19
Mar

MTV: Obama Supporter/Iraq Vet Cries When Called Back To Iraq

Posted by: Scott @ 7:40 am in Barack Obama, Baracks Broken Promises, Bush Derangement Syndrome, Culture of Corruption, Election Fraud, Middle East, Military, Obama Euphoric-Rapture Syndrome, Politics, Post-Invastion, Support the Troops, The Iraqi War, True Heroes, Videos, War On Terror, foreign policy  | 4 views

Last night on MTV’s The Real World: Brooklyn, a cast member and Iraq War vet, Ryan, was called back to serve again in Operation Iraqi Freedom. It was his greatest fear-understandably!
dfhshg
(Ryan is seen here on election night at an Obama Rally wearing an Uncle Sam costume and cheering as Senator Obama is elected President)
“I know that if I vote for Obama, I won’t have to go back to Iraq.”

Ryan was decorated for valor several times in his first tour of Iraq. He seems to be a really nice guy by all accounts and of unusually good character for the MTV series.

Ryan voted for Obama
Ryan voted to end the War in Iraq
Ryan was happy
Obama did not end the War in Iraq.

Obama knew during the campaign that the Department of Defense and generals and his own military advisors told him that a 16-month withdrawal was not a responsible withdrawal. Still, he promised it, and he deliberately misled people like Ryan.

Obama has instead chosen to follow President Bush’s timeline to end the war in Iraq (a tentative 23-month withdrawal started last fall rather than the 16-months he promised), and so Ryan was called back to Iraq again.

Ryan is not happy
Ryan is a young man who Barack Obama misled and used as nothing more than a means to power.

My sympathy and most sincere hopes for Ryan’s safety go out to him. Godspeed Ryan, and I’m sorry Obama and the Democrats’ Congress were able to lie to you without condemnation.

Here two of Ryan’s roommates watch last night’s episode and reflect on Ryan:

Ryan gets the call:

  • Share/Bookmark
Print This Post Print This Post
This entry was posted on Thursday, March 19th, 2009 at 7:40 am and is filed under Barack Obama, Baracks Broken Promises, Bush Derangement Syndrome, Culture of Corruption, Election Fraud, Middle East, Military, Obama Euphoric-Rapture Syndrome, Politics, Post-Invastion, Support the Troops, The Iraqi War, True Heroes, Videos, War On Terror, foreign policy. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Trackbacks

18 comments so far

Scott
 1Reply to this comment  

Gosh, looks like MTV pulled the video.

Why on Earth would an Obama Boosting Network like MTV do such a thing?

March 19th, 2009 at 7:42 am
Kitty
 2Reply to this comment  

I wish him all the best, really I do.

But the military is V*O*L*U*N*T*A*R*Y. You sign up knowing what could happen. No one drafted Ryan, so why on earth did Ryan enlist at all?

…

March 19th, 2009 at 7:59 am
Kim Galloway
 3Reply to this comment  

I feel for him too. I wouldn’t have the courage to go to war. He has probably seen enough and once you have a break from a combat zone i have heard, a soldier gets out of accepting he is dead already, to wanting to live again and its hard to go back to life and death way of life.
Iraq is safer now , so maybe he will be ok.

March 19th, 2009 at 8:38 am
Hoosier
 4Reply to this comment  

God bless and protect all of our troops, including Ryan.

March 19th, 2009 at 8:42 am
Dave Noble
 5Reply to this comment  

Amen, Hoosier.

March 19th, 2009 at 9:11 am
luva the scissors
 6Reply to this comment  

obama mislead so many people, they believed his pretty words and are now regreting their choice in voting for him. no man can be all things to all people yet that is how obama was packaged and now the facade is falling away and the real person and his ideas are coming out and not many are happy. i wish him a safe a tour in iraq and hope he returns home safe and sound. my father always taught me to never trust words, look at actions and then decide, is has been a good lesson.

March 19th, 2009 at 9:22 am
Neo
 7Reply to this comment  

It’s safer now in Baghdad then it is in Baltimore or most parts of South Africa.

March 19th, 2009 at 3:08 pm
Hello
 8Reply to this comment  

But I thought the war was magically supposed to be over!

If it’s not over… then that means…

All those hours spent holding signs on the sidewalk and screaming at passing motorists…

All of the trouble we went through catching all those doves so we could release them at rallies…

All those angry lesbians that we had singing ‘Give Peace a Chance’ at the DNC…

All those bumper stickers we stuck on the back of our cars…

Were for nothing?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

March 19th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
thebronze
 9Reply to this comment  

My heart pumps piss for puss-boy Ryan.

Man-up, Nancy!

March 19th, 2009 at 7:48 pm
GaffaUK
 10Reply to this comment  

It’s safer now in Baghdad then it is in Baltimore or most parts of South Africa

Is it? Depends whether you are talking violent attacks or murder, which figures you believe in and whether people are refering to the whole of Iraq or whether Baghdad itself like you are doing.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1633429/posts
2006 – compares Iraq to US cities. Need to compare cities to cities or countries to countries really – as putting people closer together would probably up murder rates.

http://engram-backtalk.blogspot.com/2008/10/murder-rate-in-baghdad.html
2008 – more recent – but a lot of speculation which shows how dubious the figures are. This guy put Baghdad as more dangerous as Baltimore (but not by much!)

Personally I would much rather be walking in Baltimore than Baghdad.

March 19th, 2009 at 8:18 pm
tfhr
 11Reply to this comment  

GaffaUK,

Are you denying that progress has been made in Iraq? It is simply a matter of fact that the political and security situations have improved dramatically just as it is a matter of fact that personnel can be recalled to active duty — these things are undeniable. Where you and Ryan both stumbled is precisely at the point in which you failed to recognize the disingenuous words used to promote the political fortunes of Barrack Obama and the unscrupulous attacks against the past administration.

Find and trust reality and/or take it from someone that has been to Baghdad and lives near enough to Baltimore, to remind you that politicians in search of personal advancement and their media lackies don’t give you information contrary to their own interests.

March 20th, 2009 at 4:56 am
GaffaUK
 12Reply to this comment  

@thr

Are you denying that progress has been made in Iraq?

Not at all. McCain was right – a surge was needed. BUT if the right number of troops was there in the first place and people like Rumsfeld wasn’t always trying to keep the numbers down before and after the invasion/liberation then that would of made a significant difference in stablising Iraq quicker and saving US and Iraqi lives.

failed to recognize the disingenuous words used to promote the political fortunes of Barrack Obama and the unscrupulous attacks against the past administration.

So which disingenuous words are you refering to and what unscrupulous attacks are you refering to?

So you been to both – did you feel safer in Baghdad than Baltimore? Did you have the same protection in Baltimore as you had in Baghdad?

March 20th, 2009 at 5:15 am
Scott Malensek
 13Reply to this comment  

BUT if the right number of troops was there in the first place and people like Rumsfeld wasn’t always trying to keep the numbers down before and after the invasion/liberation then that would of made a significant difference in stablising Iraq quicker and saving US and Iraqi lives.

Um, two things here.
First, the Surge was not successful because of 30k more troops, but because of a change in strategy to counterinsurgency
Second, there were more troops in post-invasion Iraq than during the Surge, so if the argument is that not enough troops were there after the invasion, but there were during the Surge, then you’d better check your numbers because mine show more troops in post-invasion Iraq than in Surge Iraq.

March 20th, 2009 at 5:35 am
philly_nj
 14Reply to this comment  

I really feel sorry for Ryan… its bad enough to find out you bought a ‘pig in a poke’. Having to put your life on the line to support the politics you do not believe in and voted against thats soul destroying.

I wish Ryan well, good luck, God speed, be safe, thoughts and prayers are with you.
.

March 20th, 2009 at 5:53 am
GaffaUK
 15Reply to this comment  

@ Scott

I didn’t say the Surge was only successful because of 30k more troops and I don’t see how you can say with confidence that the Surge was successful but because of a change in strategy and not also that the extra troops helped. Secondly I did not say that there are more troops there now that there was post invasion. What am I saying is that the troops then were too low and that the troops numbers were reduced too quickly.

March 20th, 2009 at 6:08 am
Scott Malensek
 16Reply to this comment  

I understand your points Gaffa. It sounds like we might have a communication issue here. Let me try to describe a different way. Apologies for confusion. :)

The US invaded w about 370,000 Coalition troops (about 275,000 were US).
In late 2003/early 2004 an insurgency took root
By 2006, the insurgency had not gained any ground militarily, but it had politically in Iraq, the world, and most importantly in the US
In late 2006 the Anbar Awakening began, and a few months later the Surge of 28,000 additional troops began (completed in June/July 07).
This surge of troops brought the number of American forces to about 150,000

Now, if the US didn’t have enough troops in 2003/04 to deal w a fledgling insurgency, then how is it that half that number were able to deal with a full blown insurgency 3-4yrs later? I submit that the answer to this question is what was lacking post invasion, and NOT the number of troops.

March 20th, 2009 at 6:35 am
tfhr
 17Reply to this comment  

GaffaUK,

I think Scott Malensek has explained the point on troops strength and application quite well.

My M4 and M9 seemed adequate to the task in both Baghdad and Fallujah but I’m afraid gun laws would prevent me from carrying out a meaningful comparison within Baltimore. I’ll share this with you though – throughout my deployment I can say that we were more concerned about the safety of our loved ones back home than ourselves.

As for the constant undermining of the Bush administration efforts by the MSM and notables such as Harry “the war is lost” Reid, you have to realize that such partisan rancor was very helpful in sustaining the insurgency. America’s enemies should not seek to win on the battlefield because the percentages are against them. At great expense that enemy could win a rare tactical edge in one isolated battle or another but it would be short lived. The proven approach is to fight the war in America’s living rooms and through useful idiots in the media and amongst the opposition party, a strategic victory can be achieved. Using our freedom of speech and democratic system to undo our military is simply a matter of taking strength and turning it to weakness. It succeeds only to the extent that we are willing to allow it.

March 20th, 2009 at 9:44 am
Nic
 18Reply to this comment  

do they know for sure he’s going to Iraq? my guess is that he will probably actually go to Afghanistan. That’s where the new surge is going. I hate it for him but I’m sure they need somebody like him there.

March 20th, 2009 at 9:35 pm

Leave a reply

Name (*)
Mail (will not be published) (*)
URI
Comment

If your comments get caught in spam a lot please log into your registered account before trying to comment again. You can email me if your comment is caught in spam

 

Identity Verification: If you wish to verify your commenter identity, so no one can steal it, click the below button: