Not just today but everyday should be spent honoring our mothers. Make sure every now and then you tell your mom what a wonderful job she is doing or has done, how proud you are of her, how special she is to you, she is a queen. Mom's like wives or girlfriends LOVE hearing how important they are to you. So every now and then show her you care. Don't just wait for one time of the year to send your best ;-)
I dedicate this entry to all you moms out there! You are all special and make this world a better place.
Aloha-Hugs
Bree
This is a MUST see movie. I am HIGHLY recommending it to all soldiers, wives of soldiers, parents, sisters, brothers, cousins and anyone eles intrested in politics the way they should be being handled. BY US the people not by our GOVERNEMENT.
Watching this movie last night made me realize even more how much our own government has taken CONTROL and basically keeps us QUIET and in FEAR of what is to come. There are so many things they brought to this movie that is dealing with what is happening RIGHT NOW with our own Administrations tactics and schemes to keep us in fear. Please if you can rent-buy or go watch V for Vendetta GO DO IT!!!!!!!!
And once you have watched it, please come back and sound off so I can hear your thoughts of this flim.
Below I posted pretty much what the movie is about without giving away too much ;-) Enjoy!
We felt the novel was very prescient to how the political climate is at the moment. It really showed what can happen when society is ruled by government, rather than the government being run as a voice of the people. I don't think it's such a big leap to say that things like that can happen when leaders stop listening to the people-Director James McTeigue
With the intention of making the film relevant to today's audience, the filmmakers included many modern day references as well. For example, the culture of fear montage of news stories ordered by Sutler contains references to an avian flu pandemic. As well there is pervasive use of biometric identification, as well as signal-intelligence gathering and analysis by the regime. Many have also noted the numerous references in the film to the current American administration. These include the "black bags" worn by the prisoners in Larkhill that have been seen as a reference to the black bags worn by prisoners at Abu Ghraib in Iraq and Guantánamo Bay in Cuba. Also London is under a yellow-coded curfew alert, which is similar to the US Government's color-coded Homeland Security Advisory System.One of the forbidden items in Gordon's secret basement is a protest poster with a mixed US–UK flag with a swastika and the title "Coalition of the Willing, To Power." This is likely a reference to the real Coalition of the Willing that was formed for the Iraq War.(At the same time, it also appears to be a reference to Friedrich Nietzsche's concept of Will to Power). As well, there is frequent mention of "rendition" in the film.There is even a brief scene (during the Valerie flashback) containing real-life footage of a anti-Iraq war demonstration, with mention of President George W. Bush. Finally, the film contains reference's to "America's war" and "the war America started" as well as real footage from the Iraq War.
Much of the modern US imagery can be personified in the character Lewis Prothero. Prothero's combat record seems to be an allusion to the current war in Iraq and other potential regions of conflict in the Middle-East ("Iraq, Kurdistan, Syria, before and after...")As the talk show host "The Voice of London" Lewis can be seen evoking the image of conservative American pundits like Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh, (particularly with Limbaugh and Prothero's drug use).Furthermore, with his rhetoric about God, gays, and Muslims, Prothero is likely to be a caricature of religious right-wing commentators like Pat Robertson. (Prothero mentions that the US itself has collapsed due to "Godlessness").
Despite the American specific references, the filmmakers have always referred to the film as adding dialogue to much broader set of issues than the US administration. When James McTeigue was asked whether or not BTN was based on Fox News McTeigue replied, "Yes. But not just Fox. Everyone is complicit in this kind of stuff. It could just as well been the Britain's Sky News Channel."
This is a MUST see movie. I am HIGHLY recommending it to all soldiers, wives of soldiers, parents, sisters, brothers, cousins and anyone eles intrested in politics the way they should be being handled. BY US the people not by our GOVERNEMENT.
Watching this movie last night made me realize even more how much our own government has taken CONTROL and basically keeps us QUIET and in FEAR of what is to come. There are so many things they brought to this movie that is dealing with what is happening RIGHT NOW with our own Administrations tactics and schemes to keep us in fear. Please if you can rent-buy or go watch V for Vendetta GO DO IT!!!!!!!!
And once you have watched it, please come back and sound off so I can hear your thoughts of this flim.
Below I posted pretty much what the movie is about without giving away too much ;-) Enjoy!
We felt the novel was very prescient to how the political climate is at the moment. It really showed what can happen when society is ruled by government, rather than the government being run as a voice of the people. I don't think it's such a big leap to say that things like that can happen when leaders stop listening to the people-Director James McTeigue
With the intention of making the film relevant to today's audience, the filmmakers included many modern day references as well. For example, the culture of fear montage of news stories ordered by Sutler contains references to an avian flu pandemic. As well there is pervasive use of biometric identification, as well as signal-intelligence gathering and analysis by the regime. Many have also noted the numerous references in the film to the current American administration. These include the "black bags" worn by the prisoners in Larkhill that have been seen as a reference to the black bags worn by prisoners at Abu Ghraib in Iraq and Guantánamo Bay in Cuba. Also London is under a yellow-coded curfew alert, which is similar to the US Government's color-coded Homeland Security Advisory System.One of the forbidden items in Gordon's secret basement is a protest poster with a mixed US–UK flag with a swastika and the title "Coalition of the Willing, To Power." This is likely a reference to the real Coalition of the Willing that was formed for the Iraq War.(At the same time, it also appears to be a reference to Friedrich Nietzsche's concept of Will to Power). As well, there is frequent mention of "rendition" in the film.There is even a brief scene (during the Valerie flashback) containing real-life footage of a anti-Iraq war demonstration, with mention of President George W. Bush. Finally, the film contains reference's to "America's war" and "the war America started" as well as real footage from the Iraq War.
Much of the modern US imagery can be personified in the character Lewis Prothero. Prothero's combat record seems to be an allusion to the current war in Iraq and other potential regions of conflict in the Middle-East ("Iraq, Kurdistan, Syria, before and after...")As the talk show host "The Voice of London" Lewis can be seen evoking the image of conservative American pundits like Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh, (particularly with Limbaugh and Prothero's drug use).Furthermore, with his rhetoric about God, gays, and Muslims, Prothero is likely to be a caricature of religious right-wing commentators like Pat Robertson. (Prothero mentions that the US itself has collapsed due to "Godlessness").
Military Spouse Appreciation Day: May 12, 2006
Content provided by LIFELines
"If the military had wanted you to have a spouse, they would have issued you one." Remember those words? Well, that was then and this is now. America's military has realized and acknowledged the significance of the military spouse. In 1984 President Reagan proclaimed the Friday before Mother's Day of each year to be Military Spouse Appreciation Day. It is your day to stand up and be honored.
For the times you've stood and watched a ship sail from the harbor, an aircraft disappear into the clouds, or a truck convoy pull out of sight, not sure when they would return, we thank you.
For the countless household moves you've made from a place you know to one that's strange and different -- often by yourself -- we thank you.
For the families you've held together, for the anniversaries, birthdays, and holidays you've celebrated alone, we thank you.
For the hand you've extended to another military spouse when the need was there, truly creating a military family, we thank you.
For the spirit and strength you've shown when your service member has gone into harm's way, we thank you.
For the pride you've displayed while serving as an ambassador of the military spouse to the rest of the world, we thank you.
Far too frequently, the sacrifices and dedication of the military spouse have gone unnoticed and unappreciated. In our nation's recent history, thousands of service members have been placed in harm's way as they stood watch as freedom's guardian. You too have stood watch at home, facing challenges alone. You have waved flags and held banners high to express your support. You have kept the candles burning on the home front as a reminder of our deployed military.
You have made difficult sacrifices of your own, and have called upon your inner reserves to nurture family life so your service member can focus on the business at hand.
Even in times of relaxed alert status for our military, you have stood ready and alert for the slightest of signs, perhaps overlooked or ignored by your civilian counterparts, signaling a potential change in the status of our military forces. As a military spouse, you have willingly packed up and relocated countless times, and may have been separated from your own parents and siblings for several years at a time.
Quite often, you have been placed in an unfamiliar ethnic or cultural setting, or a remote location. You have met this challenge with confidence and pride, making your nation proud of you. By the same token, you have extended your hand and hospitality to visitors to our country.
A country cannot count itself strong by its armed services alone, but must also depend on its civilians. With military wives and husbands setting a superior example through devotion, courage, and commitment, we are a nation of strength.
Military spouses � stand tall, stand proud � we salute you, you are truly our unsung heroes.
It estimates that Congress has appropriated $368bn for the global war on terror, including both conflicts.
It says that if the current spending bill is approved, US war costs will reach $439bn, and it estimates that an extra $371bn may be needed by 2016.
On that basis, the two wars would cost more than the $579bn spent in Vietnam.
The future costing assumes that US troop levels will drop from the 258,000 currently engaged in all operations to 74,000 by 2010.
Budget Gap
The rising cost of the war is leading to growing concerns in Congress, where attempts to control the budget deficit have been hindered by the "supplementary" requests received each year for war spending.
The CRS estimates that the US Department of Defense's annual war funding has risen from $73bn in 2004 to $120bn in 2006, with an increase of 17% this year alone.
There have also been concerns that extra non-related appropriations are often tucked inside the war funding bill.
On Thursday Senators deleted funding for a $15m seafood promotion programme that had been tucked away in the current bill.
Earlier, Senators diverted $1.9bn in war funds to pay for increased immigration controls at US borders.
Troop Levels
The cost of the war in Iraq has been increasing since US troops have become bogged down in the conflict.
The CRS says the real cost of the conflict in Iraq has risen to $8bn monthly, nearly double the cost in 2003.
It points out that it is difficult to estimate the exact cost of individual operations, such as the Iraq conflict, because the Defense Department does not break down the figures for individual operations.
And it says that the Defense Department has also minimised the cost of the war by not including other costs, including intelligence and the training of Iraqi and Afghan security forces, in its estimates.
Overall, 71% of the total war costs have been spent in Iraq, 21% in Afghanistan, and 7% on increased protection for US forces worldwide.
The main reason for the rapidly escalating costs is increased spending on ammunition, equipment and operational materials such as petrol.
Over $60bn has been spent on procurement, including improved armour, replacement of damaged vehicles, and the building of a more extensive infrastructure to support the troops on the ground.
The CRS says that "if the global war is likely to become the long war as some administration spokesman have suggested, Congress may want to consider requiring that the Department of Defense request a full year's war funds concurrently with its regular budget".
The estimates do not include the costs of reconstruction, which the US originally estimated at $56bn.
A recent report from the General Accounting Office suggested these costs would be much higher, but also said much of the money disbursed so far had been spent on security, not rebuilding.
Please go to TRUTHOUT.ORG and read more stories like this one:
Sectarian violence has forced about 100,000 families across Iraq to flee their homes, a top Iraqi official said. At least 17 people, including an American soldier, were killed Saturday in fighting.
Adil Abdul-Mahdi, one of the country's two vice presidents, estimated on Friday that 100,000 Iraqi families — 90 percent of them his fellow Shiites — had fled their homes to escape attacks by rival religious sects.
Abdul-Mahdi's estimate was higher than any offered so far by Iraqi officials.
Dr. Salah Abdul-Razzaq, spokesman of a government body that runs Shiite religious institutions, put the number of displaced Shiite families at 13,750 nationwide, or about 90,000 people.
That includes 25,000 Shiites who have fled since the bombing of a Shiite mosque in Samarra on Feb. 22 triggered a wave of attacks on Sunni mosques and clerics.
The hardline Sunni clerical Association of Muslim Scholars said about 980 Sunni families, or about 5,000 people, have left five mixed areas of Baghdad in recent weeks and moved in with relatives in Sunni-dominated communities outside the capital.
However, the U.S. military insists that even the lower estimates appear exaggerated.
U.S. command spokesman Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch said this week that American troops investigate all reports of displaced people and have found no evidence of "widespread movement" away from religiously mixed areas.
Lynch said sectarian attacks in the Baghdad area had fallen by 60 percent last week and were approaching the levels before the Feb. 22 bombing of a Shiite shrine in Samarra, which triggered a wave of reprisal attacks against Sunnis.
Accurate counts are difficult because many people simply move in with relatives. Despite U.S. claims, it is clear that substantial numbers of people have relocated to areas where their communities form the majority.
About 400 Shiite families are in a camp near Khanaqin, a largely Kurdish town near the Iranian border. Most fled Baghdad with only what they could carry.
The Human Relief Organization, an Iraqi NGO, has provided the refugees with tents from the regional government and is talking with officials to get more help.
"We get some every day," said Omar Mansour, an official with the relief group. "I'm afraid the numbers will increase greatly when the school year ends and people feel freer to flee. All these families have letters with death threats. So they came here fearing for their lives, only to live in these harsh conditions."
One letter was signed by "The Mujahedeen Brigades" and addressed to "The Rejectionists" in Beiji, using a Sunni extremist term for Shiites.
"Leave our city now, because we don't want to have to kill you as Sunnis in their regions have been killed. Go. You have been warned. The (Shiite) dogs won't stop barking until their mouths are shut," it said.
Click here to finish reading this article
I was honored when a someone from Universal Pictures contacted me asking me to help premote an upcoming film. UNITED 93(opening April 28th). So below I have posted some information about the flim and the director-Paul Greengrass. Please take a few minutes to read the post. If it is not enough information I have a link on my sidebar. If the link is not enough information. Please feel free to contact to me and I can e-mail you more links on UNITED 93.
Filmmaker PAUL GREENGRASS—the compassionate and socially aware writer/director behind films that study the impact of terrorism in Northern Ireland in Bloody Sunday and Omagh, racial violence in The Murder of Stephen Lawrence and one soldier’s abandonment in Resurrected—now focuses his cameras on the day that changed the world forever.
In United 93, Greengrass creates a gripping, provocative drama that tells the story of the passengers, crew and the flight controllers who watched in dawning horror as United Airlines Flight 93 became the fourth hijacked plane on the day of the worst terrorist attacks on American soil: September 11, 2001.
The filmmaker explores the events of this day by telling the story of a single flight and the ordinary, random sampling of flight crew, businessmen, wives, grandparents, students and others bound for San Francisco aboard a Boeing 757. In the course of the just over 90 minutes that the plane was aloft, the world below entered a new and violent age—viewed through a fog that slowly dissipated to reveal that America herself was under attack.
Faced with the daunting task of re-creating the events that took place onboard the doomed plane and down below, Greengrass and his researchers called upon a myriad of sources, conducting countless hours of face-to-face interviews with the families of the 40 passengers and crew, members of the 9/11 commission, flight controllers and other military and civilian personnel who took part in the events of the day. These interviews were distilled and, along with details from flight recordings, public record and historical fact, became the basis for the film. It was then played out by an ensemble of talented, yet largely unknown actors—democratically presented as random people sharing a flight—whose fact-grounded and acutely directed improvisations provided the highly charged human drama captured by Greengrass’ cameras.
The result is a trenchant study—chronicled and filmed in real time—of the incendiary collision of modern day and old world…and the courage that was born from such a crucible.
Greengrass asserts, "One of the reasons why United 93 exerts such a powerful hold on our imaginations is precisely because we don’t know exactly what happened. Who among us doesn’t think about that day and wonder how it must have been and how we might have reacted?"
Painstakingly researched with the support of the families of the passengers and crew who lost their lives, United 93 paints an unforgettable and inspiring portrait of everyday people confronted with an unthinkable situation…who unwittingly become the first denizens in the new era of global terrorism that began that September morning.
Greengrass writes, directs and produces United 93 and, along with producer LLOYD LEVIN (Hellboy, Boogie Nights), joins with powerhouse producers and co-chairs of Europe’s leading film production company, Working Title (Pride & Prejudice, Love Actually), TIM BEVAN and ERIC FELLNER. Greengrass is joined behind the camera by director of photography BARRY ACKROYD (Ae Fond Kiss, Bread and Roses). Many previous collaborators of Greengrass return for United 93, including editors CLARE DOUGLAS (Bloody Sunday, A Way of Life), CHRISTOPHER ROUSE (both Bourne films) and RICHARD PEARSON (Rent, The Bourne Supremacy); production designer DOMINIC WATKINS (Alpha Dog, The Bourne Supremacy); costume designer DINAH COLLIN (Shooting Dogs, Bloody Sunday); and composer JOHN POWELL (X-Men: The Last Stand, both Bourne films). Working Title’s DEBRA HAYWARD (Nanny McPhee, The Interpreter) and LIZA CHASIN (Pride & Prejudice, Wimbledon) serve as the film’s executive producers.
In choosing the cast, the filmmakers sought to bring together an ensemble comprised of gifted actors (and, in some cases, real-life flight crew members, controllers and other personnel) who came armed with the talents and skills necessary to create vivid and real snapshots of the actual men and women onboard and involved with United Airlines Flight 93. All approached the subject matter with the utmost sensitivity, keeping two goals at the forefront of their minds: to dignify the memory of those they were portraying and to arrive at, as Greengrass puts it, "a believable truth" of what happened during the 91-minute flight.
Sunday, April 9, 2006; B01
As the violence in Iraq has expanded, analysts have been asking: Are we witnessing the beginning of a formal Iraqi civil war? But far more important when we consider what role our troops might play in the extended fighting is the question: Does the United States have any right to forcibly stop such a war, when and if it begins?
Civil war, as defined by many generations of military theorists, shares characteristics with insurgencies and revolutions, but there are distinct differences, too. Although insurgencies are contests of rival groups, insurgents need not control any appreciable territory to be effective. Civil wars, on the other hand, involve two or more armed groups, each controlling part of a country. And although civil wars, like revolutions, can be influenced by outside forces as well as ideological considerations, sometimes they are merely struggles for power. Still others -- like the American Civil War -- are contests over not just politics or power, but some high motivating moral principle as well.
No such principle would seem to be at play in Iraq, for one of the insurgency's glaring deficiencies has always been its lack of a coherent ideological rallying point for all Iraqis. Its aim, by contrast, has been simple: the return to power of the Sunni Muslim minority that held sway under Saddam Hussein, or, failing that, the kind of endless anarchy that will make any other government's rule impossible. The insurgents have succeeded at the latter: Although an Iraqi National Assembly and executive branch have been created and elected, the assembly has met only once and briefly, and Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jafari is widely viewed as ineffectual and corrupt. Americans, meanwhile, are voicing overwhelming condemnation of the war, creating a perhaps unbridgeable gulf between themselves and the Bush administration. This has always been a basic definition of insurgent success, as it tends to severely restrict the counterinsurgents' time frame for operations.
Thus, all the courage that went into organizing and carrying out Iraqi elections would seem to have produced a government unworthy of the sacrifices made to bring it into being. The resulting frustration is clear in the words and increasingly deadly actions of many Iraqis who appear to be giving up on a political solution to their country's problems. This means mainly the once-persecuted Shiites (who are showing dangerous signs of splintering into fighting sub-factions) and Kurds.
The more the Iraqi government and its U.S. advocates talk about "fairness" for the Sunni minority, the more the violence seems to escalate. The insurgents do not want their people seduced into participating in the new Iraq, while the Kurds and Shiites seem reluctant to afford true national power to the very people who not only made Hussein's genocidal rule possible, but are also leading the insurgency.
This may not be textbook civil war, but it is certainly shaping up to be the beginning of one.
Let them have their war!!!!!!!!! CLick Here to read all of this article
The New York Times
Saturday 08 April 2006
Senator John Kerry made a slashing attack on the Bush administration yesterday, comparing it to the faltering government in Iraq and equating its war strategy with its planning for Hurricane Katrina, while also invoking Jesus as he criticized federal Medicaid policy.
Mr. Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat and his party's nominee for president in 2004, has been on a political and media blitz as he considers running for the White House again in 2008. In an Op-Ed article in The New York Times on Wednesday, Mr. Kerry proposed telling Iraqi leaders to form a unity government by May 15 or the United States military would withdraw.
He spoke by telephone yesterday to a political conference in New York City that was organized by the Rev. Al Sharpton, his friend from when they both ran for president in 2004.
Mr. Kerry, who voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq, repeated his deadline proposal and spoke of civil war there as a certainty that will be worse with no effective government.
Iraq served as a thematic framework for the speech, which challenged the administration's ability to manage crises on domestic and international fronts.
"The Bush administration is wondering when Iraq will have a functioning government. I want to know when we're going to have a functioning government," Mr. Kerry said, according to a transcript of his remarks.
Mr. Kerry, who was sometimes criticized as stiff and dour during the 2004 campaign, got several laughs, Mr. Sharpton said. At one point, Mr. Kerry, who has had his verbose moments, offered "a little 10-point plan" in response to complaints that neither Democrats nor Republicans have an agenda for the nation.
"Tell the truth. Fire the incompetents. Find Osama bin Laden and secure our ports and our homeland. Bring our troops home from Iraq. Obey the law and protect our civil rights," Mr. Kerry said in ticking off his list, which also included supporting health care, education, lobbying reform and alternatives to oil, as well as reducing the deficit.
A Roman Catholic who has struggled at times to talk about his own faith, Mr. Kerry also told the group that he believed "deeply in my faith" and that the Koran, the Torah, the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles had influenced a social conscience that he exercised in politics.
"I will tell you, nowhere in there, nowhere, not in one page, not in one phrase uttered and reported by the Lord Jesus Christ, can you find anything that suggests that there is a virtue in cutting children from Medicaid and taking money from the poor and giving it to the rich," Mr. Kerry said.
A spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, which skewered Mr. Kerry's speeches relentlessly during 2004, responded with a verbal shrug yesterday.
"John Kerry deserves credit for continuing to take himself so seriously, despite the fact that no one else does," said the spokeswoman, Tracey Schmitt.
TRUTHOUT-Click here to read more articles like the one posted above!!!
By RON FOURNIER, AP Political Writer
President Bush has hit new lows in public opinion for his handling of Iraq and the war on terror and for his overall job performance. Polling also shows the Republican Party surrendering its advantage on national security.
The AP-Ipsos survey is loaded with grim election-year news for a party struggling to stay in power. Nearly 70 percent of Americans believe the nation is headed in the wrong direction — the largest percentage during the Bush presidency and up 13 points from a year ago.
"These numbers are scary. We've lost every advantage we've ever had," GOP pollster Tony Fabrizio said. "The good news is Democrats don't have much of a plan. The bad news is they may not need one."
Democratic leaders predicted they will seize control of one or both chambers of Congress in November. Republicans said they feared the worst unless the political landscape quickly changes.
There is more at stake than the careers of GOP lawmakers. A Democratic-led Congress could bury the last vestiges of Bush's legislative agenda and subject the administration to high-profile investigations of the Iraq war, the CIA leak case, warrantless eavesdropping and other matters.
In the past two congressional elections, Republicans gained seats on the strength of Bush's popularity and a perception among voters that the GOP was stronger on national security than Democrats.
Those advantages are gone, according to a survey of 1,003 adults conducted this week for The Associated Press by Ipsos, an international polling firm.
On an issue the GOP has dominated for decades, Republicans are now locked in a tie with Democrats — 41 percent each — on the question of which party people trust to protect the country. Democrats made their biggest national security gains among young men, according to the AP-Ipsos poll, which had a 3 percentage point margin of error.
The public gives Democrats a slight edge on what party would best handle Iraq, a reversal from Election Day 2004.
As for Bush's ratings:
_Just 36 percent of the public approves of his job performance, his lowest-ever rating in AP-Ipsos polling. By contrast, the president's job approval rating was 47 percent among likely voters just before Election Day 2004 and a whopping 64 percent among registered voters in October 2002.
_Only 40 percent of the public approves of Bush's performance on foreign policy and the war on terror, another low-water mark for his presidency. That's down 9 points from a year ago. Just before the 2002 election, 64 percent of registered voters backed Bush on terror and foreign policy.
_Just 35 percent of the public approves of Bush's handling of Iraq, his lowest in AP-Ipsos polling.
"He's in over his head," said Diane Heller, 65, a Pleasant Valley, N.Y., real estate broker and independent voter.
Some past presidents' job approval ratings have dropped lower than Bush's. Harry Truman in 1952, Richard Nixon in 1974, Jimmy Carter in 1979 and the first George Bush in 1992 saw their ratings fall to the mid- to high 20s, according to Gallup polling.
Many have sunk as low as this president. Bill Clinton was at 39 percent in the late summer of 1994 — before midterm elections that were disastrous for Democrats. Ronald Reagan was at 35 percent in January 1983 before rebuilding his support. Lyndon Johnson was at 36 percent in March 1968, just before announcing he would not run for re-election during the Vietnam War.
As bad as Bush's numbers may be, Congress' are worse.
Just 30 percent of the public approves of the GOP-led Congress' job performance, and Republicans seem to be shouldering the blame.
Click link below to read entire article:
President Bush, as a co-founder of Iraq Veterans Against the War, I feel that your State of the Union address left many unanswered questions, particularly regarding the war in Iraq. Although you spoke of your grand plan for victory in Iraq, I would like to know exactly what the plan is. Clearly, it hasn't worked so far and it isn’t working now. In the past three years, the number of attacks per day in Iraq has increased and the war is no closer to being finished now than when it started. There have been more than 2,240 dead and 16,400 Americans wounded. This doesn’t take into account those who have returned and faced an under funded Veterans Administration, homelessness, or post traumatic stress disorder. For a real victory plan, the best course of action would be an immediate withdrawal of our troops from Iraq. Our continued presence only serves to fuel terrorism, not defeat it. Not only would an immediate withdrawal prevent the unnecessary deaths of more of our country's honorable military personnel, but it would also increase the security of our nation by allowing our troops to do what they signed up for; defending the country. Mr. Bush, even the conservative (and now broken) military has grown tired of your deceit, lack of planning, and arrogance. Your job as President is to serve the people. It’s time to heed their call and bring the troops home
To read more articles like this one click link below:
| Previous Page | Next Page |
