Complete Labor Law Poster for $24.95
from www.LaborLawCenter.com, includes
State, Federal, & OSHA posting requirements

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Families of US torops in Iraq launch campaign for their return

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Families of US torops in Iraq launch campaign for their return

    Finally, even the dumbest people are catching on to what I was saying
    months ago.

    i

    In article <[email protected]>, AFP / Pascal Barollier wrote:
    WASHINGTON, Aug 14 (AFP) - The families of more than 600 US troops in Iraq have launched a campaign for their return, bitterly criticizing President George W. Bush's reasons for going to war and what they see as his belittlement of the risks. "George Bush said, 'Bring them on,'" said Nancy Lessin, co-founder of Military Families Speak Out, referring to the president's response to post-war attacks on US troops occupying post-war Iraq. "Those three words galvanized Military Families Speak Out, Veterans for Peace and other veterans' organizations to initiate the campaign we are launching today," she said. "We say, 'Bring them home now.' Bring them home because our troops should not have been in Iraq in the first place. "Bring them home because there was no imminent danger to the United States. Bring them home because there were no weapons of mass destruction. Bring them home because there was no link between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, " said Lessin. "We are here today to say it was wrong for the US to invade Iraq, it is wrong for the US to be occupying Iraq, and there is no right way to do a wrong thing." Members of her group rallied in Washington on Wednesday and Thursday at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, home of the 82nd Airbourne Infantry. They stressed that most of them were Republicans, had voted for Bush and had supported the war based on intelligence presented early this year. "From proud liberators in the great American tradition, our troops have become oppressors and occupiers in a hostile nation," said Susan Shuman, whose son is in the Massachusetts National Guard serving in Iraq. "Our troops are stuck in a quagmire of urban desert guerrilla warfare for which they are not prepared or equipped," she said. "My question to Mr. Bush is, 'How many more of our sons do you need to bring our children home?'" said Fernando Suarez de Solar, whose son, Jesus Alberto, was killed in action in Iraq. "How many American lives are worth one gallon of oil?," he mused. Stan Goff of Raleigh, North Carolina, a 26-year career soldier and retired Special Forces master Sergeant, was bitter about the war. "You know, in all the administration's fictions of weapons of mass destruction and nuclear programs and ... the phony al-Qaeda connections that are being exposed as fabrications, this is not the rule of law," he said. "This is the rule of bombs and bullets. These are rich men in very expensive suits conducting statecraft like gangsters. "The US does have a responsibility to Iraq and to the people of Iraq to clean up the mess that we have made," said Charlie Richardson, co-founder of Military Families Speak Out. But, he added, "It can't be done with US troops. In launching the 'Bring Them Home Now' campaign, we are calling on military families and others in the military and veterans communities to speak out against the use of our troops as cannon fodder ... against the reckless occupation of Iraq." pb/aln/jlp US-Iraq-families

  • #2
    Families of US torops in Iraq launch campaign for their return

    In article <[email protected]>, Bob wrote:
    Ignoramus4661 wrote:
    Finally, even the dumbest people are catching on to what I was saying months ago.
    It's an all volunteer army. What did these parents think their sons and daughters were signing up for? How dumb can people get?
    My point exactly. And even such dumb people are now realizing what was
    obvious to me in april.

    Nevertheless, an army can be used for good and bad
    purposes. Aggression against Iraq was an example of a bad
    purpose. Their relatives are completely right to want to help get
    their sons and husbands out of that bad situation.


    i
    It's the army, duffus.

    Bob
    i In article <Qus-iraq-fam[email protected]>, AFP / Pascal Barollier wrote:
    WASHINGTON, Aug 14 (AFP) - The families of more than 600 US troops in Iraqhave launched a campaign for their return, bitterly criticizing PresidentGeorge W. Bush's reasons for going to war and what they see as hisbelittlement of the risks. "George Bush said, 'Bring them on,'" said Nancy Lessin, co-founder ofMilitary Families Speak Out, referring to the president's response to post-warattacks on US troops occupying post-war Iraq. "Those three words galvanized Military Families Speak Out, Veterans forPeace and other veterans' organizations to initiate the campaign we arelaunching today," she said. "We say, 'Bring them home now.' Bring them home because our troops shouldnot have been in Iraq in the first place. "Bring them home because there was no imminent danger to the UnitedStates. Bring them home because there were no weapons of mass destruction.Bring them home because there was no link between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein," said Lessin. "We are here today to say it was wrong for the US to invade Iraq, it iswrong for the US to be occupying Iraq, and there is no right way to do a wrongthing." Members of her group rallied in Washington on Wednesday and Thursday atFort Bragg, North Carolina, home of the 82nd Airbourne Infantry. They stressedthat most of them were Republicans, had voted for Bush and had supported thewar based on intelligence presented early this year. "From proud liberators in the great American tradition, our troops havebecome oppressors and occupiers in a hostile nation," said Susan Shuman, whoseson is in the Massachusetts National Guard serving in Iraq. "Our troops are stuck in a quagmire of urban desert guerrilla warfare forwhich they are not prepared or equipped," she said. "My question to Mr. Bush is, 'How many more of our sons do you need tobring our children home?'" said Fernando Suarez de Solar, whose son, JesusAlberto, was killed in action in Iraq. "How many American lives are worth one gallon of oil?," he mused. Stan Goff of Raleigh, North Carolina, a 26-year career soldier and retiredSpecial Forces master Sergeant, was bitter about the war. "You know, in all the administration's fictions of weapons of massdestruction and nuclear programs and ... the phony al-Qaeda connections thatare being exposed as fabrications, this is not the rule of law," he said. "This is the rule of bombs and bullets. These are rich men in veryexpensive suits conducting statecraft like gangsters. "The US does have a responsibility to Iraq and to the people of Iraq toclean up the mess that we have made," said Charlie Richardson, co-founder ofMilitary Families Speak Out. But, he added, "It can't be done with US troops. In launching the 'BringThem Home Now' campaign, we are calling on military families and others in themilitary and veterans communities to speak out against the use of our troopsas cannon fodder ... against the reckless occupation of Iraq." pb/aln/jlpUS-Iraq-families

    Comment


    • #3
      Families of US torops in Iraq launch campaign for their return

      Ignoramus4661 wrote:
      In article <[email protected]>, Bob wrote:
      Ignoramus4661 wrote:
      Finally, even the dumbest people are catching on to what I was sayingmonths ago.
      It's an all volunteer army. What did these parents think their sons anddaughters were signing up for? How dumb can people get?
      My point exactly. And even such dumb people are now realizing what was obvious to me in april. Nevertheless, an army can be used for good and bad purposes. Aggression against Iraq was an example of a bad purpose. Their relatives are completely right to want to help get their sons and husbands out of that bad situation.
      Nope. It's the army they volunteered for. Their relatives attempts to
      oppose the army are no less wrong than any other citizen opposing the
      men and women who server their country.

      Whether it's "wrong" as you claim or not is the subject of some
      political debate, however according to every poll I have read it is
      supported by the majority of Americans who believe that it is "right."

      If the parents of the troops want them out they will have an opportunity
      the next time their enlistment comes up. Most will probably re-enlist.
      It's the kind of duty that most soldiers joined the army for in the
      first place. Very few soldiers want to sit home and train forever and
      that's all.

      Bob












      i
      It's the army, duffus.Bob
      iIn article <[email protected]>, AFP / Pascal Barollier wrote:>> WASHINGTON, Aug 14 (AFP) - The families of more than 600 US troops in Iraq>have launched a campaign for their return, bitterly criticizing President>George W. Bush's reasons for going to war and what they see as his>belittlement of the risks.> "George Bush said, 'Bring them on,'" said Nancy Lessin, co-founder of>Military Families Speak Out, referring to the president's response to post-war>attacks on US troops occupying post-war Iraq.> "Those three words galvanized Military Families Speak Out, Veterans for>Peace and other veterans' organizations to initiate the campaign we are>launching today," she said.> "We say, 'Bring them home now.' Bring them home because our troops should>not have been in Iraq in the first place.> "Bring them home because there was no imminent danger to the United>States. Bring them home because there were no weapons of mass destruction.>Bring them home because there was no link between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein,>" said Lessin.> "We are here today to say it was wrong for the US to invade Iraq, it is>wrong for the US to be occupying Iraq, and there is no right way to do a wrong>thing."> Members of her group rallied in Washington on Wednesday and Thursday at>Fort Bragg, North Carolina, home of the 82nd Airbourne Infantry. They stressed>that most of them were Republicans, had voted for Bush and had supported the>war based on intelligence presented early this year.> "From proud liberators in the great American tradition, our troops have>become oppressors and occupiers in a hostile nation," said Susan Shuman, whose>son is in the Massachusetts National Guard serving in Iraq.> "Our troops are stuck in a quagmire of urban desert guerrilla warfare for>which they are not prepared or equipped," she said.> "My question to Mr. Bush is, 'How many more of our sons do you need to>bring our children home?'" said Fernando Suarez de Solar, whose son, Jesus>Alberto, was killed in action in Iraq.> "How many American lives are worth one gallon of oil?," he mused.> Stan Goff of Raleigh, North Carolina, a 26-year career soldier and retired>Special Forces master Sergeant, was bitter about the war.> "You know, in all the administration's fictions of weapons of mass>destruction and nuclear programs and ... the phony al-Qaeda connections that>are being exposed as fabrications, this is not the rule of law," he said.> "This is the rule of bombs and bullets. These are rich men in very>expensive suits conducting statecraft like gangsters.> "The US does have a responsibility to Iraq and to the people of Iraq to>clean up the mess that we have made," said Charlie Richardson, co-founder of>Military Families Speak Out.> But, he added, "It can't be done with US troops. In launching the 'Bring>Them Home Now' campaign, we are calling on military families and others in the>military and veterans communities to speak out against the use of our troops>as cannon fodder ... against the reckless occupation of Iraq."> pb/aln/jlp>US-Iraq-families>

      Comment


      • #4
        Families of US torops in Iraq launch campaign for their return

        In article <[email protected]>, Bob wrote:
        Ignoramus4661 wrote:
        In article <[email protected]>, Bob wrote:
        Ignoramus4661 wrote:>Finally, even the dumbest people are catching on to what I was saying>months ago.It's an all volunteer army. What did these parents think their sons anddaughters were signing up for? How dumb can people get?
        My point exactly. And even such dumb people are now realizing what was obvious to me in april. Nevertheless, an army can be used for good and bad purposes. Aggression against Iraq was an example of a bad purpose. Their relatives are completely right to want to help get their sons and husbands out of that bad situation.
        Nope. It's the army they volunteered for. Their relatives attempts to oppose the army are no less wrong than any other citizen opposing the men and women who server their country.
        If my son, contrary to everything I plan to teach him, volunteers in
        the army (I hope that I can prevent that), if he was sent to a bad war
        like that, I would do everything in my power to get him out of there.

        By doing so I will be a good parent and a good citizen.
        Whether it's "wrong" as you claim or not is the subject of some political debate, however according to every poll I have read it is supported by the majority of Americans who believe that it is "right."
        that means that they are ******s...
        If the parents of the troops want them out they will have an opportunity the next time their enlistment comes up. Most will probably re-enlist. It's the kind of duty that most soldiers joined the army for in the first place. Very few soldiers want to sit home and train forever and that's all.
        I am sure that they dreamed of policing a hostile country at
        122F... country that they have no business to be in.

        i

        Comment


        • #5
          Families of US torops in Iraq launch campaign for their return

          Bob <[email protected]> wrote in message
          news:[email protected]
          Ignoramus4661 wrote:
          In article <[email protected]>, Bob wrote:
          Ignoramus4661 wrote:>Finally, even the dumbest people are catching on to what I was saying>months ago.It's an all volunteer army. What did these parents think their sons anddaughters were signing up for? How dumb can people get?
          My point exactly. And even such dumb people are now realizing what was obvious to me in april. Nevertheless, an army can be used for good and bad purposes. Aggression against Iraq was an example of a bad purpose. Their relatives are completely right to want to help get their sons and husbands out of that bad situation.
          Nope. It's the army they volunteered for. Their relatives attempts to oppose the army are no less wrong than any other citizen opposing the men and women who server their country.
          Well, when *I* volunteered in 1974, as I recall I did not pledge to invade
          other people's counties and kill innocent people who just happened to have a
          different religious or philosophical viewpoint. I don't think it is right
          to ask people to sacrifice their human values just because you want to be a
          "big shot" on Capitol Hill, or just because you want to prove to your daddy
          what a big boy you are.
          Whether it's "wrong" as you claim or not is the subject of some political debate, however according to every poll I have read it is supported by the majority of Americans who believe that it is "right."
          More proof that the "majority of Americans", as you put it, are complete
          morons, capable of being sold a bill of goods regardless of the truth or the
          facts. Fortunately, there are a minority of Americans who are smarter and
          who, hopefully, will make this country a better place in the near future.

          SD


          Comment


          • #6
            Families of US torops in Iraq launch campaign for their return

            In article <[email protected]>, Shashay Doofray wrote:
            Bob <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
            Ignoramus4661 wrote:
            In article <[email protected]>, Bob wrote:>Ignoramus4661 wrote:>>>Finally, even the dumbest people are catching on to what I was saying>>months ago.>>It's an all volunteer army. What did these parents think their sons and>daughters were signing up for? How dumb can people get? My point exactly. And even such dumb people are now realizing what was obvious to me in april. Nevertheless, an army can be used for good and bad purposes. Aggression against Iraq was an example of a bad purpose. Their relatives are completely right to want to help get their sons and husbands out of that bad situation.
            Nope. It's the army they volunteered for. Their relatives attempts to oppose the army are no less wrong than any other citizen opposing the men and women who server their country.
            Well, when *I* volunteered in 1974, as I recall I did not pledge to invade other people's counties and kill innocent people who just happened to have a different religious or philosophical viewpoint. I don't think it is right to ask people to sacrifice their human values just because you want to be a "big shot" on Capitol Hill, or just because you want to prove to your daddy what a big boy you are.
            Whether it's "wrong" as you claim or not is the subject of some political debate, however according to every poll I have read it is supported by the majority of Americans who believe that it is "right."
            More proof that the "majority of Americans", as you put it, are complete morons, capable of being sold a bill of goods regardless of the truth or the facts. Fortunately, there are a minority of Americans who are smarter and who, hopefully, will make this country a better place in the near future. SD
            an impressive post SD.

            i

            Comment


            • #7
              Families of US torops in Iraq launch campaign for their return


              "Ignoramus4661" <[email protected]> wrote in message
              news:[email protected]
              In article <[email protected]>, Bob wrote:
              Ignoramus4661 wrote:
              In article <[email protected]>, Bob wrote:>Ignoramus4661 wrote:>>>Finally, even the dumbest people are catching on to what I was saying>>months ago.>>It's an all volunteer army. What did these parents think their sons
              and
              >daughters were signing up for? How dumb can people get? My point exactly. And even such dumb people are now realizing what was obvious to me in april. Nevertheless, an army can be used for good and bad purposes. Aggression against Iraq was an example of a bad purpose. Their relatives are completely right to want to help get their sons and husbands out of that bad situation. Nope. It's the army they volunteered for. Their relatives attempts to oppose the army are no less wrong than any other citizen opposing the men and women who server their country. If my son, contrary to everything I plan to teach him, volunteers in the army (I hope that I can prevent that), if he was sent to a bad war like that, I would do everything in my power to get him out of there. By doing so I will be a good parent and a good citizen.
              Whether it's "wrong" as you claim or not is the subject of some political debate, however according to every poll I have read it is supported by the majority of Americans who believe that it is "right."
              that means that they are ******s...
              If the parents of the troops want them out they will have an opportunity the next time their enlistment comes up. Most will probably re-enlist. It's the kind of duty that most soldiers joined the army for in the first place. Very few soldiers want to sit home and train forever and that's all.
              I am sure that they dreamed of policing a hostile country at 122F... country that they have no business to be in. i
              Lets see if I can get it straight. You volunteer for the army but
              want to chose where you will serve? Is it like a fireman, you hire on then
              try to choose which fires you go to? Or a policeman that gets to choose
              which calls he has to go to?
              122F. Not bad in Phoenix.


              Comment


              • #8
                Families of US torops in Iraq launch campaign for their return

                On 16 Aug 2003 14:06:45 GMT, "rallain" <[email protected]> wrote:
                "Ignoramus4661" <[email protected]> wrote in messagenews:[email protected]
                In article <[email protected]>, Bob wrote:
                Ignoramus4661 wrote:> In article <[email protected]>, Bob wrote:>>>Ignoramus4661 wrote:>>>>>Finally, even the dumbest people are catching on to what I was saying>>>months ago.>>>>It's an all volunteer army. What did these parents think their sons
                and
                >>daughters were signing up for? How dumb can people get?>>> My point exactly. And even such dumb people are now realizing what was> obvious to me in april.>> Nevertheless, an army can be used for good and bad> purposes. Aggression against Iraq was an example of a bad> purpose. Their relatives are completely right to want to help get> their sons and husbands out of that bad situation.> Nope. It's the army they volunteered for. Their relatives attempts to oppose the army are no less wrong than any other citizen opposing the men and women who server their country. If my son, contrary to everything I plan to teach him, volunteers in the army (I hope that I can prevent that), if he was sent to a bad war like that, I would do everything in my power to get him out of there. By doing so I will be a good parent and a good citizen.
                Whether it's "wrong" as you claim or not is the subject of some political debate, however according to every poll I have read it is supported by the majority of Americans who believe that it is "right."
                that means that they are ******s...
                If the parents of the troops want them out they will have an opportunity the next time their enlistment comes up. Most will probably re-enlist. It's the kind of duty that most soldiers joined the army for in the first place. Very few soldiers want to sit home and train forever and that's all.
                I am sure that they dreamed of policing a hostile country at 122F... country that they have no business to be in. i
                Lets see if I can get it straight. You volunteer for the army butwant to chose where you will serve? Is it like a fireman, you hire on thentry to choose which fires you go to? Or a policeman that gets to choosewhich calls he has to go to?
                No, but when people sign up for duty they could rightfully expect for
                the military they are part of to limit its activities to those for
                which it is constitutionally authorized, not plainly illegal hogwash
                designed to enrich and empower no one but our ruling elite, over their
                dismembered corpses.

                Whether or not that assumption would be naive or foolish does not
                change that. Nor would claiming what we did in Vietman or Panama or
                anywhere else (as some are bound to do) constituted a similar misuse
                of the military doesn't either.

                Two and three or four wrongs don't make a right.

                As someone said in some ****ty movie: "When the lawmen break the law,
                there is no law."

                Comment


                • #9
                  Families of US torops in Iraq launch campaign for their return

                  On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 11:27:07 -0400, leon skunkers <> wrote:
                  No, but when people sign up for duty they could rightfully expect forthe military they are part of to limit its activities to those forwhich it is constitutionally authorized, not plainly illegal hogwashdesigned to enrich and empower no one but our ruling elite, over theirdismembered corpses.Whether or not that assumption would be naive or foolish does notchange that. Nor would claiming what we did in Vietman or Panama oranywhere else (as some are bound to do) constituted a similar misuseof the military doesn't either.Two and three or four wrongs don't make a right.As someone said in some ****ty movie: "When the lawmen break the law,there is no law."
                  I, ___________________________________, do solemly swear (or affirm)
                  that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States
                  against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith
                  and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the
                  President of the United States and the orders of the officers
                  appointed overme, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of
                  Military Justice. So help me God.

                  There are no caviats that I can see in there, can you?

                  Gunner

                  "What do you call someone in possesion of all the facts? Paranoid.-William Burroughs

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Families of US torops in Iraq launch campaign for their return


                    "Ignoramus4661" <[email protected]> wrote in message
                    news:[email protected]
                    Finally, even the dumbest people are catching on to what I was saying months ago. i In article <[email protected]>, AFP / Pascal Barollier
                    wrote:
                    WASHINGTON, Aug 14 (AFP) - The families of more than 600 US troops in
                    Iraq
                    have launched a campaign for their return, bitterly criticizing
                    President
                    George W. Bush's reasons for going to war and what they see as his belittlement of the risks. "George Bush said, 'Bring them on,'" said Nancy Lessin, co-founder of Military Families Speak Out, referring to the president's response to
                    post-war
                    attacks on US troops occupying post-war Iraq. "Those three words galvanized Military Families Speak Out, Veterans
                    for
                    Peace and other veterans' organizations to initiate the campaign we are launching today," she said. "We say, 'Bring them home now.' Bring them home because our troops
                    should
                    not have been in Iraq in the first place. "Bring them home because there was no imminent danger to the United States. Bring them home because there were no weapons of mass
                    destruction.
                    Bring them home because there was no link between al-Qaeda and Saddam
                    Hussein,
                    " said Lessin. "We are here today to say it was wrong for the US to invade Iraq, it
                    is
                    wrong for the US to be occupying Iraq, and there is no right way to do a
                    wrong
                    thing." Members of her group rallied in Washington on Wednesday and Thursday
                    at
                    Fort Bragg, North Carolina, home of the 82nd Airbourne Infantry. They
                    stressed
                    that most of them were Republicans, had voted for Bush and had supported
                    the
                    war based on intelligence presented early this year. "From proud liberators in the great American tradition, our troops
                    have
                    become oppressors and occupiers in a hostile nation," said Susan Shuman,
                    whose
                    son is in the Massachusetts National Guard serving in Iraq. "Our troops are stuck in a quagmire of urban desert guerrilla warfare
                    for
                    which they are not prepared or equipped," she said. "My question to Mr. Bush is, 'How many more of our sons do you need
                    to
                    bring our children home?'" said Fernando Suarez de Solar, whose son,
                    Jesus
                    Alberto, was killed in action in Iraq. "How many American lives are worth one gallon of oil?," he mused. Stan Goff of Raleigh, North Carolina, a 26-year career soldier and
                    retired
                    Special Forces master Sergeant, was bitter about the war. "You know, in all the administration's fictions of weapons of mass destruction and nuclear programs and ... the phony al-Qaeda connections
                    that
                    are being exposed as fabrications, this is not the rule of law," he
                    said.
                    "This is the rule of bombs and bullets. These are rich men in very expensive suits conducting statecraft like gangsters. "The US does have a responsibility to Iraq and to the people of Iraq
                    to
                    clean up the mess that we have made," said Charlie Richardson,
                    co-founder of
                    Military Families Speak Out. But, he added, "It can't be done with US troops. In launching the
                    'Bring
                    Them Home Now' campaign, we are calling on military families and others
                    in the
                    military and veterans communities to speak out against the use of our
                    troops
                    as cannon fodder ... against the reckless occupation of Iraq." pb/aln/jlp US-Iraq-families
                    It's an all volunteer Military. Even in my day I saw very few draftees. I
                    did many things my parents didn't want me to do, let alone me! It isn't the
                    parents obligation to help their children leave a hostile environment, they
                    are full grown adults who have made a choice. Do you think the parents of
                    the children of WWII wanted them there? Of course not, but at least they
                    supported their country and prayed for a save return of their children
                    whilst they were ridding the world of unsavory leaders.
                    I have many friends in Iraq today and I would rather them be home then
                    there, but I know it's only a job, and an important job at that. I pray for
                    them to be save and to apply what they learned in their training. With both,
                    they will come out alive and better people than they were before.


                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Families of US torops in Iraq launch campaign for their return

                      Shashay Doofray wrote:

                      Well, when *I* volunteered in 1974, as I recall I did not pledge to invade other people's counties and kill innocent people who just happened to have a different religious or philosophical viewpoint. I don't think it is right to ask people to sacrifice their human values just because you want to be a "big shot" on Capitol Hill, or just because you want to prove to your daddy what a big boy you are.

                      Too bad more Moslems don't feel the way you do.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Families of US torops in Iraq launch campaign for their return

                        Tom wrote:
                        "Ignoramus4661" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
                        Finally, even the dumbest people are catching on to what I was sayingmonths ago.iIn article <[email protected]>, AFP / Pascal Barollier
                        wrote:
                        WASHINGTON, Aug 14 (AFP) - The families of more than 600 US troops in
                        Iraq
                        have launched a campaign for their return, bitterly criticizing
                        President
                        George W. Bush's reasons for going to war and what they see as hisbelittlement of the risks. "George Bush said, 'Bring them on,'" said Nancy Lessin, co-founder ofMilitary Families Speak Out, referring to the president's response to
                        post-war
                        attacks on US troops occupying post-war Iraq. "Those three words galvanized Military Families Speak Out, Veterans
                        for
                        Peace and other veterans' organizations to initiate the campaign we arelaunching today," she said. "We say, 'Bring them home now.' Bring them home because our troops
                        should
                        not have been in Iraq in the first place. "Bring them home because there was no imminent danger to the UnitedStates. Bring them home because there were no weapons of mass
                        destruction.
                        Bring them home because there was no link between al-Qaeda and Saddam
                        Hussein,
                        " said Lessin. "We are here today to say it was wrong for the US to invade Iraq, it
                        is
                        wrong for the US to be occupying Iraq, and there is no right way to do a
                        wrong
                        thing." Members of her group rallied in Washington on Wednesday and Thursday
                        at
                        Fort Bragg, North Carolina, home of the 82nd Airbourne Infantry. They
                        stressed
                        that most of them were Republicans, had voted for Bush and had supported
                        the
                        war based on intelligence presented early this year. "From proud liberators in the great American tradition, our troops
                        have
                        become oppressors and occupiers in a hostile nation," said Susan Shuman,
                        whose
                        son is in the Massachusetts National Guard serving in Iraq. "Our troops are stuck in a quagmire of urban desert guerrilla warfare
                        for
                        which they are not prepared or equipped," she said. "My question to Mr. Bush is, 'How many more of our sons do you need
                        to
                        bring our children home?'" said Fernando Suarez de Solar, whose son,
                        Jesus
                        Alberto, was killed in action in Iraq. "How many American lives are worth one gallon of oil?," he mused. Stan Goff of Raleigh, North Carolina, a 26-year career soldier and
                        retired
                        Special Forces master Sergeant, was bitter about the war. "You know, in all the administration's fictions of weapons of massdestruction and nuclear programs and ... the phony al-Qaeda connections
                        that
                        are being exposed as fabrications, this is not the rule of law," he
                        said.
                        "This is the rule of bombs and bullets. These are rich men in veryexpensive suits conducting statecraft like gangsters. "The US does have a responsibility to Iraq and to the people of Iraq
                        to
                        clean up the mess that we have made," said Charlie Richardson,
                        co-founder of
                        Military Families Speak Out. But, he added, "It can't be done with US troops. In launching the
                        'Bring
                        Them Home Now' campaign, we are calling on military families and others
                        in the
                        military and veterans communities to speak out against the use of our
                        troops
                        as cannon fodder ... against the reckless occupation of Iraq." pb/aln/jlpUS-Iraq-families
                        It's an all volunteer Military. Even in my day I saw very few draftees. I did many things my parents didn't want me to do, let alone me! It isn't the parents obligation to help their children leave a hostile environment, they are full grown adults who have made a choice. Do you think the parents of the children of WWII wanted them there? Of course not, but at least they supported their country and prayed for a save return of their children whilst they were ridding the world of unsavory leaders. I have many friends in Iraq today and I would rather them be home then there, but I know it's only a job, and an important job at that. I pray for them to be save and to apply what they learned in their training. With both, they will come out alive and better people than they were before.
                        Yep, that Iraq occupation is pretty dangerous. There are almost as many
                        GIs getting killed in Iraq as there are murders in Cleveland.

                        Bob

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Families of US torops in Iraq launch campaign for their return

                          In article <[email protected]>, Bob wrote:
                          Yep, that Iraq occupation is pretty dangerous. There are almost as many GIs getting killed in Iraq as there are murders in Cleveland.
                          cleveland is very dangerous...

                          i

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Families of US torops in Iraq launch campaign for their return


                            "Gunner" <[email protected]> wrote in
                            I, ___________________________________, do solemly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed overme, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God. There are no caviats that I can see in there, can you?
                            Well, yes.

                            The list is in order of responsibility. The orders of the President and
                            appointed officers are regulated and limited by the UCOMJ, which,
                            unless I am mistaken, have provisions for what to do when orders are
                            illegal or contradictory to the specifications of the Code.

                            Then there is that little chestnut about treaties in Article VI, Paragraph
                            2,
                            which include the Geneva Convention...

                            But, I can see where YOU might not BELIEVE there are any caveats.
                            That is your nature - ignorance at all costs.

                            Dan


                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Families of US torops in Iraq launch campaign for their return

                              On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 23:17:56 -0700, "Dan" <[email protected]>
                              wrote:
                              "Gunner" <[email protected]> wrote in
                              I, ___________________________________, do solemly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed overme, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God. There are no caviats that I can see in there, can you?
                              Well, yes.The list is in order of responsibility. The orders of the President andappointed officers are regulated and limited by the UCOMJ, which,unless I am mistaken, have provisions for what to do when orders areillegal or contradictory to the specifications of the Code.
                              Yep..and as I said, you take the Article 15 and make your case if you
                              dont agree with your CO.
                              Then there is that little chestnut about treaties in Article VI, Paragraph2,which include the Geneva Convention...But, I can see where YOU might not BELIEVE there are any caveats.That is your nature - ignorance at all costs.Dan
                              Chuckle..when did you do your military duty and what was your AO?

                              The Oath is the Oath, and no matter how much you wish it..there are no
                              Caveats. Notice the little part about "according to the regulations
                              and the UCMJ?".

                              Those cover your ***, if you think your orders are over the top. You
                              just have to make your case, or accept the punishment if you are found
                              to be wrong.

                              Simple, no biggy. Even a maroon such as yourself can understand that.

                              Now if you are unwilling to deal with the responsiblitys of the Oath,
                              or the possible need to violate it, at some later date, you simply
                              refrain from joining the military, or the police or the fire
                              department or any entity that requires you to do your duty after you
                              join.

                              Simple no?

                              Gunner

                              "What do you call someone in possesion of all the facts? Paranoid.-William Burroughs

                              Comment

                              The LaborLawTalk.com forum is intended for informational use only and should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for legal advice. The information contained on LaborLawTalk.com are opinions and suggestions of members and is not a representation of the opinions of LaborLawTalk.com. LaborLawTalk.com does not warrant or vouch for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any postings or the qualifications of any person responding. Please consult a legal expert or seek the services of an attorney in your area for more accuracy on your specific situation.
                              Working...
                              X