Frontpage

robert reddell

| Everyone was saying how successful the surge was. The information was there about how we started paying the Suni 'sons of Iraq' for their cooperation in the fight against al-queda and some even suggested that the success of the surge started even before we increased troop strength.

Bill, are you implying that increased boots on the ground from our wonderful 100% volunteer U.S. Military didn't have anything to do with decreased violence? I have to consider that you know you're taking a shot at the military saying that, and I also know you know 100% how much I support our military, therefore you cannot expect me to let this one go without a response.

Success of the surge started before increased troop strength? Now THAT is hilarious. Let me tell you this, IDF (indirect fire) attacks peaked in June 2007, dropped by 1/2 in July, dropped in 1/2 again in August. Do you know what is significant about June 2007? That is the first month that all 5 additional brigades were finally in Iraq and on the ground. For you to try to diminish the fact that our troops are what cut IDF attacks in half and in half again in 2 months is about as un patriotic as it gets. As soon as I legally can, I'll send you the data on IDF attacks.

Once again, people believing CNN and even FOX and taking it for the Gospel shows what so many people have become, pawns of the media.

On another note, do you think the current conflict in Isreal is really Palestinians versus Israelis? It's a dang shame the media won't call it like it is and just say it's muslims killing Jews and after 4000 rockets from hamas fired into Israel over the last 3 years (where's the world concern over that) the Israelis finally got fed up with it. This isn't a battle over land, it's some people following direction from their holy book, plain and simple.

I think this forum is a great place for everyone from both sides to voice their opinions, but taking shots at our military is a little overboard. There's an old Merle Haggard song about that.

Bill Pelland · Posted: 11 Jan 2009 07:31 am Post Subject: Re: Viagra for intelligence

Robert Reddell writes:

Bill, are you implying that increased boots on the ground from our wonderful 100% volunteer U.S. Military didn't have anything to do with decreased violence? I have to consider that you know you're taking a shot at the military saying that, and I also know you know 100% how much I support our military, therefore you cannot expect me to let this one go without a response.

I was not downgrading our troops at all. What I was saying is that the success of the surge was greatly enhanced by the fact that we also paid off some opponents. When we dismissed the Iragi army and sent them home (with their weapons) early on we made a big mistake as we cut off their income. By paying the Sons of Iraq we corrected some of that mistake and thus reaped benefits.

Some in the press have suggested that the surge was not really needed as we already had turned around because of the payoff to the Sons of Iraq. Whenever I write about methods used in Iraq by our political planners the other side tries to paint that as being against the troops. I have never spoken out against the job our troops are doing and in fact have been a strong supporter of treating them better when they come home.

The strength of this nation is that we the people have the right to speak out and either praise or critize our government leaders for what they do or do not do.

As for the palestinians and the Israelis you oversimplify the situation as usual. There are issues deeply rooted in economics, land, illegal settlements, and human right abuse involved here and to just say it is Muslim killing Jew is a position that precludes looking deeper into the issue. Don't forget that Iran's influence is at play here as well as in Lebanon. Don't oversimplify this extremely complicated foreign affairs situation.

Bill Pelland

PS good to have you back.

-1

Mr. Lewis:

I think I must have been sleeping a lot the last seven years because I don't recall there being any terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since September 11, 2001.

You are wrong, Mr. Lewis.

-1

Once again, you amaze me, as you managed again to go of the main subject.
But, since you brought it up, you are wrong again. As I recall we endured several attacks with anthrax AFTER September 11, 2001.

-1

| Once again, you amaze me, as you managed again to go of the main subject.
| But, since you brought it up, you are wrong again. As I recall we endured several attacks with anthrax AFTER September 11, 2001.

And I got a paper cut reading a story about 9/11. That should count too don't you think? Get real! How many people were killed in Anthrax attacks?

-1

since you ask, 5 people died and 17 were injured in the post 9/11 anthrax and ricin attacks. Next question? I think that trumps your paper cut, buddy.

-1

not to mention that it shut down Congress.......

-1

People are still dying and billions still being spent each week as a result of actions the Bush administration has taken in the past 7 years since 9/11. Every time you say that we haven't been attacked in CONUS since 9/11 you make the failures of the past seven years more obvious. Why would any terrorist organization attack us when all they have to do is sit back and watch us implode from within.

The shock waves of September 11, 2001 are still reverberating. You say we haven't been attacked for 7 years. I say the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 have lasted for 7 years. The missed oppurtunities of genuine leadership alone in the past 7 years has been tantamount to terrorism.

It doesn't matter anyway Heidi because Bush will soon be gone and Obama in. You will go from bragging about not being attacked to counting down to the next attack. You have made it abundantly clear that terrorist attacks are pure political fodder for you now.

Me? I'd rather get attacked 1,000 times and be on the side of right than live to be a 100 years old on the side of wrong. Whether or not you are attacked is a very sad and low standard. If it were a good standard, Israel has never had a good leader.

-1

| People are still dying and billions still being spent each week as a result of actions the Bush administration has taken in the past 7 years since 9/11. Every time you say that we haven't been attacked in CONUS since 9/11 you make the failures of the past seven years more obvious. Why would any terrorist organization attack us when all they have to do is sit back and watch us implode from within.
|
| The shock waves of September 11, 2001 are still reverberating. You say we haven't been attacked for 7 years. I say the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 have lasted for 7 years. The missed oppurtunities of genuine leadership alone in the past 7 years has been tantamount to terrorism.
|
| It doesn't matter anyway Heidi because Bush will soon be gone and Obama in. You will go from bragging about not being attacked to counting down to the next attack. You have made it abundantly clear that terrorist attacks are pure political fodder for you now.
|
| Me? I'd rather get attacked 1,000 times and be on the side of right than live to be a 100 years old on the side of wrong. Whether or not you are attacked is a very sad and low standard. If it were a good standard, Israel has never had a good leader.

Toby, this is nothing other than you trying to prepare us for the huge let down that Obama is going to be. You are setting the foundation for blaming every Obama failure as a carry over from Bush. Obama is already cutting and running on his campaign promises and of course it is all because of Bush.

Robert Morris
(Long Live Personal Freedoms)

-1

Toby, thank you. There is wisdom in your response to Heidi that I cannot add. Those who boast that we have not been attacked since 9/11 fail to understand the truth; our country can be attacked. We should not place our comfort in our military might but in our faith in God.

-1

| Toby, thank you. There is wisdom in your response to Heidi that I cannot add. Those who boast that we have not been attacked since 9/11 fail to understand the truth; our country can be attacked. We should not place our comfort in our military might but in our faith in God.

So now if we are attacked on Obama's watch it is God's will and not a failure of the Obama administration as 9/11 was for the Bush administration? Good work Kevin, at least you and Toby are on the same page laying the groundwork for your attempt to not hold Obama accountable for anything bad that happens on his watch.

-1

Robert,
I will hold Obama accountable by using higher standards than I used with Bush. It's all about expectations, and to tell you the truth it wasn't hard to expect less from Bush. He made it easy to not expect much. Even Bush admits as much. He mocks his own ignorance in his press conferences. Bush receives the "soft bigotries of low expectations" from me because that's what he portrays. For God's sake, he referred to Africa as a country for the first two years he was in office and he tried to outsource port security to an Arab country that plays two sides to the middle in the fight.

I think you and I just approach it from different angles. I don't judge Bush harshly out of some sense of political gamesmanship, but on merit. The same as I will judge Obama, but higher because Obama is capable of more than Bush. If we were attacked again after 9/11 I wouldn't have judged Bush on the mere bases of being attacked, but on the how, the why, and the response. As I have said many times defending Bush, the only way we can be 99.9% safe from an attack is to suspend our free and open society. Success and leadership is judged on more than just either/or. "We are EITHER never attacked OR the president is bad" or "We are EITHER attacked OR the president is good." Bush isn't a bad president because we were attacked on 9/11, Bush is a bad president because he failed to use the attack to make us a better country. He gave the enemy what the enemy wanted. They wanted:

1. shock and awe style attack
2. that would change America forever.

They supplied #1 and Bush supplied #2. They wanted a "post 9/11 America" and Bush gave it to them, even referring to our country as such. We are the same country as we were on September 10, 2001. To assume otherwise is to admit defeat.

-1

Gee Robert its nice to know that since 9/11 American hasn't been attacked. I'll bet the over 4,000 dead and 80,000 wounded American troopers would beg to differ on that issue.

-1

Robert, is there a blindness to you that even the truth of placing one's faith in God angers you? The only way I made it through the past administration is my faith in God and not so much in the current office holder. Read Psalm 118: 9. The boasting of no additional attacks within the current administration fails to grip the obvious: we were attacked. Yet, could it have been prevented? I for one would say, "no". Only because our country's foundation is freedom and there are people who will use that freedom to try to destroy us. To be frank, those who commit crimes, regardless of what their bumpersticker may say, attacks the freedom we enjoy as well as those from countries we war against.

-1

Robert,
You read my post as if I were playing the game you are playing. I'm not. I was simply replying to a post. The fact that you think I had some political motive in what I posted shows where your brain is on the matter and how much you don't know me. Please don't assume that I approach geopolitical opinion on the bases that I want one party to be successful over another party. I want the U.S. to be successful; therefore, I wanted Bush to be successful. The plain and simple is that he wasn't. I thought his dad was pretty successful in his first term that's why I voted for Bush Sr. in 1992. He didn't win so I wanted Clinton to be successful. He was so I voted for him in 1996. Good leadership qualities trump party, at least still for some people.

You know your position is weak when you are forced to get in the business of trying to guess what the other person's motives are. Weak because your ego will not allow you to think you're wrong about me even if, as in this case, you're dead wrong.

-1

You forgot 9/11. The intelligence report in August warned that Bin Laden was going to hit the US. There was also intelligence warning of plane hi-jackings and the use of aircraft as missles.

Condi Rice and the Bush Security team was asleep at the switch.

Yesterday at his news conference, Dubya said he gets intelligence briefings Mon-Sat but not on Sunday. Not exactly 100% coverage is it?

You can thank better coordination between our intelligence agencies and better world-wide communication with not being hit again but to credit an administration that totally mishandled Katrina and still has not secured our borders or our ports is a mistake in judgement.

Bill Pelland

-1

Bill: Mr. Lewis wrote:

Heidi Lockridge writes of President George W. Bush, "at least he has protected us at home." But that is pure speculation that cannot be proven.

I don't see that as being pure speculation. We have not been hit since 9/11/2001.

Your President Clinton had knowledge of Bin Laden for YEARS AND YEARS and he sat on his hands and did absolutely nothing. He looked the other way because it would have been an unpopluar thing to do and he was and continues to be driven by the polls.

He would rather have sex in his office with a chubby intern then get his hands dirty by using military force to get Bin Laden.

Those are facts - ugly, but nonetheless the facts. His administration did absolutely nothing to address the info. on Bin Laden.

Bush was not entirely responsible for the attacks on 9/11. If you honestly believe that he was, you have some soul searching to do.

Both y

-1

Bill:

You, Elizabeth and Toby just won't acknowledge the fact that President Bush has kept this nation safe since 9/11.

That is pitiful.

-1

better to live in hope than in fear, Heidi, and Bush controlled this nation with fear

-1

Bill, Toby and Mr. Lewis:

If Bush had known of the AQ attack on 9/11 ahead of time and begun rounding up suspects, he would have been castigated as a fascist (and he was afterward by certain lunatic parts of the body politic, anyway).

So in your eyes he was wrong either way.

I think with terrorism we have to be right 100% of the time, they (AQ) only have to be right once. So far we are right 100%, and I think history will look back and say what an incredible job Bush did�almost inconceivable what he did.

And as messy as the war was, that was one of the reasons�I think history will show the valiant effort of our military, the lives they sacrificed, saved many more lives over here.

Twenty years from now, Bush will be hailed as a great leader, at a time where events were taking place and attempting to take place that he will only know by living out the next 20 years, and looking back.

End of subject.

-1

"Twenty years from now, Bush will be hailed as a great leader, at a time where events were taking place and attempting to take place that he will only know by living out the next 20 years, and looking back."

Lady, you are living in la-la land big time. There will NEVER be a worse President than G W Bush!!!

-1

At the rate our current President is going, you may end up having to retract that statement sooner than later.

-1

What bothers you the most Robert? The fact your party just lost the election or the fact we now have a President who just happens to also be our first African American President. Or mabey its the fact that since the Passage in 1964 of the Voting Rights legislation people can no longer be prevented from exercising thier right to vote in this country. They can't be charged poll taxes or be forced to take tests to be able to exercisae that voting right, nor do they have to be male or have a grandfather who was a registeered voter to be able to qualify to register to vote.

-1

Ooops, forgot to mention a few other reasons I'm not happy with our President.

#1. Is liberal.

#2. Is freeing terrorists who have killed Americans.

#3. Is caving in to the folks who got him elected, basically being a pawn.

Doesn't matter what party or what his ancestry is either.

$20,000,000 for the removal of fish barriers? You've got to be kidding me.

$25,000,000 for rehabilitation of ATV trails? This is just hilarious.

What kind of sane person could say that this is what our out of work factory workers need. This is Pelosi and Reeds payback and Obama just is along for the ride. If he had America's best interests at heart, he'd have cut this junk out.

Would you not agree that $45,000,000 could be better spent to help people who need help, rather than helping some fish make it up stream better and give better trails to ride on?

Pelosi/Reed/Obama are sitting on $800 billion that could be injected into the economy immediately with a check to all tax paying citizens. Instead, they want to bicker about saving wetlands in San Francisco, building golf carts, cleaning up streams and building ATV trails.

And yes, this is Obama's issue. He can fix it, but "Mr." Pelosi is running this show.

Community organizer is not the same as leading a nation.

And the latest mirror to fall off the glitter ball.

By executive order, President Barack Obama has ordered the expenditure of $20.3 million in migration assistance to the Palestinian refugees and conflict victims in Gaza.

President Obama's executive order is expected to bring hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, many with ties to radical Islam, to American shores, furthering a process that was inaugurated in 1995 by Senator Ted Kennedy and the Cedar-Hart bill.

$20,000,000 to help Palestinians come to the U.S. Here's a nice little tidbit, if no other Arab nation will take these people, wouldn't you think there might be a reason? I would say this is unbelievable, but I knew his true colors would shine eventually, so it's not a shock to me. The "Europization" of America is under way full steam.

Change indeed.

-1

| What bothers you the most Robert? The fact your party just lost the election or the fact we now have a President who just happens to also be our first African American President. Or mabey its the fact that since the Passage in 1964 of the Voting Rights legislation people can no longer be prevented from exercising thier right to vote in this country. They can't be charged poll taxes or be forced to take tests to be able to exercisae that voting right, nor do they have to be male or have a grandfather who was a registeered voter to be able to qualify to register to vote.

Hey, not sure where all that came from, but since you ask, here you go.

The only thing that bothers me is that we have without a doubt, the most inexperienced President of the United States in history. No sense in beating that dead horse, it's been done, 54% of the U.S. wanted change. Now we get to deal with the daily humiliating headlines of "so and so" who was supposed to be appointed hasn't paid their taxes, has some illegal alien housekeeper, has some fraud case pending... etc. etc.

This is purely the result of inexperience of the elected officials. If our country's health wasn't truly on the line, it would be comical to watch this administration stub it's toe every chance it gets. Pelosi and company are driving this train, Obama's just there for support. It should be the other way around. The more I hear Obama, I think he may have some of the traits to be a good president. Another 6 years, some real experience under his belt, I would imagine he'd been a little more qualified. He's in over his head bigtime, and we're going to feel the consequences of the mistakes that are made.

He lied, flat out, 2 times. He was asked in 2004 and 2006 if he was going to run for President, and both times he said no. In fact, in 2004, he even went so far as to say that he was not qualified. Here's what he said.

You know, I am a believer in knowing what you're doing when you apply for a job. And I think that if I were to seriously consider running on a national ticket, I would essentially have to start now, before having served a day in the Senate. Now, there are some people who might be comfortable doing that, but I'm not one of those people.

What happened I wonder? George Soros and the big money lib machine saw their chance and took it.

And you do know that the Republican party is who fought for the Civil Rights Act of 1964, right? Even after JFK fought against it? Do a little research and you'll see who fought for rights and equality. You may be more Republican than you know if you ever took a look at what our beliefs are.

-1

Of course the sad fact is that Republicans like the comedian Rush Limbaugh want Obama to fail.

-1

|
| You can thank better coordination between our intelligence agencies and better world-wide communication with not being hit again but to credit an administration that totally mishandled Katrina and still has not secured our borders or our ports is a mistake in judgement.
|
| Bill Pelland

I am so glad that Obama is now in control of the Bush Weather Control System. Bill, you are so in with Obama, can I count on you for the daily forecast?

-1

Robert Morris writes

I am so glad that Obama is now in control of the Bush Weather Control System. Bill, you are so in with Obama, can I count on you for the daily forecast?

Gee Rpbert I thought we were trying to decide whether Dubya kept us safe or not.

I suggest you watch the morning news for the weather or maybe the internet weather site.

Bill Pelland

-1

| Robert Morris writes
|
|

I am so glad that Obama is now in control of the Bush Weather Control System. Bill, you are so in with Obama, can I count on you for the daily forecast?

|
| Gee Rpbert I thought we were trying to decide whether Dubya kept us safe or not.
|
| I suggest you watch the morning news for the weather or maybe the internet weather site.
|
| Bill Pelland

Remember, you libs think Bush directed Katrina to hit New Orleans. So he must have some device for controlling the weather, right?

Autos Employment Real Estate Classifieds Place An Ad Subscribe Now Weather CBS 19 Forecast	News Tyler News East TX News Health Business Obituaries Death Notices Religion	Sports Local Sports High School Sports College Sports Outdoors Sports Columns Travel	Opinion TylerPaper Editorials Nelson Clyde Column Raves,Rants,Roses Reader Responses Fit City Challenge Tyler Talk Youthful Living	Community Discover Gardening Community Columns Food Local Flavor As Seen On CBS 19 Tastemakers	Entertainment ETx Entertainment Movie Reviews Ent. Columns GoGuide Events Clubs/Organizations Achievers Social Media	FocusInOn.Me Mobile Special Reports Police Map IN Magazine Contact Info Email Newsletter	Who We Are Company History Community Links Privacy Policy Copyright Policy User Agreement Terms of Use Questions?
©2012 TylerPaper.com/Tyler Morning Telegraph 410 W. Erwin St., Tyler, Texas 75702 All Rights Reserved