VOTE VETS and their ads

[LibertyEagle]

Take a look at this. They badly need to hear about Dr. Paul it would seem.

http://www.votevets.org/

These ads seem like they might be a good counter against all the FreedomWorks military-industrial complex ads.

[Ridiculous]

I am a vet.

Joined their site, sent a message about Ron.

[Cowlesy]

I don't like General Petraeus being used as a political chess-piece. He's a soldier who was sent on a shitty job, and since he has a 35 year distinguished career, I can't support ads like this. I know some of you will say that he's a shill or that he doesn't need to follow orders, but I don't buy it, and I think the guy deserves some respect as a soldier even if we disagree with him.

[LibertyEagle]

I don't like General Petraeus being used as a political chess-piece. He's a soldier who was sent on a shitty job, and since he has a 35 year distinguished career, I can't support ads like this. I know some of you will say that he's a shill or that he doesn't need to follow orders, but I don't buy it, and I think the guy deserves some respect as a soldier even if we disagree with him.

Oh, I agree. But, I do not see how that 1st ad disrespects him. What am I missing?

[Ridiculous]

I don't like General Petraeus being used as a political chess-piece. He's a soldier who was sent on a shitty job, and since he has a 35 year distinguished career, I can't support ads like this. I know some of you will say that he's a shill or that he doesn't need to follow orders, but I don't buy it, and I think the guy deserves some respect as a soldier even if we disagree with him.

I see what you are saying, but I really don't have a problem with the add. The add doesn't really insult him or anything. It is just showing his testimony - which is valid.

I do however, have a problem with the Move On adds.

[bcmiller]

I am a vet.

Joined their site, sent a message about Ron.


ditto and ditto

thank you for your service to our country

[Richandler]

Whichever general is taking Bush's mission is leading 18-year-old men to their deaths. He said himself that he doesn't know how it defends America, because he knows it doesn't. He is accountable as much as Bush is. No general should except Bush's mission. None. Just because you are in the military does not automatically give you the title of morally impecable.

[1000-points-of-fright]

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

Notice how the Constitution of the United States comes first in the list. What is a "domestic enemy"? Are congressmen domestic enemies of the Constitution when they pass unconstitutional laws? Or does it only mean armed rebellion or domestic terrorism?

The real question is how blatant a violation of the Constitution does it have to be before a soldier can disobey orders with a decent chance of ending up on the good side of the court martial.

[john_anderson_ii]

I am a vet.

Joined their site, sent a message about Ron.

I'm an Iraqi vet as well, I'll do the same once I find out a little more about them.

[john_anderson_ii]

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

Notice how the Constitution of the United States comes first in the list. What is a "domestic enemy"? Are congressmen domestic enemies of the Constitution when they pass unconstitutional laws? Or does it only mean armed rebellion or domestic terrorism?

The real question is how blatant a violation of the Constitution does it have to be before a soldier can disobey orders with a decent chance of ending up on the good side of the court martial.


It is necessary that the military of the United States is placed under civilian control. The elected leaders of the U.S. government reside at the top of the chain of command. In most cases, defending the constitution is what the president says it is. He takes nearly the same oath of office. So attacking the congress because they pass an unconstitutional law is right out. However, if the whole process is carried out, and the law is deemed to be unconstitutional, and the President attempts to use military force to enforce this law. Every soldier, sailor, airman and Marine has the responsibility to resist, with force if necessary, the execution of those orders.

[LibertyEagle]

Here is an O'Reilly segment about a Vote Vets ad. Apparently, there are some retired generals who are members of this organization.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cnuy7kbFmU&NR=1

[Scribbler de Stebbing]

Good stuff.