An attack on Ms. Sheehan; how do we respond?

[bryant69]

This is from the Rush Limbaugh show, so I apologize in advance - but he got this call yesterday and replayed it today, so I think this is something we might hear in the coming days. here's the link --> http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_081705/content/caller_of_the_year_.guest.html

It hurts me that she's sending the message that it seems like her son died for nothing. He didn't die for nothing. He died in the United States Armed Forces. There's nothing more honorable than that.

I have an answer to it, something along the lines of "Honor the warrior, not the war," although in more depth. But I was curious to see what other responses there could be.

But make no mistake, I think this could be a very potent argument on the right wing if there isn't an adequate response to it.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[ET Awful]

1. He died in the US Armed Forces, that doesn't indicate what he died for

it simply indicates who he was with when he died.

What he died for was an ill-thought war in a country that posed no threat to the United States.

He didn't die because he joined the military, so trying to say he died FOR the military is ridiculous. He died because someone (I'll give you three guesses who) chose to blatantly toss human life away in an ill-thought, ill-planned, and illegal war against a nation that had never attacked the United States, had no means to attack the United States and posed no threat to the United States.

[Hubert Flottz]

17. He died because his parents couldn't afford his college ...

education and because all the good jobs that once paid better than McDonalds, or War-Mart, have been shipped overseas. His parents, even though they both work full time to supply food, shelter and clothing for their the family, hardly have enough to survive on, much less pay skyrocketing tuition fees, for any of their kids educations, like they had always planned and dreamed of doing. So the Soldier did the only thing left for him to do, when he joined the service to secure a decent education for himself, when his time in the Army was through.

The soldier died a cold painful lonely death, in a far away foreign land among mostly casual acquaintances, with his sweet mothers name on his lips, still hungry because Halliburton had failed to provide his last supper and had pocketed the money instead, for the likes of Dick Cheney, who needed that money more than the soldier needed his daily bread. This typical American child/soldier died, simply because he wasn't born wealthy and because the Army was the only hope he had in the world, to better himself. I'm sure like Dick Cheney, that this kid probably had "Better Things He Wanted To Do" and like George W. Bush, our hero wanted to get on with his life too, but it was not to be.

This soldier died before he was old enough to go out and have a beer with a "Bubba" kind of guy like Bush and the young soldier died still unsure, that the very first vote that he'd ever cast in his short life, had even been counted. I don't think anyone on EARTH, supports the troops like their mothers and fathers do. No other person on Earth will miss the soldier, more than his mother.

[Al-CIAda]

26. Exactly, its an illogical non-starter comment.

It doesn't even make sense.

[Fovea]

2. We all need to carry an OxyContin in our pocket

So we can reward Rush for helping our cause.
Every time he says something that completely
irrational, in fact, unparsable, he needs to be rewarded with a disco biscuit.

[bryant69]

5. That was a caller actually - sorry I didn't make that clear

The mother of a Marine.

[kcass1954]

It would only take him about 20 minutes or so to OD! n/t

[NewJeffCT]

3. See this thread with some Republican quotes

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2016950

some great quotes from Republicans about Clinton & Kosovo. Including this one:


"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."

-Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

[Cocoa]

4. Sheehan put up the crosses

Larry Northern mowed them down.

[GreenPartyVoter]

6. See this thread for more of that

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4388321

[DemNoir]

7. The truth here is painful

This President has deployed troops in a reckless and irresponsible way. In doing so they have perverted the good intentions of the honorable young men that placed their trust in the President.

[bryant69]

10. That's a good response.

[G_j]

8. my honest answer?

he died to show that it is completely unacceptable to allow war-horny chicken hawk war profiteers to push and deceive the country into war.
The best way to honor the dead is to impeach the traitors and never let such a crime happen again.

of course Freepers won't like that explanation because they have no concept of what an illegal war is, of what a lie is, and they have never read the Nuremberg war tribunals, the Geneva conventions, the Constitution etc. etc.

[Norquist Nemesis]

9. Start with who Melanie Morgan aligns herself with.

Melanie Morgan is leading the charge on this one.

[TahitiNut]

11. It's the LIES of the Bush Regime that DISHONOR the troops.

Don Quixote was courageous! It made no difference whether the threat was real or not -- it only counts that he thought so. He was a HERO.

Troops who behave honorably under the belief that they're defending our nation and supporting people not able to support themselves are worthy of being HONORED. We cannot ehtically deny them this due just because of the DISHONOR of a crimnal regime's LIES!

We tell our kids about Santa Claus. They eventually discover otherwise.
We tell our kids about the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave. They eventually discover otherwise.
Don't DISHONOR them for acting on the beliefs we encouraged!!

[Mr_Spock]

12. That's a lame old rehash from the Vietnam era.

Old lies, old hat.

We all are HONORING our heros by trying to SAVE THE LIVES of the LIVING as we SUFFER THE PAIN OF THOSE WHO'VE ALREADY DIED FOR A LIE!

A dirty rotten lie at that.

[MattSWin]

13. Our response should be....

Casey Sheehan and others serving in Iraq are forced into a position where he and his fellow soldiers had to sacrifice their lives to protect each other and serve the armed forces.

Our position isn't that our soldiers are dying for nothing, our position is simply that our troops' commitment to the armed forces shouldn't be used in a manner that puts them in a war of choice that has escalated into a civil war.

Using our troops sacrifice for a war that President Bush misled the country into fighting is a true dishonor to the sacrifice of our troops.

[judy]

14. Tell them that Judge Robert Jackson, at the Nuremberg trial

listed the war crimes that were abhorrent to the United States, and established the "Nuremberg Principles", that formed the basis for international law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Principles

And tell them to note principle number VII (7):

Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law.

And add that unfortunately, the United States Armed Forces are only as honorable as their Commander in Chief.

[bryant69]

15. Yeah

You do see how that particular response is going to have the opposite of a positive effect right?

I mean basically they say "You guys don't respect the truth" and your response is more or less "Yeah, that's right. We don't."

[judy]

16. bryant, can you explain what you mean?

I don't understand...

[bryant69]

18. Well i'm not all that bright sometimes

Here's what I typed.

I mean basically they say "You guys don't respect the truth" and your response is more or less "Yeah, that's right. We don't."

Here is what I meant to type.

I mean basically they say "You guys don't respect the troops" and your response is more or less "Yeah, that's right. We don't."

Oh well - I apologize for my stupidity.

[MattSWin]

19. judy that's the wrong response...

The right-wing says "left-wingers dishonor and hate our troops" and you say "well, our troops are war criminals."

[judy]

21. Yes Matt and Bryant,

I get your points and they are well taken.
While I still wish that even more soldiers refused to go to Iraq, I agree with you that my response would not help at all in this case.

I do think however, that what Cindy is doing is honoring the troops by demanding accountability from their so called Commander In Chief, but we all know that the CIC in this case will never be accountable.

So what then? Maybe contemplate the fact that the troops are not so much war criminals as victims of war criminals...

[TahitiNut]

20. Unless and until the Bushoilini Regime is prosecuted, convicted, and ...

... imprisoned for their war crimes, the Nuremberg Principles, to the degree that they apply to individual military personnel, are academic.

Let's try REALLY hard to remember that all the members of the German military were NEVER accused of war crimes.

[judy]

22. You are right TahitiNut...

and in fact, the ones that were accused were not the soldiers but the high level members of the Hitler administration...

I think what I was trying to say is that the military should rebel against the Bush gang, but it did come out all wrong, I agree.

[TahitiNut]

23. I'm opposed to such expectations that the troops 'rebel'. Here's why ...

First and foremost, the very LAST thing we want in this country is a military coup of any kind. It is IMPERATIVE that we diligently subordinate our military to civilian authority.

That said, it is even MORE imperative that we subordinate the federal government itself to the LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC authority of the PEOPLE. (By "liberal" in this context I mean with uncompromisingly steadfast protections of the rights and liberties of minorities, including the smallest minority of all: the individual. We cannot tolerate a tyranny of a visceral majority or its frequent substitute: a vocal plurality.)

We The People already ask much of our people in military service to (as we say) the nation. It is far too much to ask of them that they mutiny or rebel. While we might carefully laud individuals acting out of conscience, it's a very dangerous thing to expect it of them or, God Forbid, of the military acting in concert.

It's essential that We The People participate in and take control of our own government. There's no substitute that can be called a "democracy." None. We cannot be spectators cheering on the participants from the stands, yelling "Kill 'Em!" or "Rebel!" As I've said, democracy isn't a spectator sport.


It's no accident that the condition of our liberal democracy was at its greatest in the years after WW2. Never before (or after) in our history have so many participated! The greater our participation, the greater our democracy! That includes participation in the military - akin to WW2 - and participation in national service of other kinds such as NRA and public sector service. Remember, the era or "privatization" has taken people OUT of national service and put them into positions of exploitation. That's NOT a democracy.

Those who argue for "small government" are often arguing for an ELITE government. I don't want "small" government. I want a just, fair, and open government in which everyone participates!

[judy]

24. Of course.

I blew it again, but I am a committed non violent pacifist, so for me 'rebel' means refuse to fight an illegal and unjust war.

Sorry, TahitiNut, and your analysis is great.

[TahitiNut]

25. You're an example of why I love the Bay Area ... and miss it so.

:loveya:

[MattSWin]

28. soldiers can't pick and choose which wars to fight..

So I don't expect them to desert when disagreeing with a certain war.

If a person is a pacifist why would they join the military in the first place?

[TWiley]

27. "Supporting the Troops" does not mean "Supporting the LIES"

Troops not = lies. Bushtapo = Lies.

As it is widely accepted that the Pro-Bush base that supports the Iraqi war is considered to be religiously Christian, and that the reasons given for this war were false, I would like to pose a simple question.

Would Christ condemn a grieving mom just to support a Presidents lies?

Cindy correctly understands that “supporting the falsehoods” is not part of “supporting the troops.”