion".

Sheehan's purpose in sitting outside bush's ranch was to get an answer to why we went into iraq.

once you all are done calling her a goon, prostitute, stooge, slut and whatever slur you may have, i will be here to talk about why and how we went to war in iraq.

i tried doing that with steve in another thread, but he seemed to abondoned that. he was anxiously awaiting my answers, but seems to have either forgotten about them or chose not to answer them, so i'll give him (and anyone else) another chance to answer them here or in the other thread. Please take the time to do so, as i think there are important points that need addressing.

or you can just call sheehan a slut again, whatever you like.

Cindy is quoted as saying "That was the gift the president gave us, the gift of happiness, of being together."

She says this quote is taken out of context and refers only to the fact that her family was drawn together by the mere occassion of the visit with the President. The day they spent together was a "gift of happiness". She was not referring to anything the President did on that day. So she is not now contradicting herself when she asks the President to explain his "noble mission" comment.

Tell me something -- Is this guy a "radical left-wing goon?

...or how about this guy?

From Fox News:

Another senator eyeing the White House weighed in on the momentum generated by Sheehan and her

supporters. Republican Sen. George Allen of Virginia said Thursday that he wishes the president had met

with Sheehan several weeks ago and that he personally would have talked to her. Allen is considered a

strong conservative and loyal Bush ally.

We have to understand one thing very, very well. The right loosers on this site are like the Iraqi secretary of propaganda, al Sahaf, do you still know this guy? He was claiming victory in front of the camera's, while in the back you could hear US tanks firing.

It's so obvious people like Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bush are al Sahafs! Cheney made the ridiculous remark the resistance is almost done with, while we all know they kill and maim Americans by the hundreds every month, month in, month out. Stay the course, says mister Bush. What course? More and more Americans are asking that question. It is a good question. As long as American troops will be Iraq, they will be attacked, because they don't belong there. Is that so hard to understand?

Cindy Sheehan is a grieving mother. She lost a son she loved in a war less and less people believe in. She now decided to act and hopefully will save the lives of more young Americans. Their deaths were useless. This war was wrong and had nothing to do with the war on terror. It is a proven fact - proven by Congress and so many other leftwing or rightwing institutions - that Saddam did not have ties with Al-Qaida and it is pretty sure the government also knew the LARGE amounts of weapons of mass destruction were not there. It is a true shame some people call Cindy Sheehan a whore, because she is doing what more and more people start to see. Resist a government that just doesn't listen to its people. Bush doesn't care about the billions of dollars of tax money he spents on Iraq every week. He doesn't seem to care about the dead or maimed Americans. Sure he visits a hospital every now and than, but the man is just incapable of even looking sincere (Reagan was different. He WAS able to show sincere feelings towards people).

The US created a mess in Iraq and made sure more and more people in the Middle East now dislike or hate America. Next to that the US casualties are rising. People on this site have no other defense than to say "stay the course" or perhaps they have different options about the war, like kill more Iraqi's, bomb their cities, terrify civilians so they don't support the resistance, but in the end that all doesn't matter. The US will loose this war. But I believe before this happens it will get worse. The people of America must brace themselves for the near future. Casualties will soon top 2000 KIA.

The only reasonable option is to withdraw, but this is what is the biggest resemblance with Vietnam. The US is bogged down in Iraq it seems. The government doesn't want to pull back, because it makes them look weak and in the mean time they let your sons and daughters die and suffer. It trully is sad. That is why I support Cindy Sheehan. She is trully is an American hero, concerned about the position of America in the world, but above all concerned about the lives of those serving our courages armed forces. She lost a son. The rightwingers here have such a big mouth. If you are so in favor of fighting in Iraq than why don't you go there? I will tell you one thing though. It is a big mess over there and we will never win this war.

by the way more and more republicans are starting to understand what is actually going on in Iraq. One of them being senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/08/18/hagel.iraq/index.html?section=cnn_latest

Also the American public should be ready to face more stories about abuse of Iraqi people and detainees by American soldiers. Trying to cover up crimes like torture, humilation, rape indiscriminate murders, hostage taking of children, is impossible. Frustration among GI's is mounting and alcohol (and drug) abuse are becoming more and more a problem. Soldiers often form a tight unit and none of them will ever break the code of "betraying" a "buddy" who raped an Iraqi girl, killed an innocent Iraqi boy, stole jewelry of Iraqi families, humilated Iraqi detainees or anything whatsoever. We have to understand however these things do happen and if they start happening on a larger scale obviously it will become harder to keep them a secret. Every war has it's scandals and Abu Ghraib was not the last scandal in this war. The image of the United States in the world is getting really, really negative this way.

Does anyone remember that "Pretzels for Bush" campaign from a few years back? In light of Comrade Cindy's recent remarks regarding Israel (just how *is* she defining Palestine, anyway), I suggest a "Burqas for Cindy" campaign.

So, which is it guys? Did she change her opinion 180 degrees, or not? I think it would help this discussion considerably if there was was only one position from the right-wingers on this particular point.

Good....try to create a straw-man. It's not her thoughts of her son going to war that changed 180 degrees dumbass....it's her saying one thing after meeting Bush for the first time....and saying many other things now to garner attention. Nice try.

"Depleted Uranium"?

That's not a nuclear war...but you knew that...or maybe you didn't.

I was expecting the right-wing to be blaming the stroke on Cindy. Maybe tomorrow, huh?

...and I'm expecting the left-wing to blame her poor mother's stroke on either Bush or Rove....gonna go over to the DU and see if it's up there yet. Speedy and full recovery Cindy's mom....

Once again, the red herring photo of Rumsfeld meeting the enemy of our common enemy (Iran) in 1983 is irrelevant to this conversation and also shows....nothing. Big deal, Rumsfeld met with Saddam in 1983.....BEFORE he started invading other countries to annex them into Iraq...BEFORE he started gassing Iranians (at which point he lost U.S. support)...BEFORE he started gassing the Kurds. Irrelevant.

She says this quote is taken out of context and refers only to the fact that her family was drawn together by the mere occassion of the visit with the President. The day they spent together was a "gift of happiness". She was not referring to anything the President did on that day. So she is not now contradicting herself when she asks the President to explain his "noble mission" comment.

Care to share where you got this from?

Chuck Hagel is gonna try to run for POTUS in '08. So he'll say whatever he wants to get name recognition.

How'd you get on the Fox website....I thought they had liberal filters there? Notice...those Senators talking right now are running for '08, so just as in '98...they need to talk a whole lot because noone knows who the hell they are. Ironic...Democrat Senator Feingold became the first Senator to offer up a plan for withdrawl from Iraq? Is Senator Feingold insane? How can the People elect a POTUS that doesn't understand that the Senate does not run the military and only has ONE method of controlling the troops...through the budget. How could the People ever vote for someone that doesn't know the Constitution?

Also the American public should be ready to face more stories about abuse of Iraqi people and detainees by American soldiers. Trying to cover up crimes like torture, humilation, rape indiscriminate murders, hostage taking of children, is impossible.

What a sad picture you have of America's fighting men and women. Torture? Rape? Indiscriminant murders? Taking children hostages? Covering ALL THAT up?

Frustration among GI's is mounting and alcohol (and drug) abuse are becoming more and more a problem.

Ah yes....all that alcohol that doesn't exist in Iraq sure is a problem. If you think alcohol (and drug....mainly LSD and other hallucinogens) problems in the military is a "new" thing you have not worn the uniform of the United States. Nothing better after a day of getting yelled at and physically punished by Sarge for doing stupid things...AND you can't say anything back....than to obliterate the mind with a case of beer. It's been the norm since I joined in '89 and will continue to be the norm so long as the military has a command structure and available alcohol (and drugs). AND, as with ALL military conflicts, there's always a group that cannot mentally handle armed conflict. Always has been, always will.

Cindy's been deluded by the anti-war left concerning her opinion of what would make terrorism "go away" (so to speak). Sorry to burst her bubble, but if Israel gave up every concession to the Palestinians, Hamas an Hezbollah would still pursue their long-defined mission of running the Jews into the sea....and if the U.S. wrongly pulled out of Iraq, terrorism would still continue in the world...AND in the U.S. Nice try Mrs. Sheehan...cut the IAC puppet strings.

You've been a soldier too Sarge and you know as well as I do you won't run off to the press or your superiours if one of your buddies crosses the line. Sure, it depends on what he does, but you won't betray your comrades, that's like an unwritten rule. When you experienced ambushes and tough combat, the bond you develope with the guys in your unit is very strong. Everybody sticks together and it will be very difficult to prove any crime without soldiers testifying against their buddies.

http://www.longislandpress.com/dsdsmultimedia/3_ds_154917.php

As for beer dude, that's not a problem, never was. It is how much you drink, not the alcoholic beverage itself. If you have one or two glasses of good whiskey nobody cares, but if you finish the whole bottle with one or two buddies you become dangerous. In Iraq it is not as hard to get alcohol as you might think, same goes for drugs. And it is becoming a problem, not a major one yet, but some guys are really getting hooked on booze and dope to escape the boredom, stress and to forget certain experiences. How can you deny that? It's like that in any war!

It seems like you're a tough guy Sarge, but what combatexperience do you have? Where did you fight and why the hell are you not over there in Iraq if you think it's so damn important? Most soldiers want to go home man, they don't believe in this shit. Who can blame them?

By the way your remark about Chuck Hagel wasn't that clever dude.

"Chuck Hagel is gonna try to run for POTUS in '08. So he'll say whatever he wants to get name recognition."

If most people were in favor of staying in Iraq, Chuck would have said something else now wouldn't he?

Check out this website:

http://www.optruth.org/

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

Rumsfeld met with Saddam in 1983.....BEFORE he started invading other countries to annex them into Iraq...BEFORE he started gassing Iranians (at which point he lost U.S. support)

For like a week: "A State Department background paper dated November 16, 1984 said that Iraq had stopped using chemical weapons after a November 1983 demarche from the U.S., but had resumed their use in February 1984. On November 26, 1984, Iraq and the U.S. restored diplomatic relations"

Sorry Mikey...it's a different military now than in past wars. If one of my troops ever committed an act outside of the GC, UCMJ, or the current ROE....I'd punish him to the full extent of the UCMJ. Plain and simple. They're not a bunch of rapers and pillagers that you've been led to believe.

Alcohol is EXTREMELY difficult to get "over there"....you know...it being muslim land and all....and one of the first things that all of my cousins that served over there did upon leaveing there was to have a nice cold beer that they'd missed. If you think that 2/3 of the military cannot be considered binge-drinkers and possible 1/3 being alcoholics depending on your definiition, you're misinformed. Always have been and always will be and I'm not talking about only during war time. I'm talking even in peace time with nothing to "point at" for the reason. I'm talking having "case parties" or "bottle parties" every night they can where you bring a case/bottle and drink the entire thing (or until you pass out). When you can get called up to go fight tomorrow, you party like that's gonna happen. Dropping your entire paycheck in bars near base.....it's part of "normal"...at least in the infantry.

"Tough" is a mentality....and if you want answers...just think 1991, been there, done that, got the T-shirt and the scar....then take into account numerous peace-keeping, high tension places like MFO Sinai, MFO West Bank. Why am I not there? Hypoglycemia found when I was preparing to mobilize in the fall of '01 to an infantry unit after 4 years of civilian life. YOU do not speak for those over there. The 57 I know that're currently "over there" that I keep in as constant contact as I can by e-mail AND snail-mail and who I've now spent a little over $18,000 supporting (private care packages...mostly mole-skin, Q-tips, and Wet Ones...some pepperoni) do not want to "come home" without completing what they went there to do.....and they believe strongly in what they're doing. However, there is also the notion of "wanting to be there"....show me troops that want to be "at war" and I'll show you troops that really don't belong in the military of the United States. NOBODY should "want" to be at war except nutty guys that like to kill people.

Thanks for showing my point about Hagel. He's planning on running for POTUS in '08 and is getting name recognition by going with current polls. Just the kinda pol I don't want to run things...one that goes by polls. When a poll actually shows that the majority of People want the U.S. out of Iraq (differentiated from how they feel Bush is handling Iraq)...Hagel will jump on THAT too.