Opinion Talk

By Chess

February 29, 2008 8:25 AM | Link to this

He is only in the Military because its going to look “Presidential” later. If I was a rich white kid the war could kiss my royal azz.

By K

February 29, 2008 8:27 AM | Link to this

Once again the media proves there’s good reason not to like them! In the interest of a one or two day news scoop, Drudge put the lives of Harry and his fellow soldiers in danger, and took away Harry’s right to serve his country—a duty he trained for. Drudge should be very ashamed for what it’s done!

By copdawg

February 29, 2008 8:28 AM | Link to this

i think the deployment was fine. the press releasing it was and is irresponsible, god forbid we ever have to fight another major war, there would be no secrets kept.

By Jack

February 29, 2008 8:29 AM | Link to this

Of course he should. He’s no better than your son or mine. I just wish we could send George Bush and his posse to the front lines.

By Rich

February 29, 2008 8:33 AM | Link to this

I think it shows that whatever lot in life you come from, the love and security of your country is paramount to those brave enough to serve and sacrifice. Godspeed Harry.

By Rich

February 29, 2008 8:33 AM | Link to this

I think it shows that whatever lot in life you come from, the love and security of your country is paramount to those brave enough to serve and sacrifice. Godspeed Harry.

By Samantha

February 29, 2008 8:34 AM | Link to this

Just like any other person wishing to fight for their country, that his his or her own decision. Prince Harry said way back he wanted to defend his country, so let him if that’s his decision. However, because he is such a possible high target, I think the media for once could have not aired this story for safety of not only Harry, but his entire troupe.

By E.Lamar

February 29, 2008 8:38 AM | Link to this

I think it was a good decision by the prince to serve his country.Someone once said:”To those that much is given,even more is expected.”Shows a lot of character;some of our American leaders could take a page out of that book.God’s Speed To You,Harry.

By WW4

February 29, 2008 8:38 AM | Link to this

THIS JUST MAKES THE CASE FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO KEEP SECRETS FROM THE THE PRESS AND THE PUBLIC. IT IS OBVIOUS THAT NEITHER CAN BE TRUSTED WITH CLASSIFIED INFORMATION

By WW4

February 29, 2008 8:39 AM | Link to this

THIS JUST MAKES THE CASE FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO KEEP SECRETS FROM THE THE PRESS AND THE PUBLIC. IT IS OBVIOUS THAT NEITHER CAN BE TRUSTED WITH CLASSIFIED INFORMATION

By The Captain

February 29, 2008 8:40 AM | Link to this

Drudge really showed his morals on this one. Screw this kid fighting terrorist, screw his fellow soldiers, screw our allies, just get me a scoop huh!

By WW4

February 29, 2008 8:41 AM | Link to this

THIS JUST MAKES ANOTHER CASE FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO KEEP SECRETS FROM THE PRESS AND THE PUBLIC. NEITHER CAN BE TRUSTED WITH CLASSIFIED INFORMATION

By Christy

February 29, 2008 8:45 AM | Link to this

The press needs to keep their mouth shut! With 2 brothers serving in the armed forces it makes me mad that the press puts our troops in danger when they report things like this. Their was no need for us to know exactly where he was, he is serving his country and they should leave him alone. They put him and the soldier’s around him in danger!

By zeke

February 29, 2008 8:48 AM | Link to this

This is typical of the stupidity of the scourge called the media! These idiots put not only Harry in the crosshairs, but, every other soldier in his unit! This is typical of the elitist views by those in the media that they are above every law, every rule of common sense and in general good intelligent common sense! Everyone reporting anything using anonymous sources should be prosecuted! Their sources must be revealed by law, and, they too must be prosecuted! How many critical negotiations, agreements and treaties have been scuttled by these fools and their anonymous sources? Jail them all and maybe those remaining will get the picture and start doing the right thing!

By NY Nick

February 29, 2008 8:57 AM | Link to this

Kid Got Balls

By Ron

February 29, 2008 9:05 AM | Link to this

Harry was doing it right.He isn’t hiding at home.It wasn’t Drudge that first reported this,but he certainly had no right doing what he did.Soldiers are in the Middle East,in harms way and no one needs to know who or where they are at except the Military.Harry’s unit was comfortable with him there in secrecy,he was not a danger.He is now.Thank you ,Drudge.

By dawgman

February 29, 2008 9:11 AM | Link to this

I agree with many of the statement by zeke,NICK,WW4,etc. on the irresponsibility of the modern press and for Harry and William wanting to serve and stand by their fellow countrymen with the same risks and duties. When you see how many of our boys have gone thru multiple tours of duty over there it makes me proud(Michelle Obama) to be an American. Even a guy that wins a million dollars in a scratchoff wants to fulfill his committment to serve another tour of duty. By the way, “Jack”, Bush flew jets in the Air National Guard and that type of stuff is not a walk in the park or something that doesn’t take a measure of brains, courage and skill to do.

God Bless the USA!!!!!!!!!

By Howard

February 29, 2008 9:12 AM | Link to this

Good for Harry!!! He can never really be a normal person for the rest of his life, so this was his best shot…serving with his comrades in the heat of battle. I applaud and admire him for his guts and courage!! And I respect him a lot more than I ever did.

By The Oddball

February 29, 2008 9:15 AM | Link to this

Drudge is slime, and the mainstream media ought to completely freeze him out. Harry is a good kid trying to serve his country, when he could easily be accumulating his medals “in the rear with the gear.”

NICK, you need to find more reliable sources of information. President Clinton did not downsize the armed forces or intellegence services. He continued the reorganization and consolidation policies of the first President Bush, with very successful results (just ask General Powell or any senior military officer from that period) and maintained very good relations with the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The same cannot be said of the second President Bush or former Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, though current Defense Secretary Gates is trying hard to reverse the damage.

By tomg

February 29, 2008 9:19 AM | Link to this

It’s great! I personally think that all our ‘leaders’ who have the authority to send our men and women into battle should know what its like. Maybe they’ll think twice before committing our forces.

By Tomas

February 29, 2008 9:19 AM | Link to this

Drudge is a twit - why on Earth put the lives of him and his fellow soldiers in jeapordy so as to have a news story like that? At least the British Press understood the importance of it all and had a tacit agreement with MOD. Just the worst kind of journalism…

And Nick - you’re confused as usual. Look into it, but you’ll see that it wasn’t just the Democrats that cut the Armed Forces back - the Republicans were party to that as well…

By the Captain

February 29, 2008 9:22 AM | Link to this

I wonder if the conservative media and pundits are going to denounce Drudge for endangering a solder like they do every “liberal” press outlet???????????

By Grant

February 29, 2008 9:24 AM | Link to this

The hallmark of a good leader: Never ask your troops to do something you are not willing to do yourself.

In this case, never ask your subjects to do what you will not do… what you would not let your children do.

Prince Harry did not leave because his live was in danger. He left because he put his soldiers in greater danger by being there.

I applaud Harry for taking the steps to be with his men and show he is not willing to ask others to serve in his place. Leaders throughout the world should take note: here is a true leader.

By Brian, Decatur, GA

February 29, 2008 9:32 AM | Link to this

think the young man is to be commended for going at all, he could have very easily avoided it. It being known that he is there puts his fellow soldiers at risk because he is such a target. Like it or not he is not just any soldier and I am sure he does not want to be withdrawn at this point, unfortunately he does not make that decision the British General Staff will make it. I am sure that if he had a choice he would stay. I respect him for wanting to go in the first place. Truth be told all the soldiers should be brought home.

By gail varble

February 29, 2008 9:32 AM | Link to this

I believe the United States should stop prying into other countries’ business! The media in our country should be banned from telling everything that is happening in this country! Harry is trying to be a normal man and because of the US can’t even serve his own country! Butt out US!

By gail varble

February 29, 2008 9:33 AM | Link to this

I believe the United States should stop prying into other countries’ business! The media in our country should be banned from telling everything that is happening in this country! Harry is trying to be a normal man and because of the US can’t even serve his own country! Butt out US!

By Friend

February 29, 2008 9:35 AM | Link to this

Oddball is one without the facts. As one in the service during the DOD downsizing, it was not the “reorganization” of Bush, it was the 200k+ downsizing that Clinton and Gore promised in their campaigns.

As far as Harry goes - he was doing the honorable thing and the media showed once again that the scoop is worth more than human lives. Their irresponsibility is the main reason that military operations cannot open themselves to media coverage - they don’t know when to keep their mouths shut!

By SCY

February 29, 2008 9:37 AM | Link to this

Why is this news? Didn’t we fight a revolution to put the farce of a “royal family” behind us?

By steve

February 29, 2008 9:42 AM | Link to this

I don’t think it’s fair to lump Matt Drudge with “the Media.”

Matt Drudge is basically an internet gossip columnist masquerading as a journalist.

The mainstream media outlets in the UK and elsewhere who agreed to not disclose the nature of Prince’s service in Afghanistan until his tour ended did n’t breach that agreement.

By barbie

February 29, 2008 9:43 AM | Link to this

The real question is should matt drudge have run the article concerning harry? NO. Very irresponsible and self serving, as is usual for matt drudge, in my opinion.

By Copyleft

February 29, 2008 9:46 AM | Link to this

NO, he shouldn’t be there! Rich white kids are far too valuable to the country to be risked in combat! (Just ask any 20-something Republican intern working on Capitol Hill.)

By Alexis

February 29, 2008 9:49 AM | Link to this

Prince Harry absolutely should not serve in Afghanistan. He is third in line to the throne of Britain and should not see active combat duty. It is absolutely insane to think that he is equal to any regular citizen, be they British or American. Princes Harry and William, along with all others of their class should not see active duty, period. I realize the prince’s naive desire to be “a normal guy”, but he is not a normal guy, and were I his mother, rest her soul, I would not want my son to risk his exceptional life in a war that should be fought by those who’s future is not so bright. The war must be fought, and these evil muslim extremists must be destroyed; however, we must not allow our best citizens to engage in risky behaviour. Both as a British citizen and as a dual-citizenship American citizen, I oppose adamently this mistake made by my native country’s military.

By Former Dawg

February 29, 2008 9:51 AM | Link to this

Harry shows a lot more class and character than do any of our so called “leaders.” Good for him.

By Former Dawg

February 29, 2008 9:51 AM | Link to this

Harry shows a lot more class and character than do any of our so called “leaders.” Good for him.

By Melissa

February 29, 2008 9:51 AM | Link to this

I think it was all merely a photo-op for Prince Harry. It really cheapens the efforts of the hard working troops on the ground.

By Steve

February 29, 2008 10:00 AM | Link to this

This is a clear example of how the Media, as a whole, has no regard for people’s privacy or safety as long as they can report a story that will grab the public’s attention. Whatever makes headlines. I have heard it said before, “If the media had the access to everything during World War II and were allowed to report it like they do today; Would the outcome of the war had been different?”

By cityfarmgirl

February 29, 2008 10:05 AM | Link to this

I think he serves because he wants to serve his country and the media should have kept their noses out of it and not revealed anything about his deployment. they risked his safety as well as the those of the others in his regiment

By CBL

February 29, 2008 10:07 AM | Link to this

Like it or not, Drudge just advanced from “blogger” to someone who is definitely in the know when it comes to international news that matters. I read his site more often than anything else, and he’s usually got all the links to world news sites for stories that are important (aside from the gossip).

By PR

February 29, 2008 10:19 AM | Link to this

Once again Drudge, and the rest of his sensationalist media cronies prove they are A**holes. They were asked to keep it quiet, but of course sales means more to them than the prince’s aafety. Someone should shoot Matt Drudge and make the world a better place!

By JULIA HALL

February 29, 2008 10:25 AM | Link to this

Spot on Harry !!! Shame on Drudge (what ever that is) I totally agree with the comment from WW4.

By The Oddball

February 29, 2008 10:27 AM | Link to this

FRIEND, you gotta quit getting your information from talk radio. Whatever you think President Clinton may have “promised in his campaign,” there was no reduction in our military capabilities in the 1990s. This claim is made by every party out of power for the last forty years (“I inherited a weakened military!”) General Powell’s longterm plan to move away from interservice rivalry and toward a more unified command and force structure continued throughout President Clinton’s two terms in office. If you can find verifiable support from your proposition from any retired military general (the only ones who can speak freely) you let us all know, OK?

By ATL

February 29, 2008 10:39 AM | Link to this

Ethics in Journalism 101: the media has no ethical standards. Until the media has organizations like Bar Associations that police the ethics of their professionals, my respect for them will remain near zero.

By Neil

February 29, 2008 10:52 AM | Link to this

God Bless Prince Harry for serving in combat in Afganistan! It’s noble of a world leaders child to risk his life in a conflict which his government claims is necessary. Other world leaders children are safe and protected while the common people’s children are sacrificed. Bush why aren’t your daughters in Iraq?!

By reed

February 29, 2008 10:56 AM | Link to this

Great work on Harry serving…seriously, I think it was good move.

CHECK OUT THESE CLOWNS THOUGH.

A LIST OF THE LEAST BELIEVABLE SOLDIERS:

http://www.maxim.com/Theleastbelievablemoviesoldiers/articles/2/19095.aspx?src=tstlbs

COPY AND PASTE IT IF YOU NEED TO…IT’S HYSTERICAL!

By Post 22

February 29, 2008 10:59 AM | Link to this

another example of how the news media are no longer journalists but entertainers. the issue is not the story but the flash what will capture the sheeples attention for the next 20 minutes. there are items the public should know and others we do not need to know…this story was not news only flash.

By joyce

February 29, 2008 11:04 AM | Link to this

May God bless the young man for having the courage to serve and a pox to the media for exposing him. We are fighting two wars: one with our enemy and one with the left wing media.

By bob

February 29, 2008 11:12 AM | Link to this

“If the media had the access to everything during World War II and were allowed to report it like they do today; Would the outcome of the war had been different?”

GOOD POINT!!!!!

way to go Prince Harry and god speed!!

By Dick

February 29, 2008 11:20 AM | Link to this

And I say what about the other guys, are they not important to the media? I could care less he is over there.

By smilingjack

February 29, 2008 11:21 AM | Link to this

I applaud him for his tour of duty. I think its wonderful he was able to be “normal” during that time. He is finding his own way in life and not so controlled by his royal status. GOOD FOR HIM@!!! Shame the media leaked his whereabouts, he was close to finishing his time there.

By jess

February 29, 2008 11:27 AM | Link to this

Prince Harry is to be admired for is service. There should be no more requirement for him to serve in the military than there is a requirement that you or your son. That he honors his countrymen as well as ours is an example of his humanity.

I say: “Harry, you are an example for all free men in the world. Bless you for following the example set by your mother.”

By Aubrey

February 29, 2008 11:31 AM | Link to this

I think that Harry serving his country is extremely admirable. This is just another reason to hate the media. We as the public don’t need to know everything. Drudge could have very well put the lives of Harry and his fellow soldiers in danger. Way to go media.

By gagirl

February 29, 2008 11:31 AM | Link to this

Of course he should serve. Isn’t that why you enlist???

By AJP

February 29, 2008 11:35 AM | Link to this

its really not that strange for a member of the royal family to be involved in active duty during a war. harry’s uncle, prince andrew, was a helicopter pilot in the faulklands war. although the direct heir (ie charles and william) would never be seen in battle, royal men are often well decorated in the military. if the king or queen want to wage war, they must have a very good reason and feel good enough about it that they are willing to risk their own children, grandchildren, nephews, etc.

something for the leaders of this country to ponder…..

By AJP

February 29, 2008 11:35 AM | Link to this

its really not that strange for a member of the royal family to be involved in active duty during a war. harry’s uncle, prince andrew, was a helicopter pilot in the faulklands war. although the direct heir (ie charles and william) would never be seen in battle, royal men are often well decorated in the military. if the king or queen want to wage war, they must have a very good reason and feel good enough about it that they are willing to risk their own children, grandchildren, nephews, etc.

something for the leaders of this country to ponder…..

By Katie

February 29, 2008 11:36 AM | Link to this

Of course he should serve and he did.

By Tim

February 29, 2008 11:38 AM | Link to this

Hey Jack, I agree that anyone wanting to be president needs to at least have served in the military if they want the right send our young men into battle. Since George Bush was a fighter pilot in the military, he qualifies. Since neither of the Clintons’ or Sheik O’Change Obama, or any other Democrat running this election year has the military experience necessary, maybe they should just bow out, or join up. As for Harry, Americans love a rich kid with the guts to back up what he believes in. America doesn’t have any Democrats currently running with a backbone like that.

By FedUp

February 29, 2008 11:43 AM | Link to this

I agree that he should be allowed to serve, anonymously, though. Once the enemy finds out that he is a “royal”, then it puts him AND his entire company in danger. Whoever leaked this story should be sent to front lines.

By Dee Dee

February 29, 2008 11:50 AM | Link to this

Well, give Harry a cookie, he served in the military for a few weeks, now he can go home and live in the lap of luxury with the rest of the inbred, sponging parasites, namely the Royal family who cost the British taxpayers millions every year. My late father spent six years fighting in the second world war and all he got for his trouble was varicose veins. Y’All love the Royals so much you can have them.

By Jack

February 29, 2008 11:50 AM | Link to this

It was exciting to see Prince Harry step up and defend his country. There was a time in America when that was the way things were done. The first President Bush and J.F. Kennedy both fought in combat in the Pacific.

Unfortunately, the current President Bush dodged the draft by using his fathers political power to avoid combat… As did Cheney…

Now Romney has 5 sons but none of them serve. Only the poor serve now and no one thinks anything about it. The far right claims to love the military, they just don’t want to serve…

Go Harry

By Emma

February 29, 2008 12:02 PM | Link to this

To the blogger identified as Alexis, who responded on February 29, 2008 9:49 AM,

You make Harry sound like a god. He puts his pants on one leg at a time just like the rest of us.

YOU WROTE:

“I would not want my son to risk his exceptional life in a war that should be fought by those who’s future is not so bright. The war must be fought, and these evil muslim extremists must be destroyed; however, we must not allow our best citizens to engage in risky behaviour.”

So you’re saying that our men and women who are currently fighting overseas does not have an exceptional life, that their future is not bright and that they are not our best citizens?

It also sounds to me like you’re raising your son to be a coward!

Your response is very offensive to me.

Yes, Harry is from a very privileged family, but he is still human, and when he dies, his body will decay just like everyone else’s when they die.

I applaud the young man for going. And May God bless him for it, but people like you make people like him sound like a god, where lowly human beings like us don’t measure up.

By Jack

February 29, 2008 12:02 PM | Link to this

Tim

Geo Bush was NOT a fighter pilot in the military. In the Viet Nam era, the national guard was a refuge where rich kids went to avoid fighting in Viet Nam. Its an ugly episode America wants to forget.

Bush was 525th on a list when his daddy had him walked to the front of the line… And after 2 years going to drills became too much and HE SIMPLY STOPPED GOING TO DRILLS with NO consequences…

Cheney took 7 deferments as did nearly 100 percent of every Viet Nam era Republican you can name.. including Rush, who had a boil on his a*

By Tim

February 29, 2008 12:43 PM | Link to this

Let’s see. Every Vietnam Era Republican I can name. Hmmmm. John McCain - Vietnam Fighter Pilot, P.O.W. for 5 years, War Hero, next President. No need to add to the list.

By Alexis

February 29, 2008 12:48 PM | Link to this

To Emma The men and women serving in the US Military, as well as most other civilized militaries across the world, are from the lower classes. It is a fact. They join because they do not have the means to raise themselves to the status that they wish to attain, therefore they turn to the military as a way to a better life. My sons, both of them, know that the military is not an option for either of them, as they do not have to lower themselves; they have the advantages of having been born into the right sort of family who can pave the way for a life that is virtuous and rewarding. Prince Harry is not a God, but he is infact of a better class than the majority of his military commrades. It is a fact of life. You are offended, so be it. The truth can be offensive to those who don’t wish to hear it.

By Copyleft

February 29, 2008 12:51 PM | Link to this

Tim: We ran military veterans for office the last two times, but it wasn’t enough for the Repugnants—who even directly attacked war hero John Kerry for his military service while propping up another AWOL runaway (GWB)!

Military service doesn’t actually mean anything to the far right… they only care about your willingness to be a tool of neoconservative dreams of empire.

By Copyleft

February 29, 2008 12:55 PM | Link to this

As for “qualification to be commander of the U.S. military”—you mean, like Gee Dubya?

After his botched performance, a trained parakeet is qualified by comparison.

By Honey

February 29, 2008 12:57 PM | Link to this

Yep he should’ve went just all of George Bush’s relatives along with his wife’s relatives who qualify should go, they are no better than anyone else

By Blogfather

February 29, 2008 1:04 PM | Link to this

In the opening days of our great civil war, a beloved national figure was keeled, and even Lincoln was devastated. The entire nation mourned this one young man for weeks, not realizing that 600K would soon follow.

War should be a last resort. We waded into this war without a mission. What is the mission?

The Kurdish history alone should give any reasonable man pause. If only it was the Kurds. We might squeak through this if it only was the Kurds.

We are in for the fight of our young country’s life. It’s still the first inning. You people have no idea what Bush has wrought. You still think the surge matters? the surge? what’s a surge, but a police foot patrol. Everyone knows that when you increase police presense in an area, the crime rate drops there. So what? So what if we buy time for the Sunnis and Shia to compromise with issues they’ve been killing each other over for 14 centuries. They hate each other to death. They needs a civil war just like we needed one. What that country needs is a good five-year civil war.

I say we let them fight it out, fair and square. That’s the only way. Draw our troops out and back toward the Syrian and Iranian border to prevent reinforcements and let them fight. They winner will be Iraq. The Kurds are defacto independent anyway, so let them be Kurdistan.

And if Iraq wants to invade the Kurds, which is very likely, then let them be allied with Turkey and maybe we can all finish the swarthy kurds off once and for all and for the common good!

See how complicated the Iraq Mission is? None of you have any idea.

Aw just go soak your collective heads.

By Tim

February 29, 2008 1:24 PM | Link to this

Copyleft,

explain “neoconservative dreams of empire.” Would that be the EMPIRE we created for ourselves in France circa 1944? That would be the many graveyards holding our young men. Or how about the EMPIRE we claimed in Japan or Germany. We left after the war and didn’t claim any EMPIRE. Just what EMPIRE have we built? An EMPIRE that is willing to go in and try to save women and children from the horrors of these Middle Eastern ditactorships? Who have we “conquered” for our own monetary gain in the past 150 years? I for one do not believe we are going to stop these ignorant fools in the Middle East from trying to destroy mankind in the name of Allah, BUT, we do not do what we do for Oil, Money, or Empire building you Liberal fool. We are doing it to keep a very screwed up group of people from eventually destoying the planet.

By Emma

February 29, 2008 1:41 PM | Link to this

Alexis, I guess John F. Kennedy, Jimmy Stewart, Clark Gable, Elvis Presley, and Pat Tilman to name a few rich, famous and very accomplished people, did not have “the means to raise themselves to the status that they wish to attain, therefore they turn to the military as a way to a better life.” Obviously you don’t understand and underestimates the meaning of military service. American men 18-25 are required to register with the government and if there is a draft, the ones who are called will be required to go.

Nonetheless, I was not questioning the reason why people serve in the military. My issue was the fact that you spoke of this young man, this mere mortal as a god…perhaps your god.

By Alexis

February 29, 2008 1:59 PM | Link to this

Emma, quite frankly, Pat Tillman was rich only because he could play a game; Elvis Pressley only because he could sing (according to some) well, etc. ad nauseum. The only person on your list who was born affluent was John Kennedy. And he was a Democrat, so that explains his ignorance.

This war is for the poor. This war is to destroy Islam and extend the reach of Conservative Christian Principles to that area of the world, and thus extend The Republican way of life to those unfortunate people. The war should be ran by the elite and fought by the poor. That is the way to build a civilization. Classism is as old as the world itself and those who doubt it are only fooling themselves into believing they are as good as those of us who are their better. It’s that simple.

As for debating the meritocracy of the Republican nominees for President in the past, and in particular President Bush; well you who would doubt are President are guilty of Treason in my mind. You are no better than the Muslims who hate Christianity and want to destroy the free world. President Bush is a great man who is doing great things, and history will remember him for it. You traitors make me sick.

By Tom

February 29, 2008 3:26 PM | Link to this

We should care about what this guy does….why? So they pull him out and leave the rest of the guys fighting there…..wow…that’s rich!

By Copyleft

February 29, 2008 3:39 PM | Link to this

I notice you ducked the question, Tim. What exactly was your problem with the last two Democratic veterans who ran for the presidency—Al Gore and John Kerry (a war hero who actually DESERVED the title)?

Funny, the last time I checked, “getting captured and tortured” doesn’t make you a hero. That falls under the category of VICTIM. And it’s fascinating how you came up with new “requirement” for the Oval Office only AFTER two Democratic vets made their runs for it against a proven deserter.

By MrLiberty

February 29, 2008 5:30 PM | Link to this

It would be far more appropriate if every child of every person in the criminal Bush administration and every child of every senator and congresperson that voted to allow him to illegally declare war on Iraq were forced to serve. And that would include down to age 1.

Why should only innocent Iraqi children have to die? Its not like any Iraqi had anything to do with 9-11, or was singlehandedly propping up Sadam’s regime or otherwise, yet millions are dead and disfigured and the clowns in our government go on their merry way as if nothing has happened.

By Gil

February 29, 2008 5:32 PM | Link to this

Clinton didn’t downsize the military? What a laugh. Here’s an exercise: look up the Army units that fought in Gulf War I (Desert Storm). Then look to see how many of them exist today. I guarantee you, it wasn’t the Bush administration that decommissioned them.