<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What’s Their Mission, Mr. President? – by Matt Gurney</title>
	<atom:link href="http://frontpagemag.com/2009/10/12/what%e2%80%99s-their-mission-mr-president-%e2%80%93-by-matt-gurney/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://frontpagemag.com/2009/10/12/what%e2%80%99s-their-mission-mr-president-%e2%80%93-by-matt-gurney/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 00:38:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: USMCSniper</title>
		<link>http://frontpagemag.com/2009/10/12/what%e2%80%99s-their-mission-mr-president-%e2%80%93-by-matt-gurney/comment-page-1/#comment-1626</link>
		<dc:creator>USMCSniper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 02:56:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=28534#comment-1626</guid>
		<description>And while you are at it change these rules of engagement that values the lives of Afghan civilians used as human shields above those of our own Soldiers and Marines. The new rules of engagement imposed by Gen. Stanley McChrystal (at the direction of the DoD Obama Administration), the senior American commander in Afghanistan are dangerous and downright stupid. They limit the use of airstrikes and require all troops to break off combat with the Taliban and al Qaeda when civilians are present, even if it means letting the enemy escape. They also call for greater cooperation with the Afghan National Army.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Under those rules, Marines and soldiers are being denied artillery and air support for fear of killing civilians and are restricted to samll arms firefights, and the Taliban is obviously using that to its tactical advantage.  Just think of the insanity of the current situation and the suicidal position this administration has placed these warriors in. So,  we&#039;re supposed to defend the population, but we can&#039;t defend them because we can&#039;t engage the enemy fully.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The military says the new rules, while riskier in the short run, will ultimately mean fewer casualties. Ohhh..... errrrr.... is that why we had 60 casualties since last month and had a firebase almost overrun.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I would hire Obama as the assistant dishwasher on the third shift in a greasy soul food joint in the baddest part of town let alone have this panty waisted silver tongue as the commander in chief.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And while you are at it change these rules of engagement that values the lives of Afghan civilians used as human shields above those of our own Soldiers and Marines. The new rules of engagement imposed by Gen. Stanley McChrystal (at the direction of the DoD Obama Administration), the senior American commander in Afghanistan are dangerous and downright stupid. They limit the use of airstrikes and require all troops to break off combat with the Taliban and al Qaeda when civilians are present, even if it means letting the enemy escape. They also call for greater cooperation with the Afghan National Army.</p>
<p>Under those rules, Marines and soldiers are being denied artillery and air support for fear of killing civilians and are restricted to samll arms firefights, and the Taliban is obviously using that to its tactical advantage.  Just think of the insanity of the current situation and the suicidal position this administration has placed these warriors in. So,  we&#39;re supposed to defend the population, but we can&#39;t defend them because we can&#39;t engage the enemy fully.</p>
<p>The military says the new rules, while riskier in the short run, will ultimately mean fewer casualties. Ohhh&#8230;.. errrrr&#8230;. is that why we had 60 casualties since last month and had a firebase almost overrun.  </p>
<p>I would hire Obama as the assistant dishwasher on the third shift in a greasy soul food joint in the baddest part of town let alone have this panty waisted silver tongue as the commander in chief.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CPTDave</title>
		<link>http://frontpagemag.com/2009/10/12/what%e2%80%99s-their-mission-mr-president-%e2%80%93-by-matt-gurney/comment-page-1/#comment-1622</link>
		<dc:creator>CPTDave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:08:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=28534#comment-1622</guid>
		<description>if you send your child down a freeway at night on a bike with no reflective gear and he was rundown,, who&#039;s fault would it be? Your husbands for not supplying the reflective gear? or yours for sending him knowing he most likely would not make it without the support gear... you both are responsible and you more so for sending him.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>if you send your child down a freeway at night on a bike with no reflective gear and he was rundown,, who&#39;s fault would it be? Your husbands for not supplying the reflective gear? or yours for sending him knowing he most likely would not make it without the support gear&#8230; you both are responsible and you more so for sending him.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MaryAnn</title>
		<link>http://frontpagemag.com/2009/10/12/what%e2%80%99s-their-mission-mr-president-%e2%80%93-by-matt-gurney/comment-page-1/#comment-1572</link>
		<dc:creator>MaryAnn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 12:51:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=28534#comment-1572</guid>
		<description>Why blame the General? It&#039;s his Commander in Chief who supplies our soldiers with what they need to win, and McChrystal has asked for more support.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why blame the General? It&#39;s his Commander in Chief who supplies our soldiers with what they need to win, and McChrystal has asked for more support.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CPTDave</title>
		<link>http://frontpagemag.com/2009/10/12/what%e2%80%99s-their-mission-mr-president-%e2%80%93-by-matt-gurney/comment-page-1/#comment-1570</link>
		<dc:creator>CPTDave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 12:20:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=28534#comment-1570</guid>
		<description>Fighting while handicapped. Leaving our forces vulnerable to ambush. Leaving them without immediate air support.&lt;br&gt;This President and General are directly responsible for our latest casualties.&lt;br&gt;More so this General and his Commanders. &lt;br&gt;Supply our forces what they need or stop this war.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fighting while handicapped. Leaving our forces vulnerable to ambush. Leaving them without immediate air support.<br />This President and General are directly responsible for our latest casualties.<br />More so this General and his Commanders. <br />Supply our forces what they need or stop this war.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AlFranken1</title>
		<link>http://frontpagemag.com/2009/10/12/what%e2%80%99s-their-mission-mr-president-%e2%80%93-by-matt-gurney/comment-page-1/#comment-1561</link>
		<dc:creator>AlFranken1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 04:59:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=28534#comment-1561</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m willing to ignore your last paragraph if you are willing to indulge in Mr. Churchill&#039;s progressive accomplishments:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&quot;The National Insurance Act 1911 is an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom. The Act is often regarded as one of the foundations of modern social welfare in the United Kingdom and forms part of the wider social welfare reforms of the Liberal Government of 1906-1914. The increasing influence of the Labour Party among the population had put the Liberals under pressure to enact social legislation.&lt;br&gt;The Act was passed in two stages. The National Insurance Act Part I provided for a National Insurance scheme with provision of medical benefits and the National Insurance Act Part II provided for time-limited unemployment benefit . The scheme was to be based on actuarial principles and it was planned that it would be funded by a fixed amount each from workers, employers and the government. The scheme from Part II was restricted to particular industries and neither made any provision for dependants. By 1913 2.3 million were insured under the scheme for unemployment benefit and almost 15 million insured for sickness benefit.&lt;br&gt;A key assumption of the Act was an unemployment rate of 4.6%. At the time the Act was passed unemployment was at 3% and the fund was expected to quickly build a surplus. Under the Act, employees contributions to the scheme were to be compulsory and taken by the employer before the workers salary was paid.&lt;br&gt;Britain was not the first country to provide insured benefits; Germany had provided compulsory national insurance against sickness from 1884. Sections of the Conservative party opposed the Act considering that it was not for taxpayers to pay for such benefits. Some trade unions who operated their own insurance schemes and friendly societies were also opposed.&lt;br&gt;The Act was important as it removed the need for unemployed workers, who were insured under the scheme, to rely on the stigmatised social welfare provisions of the Poor Law. This led to the end of the primacy of the Poor Law as a social welfare provider, resulting in the Poor Law finally being abolished in 1926.&lt;br&gt;A key figure in the implementation of the Act was Robert Laurie Morant.&quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;That was all Winton&#039;s doing as a member of the Liberal Party.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#39;m willing to ignore your last paragraph if you are willing to indulge in Mr. Churchill&#39;s progressive accomplishments:</p>
<p>&#8220;The National Insurance Act 1911 is an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom. The Act is often regarded as one of the foundations of modern social welfare in the United Kingdom and forms part of the wider social welfare reforms of the Liberal Government of 1906-1914. The increasing influence of the Labour Party among the population had put the Liberals under pressure to enact social legislation.<br />The Act was passed in two stages. The National Insurance Act Part I provided for a National Insurance scheme with provision of medical benefits and the National Insurance Act Part II provided for time-limited unemployment benefit . The scheme was to be based on actuarial principles and it was planned that it would be funded by a fixed amount each from workers, employers and the government. The scheme from Part II was restricted to particular industries and neither made any provision for dependants. By 1913 2.3 million were insured under the scheme for unemployment benefit and almost 15 million insured for sickness benefit.<br />A key assumption of the Act was an unemployment rate of 4.6%. At the time the Act was passed unemployment was at 3% and the fund was expected to quickly build a surplus. Under the Act, employees contributions to the scheme were to be compulsory and taken by the employer before the workers salary was paid.<br />Britain was not the first country to provide insured benefits; Germany had provided compulsory national insurance against sickness from 1884. Sections of the Conservative party opposed the Act considering that it was not for taxpayers to pay for such benefits. Some trade unions who operated their own insurance schemes and friendly societies were also opposed.<br />The Act was important as it removed the need for unemployed workers, who were insured under the scheme, to rely on the stigmatised social welfare provisions of the Poor Law. This led to the end of the primacy of the Poor Law as a social welfare provider, resulting in the Poor Law finally being abolished in 1926.<br />A key figure in the implementation of the Act was Robert Laurie Morant.&#8221;</p>
<p>That was all Winton&#39;s doing as a member of the Liberal Party.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AlFranken1</title>
		<link>http://frontpagemag.com/2009/10/12/what%e2%80%99s-their-mission-mr-president-%e2%80%93-by-matt-gurney/comment-page-1/#comment-1560</link>
		<dc:creator>AlFranken1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 04:35:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=28534#comment-1560</guid>
		<description>It was a great post until the last paragraph because Sniper it too much of an idiot to know who Churchill really is&quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Churchill is a progressive liberal.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I bet neither one of you knuckleheads knew that!&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;So quoting a liberal as a great leader to somehow put a stupid spin on it to bash another supposedly liberal is --- well --- simply retarded.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Government_1905%25E2%2580%25931915&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Government...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt; &lt;br&gt;If you go this link and study Churchill&#039;s title, you will embarrass yourself enough to see that Churchill merely another WWII hero that is a progressive --- a long line of them if I may add at!!!&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;bla hahahahahahahaha&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;stupid idiots&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;blahahahahahaha</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was a great post until the last paragraph because Sniper it too much of an idiot to know who Churchill really is&#8221;</p>
<p>Churchill is a progressive liberal.</p>
<p>I bet neither one of you knuckleheads knew that!</p>
<p>So quoting a liberal as a great leader to somehow put a stupid spin on it to bash another supposedly liberal is &#8212; well &#8212; simply retarded.</p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Government_1905%25E2%2580%25931915" rel="nofollow"></a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Government.." rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Government..</a>.</p>
<p>If you go this link and study Churchill&#39;s title, you will embarrass yourself enough to see that Churchill merely another WWII hero that is a progressive &#8212; a long line of them if I may add at!!!</p>
<p>bla hahahahahahahaha</p>
<p>stupid idiots</p>
<p>blahahahahahaha</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MizPris</title>
		<link>http://frontpagemag.com/2009/10/12/what%e2%80%99s-their-mission-mr-president-%e2%80%93-by-matt-gurney/comment-page-1/#comment-1548</link>
		<dc:creator>MizPris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 02:40:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=28534#comment-1548</guid>
		<description>Yes, in fact the WH has chosen instead to go to war with Fox News. That, he deems, is more of a threat. Like i&#039;ve said before, this president has no problem warring against the Constitution and free speech. He has no problem with our military holding down the fort in Afghanistan while knowing his hand-picked General has asked for reinforcements.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt; The General is not into politics, he&#039;s into winning, and his military responsibility. Imagine that! Good for the General. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Meanwhile Obama fiddles and dithers, taking on  a  news outlet. How decisive. How brave, proving once again that a thugocracy is nothing if not dictatorial  at home, and spineless when action requires real risk of losing popularity with others who  give him meaningless prizes. God help us!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, in fact the WH has chosen instead to go to war with Fox News. That, he deems, is more of a threat. Like i&#39;ve said before, this president has no problem warring against the Constitution and free speech. He has no problem with our military holding down the fort in Afghanistan while knowing his hand-picked General has asked for reinforcements.</p>
<p> The General is not into politics, he&#39;s into winning, and his military responsibility. Imagine that! Good for the General. </p>
<p>Meanwhile Obama fiddles and dithers, taking on  a  news outlet. How decisive. How brave, proving once again that a thugocracy is nothing if not dictatorial  at home, and spineless when action requires real risk of losing popularity with others who  give him meaningless prizes. God help us!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bravobilly</title>
		<link>http://frontpagemag.com/2009/10/12/what%e2%80%99s-their-mission-mr-president-%e2%80%93-by-matt-gurney/comment-page-1/#comment-1521</link>
		<dc:creator>bravobilly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:14:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=28534#comment-1521</guid>
		<description>One time I do not want to agree with Senator Biden,  whoops thats right, Mr Vice President...But,  I really want to get the hell out of Afghanistan, because its getting to look more and more like Viet Nam.  Change the name, change the age, change the geography and the blood is all the same after a while.  Only thing is these poor boys get blown to bits...So when your&#039;re moving on the buses to make room for someone, he might be a Veteran looking at the greybearded old Veteran at the Courthouse trying to hustle for a drink or on his way to an AA meeting on the bus.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One time I do not want to agree with Senator Biden,  whoops thats right, Mr Vice President&#8230;But,  I really want to get the hell out of Afghanistan, because its getting to look more and more like Viet Nam.  Change the name, change the age, change the geography and the blood is all the same after a while.  Only thing is these poor boys get blown to bits&#8230;So when your&#39;re moving on the buses to make room for someone, he might be a Veteran looking at the greybearded old Veteran at the Courthouse trying to hustle for a drink or on his way to an AA meeting on the bus.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: halkohn</title>
		<link>http://frontpagemag.com/2009/10/12/what%e2%80%99s-their-mission-mr-president-%e2%80%93-by-matt-gurney/comment-page-1/#comment-1519</link>
		<dc:creator>halkohn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:36:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=28534#comment-1519</guid>
		<description>Joe Biden, the dumbest ass in the Senate for years, is now in charge?&lt;br&gt;Maybe he can promote free hair plugs for the Taliban, and they will like us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Joe Biden, the dumbest ass in the Senate for years, is now in charge?<br />Maybe he can promote free hair plugs for the Taliban, and they will like us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: aaronlewis142</title>
		<link>http://frontpagemag.com/2009/10/12/what%e2%80%99s-their-mission-mr-president-%e2%80%93-by-matt-gurney/comment-page-1/#comment-1517</link>
		<dc:creator>aaronlewis142</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:32:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=28534#comment-1517</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.goodmaninsurance.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;california contractors insurance&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.goodmaninsurance.com" rel="nofollow">california contractors insurance</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: josephwiess</title>
		<link>http://frontpagemag.com/2009/10/12/what%e2%80%99s-their-mission-mr-president-%e2%80%93-by-matt-gurney/comment-page-1/#comment-1509</link>
		<dc:creator>josephwiess</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:01:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=28534#comment-1509</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d rather spend the money and win this war, than yet once again break our word to the rest of the world.  If we don&#039;t keep our word, then all the stupid peace prizes in the world won&#039;t save us when the radical muslims agitate their countrymen, who will then hate us for walking out on them.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;If this crew had been in charge during WWII, we&#039;d have stopped after the first hour at the beaches of Normandy.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;We need to call them what they are: Cowards.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#39;d rather spend the money and win this war, than yet once again break our word to the rest of the world.  If we don&#39;t keep our word, then all the stupid peace prizes in the world won&#39;t save us when the radical muslims agitate their countrymen, who will then hate us for walking out on them.</p>
<p>If this crew had been in charge during WWII, we&#39;d have stopped after the first hour at the beaches of Normandy.  </p>
<p>We need to call them what they are: Cowards.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MaryAnn</title>
		<link>http://frontpagemag.com/2009/10/12/what%e2%80%99s-their-mission-mr-president-%e2%80%93-by-matt-gurney/comment-page-1/#comment-1504</link>
		<dc:creator>MaryAnn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 15:46:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=28534#comment-1504</guid>
		<description>Good post. I doubt Churchill is on Obama&#039;s reading list.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good post. I doubt Churchill is on Obama&#39;s reading list.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
