[Grovenet] Is This Why The "Support Our Troops" SignsDissappeared

Sat Dec 23 09:43:48 PST 2006

And would you send a son of yours at this time?
I have no problem supporting the troops. Just not 
the war! The way to support them is to bring them 
home!!!
Iraq will never change.
Ed
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: muriel Gordon
  To: Forest Grove local interests list
  Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 9:30 AM
  Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Is This Why The "Support 
Our Troops" SignsDissappeared

  Well I am not sure where you are seeing cars 
but, on my vacation this year we went from 
Oklahoma to New York to Montana, Wyoming, Nevada 
and  back home, all points in between, the signs 
were everywhere. We will always support our 
troops! Yes maybe more troops is the answer, all I 
know is what is going on over there right now is 
not adequate, when talking to family and friends 
over there they agree. If they need more they 
would know.
  Now I don't need any hate mail I am just stating 
my opinions. We need to kick their butts and get 
home. What happens after that is their own.
  Muriel

    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Meredith 
Bliss<mailto:mbliss at agora.rdrop.com>
    To: Forest Grove local interests 
list<mailto:grovenet at rdrop.com>
    Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 10:48 AM
    Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Is This Why The 
"Support Our Troops" SignsDissappeared

    Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the 
strategy in Iraq seems to be based on
    the notion that having a lot of soldiers 
patrolling the streets of Baghdad
    (and elsewhere) will intimidate the 
"insurgents" sufficiently so that they
    will go into hiding. If you subscribe to this 
notion, then the idea of
    sending more troops to be even more 
intimidating makes perfect sense.

    On the other hand, we learned long ago in this 
country that random police
    patrols were a waste of resources: unless you 
have a patrol car going by
    every location in the city every five minutes, 
the intensity of patrol has
    little or no impact on crime rates. And of 
course, no one would want to foot
    the bill for that sort of police presence. 
What does work to some extent is
    targeted patrol and interdiction, and all of 
the strategies of
    problem-oriented / community policing.

    What we have in Iraq seems to be an unlearning 
of those lessons, and most of
    what is accomplished by the troops is just 
providing a target for the
    "insurgents," much as the Redcoats provided 
targets for Colonists in this
    country 230 years ago. What's that expression 
about learning from history?

    Meanwhile, little to no effort has gone into 
training Iraqi police forces
    which have become little more than tools of 
the various tribal factions.

    Six years ago, we were unknowing participants 
in a political "paradigm shift"
    when a new contingent of folks came into power 
with the mantra that we do not
    respond to reality, we create our own reality. 
We are now living through the
    fruits of that terrible fallacy, as an attempt 
to force our reality upon an
    unreceptive world is nearing collapse. No one 
in Washington has a "solution"
    to the mess we've created in Iraq, but the 
consequences of this catastrophe
    will be far reaching. I don't see how anyone 
can believe that more of the
    same will create anything but more of the 
same. The Administration may just
    be hoping that enough more of the same will 
stave off the final collapse
    until after November, 2008.

    Proving once again that "may you live in 
interesting times" is a curse, not a
    blessing.

    On Thursday 21 December 2006 09:45, Ron D'Eau 
Claire wrote:
    > I heard it on the radio the other day and 
started looking around myself.
    > It's true. Almost all of those little 
plastic "Support our Troops" ribbons
    > have disappeared from cars everywhere!
    >
    > Then I see this in the today's news:
    >
    > "Soldiers in Iraq urge Gates to send more 
troops"
    >
    > "(Secretary of Defense) Gates had breakfast 
with U.S. soldiers to hear
    > their views...
    >
    > "Sir, I think we need to just keep doing 
what we're doing," Specialist
    > Jason Glenn told Gates.
    >
    > "I really think we need more troops here. 
With more presence on the ground,
    > more troops might hold them (the insurgents) 
off long enough to where we
    > can get the Iraqi army trained up."
    >
    > None of the soldiers present said U.S. 
forces should be brought home, and
    > none said current troop levels were 
adequate."
    >
    > 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061221/ts_nm/iraq_dc_16<http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061221/ts_nm/iraq_dc_16>
    >
    > But there seems little support for that idea 
at home.
    >
    > My, oh my. How times have changed.
    >
    > Ron D'Eau Claire
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > 
_______________________________________________
    > GroveNet mailing list
    > 
GroveNet at rdrop.com<mailto:GroveNet at rdrop.com>
    > 
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet<http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet>

    -- 
    ----------------------------------------
    Just happy to be here, but speaking
    only for myself!
    Meredith Bliss ---  
www.rdrop.com/~mbliss<http://www.rdrop.com/~mbliss>
    ----------------------------------------
    _______________________________________________
    GroveNet mailing list
    GroveNet at rdrop.com<mailto:GroveNet at rdrop.com>
    http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet<http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet>
  _______________________________________________
  GroveNet mailing list
  GroveNet at rdrop.com
  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet