Sigh — don’t call them unpatriotic, or question their “I support the troops but not the war” lies.
Just a few incidents from just the last few days:
- U.S. Solider burned in effigy in Portland —Â Charles at LGF has the disgusting images. The “Fuck the Troops” banner was a nice touch, too (in case anybody tried to spin the symbolism of their effigy burning). And note the “peace” activists defacing the statue of Abe Lincoln — because we all know that the “freedom of speech” includes the right to vandalism.
- Another U.S. Army Recruitment Station vandalized — I’ve written about the vandalization of Recruiting Stations several times in the past. Because my little brother commands a U.S. Army Recruiting Station, this one is especially close to me. I’ve also written that, when Recruiting Stations and the Soldiers who are posted there come under attack, they should be allowed to defend themselves and the property of the U.S. Government:
And I stand by that statement in regards to these ingrates at UCSC — the moment that rock hit the military SUV, they [the Soldiers inside the SUV] should have stopped and engaged the enemy. You might think this extreme — I don’t. We’re at war, and these kids have chosen to become domestic enemies of the US military.
And this has nothing — NOTHING — to do with their First Amendment rights, either. They don’t have the right to attack military personnel. They don’t have the right to destroy and steal military property.
And this bears repeating:
The Army recruiters should simply post a man 24/7 inside the front window, and he should be allowed to use any weapon for which he is qualified (9mm pistol, M-16 rifle, M203 grenade launcher, M2 .50 Cal rifle, etc.) to defend his post against these latte-fueled, sense-of entitlement, ungrateful idiots from further attacks on US Military property and personnel.
Yes. I am advocating the defensive shooting of college students (or other professional protestors) who engage in acts of vandalism and physical attacks against US Military property and personnel as a “justifiable†and “reasonable†form of dissent or protest.
And fuck yes I’m questioning their patriotism.
These “peace activists” (has there ever been a more inappropriately named movement) are the worst kinds of cowards. And I hope they get hit by a bus on their way to their next “rally”.
The ONLY good thing I have to say about this is that it appears that it is not the mainstream. Of course, it could become so. I sincerely hope it doesn’t.
As an aside, it must be frustrating to post topic after topic and when the left can’t find a reasonable argument (or even an acknowledgment that things such as the above are wrong) there is DEAD SILENCE.
Uh, in what way do hooded and masked anarchists haven anything to do with the Democratic Party?
Of course the analogy would be caption a photo of a KKK rally with something like: “Some compassionate conservativism!!!”
I’m sure hatred for the troops is just the beginning for that crowd.
So, to answer your question: It is not supporting the troops. And I doubt it is purporting to.
I wouldn’t call Students for Democratic Society a “hooded and masked anarchist” group.
They conduct their vandalism and assaults without the cover of masks and hoods, but with the full recognition from their university.
I must say the SDS didn’t ring a bell with me till you just brought it up, Robbie, but then bingo, I remembered that group from Viet Nam. I checked on line and understand they disbanded, but now must be back in action if they are one in the same.
If so, all one needs to recall is the hate that they spewed towards our returning soldiers in Viet Nam (or if too young check it out on line). We cannot go there again. Whatever one may think of the current war, it is not the fault of our soldiers.
Damn, am I gonna have to dredge up 40 years ago? Haven’t we learned anything?
I wouldn’t call Students for Democratic Society a “hooded and masked anarchist†group.
Just anarchists, I suppose.
Damn, am I gonna have to dredge up 40 years ago? Haven’t we learned anything?
I think that’s exactly what thousands of people marching in the streets in early 2003 were saying.
Preston, I have to acknowledge your willingness to debate that which is not easily refutable. Thank you for that. I try to do the same on left leaning sites, even if it’s not palatable.
With respect to the argument at hand, I’m not sure which march you are referring to. If it was an anti-war rally, so, that is fine. If it was an anti-soldier war rally, that is not fine.
“Uh, in what way do hooded and masked anarchists haven anything to do with the Democratic Party?”
Well they strongly support the Democrat party with their money and votes. Face it Preston, you’re known by the company you keep.
Isn’t anyone going to question the idea that the military should be able to shoot someone who throws a rock at a car? People assaulting soldiers are breaking the law. They should be arrested, prosecuted, tried, and punished if they are guilty. I remember a while back Robbie making a similar argument when US soldiers were arrested for raping and murdering Iraqi citizens. If US soldiers can kill people who throw rocks at their cars, why couldn’t Iraqi citizens defend themselves from raping and pillaging US troops? In our country, we are guaranteed due process of law. That seems to be a part of our democracy that we are unwilling to extend to people who don’t see things our way.
The point that’s being lost here is that violence and unlawful behavior are reprehensible no matter who commits them. I’m so tired of this “your side is worse than my side” arguing. It’s pointless and incomplete. What does it solve?
Well they strongly support the Democrat party with their money and votes. Face it Preston, you’re known by the company you keep.
You don’t know much about anarchists, I’m going to guess…
Preston, I have to acknowledge your willingness to debate that which is not easily refutable.
I’m not sure what you mean by “not easily refutable”. At the rally that Robbie linked to you have masked anarchists burning US flags; you have average joes calling for US troops to come home; and you seem to have some dumbasses who commemorate dead Muslims by placing crosses in a field… I think it’s obvious looking at the pictures that they have a number of differences in their respective ideologies.
Give me a break…if that isn’t easily refutable, then nothing is. I take back my comment.