Oliver North, Thank you for your excellent to the point article. I wished we had Don Rumsfeld in Vietnam and it would have turned out much differently-we would have won.I support Mr, Rumsfeld completely and I challenge the 6 x-generals who are developing a strategy for the Democratic-left liberalists and Zinni is making money on his book, vern

I think that Rumsfeld is a terrific leader. It is hard to imagine why six retired Generals have come out and criticized him for actions that they themselves have planned. Besides, we have already won the war in Iraq, we are now in a lengthy recovery to stabilize the country. . . not an easy task.

This only goes to show what I have come to believe for the last few years: A liberal is a liberal is a liberal. A liberal is a liberal first, foremost, and always. When anyone or anything comes into conflict with their deeply held religious (liberal) beliefs, that is always dumped in favor of liberalism.

These generals are just liberals. They will never put America first; they will put their liberal views first. They will betray anyone, even those who show them kindness, confidence, or mercy.

Any doubt as to why they lie about the war?

Right On Skipper :)

We both know that 'some' generals succumb to that NATO/EU Caesar complex and forget which side of the Atlantic is 'home'.

The EU agenda needs for us to fail. And the DNC is only too happy to comply.

As to those generals ... I can only wonder what kind of Attack Dog wants to be turned into a Liberal Lap Dog.

Maybe I'm Old School, but I could never do that ... I just couldn't.

Semper Fi

I believe you have hit the proverbial nail on the head, Colonel. If these men had the "honor" to go along with their rank, they would followed their convictions and stepped down much earlier. These tardy commentaries come across as almost cowardly...attacking someone once your lifetime pension is secure. It appears that the liberal media outlets are once again offering a microphone to all who wish to denigrate the president - without any background checking as to possible motives.

What I would like to know is...what is going to happen in 2008 when the media have to find an agenda other than "Get the President - no matter what ethics they have to discard along the way!"

These men don't know what honor is. They'd sell Momma' for that chance at a book deal!

Doesn't anybody remember the retired traitor Clarke, from the`04 primaries? He was loved by Clinton, after all he led the "Big War on terror" of the Clinton era. Doesn't anybody remember those insipid Waaco wackos, the Branch Davidians and their feared leader Karesh? I mean for God's sake they had firearms in their complex. So they had to die???

Okay- strike one for Clinton! And who do you think led the mission? the great Wesley C. I give him no announced status in the military, because he obviously deserves none. Yet another incident with a traitor of late, greatly publicized!

While evey General and Captain is ultimately responsible for the conduct of his men, it is also a fact that a command can be subordinated to political influences (subterfuge).

The weapons the agents carried at Waco are proof that the mission was not designed to be confrontational to the degree of precipitating a shoot-out. Weapons capabilities define the parameters of mission.

The mission was compromised by MEDIA presence even before the agents arrived. The only source that could have and would have leaked this info was Janet Reno anticipating a bloody media and political coup against the Right ... meaning Hillary was in on it ... and Clarke?

Clarke knows what went down ... and still sold his soul.

This is why the Founding Fathers did not allow for the military to play at being cops ... great shades of Oliver Cromwell!!!

Clarke is in every way a traitor ... and his claque along with him.

That's the point! They posed no danger to the public, but he through the military in head first. I'm not blaming the military! this was Clinton trying to prove he was a tough guy and Clarke helping him, without question.

That was supposed to say threw not through!

Waco and Ruby Ridge .... in both cases this was Hillary's agenda, not Wild Bill's.

Reno was Hillary's creature ... Bill wanted her gone ... now you know why ... and he failed to get rid of Reno because the DNC inner-circle supports Hillary.

Clarke belongs to the Hillary-Gore claque.

They need to keep something in mind, "You reap what you sow."

I hated saying that. I do not want my nation devolve into a banana republic ... but they do ... they prove it with every move they make ... and, sooner or later, they will surely reap what they have sown.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: