move on bought the DNC, and they own it!! Now do what they say!!!

I thought Jo Ann Emerson, districe 8, was re-elected in 2007.

Yeah right, you don't like the message so you attack the messenger. Who really knows more about it than these generals? bush and them just ain't used to people speaking the truth when that ain't what they want to hear.

Batiste resigned in protest. He was one of the best young generals on the way up. Bush is decimating the Army -- at the bottom and at the top. Impeach.

Batiste resigned in protest. He was one of the best young generals on the way up. Bush is decimating the Army -- at the bottom and at the top. Impeach.

Fabulous! I love that the generals are speaking out and trying to bring some sanity to the insane situation in Iraq. Clark '08!

Trying to tie VoteVets to the Democratic Party is kind of silly. They are a veterans advocacy group who's primary goal is to promote the interests of the brave men and women who volunteer for service. The fact that the largest threat to our nation's soldiers, currently, is the Republican Party is merely coincidental. I gaurantee you if the Democrats ever start treating the soldiers the way the Republicans do, they will start targeting our Congressional candidates as well.

Scott how is that different from what the left does? Hell some of you people attacked a mother who lost a son in Iraq just because she didn't agree with your Bush Bashing. Now call me names, and tell me how much you hate me. BTW zzzzzzzzz just pointed out the truth of what move on has said to the DNC, but that's an attack to you people. Think I'll go back to sleep now :-)

Typical, someone disagrees with this moron(bush), that "someone" happens to know what they are talking about and could persued those teetering on the edge, and all the sudden these generals are idiots or have been bought. Pothetic!!

These three Generals have served with integrity and complete loyalty to our country! Bush has never listened to any of the Generals but the ones that play for him. This is such a disservice to our country when a few in our own military shill for the worst Commander in Chief this country has ever had, and what a disservice to our troops fighting and dying over there! Americans, listen to these Generals. They are honest men, still fighting for our country. www.StopIranWar.com

Relax Dave, I don't call people names (not even you) and I don't hate you. Pity you is more like it. But don't worry, close your eyes and go back to your dream world.

You Go Generals!! you know more than "pothetic" bush (national guard dodger). loved that word Susan Neb.

Let me tell all of you something. I happen to have served with 2 of them directly and was under the command of the other once in Bosnia.#1 Eaton is disgruntled because he didnt receive another star and felt he should have been in line for the Cenom job that Abizaid got.#2 Batiste is ate up. He wanted to be the next III Corp commander at Ft Hood to which was blocked by General Franks to which he was not qualified or deserved.#3 Wesley Clark is a damn politician now and he is put on the same plane as politicians so his military spin is coming from the left totally. By the way Clark was promoted thru the ranks by Clinton. Reagan pass him over. So go figure why he is disgruntled. #4VoteVets does not represent even 1 tenth of a percent of active veterans. most of those guys are disgruntled Vietnam Vets and disgruntled National guardsmen and reservist that are upset because they have to play Army for REAL. So for any of you to say they all served with integrity I ask " How the hell do you know?" We are fighting a damn war and it is a shame we come home and hear all of this BS. This is why a lot of us are ready to go back to Iraq and do what we are trained to do and not have to hear all this BS from people that have no inkling of anything about the military.

To Dogface: you do your service no good with these pathetic wrong and wrong-headed arguments. Because a person disagrees with official policy, he is automatically "disgruntled?" Have you checked out the medals on the chests of these 3 men? Who in the hell do you think you are? Now kindly tell me who are we fighting in Iraq? Where's the war? Point out one of enemies, please. I thought the "mission" was over; why are we still occupying Iraq? I have tremendous respect for our troops; I was one a long, long time ago, but they are being misused and abused by the criminal group that occupies the White House. Support the troops; get them the hell home. There are other, less deadly, ways of settling conflicts.

Thank you Dogface Soldier. From one who happens to appreciate what you do.

Dogface, before you rush off to Iraq again, why not get in touch with G.W. Bush and encourage him to have his two able bodied daughters enlist in the Marines and sign up for a tour in Baghdad? maybe you could all go together. Since, as you say, "we are fighting a damn war", shouldn't Bush put his offspring where his mouth is instead of relying on others to sacrifice their daughters and sons to his War-Without-End? It would be the patriotic thing to do. And that's no BS.

Dogface we believe you and not the Generals. You seem to have a lot of solutions and positive impressions of those you served under. Keep up the good work...ditto...ditto... How's Veterans for Truth doing?

Dogface--Don't know where you dug up your misinformation about these three generals, but it must have been FOX. And frankly, I find it just a little hard to believe that you served with any of them or you would have more credible comments. The one I know the most about is Clark, whose resume (a matter of public record) is filled with praise from everyone from Republicans Al Haig and General Colin Powell to the ambassadors all over the world who endorsed him. Go peddle your resentment against the brass somewhere else.

Thanks for your comment, Dogface Soldier. Just out of curiosity: (1) what is your rank, MOS, and length of service? (so that those of us who have no inkling might better understand); (2) what are you referring to when you say "served with directly", and by "under the command of", do you mean one of ten or fifteen thousand, or more?; (3) where do you get the "1 tenth of a percent" statistic?; (4) what do you mean by "disgruntled Vietnam Vets"?; and (5) do you have any respect for any guardsmen or reservists? Respectfully submitted,

Hey dogface, if you'd look past your own nose you would see a president who doesn't give one s---- about you and your buddy soldiers and never did. Surprise!!!So, if you want to go back to Iraq and continue to fight a phoney war, go for it! But don't cry about it when others can see the truth and tell you about it. We just don't like Americans dying FOR NO REASON!!!

Dogface, it seems your anger and frustrations are misplaced. You should be angry at president Bush and this administration not us. We want to keep you soldiers alive.

Posted 12:38 today. Cheney sees progress in Iraq. The situation on the ground has gotten better. Man I feel so much better now. What a releif hearing this from such an expert on war. Thanks Cheney, I am now ready to support this war for another eight years.

Finally, some patriotic profiles in courage from the military.

I am sorry but isn't it true that Kansas accurately meet the needs of their disaster BECAUSE they are in IRAQ. I am sorry but didn't we just spend FOUR years and billions of dollars for NOTHING but and INCREASE to OUR NATION! So don't give us this, this is why we go back to Iraq crap ANYMORE! THIS ADMINISTRATION FAILED US, THE MILITARY FAILED US AND WE DEMAND IT STOP NOW. SO GO WHINE ABOUT HOW YOU ARE GOING TO FIGHT THIS FREAKING WAR IN WHICH HAS NEARLY BROKE THE BACK OF OUR MILITARY. I REPEAT OUR MILITARY.

And I know we don't want to talk about leaving Afghansitan too soon and now look! And what you are trained to do is to protect YOUR country- no cowtow to politicians at the risk of our nation. I expect more than that from our military leaders. I expect we will get that now!

Fantastic! Its just a shame we have to donate $$$ to our generals and veterans to hear the truth told. God bless 'em.

Dogface, you sound like the one disgruntled. Why? The Generals are trying to turn this failed war around by waking up the sleeping masses to what the real story is about Bush not listening to the commanders on the ground, and more. These Generals speaking out are genuinely concerned for our troops, the people in Iraq, and that whole region that Bush has created havoc in, not the least is also their concern about the respect that has been lost for our country internationally. You will not find a General more concerned about the welfare of our troops as General Clark is. He's proven it over and again. And I'm sorry, but I am reading many letters from soldiers in Iraq who know this was a bad decision to go into Iraq and are hoping all of us here, in the U.S., will do something to turn this around. They are there now, exhausted and concerned. I also have a nephew with Airborne in Iraq now, who believes in General Clark! www.securingamerica.com

Dogface Soldier, The only war you are fighting is a civil war in Iraq. I do support the military and wish they would come home and leave the religious factions to fight amomgst themselves. You have disguntled employees in every job so the military is probably no different. Send Bush over there!!

Great.Three generals who are the modern-day equiviliant of WWIIs Fredenhall[sacked in North Africa],WWIs Foche[Sacked in France],and the American Civil Wars McClellan[Sacked after Antietam/Sharpsburg].Of the former star-shouldered sad sacks,Clark cuts the worst figure.His Kosovo adventure where he allied himself with murdering al Qaeda-trained thugs[the worst being the KLAs Thalim ''The Butcher''Hachi,a Oct 11,1999 AP photo has Hachi and Clark shaking hands going into buddy mode where Clark refused to disband or disarm the rogue KLA],accomplished absolutely zero.al Qaeda is moving into the Balkans as we speak.As way of saying ''Thanks Wesley''for ''liberating''Kosovo for Islamic Albania,six Albanians and former Yugo Muslims tried to take out soldiers at Ft.Dix in the last few days.I wouldn't take the word of these hack generals on a bet.Good thing I never had to serve under any one of these when I was in.

Scott, Thanks for your excellent post. Since you covered a number of questions I too was wondering about, I won't repeat them. However, having read "Dogface's" post, I wonder how many "names" he has posted under previously. So often here on MSNBC.com you see a right winger post his disinformation once and disappear only to have another poster who sounds the same but uses a different moniker. My guess is the only "combat" Dogface has actually seen is from behind his keyboard.

The GOP can't seem to figure it out. They have claimed throughout the entire Iraqi fiasco that the military supports the Bush administration. Yet, now that prominent and retired military leaders are (finally) speaking out, they cry foul and claim this veterans' group is tied to the Democrats. What, don't they get to voice their opinions too? BTW, every veteran that I have spoken to on this issue wants us out NOW. Vietnam vets, Korean War vets, World War II vets, Desert Storm vets, each and every one of them has expressed total disgust at the Bush administrations' handling of the entire Iraq debacle.

Dogface; I am a veteran and although I served under various Admirals I never had the distinguished honor of being close to any. I was an NCO in charge of the division. You must have been up there in rank. Dogface, I don't believe you.

General Clark received awards and acknowledgments throughout his career, under both Democratic and Republican regimes. A list of his honors follows: http://securingamerica.com/taxonomy/term/81

The ad hominem fallacy consists of replying to an argument by attacking or appealing to the person making the argument rather than the argument itself. Have any ex-generals come out and said the Bush Administration's handling of Iraq was not incompetent? I personally would love to hear the argument that it was competent because for the life of me I cannot see how anybody could make a credible argument that it was, but I would be willing to listen to it. Dogface, thanks for your service, but as citizens we have the right (most would say duty) to question our elected leaders and the decisions they make. It would be a sad country if it were true that the only person who has any right to express an opinion on a war launched by our country, conducted in our country's name, and paid for by our country are people serving in the war. Many of us in this country have served in the military, but prefacing posts with a miliatry resume is really just a form of ad hominem fallacy; the implication is "I serve(d) in the military, and you did not therfore your argument does not matter."

Had the President listen to generals we could have had 500,000 men in Iraq. In fact a general was fired for saying exactly that. The Iraqi oil will pay for the war, that has not happen. We are going to be greeted as liberators, well we are being greeted by bombs. This president has no credibilty on any issue.

I believe if people from all ranks of the military feel they should speak out against injustice and bad policy, then they need to do so. Many have done it while still in the military, and have put themselves at risk. These former generals have spoken their minds and expressed their professional opinions. Their skills while in the military have no bearing to their ability to express their opinions. We need to get a grip on what's happening in Iraq and with our use of the military to solve all problems. I fear for the safety of all who go to war in our name. War is serious stuff and should not be fought just because someone is trained to fight. War should be a last resort and even then, should be reconsidered. Taking anyone's life, even in self-defense, is not a morally defendable action. The war in Iraq is the worst kind of war... since it is one where lies and deceipt were used to gain support. I can see someone wanting to go back to help make sure their buddies come home safe. I can also see and understand those of us who wish to protest our involvement and petition our government to stop the war and bring our military home. We've had enough of Bush's lies that have led to many thousands of deaths. We've had enough of his hypocrisy in supporting the military on one hand while ripping apart the veterans' benefits as well as the medical bennies for not only full-time soldiers but also for the Guard members. People need to be less quick to offer their lives up just because someone gave an order. This war is not defending the US, only its oil interests that it has no legal or moral right to claim.

To answer some. I happen to be a MSG promotable with over 24 yrs active service as a 18D. Have served in many roles throughout my career. If I was disgruntled I dont think I lwould have stayed 24yrs and continuing. By the way I have a Master's in B Admin. So Im not here for the education. What Im saying is you dont do soldiers any good by disrespecting the commander-in-chief. Clinton put us in a lot of situations too (Bosnia, Somalia, Haiti,Kosovo, etc. My soldiers and I give a lot and we talk a lot about different issues. Most of us are going on our 3rd tour (no big deal) You have to be there to understand. By the way Mr. GreenZone. I happen to have patrolled Hwy 8 in 2004 and lost many soldiers and received a Purple Heart myself, and patrolled the streets of Rhamadi, Samara in 2005, not to mention Tora Bora in 2003 (Afghanistan) because of the nature of my MOS. I walk the walk so I can talk the talk. Its a lot of people in America that run off at the mouth a lot but most probably 99.5% doesnt have any affiliation with the military whether it be friends are family. Speaking of how much it cost, do you not think military pay taxes. Probably more than some of you. This war has cost 1% of GDP, WWII cost 16%, Vietnam 14%, Korea 12%, go figure. As far as the medals of Clark, whoopy do, we all have medals.

It wouldn't have been popular to have reinstated the draft at the beginning of this war, so it wasn't reinstated. Generals brought up the need for it, but it wouldn't have been good politics. That's why President Bush didn't send enough soldiers to begin with. That's why our soldiers don't have enough rest at home between tours. That's why they are sent over and over and over again. That's why enough National Guard troops can't be here to assist with hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, etc. We never had a chance because we started with too few soldiers. It's too late to put 500,000 in and turn things around. It would have been nice if more reporting had been done about the need for 500,000 soldiers at the beginning of the war.

Pssst Dogface - I cant talk the talk, too. Know why? I'm an American citizen and it is my constitutional right to speak out against what I believe to be bad policies and/or bad politicians. I have never and will never believe that you have to serve in the military to question the actions taken by that military. But hey, what do I know?

That 1% of the GDP for Iraq is almost more money than we spent in all of WWII. It is one helluva lot of money and what do we have to show for it? A bunch of dead US soldiers and thousands more maimed or psychologically damaged for the rest of their lives. Get a grip on reality... no matter how you slice it or dice it, obey your orders or not, speak up or not, in favor of the war or not... we have been involved in a war based upon lies for feeding someone's greed to be wealthier, more powerful and/or to look good as the "can do, I'm the President, the Commander in Chief, so you have to obey my every order and I need to look good for the history books" president who started it all. Dissent is what this country is all about, as that is how we began, how we separated from King George's oppression. We fought for it then as we needed to be independent. We weren't even in full agreement amongst ourselves, but we succeeded. This is the model for which other countries (like Iraq) need to use in their struggle for democracy, if that is really what they want. We cannot force it upon them. We cannot use those who lived in London and were paid by the US as Iraqi ex-pats in exile, as the only voice of the Iraqi people. (These people only wanted the money and now their "leader" is in-charge of the oil in Iraq... hmmm... how convenient.) Let's choose the conflicts where need to use our military, very, very carefully. Let's weigh the results with the risks involved and determine if it's worth it. Let's have a plan, have a definition of what success is, before entering the fray. Let's seriously review the situation on a regular basis and see if it makes any sense for us to continue. Let's not have the entrance into the fray be solely at the discretion of the President with a blank check. Let's have Congress ALWAYS exercise their inquisitive rights earlier by only providing money for a specific period of time, to then be reviewed before each period is concluded which will then allow the US to extracate itself from a conflict that is too expensive or not meeting its pre-defined objectives or measures of success. If our President wishes to run the US as a big corporation, then let him do so... and answer to the Board of Directors and stockholders and employees. Bush is an utter failure in his job as CEO of the US and as President, is headed for disaster again. The military has paved his path to the history books with their efforts and I am terribly saddened that their efforts are not recognized by their CIC as well as being pointless in their roles as soldiers trained to defend their country due to the lack of honesty with their CIC. Our soldiers need to all come home safe and sound so they can do their jobs in defending our country at some other time and place when it is really in defense of our country. Terrorism against the US is for specific reasons and our presence in Iraq only fuels those sentiments. It is terribly complex, but the first step to eliminating terrorism is not by defeating it on the battlefield, as there is no battlefield in the traditional sense. Diplomacy, constructive communication and morally-sound foreign policy will do more than any army can ever attempt to accomplish. I will end this with one last question: How did the British solve their conflict with the IRA? (Hint: they didn't defeat the IRA via military might and power. It took many years of trial and error to finally achieve the peace they now enjoy with the dissenters.)

Just wondering, Dog, why are you so interested in shooting the messengers rather than listening to their message? Typical right-wing tactic. Hope you survive the rest of your service with dignity and honor. We do appreciate it, although most Americans may not appreciate your point of view.

Show us your medals, Dogface.

Fair enough, Master Sgt. Dogface, and thanx for the response. I looked up 18D, and it's Special Operations Medical Sgt., correct? Regardless of our political beliefs and opinions, all of us are glad you made it this far and wish you luck and safety in the future. You're entitled to your opinions about these generals, whether it be from first hand experience or what you've heard from others, and you're entitled to support the war and be proud of your participation. The only thing else I'd say is it's not really fair to minimize the participation and sacrifice of the Guard and Reserves, nor is it really fair to label Vietnam vets "disgruntled". Finally, I'd point out that I have never served in the military, nor have I ever claimed to personally know what it's like, but I am allowed to make comments and have opinions from my non-serving-military perspective, and you can disagree or disregard as you see fit. Again, good luck.

Dogface, the most disrespect I ever heard of a commander in chief came from an ex-soldier who said that Bill Clinton should to be taken out and I don't mean on a date. Wish you could have been there to defend the office.

Sept 26, 2006 http://news.monstersandcritics.com/southasia/article_1204896.php/Karzai_US_should_have_engaged_Afghanistan_before_9_11 'You had your twin towers blown up because you in the US failed to connect that a monster in my part of the world ... could hurt you in America,' [Afghan President Hamid] Karzai said in a speech at the Woodrow Wilson Centre for Scholars in Washington. ______________________ Sept 25, 2006 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060925/ap_on_go_co/iraq_democrats Batiste, who commanded the Army's 1st Infantry Division in Iraq, also blamed Congress for failing to ask "the tough questions." He said Rumsfeld at one point threatened to fire the next person who mentioned the need for a postwar plan in Iraq. Batiste said if full consideration had been given to the requirements for war, it's likely the U.S. would have kept its focus on Afghanistan, "not fueled Islamic fundamentalism across the globe, and not created more enemies than there were insurgents." ______________________ May 12, 2004 http://www.cdi.org/program/document.cfm?DocumentID=2208&from_page=../index.cfm Gen. Anthony Zinni, USMC: "The second mistake I think history will record is that the strategy was flawed. I couldn't believe what I was hearing about the benefits of this strategic move. That the road to Jerusalem led through Baghdad, when just the opposite is true, the road to Baghdad led through Jerusalem. You solve the Middle East peace process, you'd be surprised what kinds of others things will work out." ______________________ July 7, 2006 http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,1814684,00.html The effect the war in Iraq has had on motivating Muslims planning acts of violence in the UK is underlined to senior Scotland Yard officers in a private briefing document compiled by anti-terrorist specialists. The document, marked "restricted", says the conflict in Iraq has had a "huge impact". ______________________ http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-intel24sep24,0,2161892.story The war in Iraq has made global terrorism worse by fanning Islamic radicalism and providing a training ground for lethal methods that are increasingly being exported to other countries, according to a sweeping assessment by U.S. intelligence agencies. The classified document, which represents a consensus view of all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, paints a considerably bleaker picture of the impact of the Iraq war than Bush administration or U.S. intelligence officials have acknowledged publicly, according to officials familiar with the assessment. ______________________ May 09, 2007 http://www.juancole.com/ . . . The small cell that plotted to attack Ft. Dix was made up of Albanians from Kosovo, along with a Turk and a Jordanian. Note that in the 1980s most Yugoslav Muslims were deracinated and secular. . . . Kosovars were most often secular and anti-Islamic or heterodox when religious. Milosevic monstrously attempted to use charges of al-Qaeda presence in Kosovo (unproved) as a pretext for killing Kosovars. In fact, his policies pushed some Kosovars into the arms of the Salafis. In other words, Kosovo was not about Islam. . . If some Kosovars now turn to radical fundamentalism, it is a result of the collapse of the old Communist framework and the attacks on them of the Milosevic fascists.

Sorry Dogface but I refuse to surrender my right as an American citizen to be critical of the President/Commander-in-Chief. It is my right and my duty as a citizen to challenge the failed policies of this President or any President for that matter. I served nine years as a commissioned officer on active duty; another three years in the Army Reserve. Big deal. The mere fact that I served for 12 years or you served for 24 years does not give us any greater standing to influence American policy nor does it give us the right to stifle free speech. The United States is a government of the people, by the people, for the people. You would have us believe it is a government of the military, by the military, for the military. Do you really expect me to buy this argument that we can't be critical of the President or the incompetent manner in which the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq have been executed simply because it adversly impacts on your morale? Perhaps I might buy what you're selling if you had been equally staunch in your defense of Commander-in-Chief Clinton when the Republican attack dogs were all over him during the Kosovo conflict. Suffice it to say, I find your arguments disingenuous. You repeatedly further your own personal politics, then hide behind the shield of the military as if that somehow makes you untouchable. You imply to others that they can't speak about the war or try to influence the debate because they aren't in the military and don't know the military. You seem to equate patriotism, good citzenship, and loyalty to our nation with a policy of unfettered support for this President and his policies (no matter how bad those policies may be; no matter how much they may hinder our national interests; no matter how much they may squander our national treasury). That's not patriotism my friend, that's politics. I thank you for your service to our country. I take exception, however, to your politics and your narrow-minded concept of what it means to be a patriotic.

Sgt. Dogface--Your opinion and the opinion of your fellow soldiers is no better or worse than any citizens. We don't engage in military actions based on a show of hands by the military. In short your opinion matters little more than mine. Your job is to follow orders which eventually have come down from the Civilian authority which you and I and other citizens elect. You can voice your opinion when out of uniform but when you are in uniform you need to shut up and obey orders. When those orders change, such as when we get competent civilian leadership, then you will obey those orders. Unless you intend to mutiny. At that point you will be an enemy of the state. Cheers.

"It is my right and my duty as a citizen to challenge the failed policies of this President or any President for that matter." - Kato in Des Moines . . . "Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." ~George Washington . . . "That we are to stand by the president, right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." ~Theodore Roosevelt . . . "Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official" ~Theodore Roosevelt

A couple years ago the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff stated the active army personnel do not look down on the National Guard and Reserves. Hmmmm...I guess he didn't check with Dogface before making that statement. My kid (Sgt. in the Guard) was well aware that he could be sent to fight in a 'real' war having seen several friends of our family (both Guard and Reserves)go off to fight in Desert Storm. He's disgruntled about the arrogance, ignorance and incomptetence of this administration, but not about having honored his commitment and served his country.

i would have considered dogface's posts more seriously if I did not realize that it is chris just posing under another name.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):