Thurman's Helmet Posted May 3, 2005 Posted May 3, 2005 Are you sure? The case focuses on speech rights, but it also has become a cause for campus groups — particularly in the Northeast and on the West Coast — that oppose the war. Since January, military recruiters have encountered anti-discrimination and anti-war protesters at San Francisco State University, the University at Albany (N.Y.), the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Seattle Central Community College and several other campuses.
Alaska Darin Posted May 3, 2005 Posted May 3, 2005 Are you sure? 327325[/snapback] Oh, they support them - they just don't want there to be any. Fuggin' hippies. As if "freedom" is actually "free." Middle of Front Page - Video of Medal of Honor Recipient Jack Jacobs on his time visiting the troops in Iraq's "Sunni Triangle." I haven't watched it but heard the radio simulcast on the drive home last night. Neat guy.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 "I think it's outrageous that they can come to schools and make a sales pitch," said Brian DiPippa, 18, a high school senior who protested against military recruiters recently at Carnegie Mellon. I think we should give young Mr. DiPippa a rifle, two canteens and ship him off to Iraq. Hey Brian DiPippa...... :I starred in Brokeback Mountain:
Johnny Coli Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Can we finally put this whole "If you're against the war, you're not supporting the troops" thing to rest? It's a tired argument. New Poll 57% of the people polled now say the war wasn't worth it. That's well above the percentage of people who voted "left" in the last election. Using your argument and these poll numbers, the majority of people in the United States are therefore against the troops. It was a misleading and dumb assessment before this poll, it's even more dumb now.
Alaska Darin Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Can we finally put this whole "If you're against the war, you're not supporting the troops" thing to rest? It's a tired argument. New Poll 57% of the people polled now say the war wasn't worth it. That's well above the percentage of people who voted "left" in the last election. Using your argument and these poll numbers, the majority of people in the United States are therefore against the troops. It was a misleading and dumb assessment before this poll, it's even more dumb now. 327833[/snapback] Polls suck. Polls based on the garbage information given by our media and to people missing the bigger picture suck even worse. I don't disagree with the sentiment but I don't think we'd have had the stomach as a society to win WWII if it happened today.
RuntheDamnBall Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 I think we should give young Mr. DiPippa a rifle, two canteens and ship him off to Iraq. Hey Brian DiPippa...... :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: 327699[/snapback] :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: to an 18-year-old kid who's got a lot to learn. That accomplishes a lot, Joe.
RkFast Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Polls suck. Polls based on the garbage information given by our media and to people missing the bigger picture suck even worse. I don't disagree with the sentiment but I don't think we'd have had the stomach as a society to win WWII if it happened today. 327841[/snapback] People today wont sacrifice their Twinkies, let alone what those who lived in this country during WWII did.
Johnny Coli Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Polls suck. Polls based on the garbage information given by our media and to people missing the bigger picture suck even worse. I don't disagree with the sentiment but I don't think we'd have had the stomach as a society to win WWII if it happened today. 327841[/snapback] I was only trying to point out that I think its ludicris (sic?) to assume that all the people who are opposed to the war do not support the troops over there fighting it.
RkFast Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 I was only trying to point out that I think its ludicris (sic?) to assume that all the people who are opposed to the war do not support the troops over there fighting it. 327857[/snapback] Generally, when you dont support something, you dont support those participating in it, either.
Alaska Darin Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Generally, when you dont support something, you dont support those participating in it, either. 327895[/snapback] YEA! I get to be the contrarian exception to the rule yet again!
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Generally, when you dont support something, you dont support those participating in it, either. 327895[/snapback] Generally...not universally.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: to an 18-year-old kid who's got a lot to learn. That accomplishes a lot, Joe. 327849[/snapback] I agree he's got a lot to learn! And where better to learn "it" than in a combat zone?
PTS Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Can we finally put this whole "If you're against the war, you're not supporting the troops" thing to rest? It's a tired argument. New Poll 57% of the people polled now say the war wasn't worth it. That's well above the percentage of people who voted "left" in the last election. Using your argument and these poll numbers, the majority of people in the United States are therefore against the troops. It was a misleading and dumb assessment before this poll, it's even more dumb now. 327833[/snapback] I think Zogby Polls are still showing Kerry won the election. Polls = RJ
Campy Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 YEA! I get to be the contrarian exception to the rule yet again! 327897[/snapback] Me too. I wonder why AKC hasn't jumped all over this thread yet?
nobody Posted May 4, 2005 Posted May 4, 2005 Why don't we all just reread the billion threads that have already been done on this same issue.
aussiew Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 Yes - as I sit here after staying up until 3am packing more goody boxes for my son and his friends in Iraq - tell me yet again how disloyal I am because I don't support the war.
Ghost of BiB Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 From the benefit of hindsight, and with having to deal daily with the here and now, I really wish we weren't there. Full circle to the exit strategy stuff. I was all for the actions taken in Iraq, as many of you know for several reasons. That opinion doesn't change. Now, it's a hindrance to other things more important. franks was told to do the job with x amount of people. Period. Easy to start the job, much harder to finish it. Now, we're stuck. 100,000 was more than enough needed to take down Iraq. 300,000 on the ground could have had them home by now, and the guys writing military startegy could breathe a little easier. I suggest anyone with any REAL interest beyond nanna nanny boo boo Google the National Security Strategy of the United States, the National Defense Strategy of the US and the National Military Strategy of the US. They are open documents. Digest those, and you can begin to see the problems.
KRC Posted May 5, 2005 Posted May 5, 2005 I suggest anyone with any REAL interest beyond nanna nanny boo boo Google the National Security Strategy of the United States, the National Defense Strategy of the US and the National Military Strategy of the US. They are open documents. Digest those, and you can begin to see the problems. 329264[/snapback] That would require effort. Any way you can condense them into a soundbite for us?
Thurman's Helmet Posted May 5, 2005 Author Posted May 5, 2005 That would require effort. Any way you can condense them into a soundbite for us? 329272[/snapback] but, but I'd miss American Idol!
Recommended Posts