Delusional Congress
On July 14th, Michael Yon typed these words;
The war continues to abate in Iraq. Violence is still present, but, of course, Iraq was a relatively violent place long before Coalition forces moved in. I would go so far as to say that barring any major and unexpected developments (like an Israeli air strike on Iran and the retaliations that would follow), a fair-minded person could say with reasonable certainty that the war has ended. A new and better nation is growing legs. What’s left is messy politics that likely will be punctuated by low-level violence and the occasional spectacular attack. Yet, the will of the Iraqi people has changed, and the Iraqi military has dramatically improved, so those spectacular attacks are diminishing along with the regular violence.
Yon verified what we all believed and what we’ve all hoped for since the surge began. Fewer Americans died last month than at anytime since the war begun. CNN reports that the troops in Iraq are itching to go to Afghanistan to finish off al Qaeda. But on July 11th, 13 members of Congress were urging the President to surrender in Iraq;
It’s as if we all live in different worlds. The signatories of that letter are;
That was a letter that these Congress people wrote in support of IVAW’s newest celebrity Matthis Chiroux to help him get out of the trouble he’s brought on himself by refusing to report for duty in Iraq…last month. In the letter these members of Congress “reaffirm their support for all military members who speak out, advocate and otherwise support efforts to bring the troops home.” I wonder how often these particular members of Congress have thought about supporting all military members. Period.
I found this letter on IVAW’s website posted yesterday. Whatever will the Iraq Veterans Against the War do when there is no war in Iraq? It’s almost over now, and they’re still trying to surrender. That probably explains why they’re acting like maniacs. You’ll see what I mean by that when TSO does his latest post on Adam Kokesh.
Category: Antiwar crowd, Iraq Veterans Against the War, Phony soldiers, Politics, Terror War
Hell I may even vote for Hussein just to spend the last few years of my life laughing as he destroys the lives of millions of elitest.
Just like the liberal idiots of today. What will they do when the credit card bills come due and mommy and daddy are broke and had to rent out the basement to eat?
The IVAW idiots will try to blend in to society but will fail as someone will always out them as traitors. The internet is good for that. You can run but you can’t hide for long. Only in the communistwealth of Ma would people like Hanoi John Kerry be welcome, he would be shunned and live a miserable life in 48 of the 50 states, 55 of Hussein’s 57 states.
There is an imperative that should not be ignored. You touched upon it: Whatever will the Iraq Veterans Against the War do when there is no war in Iraq?
We must lose, and it must end badly.
Keep in mind that these yahoos are playing a game. Bush is leaving, the War in Iraq is going well. Thing is… don’t expect rational thinking.
Hey Jonn-
Pull a “Rush” and auction the copies off for the asshats!! Then donate it to the Semper fi fund…I’m sure their panties(The IVAW do wear panties,right?)would get very wadded up!!
What is quite telling of the signatories of that letter is that 6 of them are members of the Democratic Socialist of America (DSA). They are, John Conyers, Lynn Woosley, Dennis Kucinich, James McGovern, Pete Stark and Eleanor Holmes Norton:
DSA Members of Congress
It shouldn’t be a surprise because the IVAW, VVAW and VFP are joined at the hip to the Marxists of International ANSWER.
Firstly, I’ll note that Army members wanting to go to Afghanistan instead of Iraq is no sudden news. I myself have idly dreamed of submitting 4187 “Change of Theater” requests. One of the reasons many Army members want to go to Afghanistan is because they believe in that mission, as opposed to the one in Iraq.
As to what IVAW will do when the Iraq occupation is over? Well, when all the troops are home-and I mean /all/-no permanent basing in Iraq- then I guess we’ll only have two points to work on. Sadly, I have a sneaking suspicion veteran’s benefits is going to be a long fight, given that Vietnam veterans are still fighting for theirs.
If we manage to get that accomplished? I’ll pack up and go home with a cheerful good will. Remember what lazy life felt like. Drink a few more beers. Have some more time for summer barbecues. You know. The finer things in life.
Jonn wrote: Are we still clinging to that “occupation” hyperbole? An occupation is what the East Germans went through when the Soviets packed up all of their factories and shipped them bolt-by-bolt back to the Soviet Union. What we’re doing in Iraq is not an occupation by any stretch of the imagination. If we were actually occupying Iraq, there wouldn’t be any discussion about pulling our troops out, would there? We’d just shoot Maliki in the head. It’s already been proven that Iraq’s oil is worthless without the cooperation of the Iraqis, so why would we want to “occupy” it?
You might want to think about changing the name of the organization to drop the “Against the War” part. It may just end up causing you more grief than help when lobbying for veterans’ benefits – and it may drive your less insane members to more reputable and credible VSOs.
“As to what IVAW will do when the Iraq occupation is over? Well, when all the troops are home-and I mean /all/-no permanent basing in Iraq-”
Why aren’t you protesting the U S troops in Germany & Japan for 50 plus years? VVAW/IVAW suck!