Comments for American Arrogance - The Meaning of Bloody Omaha - On D-Day, the U.S. saved Europe from itself. »
Posted By pc25 6 months, 4 weeks ago in Political NewsThe skies over Normandy are invariably filled with dark rain clouds. But on one day in late April the sky was cloudless and the English Channel tranquil. Youngsters built sand castles on Omaha Beach and dogs romped in the surf. It was a vastly different scene from the bloodshed and violence that occurred on this same beach 65 years ago.
Read Full Story at online.wsj.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 39
-
100%
pc256 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA
Reply
We have grown complacent as a people in the last six and a half decades since the war in Europe reached the beginning of the end. But it is hard to remain unemotional at the hilltop cemetery that honors those who made the ultimate sacrifice so that we may live in freedom.
Though we owe these men a debt we can never repay, what we can do is honor them. Their bravery can still inspire if the story of D-Day is told with passion and honesty.
The world offers challenges each year since freedom is tested in each generation by new pharaohs. We need the guardians of liberty to remind us how precarious that freedom is. We need to rise to the occasion the way young American soldiers did on June 6, 1944-
-
icono1Comment removed: Spam
-
-
-
57%
pc256 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The only arrogance is that of the President. The presumptive certainty that he speaks for all Americans. I think that one could say that he doesn't speak for the thousands who so arrogantly sacrificed their lives that day in the hopes of securing a better world for all of us.
Reply-
67%
BB646 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I believe if you read the speech given by Chamberlain and the actions of Jimmy Carter, you would have a better understand of our current President.
Reply
Then again, why can't you and I build a nuclear power plant here but are forced to build wind and solar yet Obama supports Iran and their claim that they need nuke plants for power? Iran has far more sun and wind than many areas of our country, yet Obama wants them to have nuclear power. Whose side is the premier on?-
-
60%
DenCuddy6 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Just wait until they force the republicans to have senate meeting in the basement, oh wait, the GOP did that to the dems. You guys lost, suck it up and get over it. The american people voted and we decided we've seen what "your side" does and we said no thanks we're tired of it.
Reply-
0%
icono16 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There is no mention in my comment of who won or lost. It is obvious that 'you won' and 'we lost'. What I was referring to was to whose side Comrade President was on. I simply stated he is on his own side and no one else's.
Reply
Yet, your comment is almost as simplistic as mine, which I find rather interesting in that you, as a well educated Neo-Marxist OBama liberal, should have been more erudite in you digression from my original comment.
Later Comrade Cuddy.
-
-
67%
wtagg6 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What I find interesting is the constant chant of "The government is incompetent" and then the desire to just continue to throw money at a department of that government. That is typical of all the accusations of liberal thinking. If the government needs fixing, you fix it before continuing to throw money at it.
Reply
This is the exact principle the beav was commenting on in another article. You do not continue to throw money at banks or other corporate entities without fixing them first.
-
-
-
80%
sinophil496 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
pc25 - I gave you a positive on your first post. The article and your post were touching and fitting reminders of the bravery and sacrifice of the American soldiers on that momentous day in history.
Reply
However, this post is just another skewed. political jab that has no place in this board to honor the American military.
You are whining that Obama is arrogant in presuming to speak for all Americans. He may not speak for ALL Americans, but he certainly does speak for the MAJORITY of Americans.
The most arrogant of presidents was George Bush who lied and seduced the American public into accepting the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq. Then even when the foundation of supposed evidence of WMD's was found to be all lies, even when the war spun down into chaos and sectarian hatred, even when France and Russia offered to replace our troops and finish the reconsruction, even when the American public grew disenchanted with Bush and disillusioned with the management of the invasion, Bush continued to pursue his little war and plunge our country ever deeper into debt.
He ignored all advice not conforming to his rigid ideas on the war. He ignored all public opinion polls that said Americans were tired of the war. (I recall the lowest point of the polls was 19% favorable at one point.). He proudly proclaimed himself the "Decider." He adamantly clung to his old, wrong decisions that have affected our country, its economy, the countries of Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and now the entire global economy.-
67%
bubba26 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Absolutely.
Reply
Bush didn't speak for me AT ALL.
But I didn't "whine" about 'who' Bush spoke for.
As the President, he DOES represent America - period - for better or for worse. So whining about that is silly.
If you want to debate policies and actions of Obama or Bush or whoever - based on fact and documentation - have at it.
Otherwise, stop whining about whether or not Obama represents "you". He represents America - he does so because he was ELECTED to do so, just as Bush was elected to do so. -
-
-
80%
djn3nunez36 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The only arrogance is that of the President.
Reply
I have to agree, President Bush was one arrogant SOB presuming to speak for all Americans and leading us into an unjust invasion and occupation of Iraq that has cost, and continues to cost us dearly. Nothing like the threat that these brave men help put an end too. Good call.
-
-
-
100%
icono16 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Some of the WW2 Vets that I've had a chance to talk to believe, almost to a man, that Patton's brilliant move during the Battle of the Bulge 'sealed the deal' for the allies and basically broke the back of Hitler's resurgent Wehrmacht.
Reply-
Neutral
pokydoke6 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If you talk to vets who were actually in the Bulge battle they'll tell you differently. They'll tell you that they had the Germans on the ropes. The US had effectively stopped the German advance before Patton arrived. Patton was a brilliant strategist and leader but he did not win the Battle of the Bulge.
Reply
-
-
-
-
100%
Wolfie20076 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thank you for posting this pc. Americans need to remember how our brave men sacrificed to save others and they need to be proud of what those men did in that war. The United States is a great and exceptional nation and we should be proud of our accomplishments and what we have given to the entire world.
Reply-
-
hefaa1Comment removed: Hard Banned
-
-
-
-
80%
ForrestPhelps6 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
To: nostalgia
Reply
Not that anyone on Propeller is under any obligation to explain props/drops and pos's/neg's, but I dropped this for the simple reason that pc25 posted it. Perhaps if he had posted it and made a comment along the lines of "Americans of all political parties and ideologies have shed their blood for this nation, we should pause and thank them for their sacrifice."
Instead, this posting is used by some for political comments. This is politicizing the sacrifice those individuals made, and that is not something I am in favor of.
Finally, I disagree with the article. Not every part, or even the main part, but at least the section: "We have grown complacent as a people in the last six and a half decades since the war in Europe reached the beginning of the end."
We may have not experienced another Omaha Beach since WWII, but countless individuals, some of whom were not even soldiers, have sacrificed as much for our freedom. The writer goes on to say: "We need the guardians of liberty to remind us how precarious that freedom is. We need to rise to the occasion the way young American soldiers did on June 6, 1944. They are a constant reminder that liberty requires vigilance and courage if it is to survive," which implies (to me at least) that the writer thinks Americans haven't risen to the occasion in the intervening years, and he may even be hinting that now, today, we are at an apathetic low.
I think of the impassioned postings here on Propeller and elsewhere, and even the ones I don't agree with politically, I can still oftentimes feel that the poster fervently believes they are on guard to protect our liberty.
A person can be wrong and still be patriotic. Myself included. It may have been wrong of me to drop this, but that is my opinion. If anyone cares to discuss where I am wrong, I'm always willing to discuss.-
88%
canadianrancher576 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I gave you the pos for the simple reason that I think it is great when people take the time to explain their actions, the same goes when people neg a comment , whenever someone negs a comment of mine I don't take it as an insult but I do appreciate it when they do tell me why, although I have been around here long enough to usually know the reasons that Igot the neg.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
75%
sinophil496 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So what?
Reply
It is the Muslim world that Bush has so profoundly alienated and angered.
Although Christianity in the aggregate is still the largest religion in the world, the number of Muslims now out number the largest Christian sect in the world, which is Catholicism.
To calm down the hatred and antagonism of the Muslim world, you must talk to the Muslims. You must listen to their points of view, their opinions, their recommendations. To visit a Muslim country and just prattle on about Christianity, what we think, what we want and what we want them to do is not just the height of rudeness, it is counterproductive and dangerous.-
25%
oldslowjim6 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Just wondered why, if Bush was the instigator of all the animosity with the Muslim world, then why did the 9/11 plot begin under Clinton? Why did the first world trade center attack occur before bush? How about the Cole, embassy and other attacks?
Reply
Your premise is faulty therefore your conclusion about bush must also be faulty.-
67%
bubba26 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It is your premise that is "faulty".
Reply
Yes, the 'terrorism' started when Clinton was President. But that is NOT because "Clinton alienated" anyone.
Al Qaeda was formed because Muslims were angry that America was building bases in Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries. They disagreed with that and thought that those countries should have NO relations with America at all.
The 9/11 attack was born out of that premise and the resulting hatred for AMERICA, not from any 'hate' of a specific President.
The Clinton administration had TONS of intelligence data on the threat of Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. ALL of that was handed over to the Bush administration, who then proceeded to IGNORE it.
After 9/11, the Bush administration immediately started blaming Iraq, which was wrong from the start and PROVEN to be wrong later on.
It was Bush and his administration that exasperated the hatred of Muslims toward America by invading the WRONG country and by their arrogance towards Arab/Muslim nations. -
Neutral
sinophil496 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Before Bush, the animosity of Muslims was a more generalized negative attitude about our economic power, our one-sided support of Israel at the expense of Palestinians, our support of dictators like the Shah Pahlavi. The vast majority of Muslims were moderate towards America with perhaps a touch of envy at our economic, social, and technological progress.
Reply
The terrorists were more of a fringe element whom many moderates feared. Witness the almost universal disavowal of the 9/11 bombings and the outpouring of sympathy from most of the Muslim countries and people. Witness the approval when we went after Osama bin Laden. Even Iran gave us intelligence to track him down in Afghanistan and help set up the puppet government of Hamid Karzai.
After the unwarranted invasion of Iraq, the categorizing of Iran as one of the Axis of Evil, the majority of the Muslim world turned against the USA. The Taliban and the al Qaeda became folk heroes standing up to the great colonial power occupying Muslim lands. Osama bin Laden became a rallying point for all the angry and disenchanted Muslims.
So what was a small, spark of anger against the USA from the radical Muslim fringe turned into a roaring forest fire of hatred across broad areas of the Muslim world.
Bush caused it. Bush will go down in history in infamy for his huge global strategic error.
-
-
-
-
-
100%
wtagg6 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Christians do not seem to be that concerned about Christian terrorists.
Reply
What is the more conservative way to solve a problem, through fighting or resolving the reason for the desire to fight? Not to say that Obama will be successful, but we need to remove the reasons for the aggression or it will only continue, costing trillions.
Gary Bauer is right that we need to remove the US from the financing of the terrorism that we are fighting. That is the most non-conservative possible scenario. -
100%
bubba26 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You remember the old cliche, "never say never ..."?
Reply
Q: Barack Obama
"I believe in the redemptive death and resurrection of Jesus Christ."
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/januarywe...
" ... his campaign took on a Christian glow, with shout-outs to Jesus by the candidate, warm-ups by gospel choirs, and glossy leaflets that showed Mr. Obama speaking from a pulpit and clasping hands with a minister, his head bowed in prayer."
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/25/obam...
"The most detailed and fascinating explication of Barack Obama's faith came in a 2004 interview he gave Chicago Sun Times columnist Cathleen Falsani when he was running for U.S. Senate in Illinois. The column she wrote about the interview has been quoted and misquoted many times over, but she'd never before published the full transcript in a major publication."
http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwaldman/2008/11/ob...
Obama told the Rev. Rick Warren that "we still don't abide by that basic precept of Matthew: that whatever you do for the least of my brothers, you do for me.
"That basic principle applies to poverty. It applies to racism and sexism; it applies to not thinking about providing ladders of opportunity for people to get into the middle class."
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/16/warren.foru...
-
-
100%
kobzikov6 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"We need to rise to the occasion the way young American soldiers did on June 6, 1944."
Reply
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there a mandatory draft during World War II?
Does that mean people who agree with the author's sentiments would support reinstatement of the draft? I thought that many people on the board were against Obama's proposals for expanding community service outlined in his America Serves program, which doesn't seem nearly as demanding as a draft? -
-
100%
Dagnabit6 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Unfortunately, us baby boomers seem to have raised mostly whiny self-serving brats who seem to feel entitled to get everything they desire without any sacrafice. Of course there are always the few and the proud but they seem few and far between these days. The pride that this great country had, seems to now be filled with self loathing, selfishness and complacency. If things stay the course and the younger generation is unwilling to fight for anything, we are doomed as a country. Even though history gives us lessons to learn, we repeat its mistakes because we look at it as though it is somehow different from what is going on at THIS point in time. The same thing happened to the Romans. All of a sudden it's all gone and we can never get it back. All the kings horses and all the kings men...
Reply -
100%
wtagg6 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My concern is the assumption that the US did everything in the successful landing at Normandy and the eventual destruction of Germany. The US landed about 40% of the troops on Normandy on June 6, 1944. This shouldn't belittle the US effort, but remind everyone of all that contributed. Up to this point, England took it on the chin, not the US. England's resolve to weather the storm that was Nazi Germany allowed the possibility of D-Day to occur. The US did supply materials and did some significant fighting in NA and Italy, but England was the real fighter in the ring for the most part of 1939 through D-Day.
Reply -
50%
bubba26 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
pc25 says, "I think that one could say that he doesn't speak for the thousands who so arrogantly sacrificed their lives that day in the hopes of securing a better world for all of us."
Reply
WHAT??
WHO is being arrogant and presumptive?
Bush didn't speak for me AT ALL.
I disagreed with his policies and his actions, so I complained and I debated about them, based on facts and documentation.
But I didn't "whine" about 'who' Bush 'spoke' for (other than ME).
WHOEVER the President is, he was VOTED into that office and he DOES represent America - period - like it or not.
Your attempt to presume that YOU know what Obama "speaks" about the sacrifices of our troops is totally ludicrous and offensive. -
100%
Justice4All6 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
We owe a lot to anyone willing to fight for America. And the least we owm them is to tell them the truth about what they are risking their life for.
Reply
The ultimate insult to anyone would be to ask them to fight a war for reasons that are based on lies to accomplish something that only you and the special interests want.
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.