Carol O'Hare: Where is the outrage?

Advertisement

In this time of war, I ask, "Where is the outrage?" In the past 10 days, the Democratic leaders in Congress, and in particular Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, have, for all intents and purposes, advocated surrender in Iraq, despite the fact that a military defeat in Iraq is really only possible if we abandon our effort.

Sen. Reid said, "The war in Iraq is lost." His comments came just before our commander in the field, General David Patraeus, reported to Congress and the president on the progress of the "surge" in the war. On the heels of that remark, Sen. Reid publicly speculated as to how many Democratic seats could be won because of the war.

Sen. Reid voted for the war and for Gen. Patraeus but is now denigrating the war for political purposes. His remarks are disgraceful, demeaning to our troops, our commanders and to the American people.

It is interesting to note that during the same timeframe, we have seen the firing of a radio talk show host about demeaning comments. The constant babble and lament about Don Imus' unfortunate words went on for days over the airwaves and in print, but has there been a single utterance against Sen. Reid for his comments or dare I say, even any suggestion of his resignation?

Think back to WWII, if Congress at that time had an attitude similar to that of Sen. Reid, we would all be speaking German today.

We are in a war not of our choosing. One of our most beloved American cities, New York, was attacked on Sept. 11, 2001. We lost more than 3,000 lives that day. The enemy is different today. We are not fighting red coats against blue coats, North against the South. This enemy is in the shadows. The enemy makes itself known only through video tapes and terrorist actions. It is an ideological culture war we are fighting as well as a military struggle. The enemy is smart. They are wagering that if we begin to wane in our efforts and our interest in winning the battle, they will have won. They are behind the latest turmoil in Baghdad. Iraq is of great strategic importance to the Islamic terrorists. We know this because they have told us so themselves.

This war is not going to be ended soon. Unfortunately, I believe the war on Islamic terrorists will go on for the next generation. That is why it is so important for the American people to understand this is not a struggle for the short term, but for survival of our civilization. Negotiation and appeasement are not the answers. How do you negotiate with shadow figures or trust what they say? We must stand strong for our principles and values.

What Congress is trying to do is to micromanage the war to lessen the power of the Executive Branch. This is blatantly unconstitutional. The Constitution states that the Executive Branch, i.e. the president, State Department, Defense Department, have the power to set foreign policy and make decisions to wage war. Then comes the power of Congress to fund such efforts and oversee other matters of consequence.

We are the greatest power on earth. We have the best-trained military in the world. We must wholeheartedly support them and complete the effort.

As Winston Churchill spoke toward the end of WWII, as the war was beginning to tire his people, "Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory there is no survival."

Carol O'Hare is a Routt County/Steamboat resident. She is active in various community efforts. She is a 'recovering sports journalist,' having written for such publications as Tennis Magazine, Sports Illustrated and various news organizations. She is an avid cyclist, tennis player, skier and a member of the Conservative Leadership Council of Northwest Colorado.

Comments

Slapper 7 years, 7 months ago

The 99 troops killed as of this morning in Irag aren't seeing "progress" are they. This is the same bs that has been spouted for over the last four years and that's just what it is bs. When you invade and then occupy another country based on lies what do you think the results are going to be? Have a banana Carol and take the edge off.

0

JazzSlave 7 years, 7 months ago

To those clinging to the "Bush Lied" meme: The Clintons, Al Gore, Madeline Albright, Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, Carl Levin, Robert Byrd, Ted Kennedy, John Edwards, Jacque Chirac, Tony Blair, Gerhard Schroeder, et al, made far more declarative assertions than W about the threat of Iraqi WMD. Are they liars too? If not, why not?

0

dogd 7 years, 7 months ago

Hadley:

Simplest solution is where I've gone with my pure guess about the illogical frantic timeline into Iraq. Seems more like it was a plan waiting for an excuse to happen, than a logical response to 9-11. It's just not logical to throw gasoline on a fire, if putting it out is your TRUE objective. By the way, the number of people needed for such a high level conspiracy could fill a small corner at a cocktail party.

0

dogd 7 years, 7 months ago

Jazz: So you put up a list of people that nobody in his or her right mind would vote for. That does not change my growing suspicion that the Iraq "project" was on the board, profits calculated, BEFORE 9-11, and that the truth WILL come out.

Don't step in the deep dung of brain-dead binary-brained idiots who consider this a right vs left issue. The people who you listed may have believed in the WMD story. But I'm beginning to suspect that w and Cheney are two who NEVER DID. The truth will come out. Often does.

0

JazzSlave 7 years, 7 months ago

dogd says:

"...a list of people that nobody in his or her right mind would vote for."

Really? What were you - comatose during the 90s? Seems to me that quite a number of people were (and, according to recent polls, STILL ARE) willing to vote for der Schlickmeister. And while his bride may have recently lost some ground to Obama, whomever believes she doesn't have a shot ain't paying attention. And notably absent from my list is Guliani, of whom it can be argued that lots of people would be willing to suport; and John McCain, about whom you have previously waxed rhapsodic in this forum.

All of which is neither here nor there. You've posted an elegant evasion, but it's an evasion nonetheless. How is it that you are able to excoriate one official for stating X, and ignore others when they issue identical indictments even more forcefully? You write:

"But I'm beginning to suspect that w and Cheney are two who NEVER DID."

Fine. Substantiate your assertions.

As AJ says: You won't. Because you can't.

0

Hadleyburg_Press 7 years, 7 months ago

It never ceases to amaze me how much credit conspiracy theorists give to the upper echilons of our government. The common thread always seems to be that a massive conspiracy involving hundreds if not thousands of co-conspirators is underway to dupe the American public to the benefit of a select few. Wow! These guys must be incredible good to be able to keep such a secret and pull this off. I guess what you are saying is that Cheney and Bush are two of the smartest guys on the planet in a self serving way huh? Even the great Mossad must be jealous...

Such grand conspiracy theories are usually at best overt insecurities and paranoias manifest and at worst short cuts to thinking designed to sway the ignorant.

Ever hear of Occum's Razor? "All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one."

0

Slapper 7 years, 7 months ago

easy sbhor- once you get to the second sentance the bs is so deep you gotta get out quickly

0

dundalk 7 years, 7 months ago

another local sez:

"...he lied..." If I recall, that very sentence has come from "partisan mouthpieces" in the past. What does that make you then, and very other anti Bush rhetoric spewer correct, while there is ample evidence which comes from the likes of poster Sbvor?

0

nikobesti 7 years, 7 months ago

Mr. Rove: Oops! I forgot one: anyone who dares think differently is just lying, ignorant, OR "a spoiled brat 13 year old child." Fortunately for this country, name calling is all you have left. You haven't called me a terrorist yet, give that one a whirl.

0

dogd 7 years, 7 months ago

Jazz: Follow the money. Jazz follow the money. When something doesn't really make complete sense- follow the money.

A growing suspicion is not an assertion. If it could be substantiated, it wouldn't be a suspicion.

I AM suspicious that Iraq was on somebody's board, flow charts, profit projections and all BEFORE 9-11.

0

Rick Akin 7 years, 7 months ago

Slapper and dogd are giving the typical liberal responses. Slapper makes up facts and dogd ignores facts and logic. This is the whole reason for this conservative editorial series. Maybe, just maybe, we can make a few more people think.

0

JazzSlave 7 years, 7 months ago

A growing suspicion. Wow. Just like the noted metallurgist, Rosie O'Donnell, who suspects that an inferno fueled by mere jet fuel couldn't POSSIBLY have brought down the towers.

With all the frenzied Bush haters out there, and all his opponents clamoring for any political advantage they can acquire, your suspicions would have been confirmed by now, if there was anything to them.

But by all means keep massaging your suspicions. The rest of us will stick to the facts.

I note with amusement but not surprise, that you have studiously avoided explaining how multiple people can level identical accusations and only one of them is a liar.

0

dogd 7 years, 7 months ago

Carol:

You better know that your viewpoint definintely has some ethical, moral, and flat out common sense problems when Average Joe aka sbvor agrees.

No, I'm not anti-war. Just anti-idiot, which means I am horrified that George W Bush is still in office, after wasting more money and lives than seems possible.

Carol, if you want to back a war, better pick one where somebody on OUR side can go out every day to aquire, paint and take out targets until the other side is either gone or ready to capitulate.

The problem with this "war" is that our precious guys can't really do that, and the only real purpose of this war has been to enrich little w's and Cheney's special interest buddies with OUR money. Carol- follow the money, and it should be easy -those misspent and in turn ill-gotten billions are pretty easy to trail. Thing that's hard to find is actual value for a LOT of that money. Just because we have accomplished some good things over there, is not reason enough to continue a failed strategy.

Common sense conservatives are getting this picture. Why do you go out to fight a "war on TER" (idiot little w can't even pronounce it) with a strategy which multiplies the number of them (terrorists)?

To turn tail and run would set us back another 50 years in the Middle East. And that in addition to the 50 little w has already set us back. But as long as the bumbling administration we are cursed with right now is in charge, how to we justify the futility?

We need leadership that can at least aquire and paint a target before spilling the kind of blood and money that was WASTED IN IRAQ and NOT DONE BECAUSE OF 9-11. Very tired of that lie, as are the American people. Afghanistan was about 9-11. NOT IRAQ.

0

JQPUBLIC 7 years, 7 months ago

The bad news... by the time the supporters of "cut and run" realize what a horrible mistake they made, it'll be too damn late. The result.... we are found to be weak, the war is brought to US soil. The final outcome... a chance for our country to start over, just not sure under what flag. The republicans may have made some mistakes, I can't say for sure, I am not privy to top secret information as slapper & dogd must be, I have to try to separate the truth from fiction as reported by a mostly biased media; but the democrats using our troops as a political ploy to get into the white house is despicable and I hope the voters are paying attention. Don't go off the deep end about "top secret", some info needs to remain secret, if the citizens know so does the enemy. Let the generals and the commander in chief be the strategists in this war and give them what they need, they are the ones in the position to get the job done, as I said I'm not privy to the same info that the military and the white house has so I will defer to their knowledge and expertise. We are in a war and no matter how we got there I will support my country and our troops. Everyone has an opinion, the media uses theirs to sway public opinion in their quest for the almighty dollar. It's hard for the public to think for themselves when all the facts aren't available and the media is force feeding you what they want you to hear. For those of you that insist you were lied to, why do you believe one politician over another, because the media told you to or because you were in on the military meetings and you have the facts?

0

dogd 7 years, 7 months ago

Jazz: If my suspicions are correct: The one who knows better is the liar. Make that the 2. The ones who owe political existence to some of the people with the flow charts and profit projections which gave us Iraq. And I have no doubt that if there is information of this sort, it is tightly protected, but will get out, if for no other reason than the bumbling which has typified this entire deal. Just wait.

I suspect that the desire for a lucrative Iraq makeover, if it existed, may just have overridden ANY other concern, including stopping the kind of terrorist attack which would make such a thing politically possible. Harsh statement, but follow the money...back to about the year 2001. Any billions gone to any well connected corporations? You bet bud.

0

JazzSlave 7 years, 7 months ago

Guilty until proven innocent, in other words.

Evidence is more compelling than speculation. Show me what you can prove, not what you feel. Until then, you're just another run-of-the-mill conspiracy theorist, and it's difficult to take you seriously, "bud".

0

Hadleyburg_Press 7 years, 7 months ago

Dogd, I beg to differ on your assessment of the Iraq situation. I realize that history will be the final arbitor on what really occured, but we already are getting bits of information to piece together. For example, If you compare the post 9/11 crisis with an historical event such as the Cuban Missle crisis that Kennedy faced you can make a few preliminary judgements. The one that keeps jumping out at me is that Bush fostered a kind of "group think" in which he insulated himself from opposing information and surrounded himself by a cabinet full of syncophants. If you recall, Kennedy made it a point to surround himself with a cabinet that ran the spectrum in terms of what would be the best approach to the Soviets in the Cuban / Berlin crisis. Bush, it appears, engaged in a form of cognitive disonance not only with his advisors, but also with hard data and intel. Now, does that mean that he was fully intent on going after Iraq? Probably. Was that intent based upon some nefarious bent seeking monitary gain for his cronies? Doubtful. It is more plausible that it was the only course of action when one looks at all of the dominos that were falling including: the tying up of our military in that theater, the continued assault on our pilots in the no fly zone, the intel on WMDs, Saddams non-compliance with earlier requirements, and a need to put geographical pressure on Iran. As for the prosecution of the war, well I will leave that one to unfold before I comment.

0

nikobesti 7 years, 7 months ago

Wow sbvor, Dick is going to have to give you a raise. Or at least add a little something to your check this month. Good job on all those links! I'm so impressed that you can find some stuff on the internet that backs up your points. Great job blaming everything on the liberal media. I'm sure the entire worldwide media establishment is in on this conspiracy and feeding lies to the world. I just KNEW Saddam was responsible for 9/11! I KNEW he was an immanent treat like Dick told us. Next post you need to discount the Iraq Study Group recommendations. That was a conspiracy to bring down Bush too. He's actually doing a dynamite job over there and shame on us for not realizing that. And I love the comparisons to WWII. This war is EXACTLY the same. Carol, thanks for pointing out the unconstitutionallity of the Dem's moves. Suspending habeas corpus, Patriot Act, warrantless wire taps is really what our constitution is about. Oh, and I love how anyone who dares think differently is just lying or ignorant. Thanks for defending our great country from those ignorant Americans who cry like babies. What's their problem? Did their son die or something?

0

l_angelomisterioso 7 years, 7 months ago

Where to start- First I guess Ms. O'Hare Senator Reid's statement was that without a change of strategy the war is lost. Second, you'd have us believe that a military which could not establish the air superiority necessary to hurl itself 40 miles across the English Channel against a British Army which had just had its beaten butt pulled off the continent by a makeshift evacuation fleet was going to establish and maintain an invasion/supply line across the Atlantic? I'd submit that contrary to the wingnut's usual claims Chamberlain helped the British cause by giving them just enough time to prepare militarily including the establishment of the chain home radar system so vital in the Battle of Britain and the refurbishment of the RAF including the deployment of the Spitfire.As regards changes of strategy and tactics I suspect that an outside observer might have done wonders for say G.A.Custer and the 7th Cav. at Little Big Horn who might have welcomed an opportunity to review/revamp his strategy and tactics and possibly save his command and his life. I also love the wondrous comparative casualty figures as if a conscriptive citizen soldier army forcing a landing against a similarly technologically developed force is comparable to a full time voluntary near mercenary force technologically light years ahead of the home grown insurgency fighting with improvised weapons, RPG-7s and AK-47s near 50 year old eastern bloc weapons.
The political justifications I'll skip for now as it's too apparent that there are here any number of true believer busheviks willing to parse any statement down to the last comma.

0

another_local 7 years, 7 months ago

Providing a link to some spew written by a partisan mouthpiece constitutes supporting your argument with facts?

I'll give you a fact: The democrats now control congress due to a change in the popular support for the policies of our leadership. If you really need it, I'll find and post a link to election results to support that position.

Without popular support we will never raise the level of effort in this conflict to what it would take to win despite all the hand wringing of those who still support this half baked plan.

Does radical Islam need to be confronted? Absolutely. Will Bush succeed in doing so? Not this time around. He does not have the support of the electorate and he is not going to get it back. It is too bad that he lied and manipulated us to reach his goals and made a terrible world situation worse.

0

another_local 7 years, 7 months ago

"Most Americans FALSELY believe there was no relationship between Saddam and al Qaeda. NOTHING could be father from the truth"

Oh my. That pretty much sums it up doesn't it? No further response required on my part.

0

another_local 7 years, 7 months ago

Did Al-Q and Saddam kill the Kennedy brothers too? Was Iraq responsible for the Challenger explosion? What is your view of global warming? Maybe the Taliban sent the Rainbows here to disrupt the Steamboat political scene and get the democrats into office?

It is possible to find a link to any view you want to espouse. That does not make it true... but perhaps it helps you to believe.

punked? have a look in the mirror.

0

fish 7 years, 7 months ago

I was wondering if there is any one out there who actually reads this guys post? Lets see a show of entries if you do not read his posts and just move on down to the next person.

0

Slapper 7 years, 7 months ago

sbvor

I missed this as like most others I do not read your drivel. You write "It appears that you completely fabricated your assertion that: "99 troops [were] killed... this morning in Irag [sic]"

As of that morning 4/29 99 troops had been killed with a total of 104 for the month of April. As of today for the month of May so there is no confusion the number of troops killed in Iraq is 25 a fabulous start to what appears to be another record setting month of progress showing proof positive der leader's surge is working.

0

jeannie berger 7 years, 7 months ago

slapper, you know you cannot argue with sbvor (steamboat voracious?). You will just be inundated with websites to go to and read. I have tried to keep up with his/her reasoning but alas, my poor befuddled brain that has been warped by the liberal media cannot make any sense out of his/her posts. It is best to skip his posts and ignore his name calling. He/she has a few followers or just writes under multiple handles. I read some of his cited websites on the 9/11 commission report but didn't figure out which part of the page(s) he was referring to. Nothing I read seemed to go with the arguments he was trying to support. But hey he/she figures I am in dreamland because of my handle so I guess my opinions don't count. sbvor, It seems to me that what we are doing in Iraq is being policemen, waiting for the ruling government to be strong enough to take over. When will that be? You seem to be the person with all of the answers. For once don't give me any websites to go to, what about a straight answer from you. What about the first Gearge Bush, why didn't he put a stop to Iraq during his presidency. America was behind him. Maybe he was smarter than his son and saw that it would turn into a quagmire.

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.