Battleland

GOP Silence on the Wars 2.0

  • Share
  • Read Later
getty images

We were perplexed following Wednesday’s supposed “foreign policy night” at the Republican convention that scant mention was made of the nation’s wars and those who have fought, and are fighting, them: “It is amazing that after more than a decade of war, and 6,593 American dead (2,107 in Afghanistan and Operation Enduring Freedom; 4,487 in Iraq), the political party that spearheaded both wars is so silent on them now.”

So Battleland was taken aback last night when GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney was also silent on that score (not sure having Clint Eastwood say more about the war than the party’s presidential nominee is a good thing, but it is what it is). Frankly, we don’t have in it us to rewrite Thursday’s post for Friday. Amazingly, Bill Kristol – Republican uber-hawk and spark plug for America’s military engine – just did it for us. He even echoed our headline: Wars? What wars? with his What war? hed:

...in his speech accepting his party’s nomination to be commander in chief, Mitt Romney said not a word about the war in Afghanistan. Nor did he utter a word of appreciation to the troops fighting there, or to those who have fought there. Nor for that matter were there thanks for those who fought in Iraq, another conflict that went unmentioned.

Leave aside the question of the political wisdom of Romney’s silence, and the opportunities it opens up for President Obama next week. What about the civic propriety of a presidential nominee failing even to mention, in his acceptance speech, a war we’re fighting and our young men and women who are fighting it? Has it ever happened that we’ve been at war and a presidential nominee has ignored, in this kind of major and formal speech, the war and our warriors?

Kristol clear. Full thing here.

11 comments
Sort: Newest | Oldest
mtngoatjoe
mtngoatjoe

I truely believe that most republicans love our military. They like our troops well enough, but they LOVE military spending even more.

rusty cheeks
rusty cheeks

they are itching for another one with iran

Kevin Brent
Kevin Brent

I knew it had to be Herr von Thompson when I saw the headline. Either he didn't watch, wasn't paying attention, or figures he can lie about it because none of you will fact check him. 

mahboob_1948
mahboob_1948

Politicians are not better than whores.On the contrary whores are better.They really need the money but not the politicians.They need blood and gore and accepts no responsibility.

rokinsteve
rokinsteve

Clint Eastwood is a hero.  And republicans are chicken hawks.

flamestar
flamestar

Not amazing at all. The Republicans are ashamed. Neither war made any sense.Curring taxes in time of war caused the debt and spending money out of the US caused the depression.  Saudi Arabia attacked us but because Bush is owned by the Saudis we attacked their enemy Iraq who didn't attack us. The Saudis got what they wanted American solders out of their land and to have Iraq stop oil production. In both wars the goal was to kill one person. Iit would have been far easier to send assassination teams after  Saddam and Osama and not send troops. The Republicans are happy about the results but they are ashamed non the less..

Dan Bruce
Dan Bruce

The wars are responsible for much of our debt, and they are reminders that Republicans are bad money managers and bad commanders in chief.

Conrad Brean
Conrad Brean

Why should anyone be surprised? What do you expect when you invent something like embedded war reporting. Please sign on the dotted line before you go frontline....

FutureTimes
FutureTimes

REUTERS:

It is hard to muslims to accept there is No Allah just in books.

But for the future it is better than living in the lies by religions.

moricone
moricone

It is easy for Mormons to accept Mormon Jesus was a polygamist with three wives.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,105 other followers