Our mistake in the current war | Napa Valley Register

Home » Opinion » Letters To The Editor

Our mistake in the current war

Thursday, January 08, 2009

Comment

Dear editor, War, by its very definition, is often a violent and aggressive goal to vanquish and emerge victorious.

Since the end of World War II, Americans have come to disdain war, yet it was that war that retained our rights and protected this country’s basic principles.

I had to give up my dreams to serve my country during Lyndon Johnson’s war in Vietnam.

Fifty-eight thousand others lost much more than their dreams and goals.

There were no memorials to them other than the grieving family putting their child, brother or uncle to his or her final rest.

Having been a medic in the Air Force, I learned at a very young age that death is often a long and painful experience for the wounded.

I believe neither Mr. Johnson nor George Bush understood the concept of war. Conflicts are safe excuses for politicians.

One major difference between LBJ’s war and our current experience with a small collection of radicals is the clear and present danger to the continental United States of America.

Some sacrifices have to be made. Most Americans, sans the ACLU, understand this.

I have seen videos that should be made public as Americans have the right to know why we consider Mideast leaders as enemies.

Saddam Hussein was eventually hung for his crimes against his own people, as well as those against United States. His complicity in the destruction of America is only a perfunctory beginning. The enemy continues to exist.

War is the violent and overwhelming assault on a decided enemy.

In this case, our enemy. Sept. 11, 2001, is comparable to Pearl Harbor. The problem here is that this “war” continues to exist!

George Bush’s mistake is that he did not seek out and destroy the enemy.

James Clark / Napa

60 comment(s)

kevin wrote on Jan 8, 2009 4:58 AM:

" This particular enemy has been fighting for 1200 years and is prepared to continue for another 1,000 years if necessary. It will be a long war, Jim.

Unfortunately our new President doesn't seem to "get it". His selection of an unqualified and inexperienced CIA director is a perfect example... "

Raven wrote on Jan 8, 2009 5:15 AM:

" and how exactly was Hussein involved in the destruction of America?....

The enemy that attacked us was based in Afghanistan, so why pull resources out to start a second front in Iraq? There was no connection between him and the attack of 9/11.

Where was this clear and present danger,? there were no WMDs, which was our stated reason for going into Iraq.

You're right about one things, Bush doesn't understand what war is really like. "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Jan 8, 2009 6:14 AM:

" Hmmm, maybe Jim Clark has a point.

George W. Bush did turn away from Afghanistan and the pursuit of Bin Laden and waste thousands of American lives and over a trillion dollars in Iraq.

Since Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11... then it could be fairly said that Mr. Bungle did not seek out and destroy the enemy.

He lied us into a sidewhow intractable occupation of Iraq instead of seeking out and destroying Bin Laden.

~Ruff "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Jan 8, 2009 6:29 AM:

" I don't believe that the ACLU does not understand war, Jim.

The ACLU has been trying to get the Bush administration to win the war the way we always have by using interrogation techniques that WORK instead of UN-American torture, and rendition.

The ACLU has also been trying to get the Bush administration to stop wasting time listening in on, for instance, the private phone calls of American troops calling home to their wives for a little 'hot chat'.

It has turned out that the ACLU has been correct in trying to turn the Bush away from un-Constitutional, impractical, backfiring stupidities to the winning tactics of obeying George Washington (who won our freedom) rules about the treatment of prisoners.

Jim, you may WISH that the tactics of D*ck Cheney and George W. Bush were winning tactics, but after fighting longer than WWII -- George Washingtion was correct and the Bungle administration was dead wrong about everything.

In short, Jim Clark, the ACLU is not to blame for losing in Iraq - George W. Bush is. The US Constitution is the reason America is worth fighting for, not some warmongering liars and torture-enablers.

We are supposed to be a nation of LAWS, not of torture.

~Ruff "

freeport56 wrote on Jan 8, 2009 8:00 AM:

" Just as in your war jim, the press is almost as dangerous an enemy!

We won in Vietnam and iraq and defeated by the press.

Do you think Ruff(Al) ever served? "

Rocketman wrote on Jan 8, 2009 9:24 AM:

" freeport56.......you kinda skipped over a very valid point about Iraq and I have to disagree with you regarding Vietnam. The "troops" won the war in Vietnam; the US government gave up and retreated, leaving North Vietnam in power. Bush won the war in Iraq in just a couple of weeks. The war IS OVER. Saddam and his tyrannical government were defeated. His government is NO longer in power. What is occurring now is more of a police action and a war on terrorism that is being funded by outside sources from Iraq. If we describe war as keeping people from harming others, then we are at war with the criminals in the United States. We won in WW1 and WW2 because countries surrendered. How can we honestly say that we are at war in Iraq? Because people are dying?? Look around folks, people are being killed by criminals in the US at a greater rate than what is happening in Iraq. "

Sandra wrote on Jan 8, 2009 9:38 AM:

" The main problem with those who keep saying that Saddam was not Bin Laden, and we should of stayed focused on Bin Laden, is that they really lack an understanding of the history of terrorism in the middle east. They are clueless as to Saddam's famnily connections to terrorism, and his promotuion of it outside his borders by financial support, and allowing terrorists to clandestinally meet and plan attacks from within his borders.
Until people take the time to educate themselves on the history of terrorism, and what the tenets of Islam mean for its followers and non-followers, we will continue to hear the nonsense put forth.
They are focused on WMD's as if that was the only reason we went into Iraq. The intelligence may have proved to be incorrect.(Which is a whole other story, thank you President Clinton.) No one can be totally certain as there is some evidence of things being dismantled and moved. BUT, wmd's are only one small reason out of many why removing Saddam was the right thing to do.
I agree with Jim, big mistakes were made in this war, but the desire to remove Saddam, and the attempt to stabalize Iraq with the hopes of a democracy were not the mistakes. "

wpr wrote on Jan 8, 2009 10:43 AM:

" "Mr. Rough", The ACLU is not to blame? Really? I suppose Hamas is not to blame either? I bet you all those rain drenched conspiracy theorists in Oregon agree with you. "

freeport56 wrote on Jan 8, 2009 11:57 AM:

" Rocketman-

My words were meant to convey your sediment exactly. I also meant to say that the Liberal press is our worst enemy.

Thankyou Rocketman for some great points.. "

glenroy wrote on Jan 8, 2009 12:51 PM:

" Sandra…Rocketman…Kevin….wpr…and of course Freeport….you guys and gals are nails…. "

alucawanza wrote on Jan 8, 2009 1:04 PM:

" Sandra:
I guess I'm clueless and lack understanding of the history of terrorism. I must educate myself. I need to stop focusing on WMDs. They weren't the reason we went to war with Iraq. What???

Congress voted to give Bush support to go to war on the basis of intelligence reports that WMDs existed and were a threat. Our troops hunted for them everywhere.

Bush used 9/11 as an excuse to invade a sovereign nation, arrest its leader, and install an occupational force. Over 4,00 soldiers are dead, countless injured. This country went broke supporting this war based on lies.
And you want to blame Clinton??

The buck stops at Bush's desk. He should have verified the intelligence. He should have been truthful. Didn't your heart just skip a beat when he landed on the carrier and proclaimed: "Mission Accomplished"? What a cowboy! What theatrics. Except...what suffering has been the result of this.

How should it end, Sandra? How safe will our guys be in getting out? Bush never made a plan for withdrawing the troops. He's a decider, not a planner/thinker. What will happen to those wonderful men?

And who else should be removed? We are having problems with Iran and North Korea. Why don't we "stabilize" those countries "with the hopes of a democracy?"
It was a mistake, Sandra. It is a disgrace. Shameful.
12 days to go. "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Jan 8, 2009 1:26 PM:

" Dear 'wpr' -

Please show me where the ACLU sued President Bush to FORCE him to

...drop the ball in Afghanistan before our true enemy was defeated there.

...invade and occupy Iraq.

You can't... because Mr. Bungle got his war on without interference from the ACLU... period.

The ACLU has sued to force the government to follow our Constitution for decades.

In truth the ACLU has been singularly unsuccessful in getting the Bush administration to follow ANY law, wpr.

Please show me where Bush has turned away from lawbreaking because of the ACLU. I'll buy you a BIG STEAK DINNER!

Every time we stray from the wisdom of the Founders in law and the wisdom of George Washington in war -- we get our arses handed to us.

Bush is just the worst example of a presidential 'smartypants' who thought he knew better than the folks who won the Revolutionary War and founded the Supreme Law of Our Land.

I'm not going to kowtow to a bunch of self-styled 'super-patriots' who don't understand the most simple principles this country was founded on.

Mr. Bungle and his cretins ignored the REPEATED WRITTEN WARNINGS and let mainland America be attacked for the first time since the War of 1812.

Mr. Bungle and his criminals brought these multiple disasters down on America completely with their own hardheads and rejected all contrary evidence and advice.

Why should any sensible American have respect for somebody who wants to blame the ACLU for Mr. Bungle's HISTORIC INCOMPETENCE?

THINK, BABY, THINK!

~Ruff "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Jan 8, 2009 1:37 PM:

" Sandra - Where ya Bin Laden?

Still pushing the Saddam Hussein as worse than the guys who actually attacked us KoolAide?

Some people are slow learners, so maybe you can tell us why it was such A GRAND STRATEGY to leave Bin Laden undefeated while splitting our forces to invade Iraq and end up failing at both?

It has turned out to be a disaster for the USA because we are now fighting two wars at once with no natural allies.

Sandra, Bush is just as incompetent as president as he was at running 'Arbusto (Bus or Shrub in espanol) Oil'.

It astounds me that folks still can't face the facts about Mr. Bungle's Wild Ride.

~Ruff "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Jan 8, 2009 1:51 PM:

" fp56 - my memory of your writings is much better than your memory of mine.

Yes, I served!

In the US Navy. My father served in the US Navy and was a 100% disabled Navy vet. Many of my uncles were marines and others served in Patton's army.

It's always interesting that frightwingerz assume that somebody didn't serve because they think Bush is a bum.

AND YET... if you ask if a carbuncle like Rush Limbaugh if he should spew on military affairs because he did not serve... well that's just sooooo unfair!

Because I served... and because I'm not stupid... I have little truck with Mr. Bungle's 'singular achievements' as the worst president in American history.

Sadly... I'm also not Al Cardwell, although I have often enjoyed his zingers to the frightwingerz.

It's always a such complement to hear you repeat your same mistake concerning Al and I!

Chiao!

~Ruff "

wpr wrote on Jan 8, 2009 1:55 PM:

" "glenroy" - Explain "nails"?

"Mr. Limbluff" - No thanks for the dinner. Oregon is looking better and better isn't it? Thinking is a two way street. Don't you think "Baby"?

P.S. - Hamas? Yay or nay? "

wpr wrote on Jan 8, 2009 1:59 PM:

" "Mr. Gruff" - I'm not sure your Daddy tought you well. Your lack of respect for the President is very European. Perhaps Oregon isn't the best place for you to relocate. I hear Switzerland is nice this time of year. "

kevin wrote on Jan 8, 2009 3:03 PM:

" acluwanza said: "I guess I'm clueless and lack understanding of the history of terrorism."

LOL. For once we actually can agree on something!

Try reading the bill Congress passed authorizing the war. There are 20 reasons listed, only one of which involves WMDs. Any one of those reasons was justification for our actions in Iraq. Just stopping Saddam's (and the UN's) "food for oil" program was worth the price. Who knows what mischief those billions of dollars would have caused.

Actually the mission of the carrier group that President Bush landed on WAS accomplished. They had done an excellent job and it was a big thrill for them to have the President show them some attention and highlight their work... "

Raven wrote on Jan 8, 2009 3:10 PM:

" that your answer for anyone who disagrees with you wpr....leave? "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Jan 8, 2009 4:22 PM:

" Raven - we are dealing with a bunch of people who are still fighting (and still losing) the Vietnam war.

One of my friends showed me his human ear necklace back in the day, but there are still some folks who think the reason we lost in Vietnam was because we were not bestial enough.

Victor Charlie won because he was fighting a foreign invader of HIS homeland. The Vietnamese beat our army because they had nowhere else to go and could only win or die. And, EVEN SADDER, with 58,000 American dead, after awhile the Vietnamese are 'our friends' (as in corporate trading partner).

This refusal to face reality reminds me of the way the German Army was abandoned to its fate in Stalingrad because their leader could not bear to order a retreat, even if a million men died in the inevitable defeat.

If somebody hasn't learned more than having an 'America-Love It or Leave It' bumpersticker on their car, and still doing the 'Purple Heart Bandaid' trick of challenging the patriotism of veterans... it's not like they are ever going to listen to REASON.

The American people just have to reject their candidates at election time just like they did in 2006 and 2008.

~Ruff "

Rocketman wrote on Jan 8, 2009 6:17 PM:

" and Kevin..........ALL, of the most powerful Democrats in Congress supported the Iraq War based on the issue of WMD's as documented by their speechs at the time. Both parties had the same information and both parties supported the war based on everything you noted...............well except our newly elected President.......the same one who is already changing his voting record on issues that he said during the campaign that he would never support!! "

a teacher wrote on Jan 8, 2009 6:25 PM:

" Ruf, My question would have been, what's it matter whether I served or not? It always seems to me that the frightwingerz (love that) seem to think that serving in the military trumps all arguments and gives them more of a right and more authority in these matters. The only places that might be true are fascist countries.

This isn't a fascist country. "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Jan 8, 2009 7:52 PM:

" a teacher - I don't personally decide to listen to somebody because they are or are not a veteran.

I do tend to ridicule folks, even veterans, who are wearing elephant dung as a tuxedo.

So in my own gentle way, I oppose the double-bind presented by self-labeled 'super-patriots' that if you are not a frightwinger - veteran or not - you should just shut up and let them slaughter America's kids.

All the 'artful dodgers' in Washington forget that it is OUR KIDS, and OUR SPOUSES that get killed or maimed in their egotistical games.

How many presidents, House Speakers, and Senate Majority Leaders go to the Vietnam Memorial on Memorial Day? NOT VERY DARNED MANY. Because they know it is there to SHAME them.

Today, Richard Perle published a 4,000 word document that says, (Get a load of this honey-wagon load) that the NEOCONS did not foment the Iraq Invasion.

Talk about your completely unprocessed "Look a widow in the eyes and demand her son after killing her husband" sociopathic sewage!

No wonder the man reminds me of Bella Lugosi.

But there definitely are some who consider all this sludge as manna and beg for more KoolAide to wash it down with.

~Ruff "

Sandra wrote on Jan 8, 2009 8:16 PM:

" Ruff,
I really do not know why I bother, as I can hardly even understand what you wrote....
I never said we should of not continued after Bin Laden. Was he worse than Saddam? Well golly gee Ruff, what is worse, a murderer, or a killer? In fact Clinton should of got him when he had the chance. He was a little distracted...too many cigars, I guess.
I also cannot come to Bush's defense as I agree he scre#ed up this war royally.
Why don't you try reading my post again with your thinking hat on. Maybe you will understand it better the second time. "

alucawanza wrote on Jan 8, 2009 9:05 PM:

" kevin:
Bush has admitted on T.V. that the intelligence was "a matter of bum information."

It was well known that Iraq was more prone to civil war than democracy.

That landing on the carrier was indeed a signal that we had won in Iraq. I remember it well, right down to the ill-fitting outfit Mr. B wore. What a drama that was!

The name George Bush will always be linked to Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, Katrina, water-boarding, and the sub-prime mortgage crisis. The buck stops at the president's desk.

Bush failed to institute a new efffective immigration policy.

He was unable to reform the healthcare system.

4,200 dead and over 30,000 wounded.

Did not veto a single spending bill.

Ignored 2/3 of Americans who were opposed to the Iraq war.

Neglected basic infractructure needs.

What a legacy. How can you be proud of this guy, Kevin? All those beautiful American boys and girls, dead or wounded, for a war based on subterfuge and lies.

12 days to go.
BTW...You know sarcasm when you see it. Don't take it literally. "

glenroy wrote on Jan 9, 2009 4:58 AM:

" There were only half a dozen congressional investigations into whether or not President Bush manipulated, withheld or lied…..not one found a shred of truth.

Regarding Vietnam ….what matters is what the victors say history is, losers don’t write it.

Vo Nguyen Giap’s Memoir is pretty darn explicit…after the Tet Offense the VC was completely defeated in every province and without hope of being reconstituted. North Vietnam had suffered a Military Defeat beyond imagined. Ol Uncle‘s Ho‘s Klan had accepted the reality of North and South Vietnam and it was only after months of rioting by the antiwar movement that led them to realize it was a ‘media war’ so they began pumping millions into the world wide antiwar movement. According to, all the propaganda of massive civilian losses from US bombing, the Christmas Hospital bombing that was covered around the world for months never happened. Giap leaves no doubt that while as brave as any his troops didn’t win this war…American libs won it for him…after they twice defeated by American forces….Heavenly gifts from Ho…ho-ho.

Trouong Nhu Tang wrote ‘A Viet Cong Memoir,’ anyone with knowledge of this war would know his pedigree….dispelled the core American antiwar myth that the VC was indigenous and independent. He also tells a very personal story of complete and utter defeat after the Tet. Ah at the unbelievable might of American forces. ‘WE WERE COMPLETELY DEFEATED BY THE AMERICANS‘….then of course Congress surrendered after the Paris Peace Treaty was breached by the North….

Being a year beyond the last draft, with all 3 uncles fighting there….digging and finding the truth was a political awakening for many of us…. "

Sandra wrote on Jan 9, 2009 7:38 AM:

" alucawanza,
I wonder if you will hold Obama to the same standards? Things are already happening that give me much pause to wonder about him. Have you noticed, or are you still so obsessed with beating a dead horse that it has gone by while you were distracted?
Keep your list of short comings and compare Obama's acomplishments 4 years from now. Let's see how he does......
Also, nowhere does Kevin say he was proud of Bush. All that he says is what is true concerning congress, while you chose to ignore the whole picture to further spread vitriol. "

Raven wrote on Jan 9, 2009 9:45 AM:

" nice synopses of Viet Nam...but the relevance to Iraq is what?...none that I can see, unless you mean the overwhelming disapproval of the public toward both wars. "

a teacher wrote on Jan 9, 2009 11:34 AM:

" War, as Von Clauswitz wrote, is politics continued by other means. The North Vietnamese understood that, the Americans did not. Prior to the Tet offensive the Johnson administration and his generals were telling the American public that the North Vietnamese were defeated. When the North Vietnamese managed a major offensive in nearly every major city in the South was a shock to our military and the public.

Inspite of the fact that our military completely defeated the North's army is irrelevent. Our generals could truthfully report that the NVA was completely routed, but the American public responded with "Isn't that what you told us last time". THAT was the turning point of the war, when the American public lost faith in the Johnson Administration and the military. George Washington pulled off the same thing during the American revoulution.

It wasn't the liberals, it was the "Silent Majority".

You can track the same thing in Iraq. Prior to the battle of Falluja, the administration had been telling us that the Iraqi resistance consisted of "deadenders". Falluja showed that was far from true, even though we won that battle. That was the point that American public opinion turned against the war.

All the surge amounts to is an exit strategy, just like Nixon's "Peace with honor" strategy. American troops will leave, and then the real war will begin.

Another historian wrote: "those who don't learn from history are condemned to repeat it". "

John Richards wrote on Jan 9, 2009 7:37 PM:

" Ruff wrote: "Victor Charlie won because he was fighting a foreign invader of HIS homeland."

That makes about as much sense as saying North Korea was fighting on its homeland when it crossed the border with South Korea in 1950.

Although the Vietnam war was initially fought by home-grown VC, North Vietnam army regulars did most of the fighting from 1965 onwards. I know, I was there. "

alucawanza wrote on Jan 11, 2009 3:58 PM:

" Sandra:
What has happened? Mr. Obama has not been inaugurated yet. Of course he will be held to the same standards. I will remember every campaign promise, just as I remembered Mr. Bush's. Mr. Bush's shortcomings are well documented. Google: George Bush's Mistakes. It's all there, clearly documented, verified, freedom of speech and press letting us know all of his shortcomings. Take a look. I've been watching for eight years, hoping for the best. Been disappointed in Mr. B since he was falsely elected in 2000.

I'm not spreading vitriol. I am exercising my freedom of speech. I'm telling what I know to be the truth. Reread my post. It's all true. I can site you resources that I have used to learn about this president. You should HAVE known that the first time you read it. I can't believe there's anyone left defending this man.

Sandra, you know very well that members of Congress voted for the war based on faulty intelligence information. They all had press conferences discussing this. Kevin is a master of the "smokescreen".

Let's watch Obama and see what happens. He has a big mess to clean up with what he has inherited.

Tell me Sandra: Why is it that no one knows where $350 billion of the TARP money has gone? Why has there been no accounting for it? Why isn't the accounting on the front page of the newspapers? This is the taxpayers' money. Who's keeping track?

To be continued. "

alucawanza wrote on Jan 11, 2009 4:03 PM:

" Sandra:
Here's where your war dollars are going and yet our soldiers have to armor their own vehicles:

– The Coalition Provisional Authority delivered 363 tons of cash on an airplane, totaling $12 billion, to Iraq “without assurance the monies were properly used or accounted for.”

– The State Dept spent $36.4 million dollars on weapons and equipment that could not be accounted for because “invoices were vague and there was no backup documentation“.
(The State Dept is part of the executive branch of government....)

– Top contractor KBR came under fire last year from government investigators for overpricing its contract by $2 billion, which, for example, included overstating labor costs by 51 percent.

– State Dept. employees testified in May 2008 that the U.S. “allowed corruption to fester at the highest levels of the Iraqi government,” resulting in the loss of billions in U.S. tax dollars. (Who is ultimately responsible?)

So yes, we'll keep Obama under watch. Every president's every move is watched. This is not vitriol, Sandra. These are facts. The buck stops at the president's desk. And keep on watching Mr. Bush. He's not done yet. He's working on his legacy... "

anticommie wrote on Jan 12, 2009 11:51 AM:

" So I guess my main question to you Ruff is this:

How is it that my brother, who spent over a year in Baghdad in combat conditions, supports this war? He was there, and the only thing that he has negative to say about it, is that the troops are not being allowed to do what is necessary to win the fight and leave. He says that soldiers hands are tied and are unable to do what is necessary because they are afraid of criminal charges being brought against them by the likes of people like you and your kind. The left wing winos in this country have sold out their country's service men and woman through propaganda the same way they did in the Vietnam era.

We lost the war in Vietnam because of the political pressure and propaganda campaign of the Lefties in this country. We easily could've won the war in Vietnam, and we could easily win the war in Iraq. It would just take the same practices used in WWII to do it. The left doesnt have the stomach for it. "

Raven wrote on Jan 12, 2009 12:25 PM:

" anticommie, the only way we could have 'won' the war in Viet Nam was to permanent occupy it with massive numbers of land forces because we had not won, to use a trite phrase, the hearts and minds of the Vietnamese and without their support for a legitimate South Vietnamese government, no amount of effort on our part would have stopped the final result short of nuclear weapons.

While your brother may support the misguided efforts in Iraq, there are just as many soldiers who say we never should have been there in the first place. And if they committed no war crimes, then there was nothing to fear because the UN Resolution gave them, military that is, immunity for acts committed in the line of duty. That was just superseded by the new agreement which took effect on Jan 1, where they are still immune from prosecution for legal actions in the line of duty. They are not immune for crimes committed outside the line of duty and should never be immune.

Trying to dismiss opposing points of view as those from 'left wing winos' and 'you and your kind' merely shows you are unwilling to treat those who speak as people but instead as objects you can ridicule, which makes it easier to dismiss their arguments. "

anticommie wrote on Jan 12, 2009 2:12 PM:

" Raven:

Your last point, if you mean it, would have to apply to your friend Ruff.

According to my brother, all, ALL of my brothers troops he served with felt the same way that he does. You all on the left love to say this war was mislead I heard the reasons even from Bush's mouth, more than just WMD's. You on the left just made that the only reason we went in there. You all were in the streets protesting.

And yes I to dismiss opposing views for the most part from left wingers because they live in such a state of idealogy that their realizations of truth have been wiped away by hatred and bigatry towards the right. "

Raven wrote on Jan 12, 2009 4:14 PM:

" antipc, you know as well as I do that one should be suspicious of any statement that includes "everyone" or "all" they are simply not true and your know that; and if you look back you will find quite a few of the 'left' supported the war at the beginning - again, one of those all statement that is true.

Really glad to see you don't live in such a state of idealogy, antipc, heaven forbid if you were to harbor hatred and bigotry toward the left as you say the left does toward the right ... maybe if you were to acknowledge that they are just as principled as you consider your self to be, it might be easier to come to some common ground? "

anticommie wrote on Jan 14, 2009 8:31 AM:

" Im tired of "common ground". At this point of the game "common ground" is what is partly wrong in this country. To me, the left is wrong on just about everything, so Im not going to settle for "common ground." The left is just wrong. And dont be mistaken, Many in the republican party have forgotten their conservative beliefs and have applied left wing liberal characteristics to their voting records. "

JimClark wrote on Jan 14, 2009 1:42 PM:

" I must thank you all for your spirited debate. I send my offerings to many newspapers throughout the United States and Her Majesty's realm. I consider your thoughts, notions and opinions as I respond to my original entry.
Naturally I use a different name in the world media however, your considerations are included in my responses. The NVR gives individuals the ability to express themselves. Anyone with a computer and internet access should participate in this worthy enterprise. Why? You have the inalienable right to speak freely. So many others on this planet can only dream of speaking out and writing freely.

Editors? Well, you hate them when they chop up what you write and you love them when you get money for what you wrote. Dan Ross? I can’t help but love you. I believe you know what I am referring to. "

NVR-Dan Ross wrote on Jan 14, 2009 1:50 PM:

" Awww JimClark, thanks. Nice that we can agree to disagree and move on, eh?
Next cup of Joe is on me. "

JimClark wrote on Jan 14, 2009 2:04 PM:

" Mr. Ross: MOST ASSUREDLY!!!!! I must continue to be what and who I am yet I appreciate your interventions more than you may know. JC "

JimClark wrote on Jan 14, 2009 2:16 PM:

" What a shock!! Mr. Limblog seems to have agreed with my original offering. What has followed has become almost extraneous as what I wrote has been subject to a dissection that ignored the original message.

That being stated, I thank you all for your responses as you are what might be the remains of the American Mind.

There are democrats and republicans. It was the conservative and the liberal that gave us our Constitution; THE Law of our Land. "

JimClark wrote on Jan 14, 2009 2:46 PM:

" Dan: How about a Jamba Juice? I like coffee in the morning but when I go to Raley's I get a Jamba first.
We could have coffee at Raley's though. After all, you are The editor.... :). "

NVR-Dan Ross wrote on Jan 14, 2009 3:01 PM:

" JimClark:
Jamba Jiuce is is, strawberry nirvana for me, how does 10 Friday morning sound? That's my early morning!
I'll buy for you and the first 10 readers who show at 10 and tell me they read this online, but only if you can be there ...
(checks wallet, sees it empty, grimaces) "

a teacher wrote on Jan 14, 2009 7:35 PM:

" Which Jamba Juice? "

JimClark wrote on Jan 15, 2009 5:04 AM:

" The Jamba across from Target South Napa is good. We can say Hi to Kate who is always so nice and she knows that I loive their Orange Dream Machine. The boost is dependent on how I feel. See y'all there. "

Sandra wrote on Jan 15, 2009 7:13 AM:

" alucawanza,
My oh my, you certainly feel the need to vent. I suggest you reread my posts. You do want to tear down Bush, I get that. But, nowhere have I ever propped Bush up, so while I am aware of all you have said, some of it questionable, as facts are facts and there always seems to be facts on both sides of an issue to wade through and compare to get to the real truth..... My question about Obama was meant to give you pause to consider the high standards you hold for Bush, and to suggest you hold Obama to the same. And if you do, I would think you would already be worried, as he seems to be backpedaling on a few things, and his appointmant of the guy who did not pay taxes to oversee taxes is certainly an interesting one......Personally, I realize our elected officials are just human, and Bush had the same info as congress....Faulty? Probably, yes. Again, we can all thank another human being for that. He was pres., before Bush...you remember him? "

JimClark wrote on Jan 15, 2009 9:27 AM:

" I hope all of our respective colleagues will read this. I shall take note of the first nine who arrive as I will be the first I sincerely look forward to meeting my devil who cares about what I write. (That is a compliment Sir).

My Father and I were discussing issues and suddenly he burst out in what appeared to be anger He said, I am so tired of you being wiser than me” Even now that brings tears as he passed away a short time later. I can only look to the sky and tell him I wish we had more time to spend together. HE was wiser than I. He had been many places and seen and experienced many things in his lifetime only he could share with his children. That was the 1960s and early 70s when we were supposed to find the past a waste less use of consideration. Wish he was here now.

I’m looking forward to tomorrow. "

NVR-Dan Ross wrote on Jan 15, 2009 11:27 AM:

" Jamba Juice in the South Napa Marketplace, the center with Target Raleys and Home Depot ... 10 a.m. Friday.
I think I'll do this once a month at a different location so people can come by and voice their concerns about what we do here at NapaValeyRegister.com.
I'm only buying, though, this time around and for the first 9 since JimClark is already in!
--Dan "

alucawanza wrote on Jan 15, 2009 2:07 PM:

" Sandra:
Are you saying that Cllinton gave Bush faulty intelligence. Puhleese.. Tlhe problem was that Bush didn't pay attention to the information that Clinton left. They knew before 9/11 that terrorists were planning an attack using air liners. They had the intellligence. They didn't act on it.

The problem is the buck stops at Bush's desk if information is faulty. They knew...They had an agenda before coming into office. (Bush and Cheney) It will all come out. As soon as these criminals are out of office all their little minions will be writing books exposing all the corruption. Wait and see.

Don't worry about Obama's selections. Just remember that Bush picked Cheney who was given a $36 million dollar goodbye from Halliburton when he left Halliburton's employ to be Vice President. Thus, two years of no bid contracts going to Halliburton to do work in Iraq! How's that for a scandal that no one pays attention to. Do you remember it? "

JimClark wrote on Jan 15, 2009 4:37 PM:

" Dan: I'm a retired person and I shall be at each of your gatherings.

I just realized that I am more than retired; I'm also "old" but I still love life. "

anticommie wrote on Jan 18, 2009 7:40 AM:

" alucawanza wrote on Jan 15, 2009 2:07 PM:

They knew before 9/11 that terrorists were planning an attack using air liners. They had the intellligence. They didn't act on it.

One thing that you are forgetting here is that airliners had been trying to have locked doors on the cockpits to their aircrafts for years and years. There were too many groups that said there was no reason to have the locked doors. In this country, people dont realize the steps to ensure saftey, and it takes something like 9/11 to make them realize that certain things must be done. The sad part is, 8 years after 9/11 people are already forgetting those steps.

Another thing. To ensure we dont have any more attacks, this country has to be 100% successful in the enforcment of anti-terrorism. Our enemy only has to be successful 1% of the time to disrupt this nation. The odds are not in our favor. "

glenroy wrote on Jan 18, 2009 10:13 AM:

" Anticommie...The bottom-line is libs are hopelessly lost in their own rhetoric… forever avoiding accounting for their policy failures…like dealing with professional Con-artists it's never their fault…

To place 9/11 blame on President Bush libs have to ignore tens of thousands of pages documenting, dates, places, intelligence reports, first hand interviews, memos, deciphered communications on how al Qaeda succeeded. Written not by partisan hacks or under threat of House Democrat boycott but by moderates of their own party. Yet libs would cling to a single ‘boiler plate’ memo while willfully overlooking several dozen Clinton memos with specific actionable intelligence which had anyone been acted upon 9/11 would have been avoided. Incompetence personified.

Anyone who really wants to know the facts has to ask themselves ‘why wasn’t Gore’s “Phased Security Plan… Making It Safe for Americans To Fly Again” wasn't investigated by the 9/11 Commission? Why Gorelick? The Gore 4 phased security program without profiling would now make our sky’s the safest in the world…. a few months later over a dozen Arab looking terrorist breezed through without a second phase look…imagine the chicken hawk chest beating had that been a Republican…LOL….

There is plenty of blame to go around dating back to the Carter Administration, but there is no doubt that the scale and magnitude of the failures resulting from Democrat Policy were infinitely more damaging to us and the rest of the world….being dragged into a war that has been going on now for nearly 14 centuries became unavoidable when Carter traded in the Shah for what he described as the “coming of an Islamic Angle”….indeed he was for al Qaeda and indeed we still pay for Carter’s gross incompetence. "

Raven wrote on Jan 18, 2009 12:38 PM:

" well maybe it has to do with bush and company ignoring briefings warning them of al qaeda operations, with Rice declaring it was ancient history....if Bush wants to claim responsibility for the seven years since that attack, he must also bear the responsibility for what he didnt do before the attack. "

JimClark wrote on Jan 18, 2009 1:00 PM:

" Clinton & Gore give evidence of the decline in the American Mind "

JimClark wrote on Jan 18, 2009 1:02 PM:

" What does that say about you who elected them??? "

anticommie wrote on Jan 18, 2009 5:28 PM:

" Raven:

Like Clinton was a beacon of light in the fight against global terrorism. Rember the 1st bombing of the World Trade Center, USS Cole, US Embassy? Oh wait... Clinton was on top of fighting terrorism, even when Sudan offered Obama, I mean, Osama to us in 1994 and 1995.

Imagine if Bush had told the airport securities to be on the look out for Arab looking individuals getting on aircraft, they might take over planes. People on the left would scream "racial profiling." Ohh wait... they already do that. "

Raven wrote on Jan 19, 2009 7:54 AM:

" Never said Clinton was, anticommie...again, if Bush is claiming the credit for no attacks since 9/11, he also gets the responsibility for the 9/11 attack...a captain of a ship doesn't get to shift the blame to the previous captain when something happens on his watch.

(btw, we caught and prosecuted the people who did the first WTC attack..something bush has failed to do.) "

cab e-girl wrote on Jan 21, 2009 9:53 AM:

" Raven: I think most reasonable Americans did not expect 9-11 and most reasonable Americans don't blame Bush for the attacks with the exception of the kooks that say he knew about and planned the attacks. Would you have Bush out starting wars pre 9-11 to ward off attacks? I think not. The bottom line is he responded to attacks by murderous religious zealots and we have not had an attack since that time. Why is it so hard for the left to give credit where credit is due? I have plenty of complaints about Bush; like it or not he has done a good job protecting this country from attacks by people who wish to destroy the very framework of this nation. "

Raven wrote on Jan 21, 2009 7:00 PM:

" cab-e-girl, all I am saying is if Bush gets the credit for no attacks, he also gets the responsibility for the 9/11 attacks... he and his staff had warnings and did nothing, not even increasing the threat level for airport security. "

JimClark wrote on Jan 22, 2009 3:28 PM:

" Raven: Your President Clinton's lack of action in response to terrorists gave us the 9/11 disaster. I just love the selective memories some of our contributors hold so close and dear to their heart sans mind. "

Raven wrote on Jan 22, 2009 8:31 PM:

" never said Clinton was blameless JC, just addressing the Bush amnesia.... "

Join the conversation

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login? (requires cookies)
	Forgot Your Password?

Create an account

Comment Guidelines

The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.

What gets your comment posted?

• Staying on topic

• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less

• Avoiding name-calling

• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger

What gets your comment deleted?

• Personal attacks

• Derogatory remarks

• Name-calling of any sort

• Going off-topic

• Hate speech

• Racially-insensitive comments

• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict

• Posting e-mail addresses

• Posting comments of a commercial nature

• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS

• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.

The fine print

- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.

- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.

- Comments may take several hours to be posted.

- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.

- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.

- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.

Search: