Current weather

  • Overcast, light rain
  • 48°
    Overcast, light rain
  • Comment

Veteran's perspective appreciated

Posted: June 17, 2014 - 2:54pm  |  Updated: June 18, 2014 - 8:44am

Thank you Colonel Pollock for sharing your insight and experiences in Iraq (Clarion, June 13). I can’t imagine what the families of the dead and disabled veterans must be thinking when they read about how their loved ones sacrifices have been for naught.

It would appear that not only are we giving up the fight against terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are also giving up the fight for energy independence.  Today’s paper says that oil prices are starting to spike with the upheaval in Iraq, yet we continue to throw up roadblocks to the development of our own energy resources in this country. 

Then I read about how we gave up 5 terrorist who will surely rejoin the fight against us. Are we purposely trying to loose? What happened to this country?

I think you know the answer. Don’t forget to take a friend to vote this fall.

  • Comment

Comments (11) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
Suss
3512
Points
Suss 06/18/14 - 07:33 am
5
0
SOFA, Mr. Smith

The Status of Forces Agreement signed by Bush mandated the pullout of American troops.

Read it for yourself. Iraq got the terms Iran wanted. This was Bush's deal, no one else agreed on behalf of The United States.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/20081119_SOFA_FINAL_AGRE...

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/terrorism/a/iraqsofa.htm

Oil Production in America is at an all time high. Our country is now exporting refined products to foreign countries.

Too "loose" to lose, is not a policy.

Bush and his war mongers lied to get our troops into wars, signed off on getting our troops out of the war, and as some would like to make believe that this is all the fault of the current administration.

The first casualty of war is always THE TRUTH, now those lies continue.

I thank all that served. Please reflect on those that did.

We do not need to put more troops in Iraq because of failed plans of the Bush/Cheney for profit war machine.

jford
1738
Points
jford 06/18/14 - 10:15 am
3
1
Mr Smith,

The colonel might have experiences in Iraq but his insights were shown to be deeply flawed. The colonel was shown to be grossly misinformed.

As for the fight for energy independence, that is a mythical talking point. It's not a tangible thing at all.

Ever since the oil embargo in the 70s people have propped up a talking point centered on the phrase energy independence.

With the US consuming energy at the pace we do, we cannot and will not ever produce enough to gain what's been called energy independence. It's simply not physically possible.

Yes, crude production in the US is rising, around a 35% increase in the last ten years, but taken as a percentage of world inventories, it's only about a 1 percent change. That !% change isn't going to change pricing, and it's certainly not making a dent in our consumption. Yes, we do export some crude, but that's not because we've exceeded our own needs, that's because the oil companies can make more money on foreign markets and we let them do it before insuring our own needs are met.

We didn't give up 5 terrorists, we conducted a prisoner swap, something that's been done countless times before without some hysterical insecure wailing that it means the end of democracy as we know it.

Please try to inform yourself of realities before expressing your unfounded hysteria.

bluelight413
14
Points
bluelight413 06/18/14 - 10:23 am
0
2
Thank you Mr Smith

Suss, You are telling the part of the story that supports your narrative. A SOFA is always negotiated for a set period of time. All SOFA agreements are caveated with the clause that if it isn't renewed, the troops have to leave. The end date for the expiring SOFA was set under the assumption that the Obama and Maliki government would renew the agreement and that the US would continue on with the train advise and assist mission. Negotiations broke down in the fall of 2011. I have linked the NYT editorial by David Brooks (no fan of Bush policies) that describes the fallout of the failed negotiation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/13/opinion/david-brooks-the-sunni-shiite-...

Suss
3512
Points
Suss 06/18/14 - 11:30 am
3
0
Iraq's Terms

The SOFA agreement could of, would of, should of but did not change.

Iran had held great influence over Iraq during the original signing and later negotiations.

I guess we are free to assume Bush's going to war is also a failure to negotiate.

More on why we left Iraq....

http://world.time.com/2011/10/21/iraq-not-obama-called-time-on-the-u-s-t...

bluelight413
14
Points
bluelight413 06/18/14 - 11:55 am
2
2
Suss

Suss, if you are waiting for me to endorse our original policy regarding going to war in Iraq, you'll be waiting awhile. Don't assume because I'm critical of one President's policy, I'm endorsing another's.

jford
1738
Points
jford 06/18/14 - 09:48 pm
1
1
What we can assume,

is that you, like the colonel, and like Mr Smith, would like to lay off Bush's mistakes on the present administration.

As for David Brooks, your lame attempt to stake out anti-Bush territory for Brooks is just the same kind of misdirection and deceit.

David Brooks was a major pro Iraq war cheerleader.

He was a Bush enabler, a Bush booster. He's also been identified as a documented Bush apologist.

Brooks, back then was writing for the Weekly Standard, and no matter how many times one goes back to review the bile and the pompous arrogance of all those people at that time, who were so very wrong about Iraq, it's astounding to recognize that not once have these people acknowledged that all they wrote was wrong.

The Weekly Standard, of course, was edited by Bill Kristol, who has an even worse track record on the war. Both of them got jobs with the NYTimes. Not a good reflection in NYTimes hiring practices.

These are the very last people who should shape the discussion of American foreign policy. They've proven themselves inept, totally incompetent.

No subterfuge from you is going to wipe the slate and resurrect Brooks as being anti-Bush, that's not being honest.

As to claiming the president didn't hold up his end, saying Bush signed the SOFA 'expecting Obama' to right his wrong, and that he failed, that's another lie. A plain and simple lie. That's a fabrication, meant to deflect from the reality.

And it's not new, it's been debunked for years, ever since right-wing media started trying to claim that the current violence in Iraq is the result of the 2011 withdrawal of U.S. troops in Iraq and President Obama's willful failure to secure a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

In reality, Iraq refused the terms of a SOFA with the U.S. despite Obama's efforts to maintain a military presence there. Iraq supported Bush's decision to sign an end to the earlier SOFA, and Iraq was the reason there was no further SOFA.

Quit attempting to deceive, plenty of people have already tried it before you and they aren't any more successful. You failed in your attempt to deceive, just as the colonel failed, and just as Mr Smith failed.

cheapersmokes
880
Points
cheapersmokes 06/20/14 - 09:03 am
1
2
jford for President!

Whoever this jford is they should run for President since they try to come off as some super being....knowing all and with the vision to see into the past and determine just how the future will play out! Then if elected they could then blame everything on Obama just like he has done.

Yes, this is a sarcastic post for those little minded liberals out their!

leewaytooo
1759
Points
leewaytooo 06/20/14 - 03:36 pm
0
0
"their"?????????????????? rea

"their"??????????????????

really.......do you proof read....or.. simply incompetent when

it comes to grammer?

it should be "there"

it's ok... I just figured you were trying to obfuscate the

truth like good little repukes do day and night for

the length of their lives ..............so go there

Suss
3512
Points
Suss 06/22/14 - 08:10 am
1
1
I loved my Grammer

I loved my Grammer but she died. She did her best to teach me grammar before she passed.

grammer
"A common typo for grammar. Most commonly found in sentences that correct someone else's grammar."

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=grammer ^^^^^^^

"Your and idiot Randy because you have bad grammer" (sic)
^^^^^Humor^^^^^^^ or maybe not!

"their"?????????????????? rea"
"their"??????????????????"
"really.......do you proof read....or.. simply incompetent when"

"it comes to grammer?"

"it should be "there"

"it's ok... I just figured you were trying to obfuscate the

truth like good little repukes do day and night for

the length of their lives ..............so go there"

Leewaytoo. ^^^^^^^^^

Maybe, just maybe quotes and arrows will suffice. The links were sufficient for most, but not for all.

I see that the "grammer vs. grammar" problem has caught on with other corrections, but again not all. LOL

jford
1738
Points
jford 06/22/14 - 07:42 am
2
1
Worse than cheapersmoke's indecipherable grammar is the lack,

...of any ability to make any sense of the word salad.

But when attempting to defend the indefensible, the wingers do what they do best, they sputter and fume to no discernible effect.

leewaytooo
1759
Points
leewaytooo 06/22/14 - 12:57 pm
0
3
a little vowel a vs e and one

a little vowel a vs e and one jumps up and down in

anticipation.... not quite like passing off someone

else's words as being your own.... kind of like

plagiarism.........oh no

I will try to do better next time..............lol

"grammer
A common typo for grammar. Most commonly found in sentences that correct someone else's grammar."

see, use quotation marks and it is not like you are taking some one else's words straight from

urban dictionary and passing them off as your own.

thought you were going "to do better"??

and it is, you're not your. lol

it would seem that spell check thinks that grammer is related to Kelsey not linguistics.

and I thought you were capable of doing "better" ??

Back to Top

Spotted

Please Note: You may have disabled JavaScript and/or CSS. Although this news content will be accessible, certain functionality is unavailable.

Skip to News

« back

next »

  • title http://spotted.peninsulaclarion.com/galleries/321268/ http://spotted.peninsulaclarion.com/galleries/321253/ http://spotted.peninsulaclarion.com/galleries/321248/
  • title http://spotted.peninsulaclarion.com/galleries/321243/ http://spotted.peninsulaclarion.com/galleries/321208/ http://spotted.peninsulaclarion.com/galleries/320593/
  • title http://spotted.peninsulaclarion.com/galleries/321173/ http://spotted.peninsulaclarion.com/galleries/321163/
My Gallery

CONTACT US

  • 150 Trading Bay Rd, Kenai, AK 99611
  • Switchboard: 907-283-7551
  • Circulation and Delivery: 907-283-3584
  • Newsroom Fax: 907-283-3299
  • Business Fax: 907-283-3299
  • Accounts Receivable: 907-335-1257
  • View the Staff Directory
  • or Send feedback

ADVERTISING

SUBSCRIBER SERVICES

SOCIAL NETWORKING

MORRIS ALASKA NEWS