Please explain, in your opinion, the difference between terrorists and rebels.

Was Timothy McVeigh a terrorist or a rebel in your opinion?

Trying to overthrow a democratic government = terrorism. That is what the insurgents are doing.

I just noticed ANOTHER lie. Amazing, so many lies in so short a quote. Of course, lies don't make him biased - what?

Raytri, let's pretend for a moment that the articles you cite are completely truthful and unbiased (measured and balanced, if you will), does that mean you contend that the man is honest and unbiased? No, I didn't read the articles you posted, because even if I conceded that they were unbiased, it doesn't change my argument.

__________________
"Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves." ~Ronald Reagan

What's the lie? Isn't every soldier subject to stop-loss? Aren't many units gearing up for or already involved in repeat deployments to Iraq?

Sure, eventually Iraqi forces will take over. But that's not happening very quickly. The objective reality is that many units and many soldiers can look forward to extended tours and repeat deployments -- especially combat units.

Heck, even Newsmax recognizes that: http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...24/93150.shtml

So does the military: http://www.military.com/NewsContent/...040805,00.html

The Army has cycled more than 900,000 soldiers in and out of Iraq and Afghanistan over the last three years, with about 375,000 of them deploying more than once.

That sentence is a little vague, but even if you read it as "900,000 separate individuals", that means nearly half of them have already served multiple tours. Throw in extended tours and units currently preparing to redeploy there, and I think Nordland provided an accurate picture of a soldier's prospects.

I guess not. But if you can't judge a man by what he writes and says, how can you judge him? I'm not sure I get your point.

__________________
Man up.

Army may cut Iraq tour time in half...
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-break...3648-8432r.htm

GIs On Extended Iraq Tours Offered Bonus
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/...022104,00.html

Rumsfeld Extends Iraq Tour for 20,000 Troops
http://www.iwar.org.uk/news-archive/2004/04-15.htm

None of these stories support Nordland's claim that most soldiers have little to look forward to but another tour.


I choose to judge him by the whole of what he writes and says, not a few choice things. If John Doe writes one false story and one true story, why do you bother reading his third story?

__________________
"Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves." ~Ronald Reagan

Thanks for the links. Added them to my own database for future use.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8080407/

Here is but one of several links to the UN satellite and the missing weapons that, according to the left, never existed in the first place. So once again, how can something be missing that never existed in the first place? Hmmmmm?

__________________
"Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival."
Winston Churchill

The first story is about how the Army is considering shorter, more-frequent tours instead of one-year tours. The other two are about extending tours for troops already there. What's your point?

They don't prove Nordland's point, but that's because they don't address it. My link on total Army deployments does. Some troops are being extended; Many of those that rotate home can expect another tour in Iraq after they complete their stateside rotation.

If you're saying that the stateside rotation and tax bonuses are "something to look forward to" besides another tour, I agree, but you're parsing his words quite finely. The fact is many soldiers currently in Iraq can expect to go back within a year or two, and 375,000 Army soldiers have already done so.

Fine, but what you call "lies" are anything but. You're pouncing on ambiguities and generalities and calling them lies; you denounce anecdotal descriptions because they do not match your own anecdotal experiences.

When the Downing Street memo says intelligence was "fixed" around an invasion, do you see that as conclusive proof of Bush lying, or do you give it a more generous reading? Me, I read it as a bit ambiguous though worthy of follow-up.

I bring that up to make the point that people use language imprecisely. Generalizations are by nature inaccurate in the details. What means one thing to one person can be read a different way by another.

Everything I've read from Nordland reflects tough but fair reporting. When you read his interviews with generals, the questions are neither timid nor accusatory. When you read his analyses they tend to focus on the problems rather than the achievements, but is that bias or simply what's interesting? The trouble still ahead is always more newsy than the troubles already overcome, especially in analysis pieces that are SUPPOSED to look ahead.

Remember that the media are supposed to be a bit oppositional to power, AND find the stories that nobody else is writing about. The government has no trouble being heard; reporting the White House view is a matter of mere stenography, which essentially is what the White House press corps is. It's the other stories that require digging.

For example, here's a piece on the reconstruction in Iraq, written in 2003: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3339605/

He states at the outset that this is the "boldest reconstruction project since the Marshall Plan" and that "we cannot afford to fail." Then he goes on to detail how corruption, insurgent attacks and other problems are hobbling progress, as well as criticizing the administration for using misleading numbers when describing progress. They actually visited several schools listed as "rehabilitated", only to discover that that word doesn't seem to mean what we think it means.

He makes clear that the intentions are good, the people sincere, a lot of work is being done under difficult conditions, etc. He specifically pooh-poohs the idea that contractors are gouging on fuel prices, for example.

Is that "bias"? Is he anti-U.S.? Or is he simply doing what he's supposed to do -- going to look with his own eyes at the facts on the ground?

__________________
Man up.

Okay, it doesn't say the UN has a satellite, only that they're using satellite imagery. That makes more sense.

What's missing is equipment that was being monitored by U.N. inspectors prior to the invasion, most of which is dual-use. They are not weapons nor necessarily part of a functioning program to develop weapons.

This is not new.

__________________
Man up.

So.....it should have been destroyed by UNSCOM a long time ago.

And speaking of satellite imagery.......so we're NOW supposed to believe satellite imagery 100% when we weren't supposed to just before the Iraq war?

__________________
Clintonite after Clintonite. My question is, "So when does this so-called CHANGE start?"

"They are not weapons nor necessarily part of a functioning program to develop weapons."

You must be reading a different article than the one I linked, because the article cites these sites as ones used to manufactor and produce WMD's used prior to 1991. It also reports these locations could be used for either WMD's or making normal industrial chemicals.

The main point is, the UN was never allowed to observe these sites to the extent of determing what was being made at these locations. It could just as easily be WMD's as not.

And now, all the equipment is missing. Now, if the equipment was being used to make conventional chemicals, then why the need to dismantle and HIDE the equipment? Just what is Saddam HIDING?

The US and its allies decided Saddam could not be trusted, so we Lee Harvied Saddam and his troops.

__________________
"Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival."
Winston Churchill