VoteVets embraces ideological foe when he agrees with them

VetsVoice publishes a missive written by retired BG Steven Anderson which supports the President’s energy bill entitled Save Energy, Save our Troops;

A new energy efficiency policy would not only save lives and cut costs, it would make a powerful statement regarding the Pentagon’s commitment to lowering our dependence on foreign oil. We have the finest troops in history; improving the insulation in their structures would not only keep them more comfortable, it would also go a long way to bringing more of them home safely

TSO reminds us that General Steven Anderson, a scant three years ago, tore apart every little bit of VoteVets entire stand on the war;

“There are some signs that our new strategy is working,” Brig. Gen. Anderson said in a teleconference from Baghdad. “It’s going to be a long, hot summer, and it won’t be really until the end of it that we’ll be able to evaluate it. There is plenty of opportunity, and plenty of reason to be cautiously optimistic about what’s going on over there.”

The 10 myths, as outlined by Brig. Gen. Anderson, are:

• The war in Iraq is about oil;

• The U.S. is fighting alone in Iraq;

• Iraq is engulfed in a full-scale civil war;

• The Iraqis were better off under Saddam Hussein than under the new government;

• The Iraqi government is ineffective;

• Economic development is non-existent in Iraq;

• Contractors cost the U.S. government too much money;

• U.S. troops aren’t properly equipped;

• Morale is low among U.S. troops; and

• The U.S. has lost in Iraq.

None of these myths are true, Brig. Gen. Anderson said, and the situation in Iraq is much better than is often reported here [in the US].

So, like TSO, I’m wondering which of the above points VoteVets is willing to concede to Anderson in return for his support on the energy issue? How can Anderson be absolutely wrong on all of those points, but right on the single point when he writes in VetsVoice? Or vice versa?

Category: None