WTF ... IS WTF!?
We are a collective of people who believe in freedom of speech, the rights of individuals, and free pancakes! We share our lives, struggles, frustrations, successes, joys, and prescribe to our own special brand of humor and insanity. If you are looking for a great place to hang out, make new friends, find new nemeses, and just be yourself, WTF.com is your new home.

Headlines Mom Protesting Iraq War Meets Bush Aides

voiceofreason

Seeker of Truth
1,329
0
0
#1
CRAWFORD, Texas - The angry mother of a fallen U.S. soldier staged a protest near President Bush's ranch Saturday, demanding an accounting from Bush of how he has conducted the war in Iraq.

Supported by more than 50 demonstrators who chanted, "W. killed her son!" Cindy Sheehan told reporters: "I want to ask the president, 'Why did you kill my son? What did my son die for?'" Sheehan, 48, didn't get to see Bush, but did talk about 45 minutes with national security adviser Steve Hadley and deputy White House chief of staff Joe Hagin, who went out to hear her concerns.

Appreciative of their attention, yet undaunted, Sheehan said she planned to continue her roadside vigil, except for a few breaks, until she gets to talk to Bush. Her son, Casey, 24, was killed in Sadr City, Iraq, on April 4, 2004. He was an Army specialist, a Humvee mechanic.

"They (the advisers) said we are in Iraq because they believed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, that the world's a better place with Saddam gone and that we're making the world a safer place with what we're doing over there," Sheehan said in a telephone interview after the meeting.

"They were very respectful. They were nice men. I told them Iraq was not a threat to the United States and that now people are dead for nothing. I told them I wouldn't leave until I talked to George Bush."

She said Hagin told her, "I want to assure you that he (Bush) really does care."

"And I said if he does care, why doesn't he come out and talk to me."

LINK
----------------------------------------
Another Mother finds out that her son gave up his life for pointless, blind ambition. So sad.
 

Slacker

Postaholic
3,735
139
127
#2
I was just going to make a thread about this. Hey he went to war.
 
1,723
90
112
#3
Linksy said:
I was just going to make a thread about this. Hey he went to war.
Yeah, he did, but I doubt it was because of the war. He was probably in the army before the war. Once you're in the army, you just have to take your orders.
 
4,149
1
0
#4
I'm sorry for her loss, and I support what she's doing. The question I have is this: did she feel this war was pointless before her son died? If she did, was she doing something about having her opinion heard before her son died?
 

Slacker

Postaholic
3,735
139
127
#5
canadian_pov said:
Yeah, he did, but I doubt it was because of the war. He was probably in the army before the war. Once you're in the army, you just have to take your orders.
It was his choice to go in the army. He knew that if a war broke out or whatever he knew that he might have to go. He was taking a chance. Just like everybody else that joins the army. He wasn't made to go in the army. The woman shouldn't protest because her son chose to go to the army with the risk of a war. It was bushes choice to send them but it was that guys choice to join the army so it kind of adds up. Bush didn't kill him.
 

A7XManiac2005

Banned - What an Asshat!
9
0
0
#6
She shouldn't be complaining. I feel bad that her son died, but she should've known that the president and all of his aides were lying about the purposes of war. All the people in Iraq have all been tricked by "King Bush".
 

UberSkippy

a.k.a. FuckTheBullShit
7,529
28
142
#7
Linksy said:
It was his choice to go in the army. He knew that if a war broke out or whatever he knew that he might have to go. He was taking a chance. Just like everybody else that joins the army. He wasn't made to go in the army. The woman shouldn't protest because her son chose to go to the army with the risk of a war. It was bushes choice to send them but it was that guys choice to join the army so it kind of adds up. Bush didn't kill him.
You know, she wasn't protesting her son's joining the Army. She was protesting her son's death for a war that is now viewed as highly pointless.

"He joined the Army" is a dumbass kneejerk response to the issue. Joining the Army has risks yes. But one of the mitigating factors is our elected officials' "restraint" from sending those men and women into harm's way. In this case her protest likely revolves around the fact that this particular president showed no restraint and likely lied to the US at large to foster support for a war that wasn't called for. In other words, he sent her son to fight a war that wasn't necessary which means her son died but not for the reasons he was told he was risking his life for.
 

JLXC

WTF's Official Conspiracy Fanatic
Premium
7,550
264
302
#8
Questioning Bush about his little war is GOOD.

Complaining your volunteer soldier son got killed in a military action is pointless. You know the risks, there's no illusions about being a soldier. It's not camp, it's the military. It's not college funds, it's dodging lead. Get a grip.
 

gummi_

Tenderony
166
0
0
#9
Im with tiger here... did she publicly show opposition to the war before her son died? Was she doing anything to help stop the war before this?

I also think Linksy has a point. (Sorry Uber :p)

Pointless war or not, he did join the army. These men and women join willingly, and knowing that in the course of their service they may die for their country.

The war is questionable and largely interpreted as wrong from the start, and her son dying for such a war is a horrible thing, however he was in the army, he knew he might have to go to war, whether he agreed with said war or not.
 
R

RedOctober

Guest
#10
I think you all are a bit weird. Where is the difference from the German "Befehl ist Befehl" mentality in WWII?

It's every soldier's own responsibility to not obey orders when they are against his own consience.
He could have resigned.
If not, shit happens in a war.

You can't have it both ways.
 
685
0
0
#11
voiceofreason said:
Another Mother finds out that her son gave up his life for pointless, blind ambition. So sad
Yet another overgeneralization of the issue. It's not that simple and you know it.

A7XManiac2005 said:
She shouldn't be complaining. I feel bad that her son died, but she should've known that the president and all of his aides were lying about the purposes of war. All the people in Iraq have all been tricked by "King Bush".
You, sir, are an ass. Are you arguing that because we all knew Bu$h is full of shit that she doesn't have the right to be pissed off that her son died? Are you purporting that because her son chose to go to Iraq that the mother has no grounds to question the Administration's continued ineffectiveness? Are you suggesting that there is a connection between a person choosing to go to Iraq and general acceptance of Bu$h's views and policies?

JLXC said:
Complaining your volunteer soldier son got killed in a military action is pointless. You know the risks, there's no illusions about being a soldier. It's not camp, it's the military. It's not college funds, it's dodging lead. Get a grip.
It's not pointless. It's going to be exactly that kind of response that will eventually either force the Administration to account for the route it took to get us into Iraq or get us out of there sooner rather than later.
Oh, and there ARE illusions about being a soldier. I've known quite a few people who, when faced with the prospect of actually being deployed to a combat zone,tried their absolute damnest to get their jobs changed, their deployment status changed, their enlistment status changed...anything they could think of to keep from going. Not because of their views on the war...but because they were scared and never thought that they would actually have to walk the walk. People do join for the college money, and a lot of them never expect to actually be placed in harm's way.

And now, for the rest of you:

For us - and by US, I mean military - the war is not always political. Our decisions to go are not always driven by a desire to 'protect our country'. We are not always patriotic poster children. I cannot speak for the Army, because I didn't serve with any of them long enough. I can, however, speak for the Marine Corps.
You people seem to accept that we MUST be Bu$h toting, right-wing conservative, christian fundamentalist clones to be serving in Iraq. I mean, if we didn't believe in the cause, why would we be there, right? :mfinger:
You sit there from within your comfortable lives and convince yourselves that you know something about the value of humanity and comment ad nauseum upon the morality - or lack thereof - of the country in which you live; all the while completely failing to understand anything other than what you think you know.
It's one thing to question the government. It's entirely another thing to assume that the military doesn't understand what it's doing over there. It's very much another thing to assume that the military is blind to what is happening, and that acceptance of a job that still must be done is to accept the reason behind it.
Let me explain some things to you, since it doesn't appear that ANY of you have experienced either Iraq or combat in general, and probably will never place yourselves in a position to have to make decisions that affect whether or not someone lives long enough to eat their next meal. My contempt for people's opinions who haven't the credentials to judge should be fairly obvious by now.

Like I said, for many of us the war is not political. I left a wife and three kids behind to go, just like a lot of other people did. What you people don't seem to understand is that there is another factor to consider when we decide whether or not to 'go to war'. What I often think it impossible for you to understand is that we feel a certain responsibility for those under our charge...and that sense of responsibility often prevents us from allowing our men, our comrades, our friends, to travel into harm's way without us.
We often are not patriots at all, but are more inclined to look after the welfare of those whom we have trained and trained with. Their skills are a direct reflection upon our abilities to lead, and even if you don't 'lead' per se, you are an integral part of a team...to train with a team, to suffer with a team, creates a bond between people...a bond which is not lightly forsaken.
For me, I was not going to allow the men that I had trained and built to go without me...for my sense of responsibility was to these men that had followed me for so long. How many of you are willing to abandon someone that looks up to you right when they need you? Now make that a life-and-death situation. See what I mean?
Oh, and my contract was up...I didn't have to go. I did, in fact, resign. And you know what, my wife supported that...military wives seem to understand a little more about honor and duty than many of you seem to.

Just because we go doesn't mean we support either Bu$h or his reasons for going in the first place. Many of us don't care for the obnoxious shows of patriotism that people seem to think fuel us. Most of us don't even care to be labeled as 'patriots'. No, our business is war, so technically it wouldn't matter if we invaded Cleveland...(or canada :) )...and our business is doing everything we can to make sure that the people we're responsible for come home, which is a degree of responsibility that I wager most of you will never know.

As for why these people die... it's not that the insurgents are better than us, no..but if you look at the timing of a unit's deaths, the smart money says their death rates increase towards the end of their deployment...when everyone is sick of being there, when they've developed the attitude that they've 'got it all under control'...they get lax and lazy. The area from Haditha to Hit to Ar Rutba was ours...so I know the area. Was there a lot of action? Yeah. Did we lose some people? Yeah. But we never got lazy, we never got complacent...because the minute you do, you get killed. You get complacent and all of the sudden you're not looking at people you should be looking at, you're not checking vehicles you should be checking...you're not watching the sides of the road as you travel down it. Next think you know...BOOM.
For you people to think that we're getting our asses handed to us is simple ignorance posing as arrogance. You have no idea what's going on over there. We're not faililng to make significant progress because of the military...it's happening because neither the government nor the American people have the stomach to deal with it as it needs to be dealt with. The instant the first body bag comes home everyone all of the sudden forgets what the point was.
Well people, for us, the point is that those people still need help. Do we care about oil? Do we care about money? No, we leave that up to the Administration and Bug business....but the Iraqis are so far away from being able to stand on their own two feet as a soveriegn nation that we're committed to finishing what was started...right, wrong, or indifferent.

You're right, it's war, and people die. But we don't die ignorant and we don't risk our lives for the reasons you think.
 

voiceofreason

Seeker of Truth
1,329
0
0
#12
FlipTheState said:
Yet another overgeneralization of the issue. It's not that simple and you know it.
There is nothing General about it, it's VERY specific, this Mother realized that her son died in vain, for nothing. She wants an answer.

It is ACTUALLY that simple...
 

UberSkippy

a.k.a. FuckTheBullShit
7,529
28
142
#13
FlipTheState said:
A whole bunch of goog points but it's too long to quote. Scroll up and read it yourself lazy ass.
You know, you do make a number of good points. However, you forget that many of us do understand the military mentality. I grew up in a family of Marines and Naval Special forces. (Yeah, thanksgiving was a fucking ton of fun with that lot around.)

I still stand by my point that saying "He was in the military so it's ok that he died." is total bullshit and a completely candy ass way out of being a responsible adult. It's NOT fucking ok. Yes, joining any service from a police force to any combat military unit has many, many risks. And as FlipTheState said, in many cases those men and women put their asses on the line for things we don't quite understand. But that doesn't mean we should just sweep their deaths under the rug and suggest that they got what they somehow deserved.

But the argument here shouldn't be about whether those soldiers are political pundits, Bible thumping morons, free thinking pot heads or just plain old average Joes. The argument here lies in the fact that these men and women WILL go into combat and WILL die because they are told too. They're NOT mindless fucking robots and they are NOT disposable as so many people here seem to think.

The argument here is that our government (Namely GWBush) made comments, told us things and showed us things that are now blatantly not true. As a president it is supposed to be his duty to send our fighting forces into harms way. Part of that duty is making sure that our fighting forces are sent into harms way for the right reasons. It now would seem he didn't live up to his duty as a president.

The argument here stems from the fact that our illustrious commanding dickhead sent our troops into combat for what now appears to be his own personal agenda and not the public one he touted about the country. It appears that he lied to us as a whole and now our troops are fighting and dieing for what was a lie.

Is there some good to come out of this? Probably the downfall of Sadam and what I hope will be an eventually free Iraq. Those are good things. And frankly, I may have a LOT more support for this war if those were the reasons we went in there.

And to FlipTheState, while not all of us are military, as citizens it is still our right and our duty to have these arguments. Granted it might be as irritating as hell to you and the men and women in actual combat. But if conversations like this don't happen the people tacitly approve of actions that put you and your friends in danger. I understand the duty and honor aspects of it, but where you (as in military personel) can't always voice your opinions, we (as civilians) can. It's a check and balance situation where the citizens should take some responsibility in making sure people like you don't get sent into combat for lesser reasons that you should.
 
685
0
0
#14
voiceofreason said:
There is nothing General about it, it's VERY specific, this Mother realized that her son died in vain, for nothing. She wants an answer.

It is ACTUALLY that simple...

All that and the only thing you have to say is that it actually is that simple?
You didn't say he died in vain, for nothing...you said he 'gave up his life for pointless, blind ambition.'..pick one.
To say he died for blind ambition is to argue that he died so that Bu$h could get a bigger piece of the pie, so that fat politicians could live fat, happy lives. To say he died for nothing...well...maybe you didn't read the entire post.

My comment that you were overgeneralizing was to point out that in your effort to blast the Bu$h administration for its obvious fuck ups, you fail to actually provide a valid point.
Listen, whether or not Bu$h lied to get us over there is a dead issue...we can't continue bringing everything back to that point...why?
BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY OVER THERE!

Whether or not you agree with the 'war', whether or not your tender sensibilities have been offended, or whether or not you've just decided to argue the issue based on some sense of juvenile self-awareness...it doesn't matter. We are there, and no amount of arguing or self-important pontification is going to bring us home.
Aside from whether or not Bu$h is an ass...we really have done a lot for that country. Stuff that you at home in front of your television sets haven't been shown. In a way, I laugh at the irony, because while voicing your loud opinions about how the media is full of shit you still are forced to filter your knowledge of the outside world through it.
What good have we done? I'm not talking about contribution to the global community or a reduction in crude oil prices...that's not my issue. My point is that we've built hospitals, built schools, rebuilt communities, and basically allowed those people a chance to build their own lives, their own government. How do I know these are good things? Well...not sure how many of you speak Arabic or last spoke to an Iraqi national, but try asking a muslim or Arab that's been living in the states for a while how they feel about it. Anyone with a decent education understands that while the Administration might be all fucked up, we still did a good thing.

EDIT: Any time you feel like having an informed conversation about what happens over there, let me know. Some things are fucked up...but not everything. If you want to argue effectively, then you have to know what you're talking about. You argue from a strictly political sideline point of view, and there is so much more to this whole situation. It's not simple...not in any way, shape, or form, and consequently neither can our opinions be simple.
 
685
0
0
#15
UberSkippy said:
And to FlipTheState, while not all of us are military, as citizens it is still our right and our duty to have these arguments. Granted it might be as irritating as hell to you and the men and women in actual combat. But if conversations like this don't happen the people tacitly approve of actions that put you and your friends in danger. I understand the duty and honor aspects of it, but where you (as in military personel) can't always voice your opinions, we (as civilians) can. It's a check and balance situation where the citizens should take some responsibility in making sure people like you don't get sent into combat for lesser reasons that you should.
I very much agree with you. In fact, it seems that your arguments are the most rounded of any I've come across. My issue isn't that people shouldn't have these arguments...they are indeed central to the democratic ideal.
The thing that irritates me is that people often confuse their points. They often confuse support for the people doing the job with support of the people who sent us there.
To the people who say it's for nothing? What will your argument be when/if Iraq is finally able to stand on its own two feet as a viable soveriegn entity?
While we may have been lied to, that doesn't make what we're doing vain and pointless. It simply makes the Administration vain and pointless.

I'm not saying that the general citizen doesn't have a stake or a right to speak out...I'm saying that if you (collectively) are going to take advantage of that right, then you should damn well be informed and knowledgable. And...you should focus your arguments to support your views, not respond to every news article with the easy way out: "The whole war is for nothing"...

It's just important to me that people understand that there is a difference between supporting the people who went and supporting the people who sent us.
 
1,723
90
112
#16
FlipTheState said:
I very much agree with you. In fact, it seems that your arguments are the most rounded of any I've come across. My issue isn't that people shouldn't have these arguments...they are indeed central to the democratic ideal.
The thing that irritates me is that people often confuse their points. They often confuse support for the people doing the job with support of the people who sent us there.
To the people who say it's for nothing? What will your argument be when/if Iraq is finally able to stand on its own two feet as a viable soveriegn entity?
While we may have been lied to, that doesn't make what we're doing vain and pointless. It simply makes the Administration vain and pointless.

I'm not saying that the general citizen doesn't have a stake or a right to speak out...I'm saying that if you (collectively) are going to take advantage of that right, then you should damn well be informed and knowledgable. And...you should focus your arguments to support your views, not respond to every news article with the easy way out: "The whole war is for nothing"...

It's just important to me that people understand that there is a difference between supporting the people who went and supporting the people who sent us.
The people who sent you are assholes. Bush, as Commander-in-Chief, has a responsibility never to send the soldiers who defend your country into harm's way for anything less than a very good reason.
However, soldiers are not neccessarily assholes. I'm sure some are, but most are not. There are many routes to war, some noble, some not so noble. But the point is this: soldiers take their orders, and they perform them to the best of their abilities.
I do not agree with the war, I think you went there for untruthful reasons, but good things have happened as well. I fully support the men and women over there just trying to do their jobs. They are heroes, no matter what.
There is a saying, that war is the most terrible human creation, but warriors are the best of humanity, because they are willing to put their lives on the line for others.
 

voiceofreason

Seeker of Truth
1,329
0
0
#17
FlipTheState said:
All that and the only thing you have to say is that it actually is that simple?
You didn't say he died in vain, for nothing...you said he 'gave up his life for pointless, blind ambition.'..pick one.
To say he died for blind ambition is to argue that he died so that Bu$h could get a bigger piece of the pie, so that fat politicians could live fat, happy lives. To say he died for nothing...well...maybe you didn't read the entire post.

My comment that you were overgeneralizing was to point out that in your effort to blast the Bu$h administration for its obvious fuck ups, you fail to actually provide a valid point.
Listen, whether or not Bu$h lied to get us over there is a dead issue...we can't continue bringing everything back to that point...why?
BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY OVER THERE!

Whether or not you agree with the 'war', whether or not your tender sensibilities have been offended, or whether or not you've just decided to argue the issue based on some sense of juvenile self-awareness...it doesn't matter. We are there, and no amount of arguing or self-important pontification is going to bring us home.
Aside from whether or not Bu$h is an ass...we really have done a lot for that country. Stuff that you at home in front of your television sets haven't been shown. In a way, I laugh at the irony, because while voicing your loud opinions about how the media is full of shit you still are forced to filter your knowledge of the outside world through it.
What good have we done? I'm not talking about contribution to the global community or a reduction in crude oil prices...that's not my issue. My point is that we've built hospitals, built schools, rebuilt communities, and basically allowed those people a chance to build their own lives, their own government. How do I know these are good things? Well...not sure how many of you speak Arabic or last spoke to an Iraqi national, but try asking a muslim or Arab that's been living in the states for a while how they feel about it. Anyone with a decent education understands that while the Administration might be all fucked up, we still did a good thing.

EDIT: Any time you feel like having an informed conversation about what happens over there, let me know. Some things are fucked up...but not everything. If you want to argue effectively, then you have to know what you're talking about. You argue from a strictly political sideline point of view, and there is so much more to this whole situation. It's not simple...not in any way, shape, or form, and consequently neither can our opinions be simple.
Your arguments are simple minded. If you can't understand that people dying for George Bush's blind ambition are lives lost in vain, then you probably need to find a forum with training wheels...
 
4,149
1
0
#18
FlipTheState said:
And now, for the rest of you:

For us - and by US, I mean military - the war is not always political. Our decisions to go are not always driven by a desire to 'protect our country'. We are not always patriotic poster children. I cannot speak for the Army, because I didn't serve with any of them long enough. I can, however, speak for the Marine Corps.
You people seem to accept that we MUST be Bu$h toting, right-wing conservative, christian fundamentalist clones to be serving in Iraq. I mean, if we didn't believe in the cause, why would we be there, right? :mfinger:
You sit there from within your comfortable lives and convince yourselves that you know something about the value of humanity and comment ad nauseum upon the morality - or lack thereof - of the country in which you live; all the while completely failing to understand anything other than what you think you know.
Boy, I'm glad I only asked about the mother. First off, I'd like to thank you, Sir, for serving in the Marine Corps for whatever reasons you did, whether it was just to defend your own or the country, I don't care. Thank you. As the daughter of a retired Air Force officer I understand how rough it can be on you and on your family.
Secondly, I'd like to support one of your points. My dad has always been a Democrat. He didn't support the war, but he supports the troops because he understands that they're not there for political reasons. Both of us want as many of them brought home safely as possible. He hates Bush, and I know that there are other military folks out there that do. While my dad never actually went into battle, his team had duties controlling the flights over to Iraq, so in a small way his job required him to aid the war despite his personal feelings against it. It came down to his duty to his fellow officer, and for him it was his duty to the country as well. So, basically all I'm trying to say is that FliptheState is right, not all military personnel are right wing Bush supporters.
 
685
0
0
#20
voiceofreason said:
Your arguments are simple minded. If you can't understand that people dying for George Bush's blind ambition are lives lost in vain, then you probably need to find a forum with training wheels...
My posts are never simple-minded, nor are my arguments. The fact that you think this only shows that you don't make it past the second or third sentence.
However, I would like to thank you for completely invalidating any argument you might have had by responding with...wait...is that a flame? Nice job.
Looks like once we get out of the realm of "BUSH SUCKS" that you don't have much to stand on.