PDA

View Full Version : " The USS John Murtha? How About USS Saddam Hussein ?"



megimoo
01-15-2011, 03:55 PM
Former sailors, soldiers and Marines are expressing outrage at Navy Secretary Ray Mabus’s decision to name a naval warship after recently deceased Pennsylvania Democratic Congressman John Murtha.

Murtha angered many again in 2006 when he accused eight Marines of deliberately killing Iraqi civilians in Haditha “in cold blood.” As of today, charges against six of the Marines accused have been dropped, one acquitted, and a court martial for the sole remaining defendant has been postponed.

The opposition is largely a function of Murtha’s actions and comments during his final years. Murtha became known as one of the most vocal opponents of the war in Iraq — despite voting in 2002 for the resolution that authorized the use of force against Saddam Hussein. In 2005 he declared the war unwinnable, and pushed a resolution to get the troops out of the country.


http://dailycaller.com/2011/01/15/the-uss-john-murtha-how-about-the-uss-robert-miller/

Comments:
You do not name ships after people who betray the military and who believe the military's only purpose is to exist so you can get contracts in your district to make stuff for them.
...................
Even a garbage scow is too good to be disgraced by being named after having Murtha.
............................
That will be a jinxed warship. No seaman will want to serve on it.
........................
How about we have the Navy train an all Gay crew and call it the USS BARNEY FRANK?
.........................

Yukon
01-15-2011, 03:57 PM
Meg,

For goodness sakes man the war is unwinnable? He was correct. I think a majority of Americans wants this Iraq war ended now. Terrorists can not be defeated.

fettpett
01-15-2011, 04:02 PM
Meg,

For goodness sakes man the war is unwinnable? He was correct. I think a majority of Americans wants this Iraq war ended now. Terrorists can not be defeated.

hey shit for brains, Thats NOT why Marines are upset with the name of this ship. John Murtha called Marines murders and worse on the Floor of Congress, with NO proof and never apologized for his remarks after the men were found innocent of all charges against them

Yukon
01-15-2011, 04:04 PM
How do you know the average Marine is upset?

Kay
01-15-2011, 04:05 PM
Yukon you don't have a clue why Murtha is so hated do you.
I'd school you on that but it would make my blood pressure
go up and I'm enjoying a nice relaxing Saturday afternoon.
Naming a Navy ship after this scumwad is blasphemy.

Kay
01-15-2011, 04:13 PM
How do you know the average Marine is upset?

I would direct your attention here for a clue:

http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?t=563

fettpett
01-15-2011, 04:14 PM
How do you know the average Marine is upset?

because Marines have far more intelligence than you do, for one and know this guy was a prick and protect their own


http://www.navytimes.com/news/2010/04/navy_murtha_backlash_042710w/
Despite the encomia from Pelosi and Mabus, thousands of Web users remembered a different Murtha — the one who opposed the Iraq war and accused Marines in 2005 of killing Iraqis “in cold blood” — when reacting to the announcement about the ship named in his honor. A Facebook group called “People Against Naming A Navy Ship USS Murtha” had 1,336 members as of Monday morning, and it was becoming a clearinghouse for angry comments and homemade cartoons criticizing Murtha.

Yukon
01-15-2011, 04:16 PM
because Marines have far more intelligence than you do, for one and know this guy was a prick and protect their own

Okay, you've made your point. Thank you for the clarification. That being said the war in Iraq is unwinnable.

Kay
01-15-2011, 04:26 PM
That being said the war in Iraq is unwinnable.

We already won that one, or didn't you hear?
What the Iraqis do with what we've given them,
may be another story after we are gone.

megimoo
01-15-2011, 04:48 PM
Meg,

For goodness sakes man the war is unwinnable? He was correct. I think a majority of Americans wants this Iraq war ended now. Terrorists can not be defeated.Don't call me Megs you liberal Twit.If you and your ilk had your way we would have surrendered before Yorktown !
By the way were your ancestors part of those deported to Canada after Cornwallis surrendered Yorktown so the American Patriots wouldn't hurt them?

" Edward Winslow descendant of the Plymouth Pilgrims raised a Tory Volunteer Company, participated at the Battle of Lexington-Concord as a Loyalist, in 1776 was evacuated to Nova Scotia, then returned to New York to a patronage position of muster master of all Loyalist forces in North America, only to die impoverished in Halifax (1784).

Oliver De Lancey a man of great wealth and reputation raised three Loyalist regiments and served as the Commander of Long Island for British General Howe. His mansion was ransacked in 1777 and confiscated in 1779 by the Continental Army. De Lancey died in 1785 in Beverly, Yorkshire, two years after exile from America."

fettpett
01-15-2011, 04:49 PM
Okay, you've made your point. Thank you for the clarification. That being said the war in Iraq is unwinnable.

the Iraq War was won in 2004. We haven't been in a War there in 6 years. We've been helping rebuild the country since then (whether we should or not is debatable) We've been fight the terrorist over there and have done a pretty damn good job at it too.

Zathras
01-15-2011, 04:50 PM
Okay, you've made your point. Thank you for the clarification. That being said the war in Iraq is unwinnable.

The war is over DUmbass, or maybe you're just too fucking stupid to understand that.

You know for someone in their 60's you sure are showing the intellect of a 10 year old.

Zathras
01-15-2011, 04:51 PM
How do you know the average Marine is upset?

How do you know they aren't DUmbass?

namvet
01-16-2011, 09:43 AM
at least the Navy did a public service. they killed the muther fucker. salute

obx
01-16-2011, 09:47 AM
What is next? USS Jane Fonda?

NJCardFan
01-16-2011, 01:00 PM
Okay, you've made your point. Thank you for the clarification. That being said the war in Iraq is unwinnable.

The war in Iraq has been over since 2004 and we won. Saddam and his cast of characters are either dead or hiding in some other despotic country. Now, back to your inane thread. Answer the question I put to you or go away, pussy.

Adam Wood
01-16-2011, 04:21 PM
What is next? USS Jane Fonda?

Probably. Followed by the battleship William Ayers.

fettpett
01-16-2011, 04:53 PM
Probably. Followed by the battleship William Ayers.

and the aircraft carrier USS Soros

namvet
01-16-2011, 05:04 PM
and the row boat Pelosi

m00
01-16-2011, 08:37 PM
the submarine Bill Clinton?

Rockntractor
01-16-2011, 08:38 PM
the submarine Bill Clinton?

Paint it like a cigar!:D

m00
01-16-2011, 08:42 PM
Paint it like a cigar!:D

When it dives, it goes deep!

m00
01-16-2011, 08:44 PM
Sewage Barge Al Gore

Rockntractor
01-16-2011, 08:52 PM
Sewage Barge Al Gore

Gorbage barge!:D

m00
01-16-2011, 08:53 PM
Gorbage barge!:D

It's actually a reverse sewage barge, since poop only comes out of it.

Where's that pic? :p

Novaheart
01-16-2011, 09:00 PM
hey shit for brains, Thats NOT why Marines are upset with the name of this ship. John Murtha called Marines murders and worse on the Floor of Congress, with NO proof and never apologized for his remarks after the men were found innocent of all charges against them

The specifics of this case aren't important. There is an objection every time a ship is named for a person. This will only get worse as there are fewer ships and greater demand for representation in the naming of things like this.

Some school systems have avoided this pissing (and pissing off) contest by making a fixed policy of not naming schools for people. If they build a new high school in Springfield, it's Springfield High School. If there is already a Springfield High School then they give it the next nearest geographic name.

Naval vessels should be named automatically under policy for the states in alphabetical order, and then the territories in alphabetical order, and the major cities by population or something like that.

I realize that this common sense solution would take away one of the political parties' favorite ways of irritating the shit out of the other party, but it's really best.

namvet
01-16-2011, 09:07 PM
the submarine Bill Clinton?

the one that goes down and can't get it up

fettpett
01-16-2011, 09:08 PM
The specifics of this case aren't important. There is an objection every time a ship is named for a person. This will only get worse as there are fewer ships and greater demand for representation in the naming of things like this.

Some school systems have avoided this pissing (and pissing off) contest by making a fixed policy of not naming schools for people. If they build a new high school in Springfield, it's Springfield High School. If there is already a Springfield High School then they give it the next nearest geographic name.

Naval vessels should be named automatically under policy for the states in alphabetical order, and then the territories in alphabetical order, and the major cities by population or something like that.

I realize that this common sense solution would take away one of the political parties' favorite ways of irritating the shit out of the other party, but it's really best.

the specifics are important in this case.

Naming of a Military vessel=/= naming of a school, sorry your idea doesn't hold merit and would piss off more people than the current system. There are very few controversies over Ship naming

Novaheart
01-16-2011, 09:20 PM
the specifics are important in this case.

Naming of a Military vessel=/= naming of a school, sorry your idea doesn't hold merit and would piss off more people than the current system. There are very few controversies over Ship naming

Better to eliminate the problem.

fettpett
01-16-2011, 09:58 PM
Better to eliminate the problem.

there is no "problem", it's a very rare occurrence one that could and should be easily fixed

PoliCon
01-16-2011, 10:48 PM
Okay, you've made your point. Thank you for the clarification. That being said the war in Iraq is unwinnable.

says who?


BTW - I don't know if you have checked recently - but your own president has declared Iraq a success and has removed all combat troops from the country. you MIGHT want to update your talking points. :rolleyes: retard.

PoliCon
01-16-2011, 10:49 PM
What is next? USS Jane Fonda?

maybe the USS Benedict Arnold . . .

Odysseus
01-16-2011, 11:43 PM
Meg,

For goodness sakes man the war is unwinnable? He was correct. I think a majority of Americans wants this Iraq war ended now. Terrorists can not be defeated.
Bull. Terrorists have been defeated throughout human history. Terrorism is simply asymmetrical warfare in which non-combatants are targeted in order to undermine a more powerful opponent, in order to erode support and undermine the strengths of the stronger side. By its very nature, terrorism is a sign of a weaker opponent, and there are numerous ways to defeat them. The Romans defeated the Sicari, a group of assassins in Judea, by sacking Jerusalem and depriving them of a base of operations. The Mongols did the same thing to the Hashashiyyine. The Narodnaya Volya was a victim of its own success, having murdered Czar Alexander II, they were almost all imprisoned, and it was only the amnesty of a later government that allowed them to reform and take part in subsequent revolutions. The lessons are clear. First, terrorists invariably overreach, and in doing so, alienate the people whose support they must have in order to continue operations. We saw this in Iraq, when Musab al Zarqawi began targeting Muslims that he considered unreliable, and drove the Sunnis into the American camp. It also happened to the Italian Red Brigades after they killed former Prime Minister Aldo Moro. Second, when they don't overreach, and maintain popular support, then their base of operations has to be destroyed. The people that they depend upon then turn on them for inviting destruction. The problem with the way that we fight terrorism now is that we resort to half-measures, and pretend that we are dealing with a law enforcement problem, or that the terrorists can be mollified by appeasement. The kind of person who straps bombs onto children isn't going to be mollified by anything short of the complete annihilation of either his enemies or himself. Once you understand that, the choice is clear: You either choose to die, or choose to kill.


Okay, you've made your point. Thank you for the clarification. That being said the war in Iraq is unwinnable.

Any war is unwinnable if you chose to surrender before you fight. As I stated above, this war is completely winnable, and in fact, we've pretty much won it. The question in Iraq is not whether we won the war, but whether the peace will be sustained, and that's a separate issue.

Oh, and Murtha's conduct, accusing Marines of murder without evidence in the Haditha case, was despicable. This ship should be renamed to something less insulting to Americans, like the USS Eddie Slovik. Better a ship named after a coward than an opportunistic sleazebag.