Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22

Thread: Yup the left "supports the troops"

  1. #1

    Yup the left "supports the troops"

    Tuesday, Aug. 30, 2005 7:17 p.m. EDT

    Eleanor Clift's GI Comments Anger Many

    [This story first appeared as an article by Susan Jones, CNSNews.com Senior Editor.]

    A group that supports the U.S. military is demanding an apology from Newsweek magazine's Eleanor Clift, who recently characterized America's armed forces as a "mercenary Army."

    Her comments - made this past weekend on the syndicated TV program "The McLaughlin Group" - were "unfounded and grossly inappropriate," said the Freedom Alliance.

    In an Aug. 30 letter to Clift, Freedom Alliance President Tom Kilgannon asked her to retract her comment and apologize to the armed forces and their families.

    Clift made the comment during a discussion about military recruiting efforts:

    "But I think what we're coming to grips with is the fact that we actually have a mercenary Army," Clift said, according to a transcript of "The McLaughlin Group" program.

    "And it doesn't have a nice ring to it. We call it 'volunteers,' but we're basically paying people to serve their country. And if you're going to pay people and have a mercenary Army, you're going to have to pay the market rate. And so the bounties are going up - more money for tuition, higher enlistment bonuses - and I think it's appropriate."

    The Freedom Alliance said it is "wholly inappropriate" to describe America's military men and women as mercenaries.

    "It is a vile and thankless description of those who are responsible for defending your life and right to free expression," Kilgannon wrote in the letter.

    "A professional wordsmith such as yourself should understand that mercenary troops have no loyalties, no ties and no bonds to any nation. They fight not for duty, flag or country but for selfish gain. They have no regard for political ideology and no respect for national interests. Often, at the first sign of resistance, mercenary troops turn and run."

    Those qualities do not describe U.S. troops, Kilgannon said, adding that Clift should "be ashamed of yourself for suggesting otherwise."

    Kilgannon suggests that during her next appearance on "The McLaughlin Group," Clift should apologize - and retract her description of U.S. troops as "mercenaries."

    "You may also want to search your heart for a little more consideration for those who keep this nation strong and free," Kilgannon writes.

    The Freedom Alliance, founded in 1990 by Lt. Col. Oliver North, describes its mission as advancing the American heritage of freedom by honoring and encouraging military service, defending the sovereignty of the United States and promoting a strong national defense.

    It also exposes anti-military bias in the media.

  2. #2
    [QUOTE=pope]Tuesday, Aug. 30, 2005 7:17 p.m. EDT

    Eleanor Clift's GI Comments Anger Many

    [This story first appeared as an article by Susan Jones, CNSNews.com Senior Editor.]

    A group that supports the U.S. military is demanding an apology from Newsweek magazine's Eleanor Clift, who recently characterized America's armed forces as a "mercenary Army."

    Her comments - made this past weekend on the syndicated TV program "The McLaughlin Group" - were "unfounded and grossly inappropriate," said the Freedom Alliance.

    In an Aug. 30 letter to Clift, Freedom Alliance President Tom Kilgannon asked her to retract her comment and apologize to the armed forces and their families.

    Clift made the comment during a discussion about military recruiting efforts:

    "But I think what we're coming to grips with is the fact that we actually have a mercenary Army," Clift said, according to a transcript of "The McLaughlin Group" program.

    "And it doesn't have a nice ring to it. We call it 'volunteers,' but we're basically paying people to serve their country. And if you're going to pay people and have a mercenary Army, you're going to have to pay the market rate. And so the bounties are going up - more money for tuition, higher enlistment bonuses - and I think it's appropriate."

    The Freedom Alliance said it is "wholly inappropriate" to describe America's military men and women as mercenaries.

    "It is a vile and thankless description of those who are responsible for defending your life and right to free expression," Kilgannon wrote in the letter.

    "A professional wordsmith such as yourself should understand that mercenary troops have no loyalties, no ties and no bonds to any nation. They fight not for duty, flag or country but for selfish gain. They have no regard for political ideology and no respect for national interests. Often, at the first sign of resistance, mercenary troops turn and run."

    Those qualities do not describe U.S. troops, Kilgannon said, adding that Clift should "be ashamed of yourself for suggesting otherwise."

    Kilgannon suggests that during her next appearance on "The McLaughlin Group," Clift should apologize - and retract her description of U.S. troops as "mercenaries."

    "You may also want to search your heart for a little more consideration for those who keep this nation strong and free," Kilgannon writes.

    The Freedom Alliance, founded in 1990 by Lt. Col. Oliver North, describes its mission as advancing the American heritage of freedom by honoring and encouraging military service, defending the sovereignty of the United States and promoting a strong national defense.

    It also exposes anti-military bias in the media.[/QUOTE]

    that person just wanted more money for the troops, what the hell is wrong with that?

  3. #3
    it's like what bill maher said, we act like they're heros but we pay them like chumps.

  4. #4
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    Of course Clift would have no problem were there a draft....

  5. #5
    From Miriam-Webster Online:

    [QUOTE][B][U]Main Entry: 1 mer·ce·nary [/U] [/B]
    Pronunciation: 'm&r-s&n-"er-E
    Function: noun
    Inflected Form(s): plural -nar·ies
    Etymology: Middle English, from Latin mercenarius, irregular from merced-, merces wages -- more at MERCY
    : one that serves merely for wages; especially : a soldier hired into foreign service [/QUOTE]

    Lets see.....

    --I would guess (since there are no real figures to back it up, one way or the other) that the majority of American Servicemen in action are doing it for MORE than just wages, so IMO that eliminates the first part of the definition.

    --And obviously, US servicemen are not in the employ of a foreign service, eliminating the second part of the definition.

    So it appears this likely well-educated writer used the wrong term, and instead of teh correct term or terminology, used something most people would find derrogatory and insulting.

    That being the case, an apology and retraction/correction would not be uncalled for.

  6. #6
    forget the actual infantry - there are mercinaries on the ground in Iraq and afghanistan in the form of PSC Prvate Security Companies such as Triple Canopy and Blackwater - and paying these highly trained badasses (among other consultants for transportation, supply lines, etc) comprises fully 25% of the DoD Iraq expenditure.

    The day those guys leave Iraq is the day s--t really hits the fan. The only reason there is any law and order at all (that is to say, just a smattering) is due to the PSC's a.k.a Real LIfe MERCINARIES.

  7. #7
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Westchester Co.
    Posts
    38,613
    [QUOTE=bitonti]forget the actual infantry - there are mercinaries on the ground in Iraq and afghanistan in the form of PSC Prvate Security Companies such as Triple Canopy and Blackwater - and paying these highly trained badasses (among other consultants for transportation, supply lines, etc) comprises fully 25% of the DoD Iraq expenditure.

    The day those guys leave Iraq is the day s--t really hits the fan. The only reason there is any law and order at all (that is to say, just a smattering) is due to the PSC's a.k.a Real LIfe MERCINARIES.[/QUOTE]
    Where do you get this stuff, especially the 25% figure?

  8. #8
    [QUOTE=jetswin]Where do you get this stuff, especially the 25% figure?[/QUOTE]

    it's true all you have to do is read the papers. that 25% admittedly also includes companies like Halliburton - my point is that this is a privatized war alot more than people realize.

  9. #9
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=jetswin]Where do you get this stuff, especially the 25% figure?[/QUOTE]

    Mother Jones, Knight Rider, DUmpster......

  10. #10
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]Mother Jones, Knight Rider, DUmpster......[/QUOTE]

    it's common knowledge. Even the DoD budget was written by consultants.

    [url]http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11498[/url]

  11. #11
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Westchester Co.
    Posts
    38,613
    [QUOTE=bitonti]it's common knowledge. Even the DoD budget was written by consultants.

    [url]http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11498[/url][/QUOTE]
    a slight exaggeration, as is the 25%....an average of 9.5 mill/year is not 25% of over 400 bill/ year spent on defense.

  12. #12
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=bitonti]it's common knowledge. Even the DoD budget was written by consultants.

    [url]http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11498[/url][/QUOTE]

    what I find hysterical, though I shouldn't because it is part-n-parcel to lib hypocrisy, is how you refer to places like Newsmax and Drudge as "slogs" yet try and prove your point posting garbage from mother jones, knight rider or the homemade website you've sourced above.

  13. #13
    I didn't say 25% of the whole DoD budget i said 25% of the Iraq expenditure.

    to be frank I looked up my source and i was wrong. The statistic is that private corporations hired in Iraq were using up to 25% of their gov't income on personal protection, such as PSC's.

    Apologies for the misunderstanding, I was wrong.

    Originally printed in the NY Times magazine: [url]http://www.refuseandresist.org/war/art.php?aid=2153[/url]

  14. #14
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=bitonti]I didn't say 25% of the whole DoD budget i said 25% of the Iraq expenditure.

    to be frank I looked up my source and i was wrong. The statistic is that private corporations hired in Iraq were using up to 25% of their gov't income on personal protection, such as PSC's.

    Apologies for the misunderstanding, I was wrong.

    Originally printed in the NY Times magazine: [url]http://www.refuseandresist.org/war/art.php?aid=2153[/url][/QUOTE]

    Good to see the sites you hang out at...just helps prove my contention you are in fact a radical liberal/leftist rather then the "independent" you claim to be....

  15. #15
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]Good to see the sites you hang out at...just helps prove my contention you are in fact a radical liberal/leftist rather then the "independent" you claim to be....[/QUOTE]

    CBNY i can't link directly to the times, unless you want to pay 4 dollars to read the archived article.

    also do you think I care about your perception of me? Ohhh CBNY says I'm a radical liberal. so friggin what? is that a jailable offense?

    I know it's important to you to denote everyone's political affiliation so you know who to hate. Wouldn't want to sprain that brain of yours actually thinking for yourself or anything. Right about now, Bush could crap in your mouth and tell you it was a sundae.

  16. #16
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=bitonti]CBNY i can't link directly to the times, unless you want to pay 4 dollars to read the archived article.

    [/QUOTE]

    That a load of crap- you can get current stories from the Times for free by registering, I post them here all the time. Archived stories cost $2.99.

    [QUOTE]also do you think I care about your perception of me? Ohhh CBNY says I'm a radical liberal. so friggin what? is that a jailable offense?

    I know it's important to you to denote everyone's political affiliation so you know who to hate. [/QUOTE]

    Not at all- it is just important to know who lies and who does not....who is willing to call themselves for what they are and who must disguise themselves as "independent" for fear people may find out who they really are...

    [QUOTE]Wouldn't want to sprain that brain of yours actually thinking for yourself or anything. Right about now, Bush could crap in your mouth and tell you it was a sundae. [/QUOTE]

    Of course you are the first to call out others for "character assassination". Yet when you are revealed for what you really are then it gets personnel....just more proof what a complete hypocrite you are...just like your lib buddies...

  17. #17
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]That a load of crap- you can get current stories from the Times for free by registering, I post them here all the time. Archived stories cost $2.99.
    [/quote]

    "The Other Army" from the NY Times - $3.95

    [url]http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0D14FF3A580C778DDDA10894DD404482[/url]


    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]
    Not at all- it is just important to know who lies and who does not....who is willing to call themselves for what they are and who must disguise themselves as "independent" for fear people may find out who they really are...[/quote]

    I have been called many things on this board. A coward who pretends he is something he is not, or someone who hides their true nature - that's a new one. Whatever I am I proudly and tactlessly declare it every day. For the record the democrats are probably more incompetant than anyone. They are horrible and disgust me with their non-actions and non-ideas. But all that doesn't change who is in charge. I am not interested in talking about a party that has no power. Why don't we talk about the socialist party or the green party? they are sideshows too.


    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]
    Of course you are the first to call out others for "character assassination". Yet when you are revealed for what you really are then it gets personnel....just more proof what a complete hypocrite you are...just like your lib buddies...[/QUOTE]

    What Lib Buddies? Its me posting against 15 cons every single day. Sometimes there are other liberal posters but they always get banned. You can talk all sorts of crap CBNY but guess what you aren't grossly outnumbered. You aren't a marginalized minority. Your side controls every aspect of the government. We live in a single party state. I guess that's not enough for you. Relentlessly pounding your message into the ground, for what reason? So that there is absolutely no controversy in the USA? No thought that goes against Bush? You hate PC yet what do you strive for but absolute thought control. Anything said against Bush you knee-jerk against it. Anything he says you knee jerk believe in. What would make you happier than a land without criticism?

    maybe you should examine what this administration has done for you to give them absolute carte blanche before you get out your big guns and start shooting. It's easy to call people hypocrites and liberal traitors it's not so easy to look in the mirror and evaluate yourself, determine what you believe in and why.

    What do you bring to the discussion except 100% blind support of the President every single day? Oh yeah it's really productive to never say anything in the least bit critical. Way to hold our leaders accountable CBNY.

    last time i checked I'm an American citizen and the government works for me not the other way around. People say i never admit when I'm wrong - i was wrong and admitted so on this very thread. Don't worry i don't expect you to admit anything.
    Last edited by bitonti; 08-31-2005 at 01:37 PM.

  18. #18
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE]I have been called many things on this board. A coward who pretends he is something he is not, or someone who hides their true nature - that's a new one.[/QUOTE]

    Maybe that's cause you tried to pawn yourself for something other then you really are...

    [QUOTE]What Lib Buddies? Its me posting against 15 cons every single day. Sometimes there are other liberal posters but they always get banned. You can talk all sorts of crap CBNY but guess what you aren't grossly outnumbered. You aren't a marginalized minority. Your side controls every aspect of the government. We live in a single party state. I guess that's not enough for you. Relentlessly pounding your message into the ground, for what reason? So that there is absolutely no controversy in the USA? No thought that goes against Bush?[/QUOTE]

    :bigcry: :bigcry: :bigcry: :bigcry:

    As stated before- your arguement about a "one party state" is ludicrous and election results just prove how futile the rat message is...

    [QUOTE]You hate PC yet what do you strive for but absolute thought control. Anything said against Bush you knee-jerk against it. Anything he says you knee jerk believe in. What would make you happier than a land without criticism? [/QUOTE]

    Again- nothing more the liberal rhetoric and characte assassination= complete hypocrisy...the assumption that everything the President does is automatically accepted is based on the fact liberals have nothing to offer...on the other hand, God forbid one brings up transgressions of the previous administration.

    [QUOTE]maybe you should examine what this administration has done for you to give them absolute carte blanche before you get out your big guns and start shooting. It's easy to call people hypocrites and liberal traitors it's not so easy to look in the mirror and evaluate yourself. [/QUOTE]

    I do on a daily basis.....greatest home ownership in American history which directly effects my business in a positive way....fighting terrorists in their land....taking the fight to them rather then passively reacting to being attacked by them....seems good to me..

    [QUOTE]What do you bring to the discussion except 100% blind support of the President every single day? Oh yeah it's really productive to never say anything in the least bit critical. Way to hold our leaders accountable CBNY. [/QUOTE]

    Again, nothing more then character assassination...unlike your rhetoric and baseless opinions I bring facts...whether it is correcting you on the "free-for-all" Vietnam was after America left or the "insurgency" in Germany after VE day or the way many blame America for Hiroshoma....

    What do you offer other then blind support of anti-Bush rhetoric usually sourced from homemade, radical, leftist sites?? Anything?? Anything other then baseless anti-Bush opinions?? Anything at all??
    Last edited by Come Back to NY; 08-31-2005 at 01:49 PM.

  19. #19
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Westchester Co.
    Posts
    38,613
    [QUOTE=bitonti]"The Other Army" from the NY Times - $3.95

    [url]http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0D14FF3A580C778DDDA10894DD404482[/url]




    I have been called many things on this board. A coward who pretends he is something he is not, or someone who hides their true nature - that's a new one. Whatever I am I proudly and tactlessly declare it every day. For the record the democrats are probably more incompetant than anyone. They are horrible and disgust me with their non-actions and non-ideas. But all that doesn't change who is in charge. I am not interested in talking about a party that has no power. Why don't we talk about the socialist party or the green party? they are sideshows too.




    What Lib Buddies? Its me posting against 15 cons every single day. Sometimes there are other liberal posters but they always get banned. You can talk all sorts of crap CBNY but guess what you aren't grossly outnumbered. You aren't a marginalized minority. Your side controls every aspect of the government. We live in a single party state. I guess that's not enough for you. Relentlessly pounding your message into the ground, for what reason? So that there is absolutely no controversy in the USA? No thought that goes against Bush? You hate PC yet what do you strive for but absolute thought control. Anything said against Bush you knee-jerk against it. Anything he says you knee jerk believe in. What would make you happier than a land without criticism?

    maybe you should examine what this administration has done for you to give them absolute carte blanche before you get out your big guns and start shooting. It's easy to call people hypocrites and liberal traitors it's not so easy to look in the mirror and evaluate yourself, determine what you believe in and why.

    What do you bring to the discussion except 100% blind support of the President every single day? Oh yeah it's really productive to never say anything in the least bit critical. Way to hold our leaders accountable CBNY.

    last time i checked I'm an American citizen and the government works for me not the other way around. People say i never admit when I'm wrong - i was wrong and admitted so on this very thread. Don't worry i don't expect you to admit anything.[/QUOTE]

    wow, that was a passionate post...

    You do deserve a golf clap for stepping up and saying you're wrong, I think you get a bad rep because you get lumped in with many idiotic posts from others seemingly taking a similar stance on certain issues.

    You are right about dissenting opinions, they are a necessary evil. :D

  20. #20
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]Maybe that's cause you tried to pawn yourself for something other then you really are...



    :bigcry: :bigcry: :bigcry: :bigcry:

    As stated before- your arguement about a "one party state" is ludicrous and election results just prove how futile the rat message is...



    Again- nothing more the liberal rhetoric and characte assassination= complete hypocrisy...the assumption that everything the President does is automatically accepted is based on the fact liberals have nothing to offer...on the other hand, God forbid one brings up transgressions of the previous administration.



    I do on a daily basis.....greatest home ownership in American history which directly effects my business in a positive way....fighting terrorists in their land....taking the fight to them rather then passively reacting to being attacked by them....seems good to me..



    Again, nothing more then character assassination...unlike your rhetoric and baseless opinions I bring facts...whether it is correcting you on the "free-for-all" Vietnam was after America left or the "insurgency" in Germany after VE day or the way many blame America for Hiroshoma....

    What do you offer other then blind support of anti-Bush rhetoric usually sourced from homemade, radical, leftist sites?? Anything?? Anything other then baseless anti-Bush opinions?? Anything at all??[/QUOTE]

    ny, you really are nuts. if i were you, id seek mental help. its actually pretty comical what you do. your predictability actually does provide some humor. this is what you do, in a nutshell. you post something that you copied and pasted from the internet that favors your stance on things. somebody makes a relevant point. you go on to attack the rats and then if they made a really good point, thats when you go and bring up our friend "billy blowjob." i love it how cindy sheehan is a skank, a hag, etc, but if somebody even BRINGS UP THE FACT that you are assassinating her character, you cant even address that, you have to go on to say that the lib who says youre assasinating her character is assassinating your character by even mentioning it. if a good point is brought up about anything, you cant address that, you have to talk about "billy blowjob" and his tenure in office. guess what, "billy blowjob" isnt in office anymore, buddy. the best part is you say this as if past conservative leaders have never made any mistakes.

    anyway, just felt like pointing that out, it is pretty comical the predictability of your posts and how you're never take any criticism head on, you always have to devert it and then make the personal attacks, it's ok, it just shows that you know you're full of **** and to make up for that you have to try other means. anyway, i know that when you reply to this youll just say im using typical liberal rat tactics to assassinate your character, i understand that, its expected. but, what im trying to get at is that you really do need some help, to what extent, i dont know, but you should look into that.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us