Hey, I have an idea: Let's hijack a thread.

[Dreepa]

and nothing was left at the office except for a peace plant, which we
gave to the office staff.

is a peace plant marijuana?

[David]

I've met some of the people from this group.  They seem genuinely anti war.  I would encourage support for these guys.  They also may help in an anti war protest.   

[CNHT]

I think Sununu is coming around.  His Republican Liberty Caucus (then national equivalent of the NHLA) ratings are very good - he is a reasonable guy.  I think as a young Senator, he fell into the trap of trusting his party too much, and giving it too much loyalty.  He has stepped away from his party on RealID.  Not everyone has the courage and convictions of Ron Paul, but I think Sununu has the correct core beliefs. 

Now, on the other side, the Democrats ARE NOT the party of peace.  Please trust me on this, I spent ALL of the Clinton administration overseas fighting in undeclared wars in the Air Force.  It was under the Clinton administration that the policy of Regime change in Iraq was put into place. 

Both parties are parties of foreign interventionism.  They just differ on when and where to step in.  I have far more faith that a man that believes in liberty in so many other ways (Sununu) will begin to see the light.

Thanks Jim for printing the TRUTH about why we are just hurting ourselves to engage in activities such as described in that post.
The Iraq intervention policy was signed into law in 1998 by President Clinton and it just happened so they did not invade until this administration so ALL are to blame who run things, not the individuals under the party headings.

Instead, if these 'peaceniks' were truly not hypocrites with another agenda, (to my knowledge, they've never protest any war started under a Democrat admin) they would be camped outside HODE'S and PORTER'S offices asking why they proposed and promoted a bill that not only funded the war MORE than what was asked but added in numerous spending appropriations to groups that would benefit and cause the re-election of people in certain districts, groups who should never be getting special privileges in the way of handouts from the taxpayers.

This is a  double blackmark.

The best people to target for EVERYTHING would be the two freshmen, Hodes and Porter, if you want to eradicate ALL of this madness. They have done nothing and will do nothing to 'end the war' except to use it for their wider (socialistic) agenda.

You don't see Ron Paul, who is for pulling out eventually, voting for this nonsense or aligning himself with these kinds of people.
If you've been in NH as long as I have, you know who the culprits are their history and why to avoid them and their activities like the plague.
They are just users and abusers of public sentiment...that's all.

[CNHT]

I've met some of the people from this group.  They seem genuinely anti war.  I would encourage support for these guys.  They also may help in an anti war protest.   

They are anti-war and use it for propaganda for a wider agenda. Otherwise they'd be targetting those who are in the majority and have control.

Even the guy over at antiwar.com agrees about Ron:

[Ron Paul] "...is a true paleo-Republican in that he wants to go all the way back to the conservatism of Robert A. Taft. Here is a ten-term congressman from Texas who remembers what the Republican party used to stand for – limited government, the foreign policy of the Founders, and the preservation of our old Republic against the Scylla of domestic tyranny and the Charybdis of conquests abroad. There is much history here, and, in Paul's case, authenticity – he's a country doctor, a man who oozes sincerity, and just the kind of stern yet benevolent figure, brimming with integrity, who is conceivably capable of leading the GOP out of its ideological quagmire, and reclaiming its lost heritage."

[forsytjr]

I should disclose that I was in the Military for 17 years.  12 years active duty, and the last 5 as a reservist.  I flew KC-135s.  I spent time in Saudi Arabia right after the first gulf war.  A war declared by Republicans with the backing of the U.N.  Now, when Clinton came in, it's not like he pulled us out.  I continued to go to the dessert as my daughter grew up.  Then between trips to the dessert, I got sent to Bosnia twice.  Then I got put on alert to fly sorties to refuel planes going to Somalia.  Some of my friends got sent to Africa.  I luckily transitioned over to a teaching then research job, so that was it for me.  All undeclared wars.  Bush ran on a "humble foreign policy", but that turned out to be a lie, so 2 years short of retirement (a $500,000 value), I resigned my commission.  The theme here is that each politician runs on an anti-war platform for the previous wars, but then starts some of their own.  When you get one politician thrown out for someone who doesn't have any real anti-war record, you are just being used.  It has happened throughout our history.  What I want to see is peace protests with Ron Paul signs (who has a REAL record), not peace protests that help one pro-war guy in favor of another pro-war person.  Has anyone here bothered to talk to Sununu about his stance?  Written him letters?  Well, I have. 

[CNHT]

I should disclose that I was in the Military for 17 years.  12 years active duty, and the last 5 as a reservist.  I flew KC-135s.  I spent time in Saudi Arabia right after the first gulf war.  A war declared by Republicans with the backing of the U.N.  Now, when Clinton came in, it's not like he pulled us out.  I continued to go to the dessert as my daughter grew up.  Then between trips to the dessert, I got sent to Bosnia twice.  Then I got put on alert to fly sorties to refuel planes going to Somalia.  Some of my friends got sent to Africa.  I luckily transitioned over to a teaching then research job, so that was it for me.  All undeclared wars.  Bush ran on a "humble foreign policy", but that turned out to be a lie, so 2 years short of retirement (a $500,000 value), I resigned my commission.  The theme here is that each politician runs on an anti-war platform for the previous wars, but then starts some of their own.  When you get one politician thrown out for someone who doesn't have any real anti-war record, you are just being used.  It has happened throughout our history.  What I want to see is peace protests with Ron Paul signs (who has a REAL record), not peace protests that help one pro-war guy in favor of another pro-war person.  Has anyone here bothered to talk to Sununu about his stance?  Written him letters?  Well, I have. 

Very well said. People who are allowed to be president certainly are not naive about the fact that they are there to do the bidding of the people in control, the ones who run the world, and who start the wars. So even if Bush was personally into humble foreign policy, the ones who are really in control might say differently.

Iraq policy was not formed the day Bush walked into the White House, nor is it being changed just because Democrats are now in the majority.

[forsytjr]

I honestly think the best civil disobedience thing that can be done is to promote Ron Paul as a Candidate.  I don't think much will change till we get a new President.  And, I think the rest of the politicians can be bought out by the military industrial complex.  Ron Paul has a demonstrated record of not succumbing to special interests.  So go hold up peace signs, but also hold up a Ron Paul sign.  When I announced to my church that I had resigned because of this issue, they wanted me to march in some peace protests.  I said I would do it once I got some Ron Paul signs to hold up.  Otherwise, I would just be used to help swap one war-mongering party for the other. 

I am sick and tired of being used by politicians.  All my military career I was used, and I won't stand for it anymore.  I'm waiting for some chump to tell me "support the troops" - and I'll tell them "I am a troop". 

One thing I will say, is I read of people showing up at funerals of soldiers and protesting.  I think this is in incredibly bad taste, and completely reprehensible.  I don't want to hear of anyone from this group doing that.  You have to understand that for someone who has signed up to defend his country, and has placed their trust in politicians to use them appropriately - it's not easy to come to realize that the sacrifices you have made were in vain, and for political benefit.

[Caleb]

I honestly think the best civil disobedience thing that can be done is to promote Ron Paul as a Candidate.  I don't think much will change till we get a new President. 

I think Aerosmith wrote the song for Paul's candidacy:  DREAM ON, DREAM ON, DREAM ON.

Don't get me wrong.  I like Paul.  I gave him money for his campaign, and I hope he wins.  Realistically, the best he can expect to do, though, is bring some attention to his issues. This election, like all elections, will be settled by who the power brokers decide they want in.

When I announced to my church that I had resigned because of this issue, they wanted me to march in some peace protests.  I said I would do it once I got some Ron Paul signs to hold up.  Otherwise, I would just be used to help swap one war-mongering party for the other. 

Agreed.  Neither Party is looking out for Caleb.

I am sick and tired of being used by politicians.  All my military career I was used, and I won't stand for it anymore.  I'm waiting for some chump to tell me "support the troops" - and I'll tell them "I am a troop". 

That's all you are ever going to get from Politicians.  They will continue to divide and conquer until they have shackled us all.  They are interested in their own power, and their own control, and they hold us in contempt. They don't care about you. They don't care about your rights. And they don't care if you live or die unless it directly relates to giving them more power, control, or money.

One thing I will say, is I read of people showing up at funerals of soldiers and protesting.  I think this is in incredibly bad taste, and completely reprehensible.  I don't want to hear of anyone from this group doing that. 

That is some nutjob wacko in Texas who profanes the name of Christ with his vitriole. I don't think anyone here has any desire to protest someone's funeral.

You have to understand that for someone who has signed up to defend his country, and has placed their trust in politicians to use them appropriately - it's not easy to come to realize that the sacrifices you have made were in vain, and for political benefit.

The power brokers consider the troops the same way they consider the rest of us: as pawns in their little game to rule over us.  Consider a little quote from Tolstoi:

"After my thoughts had for two years been turned in the same direction, fate seemed expressly to have brought me face to face for the first time in my life with a fact which showed me absolutely unmistakably in practice what had long been clear to me in theory, that the organization of our society rests, not as people interested in maintaining the present order of things like to imagine, on certain principles of jurisprudence, but on simple brute force, on the murder and torture of men....What is the meaning of it? Yet I know all these men. If I don't know all of them personally, I know their characters pretty nearly, their past, and their way of thinking. They certainly all have mothers, some of them wives and children. They are certainly for the most part good, kind, even tender-hearted fellows, who hate every sort of cruelty, not to speak of murder; many of them would not kill or hurt an animal. Moreover, they are all professed Christians and regard all violence directed against the defenseless as base and disgraceful....The authorities, those who have started, devised, and decreed the matter, will say that such acts are necessary for the maintenance of the existing order; the maintenance of the existing order is necessary for the welfare of the country and of humanity, for the possibility of social existence and human progress.Men of the poorer class, peasants and soldiers, who will have to execute the deed of violence with their own hands, say that they do so because it is the command of their superior authority, and the superior authority knows what he is about. That those are in authority who ought to be in authority, and that they know what they are doing appears to them a truth of which there can be no doubt. If they could admit the possibility of mistake or error, it would only be in functionaries of a lower grade; the highest authority on which all the rest depends seems to them immaculate beyond suspicion....When one's eyes are opened to this awful deception practiced upon us, one marvels that the teachers of the Christian religion and of morals, the instructors of youth, or even the good-hearted and intelligent parents who are to be found in every society, can teach any kind of morality in a society in which it is openly admitted (it is so admitted, under all governments and all churches) that murder and torture form an indispensable element in the life of all, and that there must always be special men trained to kill their fellows, and that any one of us may have to become such a trained assassin."


And of course this famous one:

"In all history there is no war which was not hatched by the governments, the governments alone, independent of the interests of the people, to whom war is always pernicious even when successful."

[KBCraig]

One thing I will say, is I read of people showing up at funerals of soldiers and protesting.  I think this is in incredibly bad taste, and completely reprehensible.  I don't want to hear of anyone from this group doing that.

That is some nutjob wacko in Texas who profanes the name of Christ with his vitriole.

Kansas, not Texas.

While I don't condone retributional violence, odds are that if Fred Phelps was based in Texas, he'd be in hiding rather than drawing international media for his "dead soldier protests".

Kevin

[Russell Kanning]

I think Sununu is coming around.  His Republican Liberty Caucus (then national equivalent of the NHLA) ratings are very good - he is a reasonable guy.  I think as a young Senator, he fell into the trap of trusting his party too much, and giving it too much loyalty.  He has stepped away from his party on RealID.  Not everyone has the courage and convictions of Ron Paul, but I think Sununu has the correct core beliefs. 

When he starts voting for freedom, I will believe you.

[Russell Kanning]

This thread hijacking is a conspiracy.

[KBCraig]

This thread hijacking is a conspiracy.

You're just saying that because you're part of the cabal.

[Kat Kanning]

You should see some of the secret rituals...wooohooo!  But then, if you did, we'd just have to kill you, so I guess it's better you haven't

[CNHT]

The thread actually was in response to the people in Sununu's office but doesn't make sense now because it was moved.

Point Jim and I are trying to make is, Sununu is not the one that can do anything about this...and he is more pro-liberty (80%) than anyone who is going to be running against him.

If you don't agree, then your energies would probably be better spent finding and promoting someone who you feel is 100% pro-liberty instead of making it easy for more socialists to get elected.

[Caleb]

The only body with which I will not argue in calling for a withdrawal or a timetable has recently spoken to that effect - the Iraqi Parliament.

Oh, oh, mvpel.  Looks like you're going to have to join those of us calling for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq:

Majority of Iraq Lawmakers Seek Timetable for U.S. Exit

By KIRK SEMPLE
05/12/07 "New York Times" -- - BAGHDAD, May 11 — A majority of Iraq's Parliament members have signed a petition for a timetable governing a withdrawal of American troops, several legislators said Friday.

The withdrawal would depend on the growth and maturity of the Iraqi security forces, to ensure that the departure would not create a security vacuum and accelerate the sectarian conflict, the petition's sponsors said.

"The troop withdrawal would move in parallel with the buildup of Iraqi troops, but their stay should not be for a long time," said Saleh al-Igili, a member of the parliamentary bloc allied with the anti-American Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr, which sponsored the petition.

Officials with Mr. Sadr's bloc said 144 of Parliament's 275 members — including Sunnis, Shiites and at least one Kurd — had signed. The document is being developed into a draft bill by Parliament's legal and foreign relations committees, said Bahaa al-Araji, a member of the Sadr bloc and head of the legal committee.

The petition formalizes a widely held sentiment among many legislators — and among Iraqis in general — that American troops should withdraw as soon as possible, though not before Iraqi forces are prepared to assume control of the country's security.

Even Mr. Sadr has cautioned against an immediate withdrawal, although he has been in the vanguard of Iraqi leaders demanding an American departure, and last month withdrew his six ministers from the cabinet in protest over Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki's resistance to timetables.

The petition echoes elements of the debate in Washington over troop withdrawals from Iraq. Like the petitioners, many Democratic lawmakers have demanded a timetable for a withdrawal, over the opposition of President Bush and Mr. Maliki, though the president has accepted the idea of nonbinding benchmarks.

But in another respect the petition brings the majority of Iraqi legislators into agreement with the Bush administration: both argue that an American withdrawal should depend on the readiness of Iraqi troops.

Mr. Araji said the legislative committees drafting a bill had asked the interior and defense ministers for an estimated timeline for the development of effective Iraq security forces.

Pressure in the United States and Iraq for deadlines comes during a buildup of American and Iraqi troops to buttress the latest security plan for the capital. Three additional American brigades, a total of about 7,000 troops, have already been deployed in and around Baghdad, and two more are scheduled to arrive in the next two months.

The increase appears to have led to a limited reduction in violence in Baghdad, particularly in the kinds of assassinations for which Shiite militias have most often been blamed. But American and Iraqi forces have not been able to stop the car bombings and suicide attacks attributed to the Sunni Arab-led insurgency.

Bridges were the targets of two suicide bombings on Friday in a neighborhood on the southern fringe of Baghdad, killing at least 22 people and wounding at least 50, an Interior Ministry official said.

Military pressure on Baghdad has driven some Sunni Arab militants to Diyala Province, north of the capital, where they have joined a worsening battle between Sunni and Shiite militias.

The challenge to the American and Iraqi military in Diyala was underscored Friday by the American military commander in northern Iraq, Maj. Gen. Benjamin R. Mixon, who said he had asked for more troops to join the fight in the province.

The level of violence in Diyala, already high, has increased since the start of the American-led security crackdown in mid-February, making it one of the most lethal regions in Iraq for American troops.

"I do not have enough soldiers right now in Diyala Province to get that security situation moving," General Mixon said. "We have plans to put additional forces in that region." He declined to provide details about possible future deployments. But he insisted that a cornerstone of the country's long-term security would be a sustained American presence.

"We just can't think about pulling out of here just like that," he said.

The American military command said two soldiers were killed and 11 wounded in two attacks on Thursday, one in Baghdad and the other in Diyala. The Interior Ministry official said at least 17 bodies had been recovered from streets around Baghdad.

Khalid al-Ansary and Khalid W. Hassan contributed reporting.

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company