Support for Bush drops among US military: poll
Support for President George W. Bush's Iraq policy has fallen among the US armed forces to just 54 percent from 63 percent a year ago, according to a poll by the magazine group Military Times.Actions speak louder than words.
In its annual survey of the views of military personnel, the group reported on its website that support for Bush's overall policies dropped over the past year to 60 percent from 71 percent.
Far from being discouraged, our Army and Marine veterans of Iraq have been re-enlisting in startlingly high numbers — knowing they'll be sent back to Iraq. The let's-just-surrender trio of Dean, Reid and Pelosi may believe we're bound to fail, but our troops are voluntarily betting their lives on a win.
Plus...
Our military leaders are so confident about the situation that they believe we can reduce our troop levels significantly in 2006. So much for being defeated.
posted by Pat Campbell @ 9:18 PM
6 comments
6 Comments:
Contrary to liberal mythology, the front-line troops, the ones who actually do the fighting, are the ones who are re-enlisting in enough numbers to keep the fighting units battle-ready. The enlistment and re-enlistment quotas are sometimes not met, because blacks, who have in recent decades came to be disproportionately represented in higher numbers in the support units, are enlisting in fewer numbers. In other words, black cooks, black supply clerks, black paper pushers, etc. are not re-enlisting and they're telling their brothers and cousins to not enlist. If the liberal MSM and the liberal black "leaders" would stop indoctrinating young blacks with their twisted philosophy, there would be no more of our intermittant, occassional, enlistment and re-enlistment problems.
If the war is so great. Why don't the children of the chicken hawks sign up. It's mostly poor people who need a job or money for college. The Bush daughters don't have to worry about that. Besides they might break a nail if they had to go out to fight.
I didn't see Al Gore's son signing up for any of the Clinton/Gore wars, e.g., Kosovo. Oh, wait. I forgot. He was too busy being repeatedly arrested for speeding down the highway while drunk.
On the other hand, I'm 100% certain that Chelsea will enlist when her momma, the future President, sends troops to fight in support of muslim murderers.
Does anyone know how many of John Kerry's or Ted (hic)Kennedy's children have signed up to defend their country? Or Jessie Jackson's (legitimate or otherwise), Howard Dean's, etc? Is it really necessary for the President's childred to serve in the military in order to defend our country? What a tired and stupid argument.
You all missed the point. The neo-cons created the war. The people you mentioned are just as priviliged and just as obnoxious, but they don't believe in this nonsensical war. The onus is on the chicken hawks and their families. They should lead by example is they are so sure of themselves.
"You all missed the point."
No, YOU missed to point.
During the Clinton wars, none of the Democrats offspring enlisted. Why should that criteria be applied only to Republicans' children during Republicans' wars? In other words, ragging on W's children while not challenging
Democrats' kids during Democrats' wars is hypocrisy. In other words, you're a hyprocrite.
Did you get the point that time?
Post a Comment
<< Home