I’m not quite sure how I became the face of the polled 53%, nobody called me to poll me about anything. And I certainly don’t wish to get in a dogfight with a soldier (from Tx no less), but RTO Trainer seems to have singled me out of the thousands in the blogosphere, so let’s rock.
First, a little background. RTO Trainer is referring to a new poll which asked:
"Do you think the United States has an obligation to American soldiers who have been killed or wounded in Iraq to remain in Iraq until the mission there is completed, or not?"
53 percent of respondents said the U.S. has no such obligation, compared to 39 percent who say it does.
RTO apparently got some bad intel that I was ever asked my opinion. I wasn’t. But if I had been I would have stabbed the poller with my sharpened flag poll for asking such a stupid, unanswerable question in the first place. With the way the question was posed; “ Does the US have an obligation to American soldiers who have been killed or wounded in Iraq to remain in Iraq...”, there is no way good way to answer without sounding cold and unsupportive. I would imagine that's exactly what the poller had in mind when came up with it.
In the WaPo story I linked to above, the writer makes this statement, which I whole-heartedly agree with;
“Nobody wants to believe that soldiers have died in vain. But if they have, sending more soldiers to die after them doesn't make it better -- it only makes it worse.”
If you are asking me if I believe we should remain in Iraq out of some misguided sense of obligation to the soldiers who have already needlessly died there, then here is my answer, in no uncertain terms:
No. NO. A thousand times, no!
How this can misconstrued as not supporting the troops, I’ll never understand. This is the very antithesis of support for the troops.
RTO Trainer, you must understand. The 53% were not unsupportive of the troops. They are unsupportive of this war. They are unsupportive of your president. It is a very thin line to walk to support the soldiers fighting a war you believe is unjustified. The simple fact is, I, and others like me, support the soldiers MORE than the people who are still in favor of the war in Iraq. That’s why I don’t agree with sending more troops to die simply to justify the ones who have already died. I think that’s just insane.
I try to understand the mindset of the gung-ho soldiers who blindly follow the leader, no questions asked. I understand that you MUST believe that your mission is both valid and attainable. I believe you believe your leaders. I believe that soldiers are trained to follow orders, no questions asked. I believe that the troops all believe they are fighting a righteous war for righteous reasons.
I also believe you should talk to some veterans of the Vietnam War.
We on the outside can see the forest for the trees. You, perhaps, are too close to the situation to be able to do so. We are allowed to ask questions and weigh the answers, searching for the truth. You are not. You aren’t allowed to even question those who rank immediately above you, much less further up the ranks to the very men making the decisions. You are trained to follow orders. I’ve been trained to do exactly the opposite…
I cannot imagine how horrible it will be when the truth of this war is discovered be those who are fighting it. Apparently 53% of us can already see the truth, although I believe it’s more like 79% because that’s the actual percentage who no longer support the president or the war in Iraq. Again, have a conversation with a Vietnam vet.
The truth of the matter is, your president doesn’t support you. Ask yourself these questions:
Do my comrades and I have the tools necessary to fight this war? Do I have the armor necessary to protect myself again IEDs?
Are my bills being paid for my family back home while I’m putting my life on the line for my country?
Will there be support for my family and I if I’m injured?
Does my president understand the difference between Shiite and Sunni? Does he even know which faction is killing my friends? Did he take the time to understand the enemy before he sent me to fight?
Have I been told the truth about my mission?
Have I been given a mission that is even winnable?
I could go on and on, but won’t at this time. And just so you know, I am related (by marriage) to a Black Hawk helicopter pilot who is in Iraq, and my daughter’s best friend is in the army, although not stationed in Iraq at this time. I want this war over before he is.
It is not winnable.
PS. And thanks for wishing me dead before I've even had my morning coffee. I think I've shown great restraint.
14 comments:
"No. NO. A thousand times, no!"
there is no better way to say it. thanks for a thoughtful and passionate post.
"...such a stupid, unanswerable question in the first place." - Agreed, but then how do you react when polling asks similar questions that are inane and specifically woven to get a point across that you agree with the results?
"If you are asking me if I believe we should remain in Iraq out of some misguided sense of obligation to the soldiers who have already needlessly died there, then here is my answer, in no uncertain terms:
No. NO. A thousand times, no!"
That, too, would be a stupid question to ask, but I can see how it would fit into the "see how many people want us out of Iraq?" category. Sane people will say "no" in one chorus, because it's not about doing it for the dead, it's about keeping others at home and aboard (US Citizens, where ever they may travel are still going with our protection...you get that deal for being a citizen) in the future.
"RTO Trainer, you must understand. The 53% were not unsupportive of the troops."
Your statistical evidence, please? Were your the pollster on this?
"They are unsupportive of your president."
Last time I checked the process of this nation, he is our President. Bill Clinton was my Commander in Chief and my President for 8 years. My map shows OK in the Continental US. You don't have to like who is there, but you need to understand who is there is ours....just remember, when you support such vicious types of commentary, you are setting a tone one way, will you be ok if someone you like is in the White House and the same think occurs in the media or on the net?
"It is a very thin line to walk to support the soldiers fighting a war you believe is unjustified."
I would challenge you to delve into your decision on "unjustified." Do you support the police chasing criminals leaving the scene of a crime and endangering others? Is their chase unjustified? Do you agree with the war in Afghanistan, but not Iraq, or are you against the entire War on Terror issue?
If it's the last choice, I'd say you need to do some serious reading of international relations and history. It's all about precedent and there's some big ones to be handled, or we're going to suffer and not just when a plane hits a building.
If you do agree there is justification for the War on Terror, you may not agree with the strategy taken to handle it. Get in line....history is full of thinkers far greater than you or I who have questioned the "management" of major campaigns, within and from outside our government.
"The simple fact is, I, and others like me, support the soldiers MORE than the people who are still in favor of the war in Iraq."
Easy to say, but not so easy to prove. Amazingly enough, most people I know will not discuss what they give, or do for others. Some of the most unlikely people have been very charitable, and they sure never like the light focused on them.
"MORE" (your word) is also very subjective...more substance is better, not just relative measures, when no one has laid out a measurement standard to register such claims against.
"I try to understand the mindset of the gung-ho soldiers who blindly follow the leader, no questions asked."
The "blindly follow orders" crowd is usually found in the grips of combat, when it's life and death, and the directions need to be followed now and not later, or it's worse. For 20 years in leadership, the time for such things like this occurred three times. The rest of the time, there was time to explain why something was being done, and yes, sometimes I had to look at someone and tell them to do it the way I said. Did we disagree on how to do things? Yes, but it was a matter of opinion, and not an issue of putting men or material at risk of loss or damage. The myth of "blindly following orders is long gone, with an educated base of soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines.
"I understand that you MUST believe that your mission is both valid and attainable."
Precisely. How about you talk to those who are currently doing the work for you and I and you will find they have a view of attainable far beyond your concept, and they are making things happen like you can't conceive. Cindy Sheehan and a few soldiers do not speak for the many of them. Like taking a poll, if you want reality reflected, get out and about and "sample" many.
"I believe you believe your leaders."
Yes, many do. Your statement it looking pretty condescending. Believe me, they can read and listen very well and aren't kept in a sanitized environment, reading only environment, cut off from the New York and LA Times. Heck, they even let them read the net ashore and even at sea now! What are you really trying to say here?
"I believe that soldiers are trained to follow orders, no questions asked."
They are trained to do that when it is necessary and required. They are also required to not carry out orders that violate the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and to report such violations. If they do not, then they are charged for regulations broken, too. You need to quit painting your service members as some sort of moronic people who can't do anything except do what they are told.
"I believe that the troops all believe they are fighting a righteous war for righteous reasons."
Good. We agree.
"I also believe you should talk to some veterans of the Vietnam War."
I'm willing to bet RTO has spoken to a few. I have spoken to many, coming in the service in 1972, but having lived in the Far East growing up. I have met very few who regret it, and only one who thinks it was wrong in all these years, and I only first met him a year ago. The rest I have met and worked with were proud of their service.
Not a one of them acted like John Kerry. I have heard Adm Stockdale speak, and I have read his book "In Love and War" (co-written with his wife). He was a man of great integrity and courage. John McCain is a Vietnam vet, too. Maybe you (assuming you already have talked to some and not just "know" them by reading about some of them in the paper) need to talk to more of them.
"We on the outside can see the forest for the trees. You, perhaps, are too close to the situation to be able to do so."
How marvelously intelligent you and your "we" are. I beg to differ. I suppose you second guess any professional you meet, like your doctor and dentist and car mechanic. They, too, within their field of expertise are too close to the reality of what they deal with, right? Grow up. Do you work? If so, do you enjoy clients/customers who come to ask you a question, then tell you you're stupid? How about you're wrong? Delightful, isn't it. Think about it, then you may come to understand you are truly intelligent when you realize what you don't know and find someone with the understanding to help you.
"We are allowed to ask questions and weigh the answers, searching for the truth."
Is this some global privileged level you have attained? Or are you telling me how the military works?
"You are not. You aren’t allowed to even question those who rank immediately above you, much less further up the ranks to the very men making the decisions. You are trained to follow orders. I’ve been trained to do exactly the opposite…"
When did you attend any boot camp? How long was your service exactly? If the answer is "Never" and "I didn't serve" then you better pull out some supporting documentation for your wild allegation. And, while you're gathering your sources, how about showing links to your training that makes you question everything at all (that would be the opposite of what you said about the soldiers).
"I cannot imagine how horrible it will be when the truth of this war is discovered be those who are fighting it."
Since you know the truth, how about gracing us with it? That after using nerve agents on the Kurds, Saddam had no chemical weapons? That documents show his intelligence service was working with al-Queda and they harbored Abu Nidal in country. How about the reports Saddam made to the UN after GWI that listed quantities of anthrax and nuclear and weapons programs that the UN told him he couldn't have? I guess those were all written by George W. Bush in the early 1990's because he knew his time would come and he'd get his chance at a war?
"Apparently 53% of us can already see the truth, although I believe it’s more like 79% because that’s the actual percentage who no longer support the president or the war in Iraq."
Guess what? Some of those people are angry at the President for not not executing a scorched earth type warfare strategy on Iraq. You jumping on their train? Think it through, it's not as simple as you see it.
And, you keep saying the "truth" as though you have something. Come on...spit it out and say it.
"The truth of the matter is, your president doesn’t support you. Ask yourself these questions:
Do my comrades and I have the tools necessary to fight this war?"
Yes. exactly what weapons or support system is inadequate and which are not deployed as suitable? Cough up the list, or consider yourself not educated enough to handle a discussion on this matter.
"Do I have the armor necessary to protect myself again IEDs?"
Do you have enough structure in your car to keep a semi-tarctor trainer risk rig at 80 miles an hour from squashing you like a bug? every one in the press jeered Secretary Rumsfeld, but his point is well taken: If there is a large enough explosive charge, you can't stick enough armor in it's way. Having to wear 40 lbs of body armor now is already quite a challenge, especially in the 130+ summer sun. Are you up to it? If I put a 155mm artillery round near you and set it off, there isn't anyone making body armor to stop that. If you are making it, get yourself a GSA contract and help save some lives. Are you and explosives or materails engineering expert by any chance? I'll settle for a discussion with you on the topic if you're even a physicist, but otherwise, you're out of your league here.
"Are my bills being paid for my family back home while I’m putting my life on the line for my country?"
Yes, they are. Financial accountability is for each person, just like you. Some service members overstep their credit limits, just as civilians do. If you're chiming in on the National Guard and Reservists complaints of pay cuts, then you have to think of a couple of issues: Will you, the tax payer, accept matching their civilian pay, regardless of what it was, while they are on active duty? If the answer is no, would you support cutting some social welfare, or disease research program to do this? How about expecting anyone who signs a contract, even if it looks like easy money for one weekend a month and two weeks every summer, to deal with the conditions they got themselves into by not planning for this sort of thing? I skydive. The rule is you spot the plane for exit based on your reserve parachute, not your main. Why? Because it keeps you safe.
"Will there be support for my family and I if I’m injured?"
Yes. There is. And, if you don't think the SGLI is enough, you can purchase term life insurance to fill the gap between the SGLI and your real insurance needs. How do civilians do it? Do you expect every one who looses a a spouse to have a pile of money dropped into their account? It's called planning for the future and your family, like any responsible adult should be doing anyhow, in all walks of life. Last I heard, people out of uniform are struck down with accidents and other such things regularly, too. I suspect you also have know civilians that lost their financial standing at plant closing, or the big oil field busts a few decades back. The ones who had saved and planned probably made it, but many walked away from their expensive houses to bankruptcy.
"Does my president understand the difference between Shiite and Sunni?"
Do you know the answer to this? Really, because one sect says it has to be in the blood line and the other says they are elected/chosen, they are both part of the violence. Moot point. I'm sure there are plenty of details about life that you don't know that really don't make a difference if you are a functioning human being. If a bunch of people are fighting you, whether Baptist, Hindu, Sunni, Catholic...they are fighting you. Would you like us to have special bullets for they "type?"
"Does he even know which faction is killing my friends?"
If they are killing your friends, who cares what faction they come from? That's a pretty inane question. They are both fighting over there and both sects have a history of violence.
Would you support the wholesale massacre of the "one" sect that is doing the killing in your eyes or would that be a war crime? Would you consider it supporting the troops if the President told the soldiers to kill those who are killing them?
Damn, what a novel idea! Then that would be like going to war! Your are a true genius. Maybe the problem is we are so restrictive, because too many are worried about the political fallout, if we do actually allow soldiers to kill those who are killing them, which, sometimes are surrounded by their own families.
"Did he take the time to understand the enemy before he sent me to fight?"
I'd say no one person can grasp it all, after all, it's a bunch of people, hung up on the response to their brutality from about 622 AD thru the 1700s, where many people were slaughtered and none of them are alive today to complain about it. The US, and the World Trade Centers didn't even grace history when all of that happened. BTW, why did Christopher Columbus sail west and find the Americas? Simple answer: The Muslims were raiding the caravans coming thru the middle east to Europe and wrecking trade. Heard of the Barbary Pirates? Muslims. President Jefferson sent a fledging Navy to handle them, because they were raiding ships bound for the US. This is not the first time in history that the Muslims culture has used violence to do business with the rest of the world.
"Have I been told the truth about my mission?"
Yes, they have been. What do you know that the soldiers do not?
"Have I been given a mission that is even winnable?"
Yes. A "free standing" Iraq is possible. Do you have the guts to grit your teeth and see the women of Iraq not be shoved back into their houses, be mutilated and told they cannot drive, hold a job outside of the house, or venture out without a male relative with them? How about letting them have what you are the benefactor of in this nation: Freedom to be themselves. If not, you are dooming many to a horrible live, while you sit over there, safe because of those willing to fight for you and them, while you make derisive comments about their intelligence, their motivation and their character. It's so easy when you are protected by a buffer of about 4000+ miles, isn't it?
"I could go on and on, but won’t at this time. And just so you know, I am related (by marriage) to a Black Hawk helicopter pilot who is in Iraq"
Is he brainwashed? I bet that person is a smart, well educated person and full of life.
"and my daughter’s best friend is in the army, although not stationed in Iraq at this time."
Is he one of the brainwashed masses?
"I want this war over before he is."
What does he want? Are you in the business of controlling others lives?
"It is not winnable."
What historical precedent do you have for this? WWII? It was looking pretty grim at Guadalcanal and the Kasserine Pass. I guess it was unwinnable and we should have pulled out and let Hitler destroy Eurpoe and Tojo and the Emperor continue the rape and killing they were doing in China.
Want a dose of reality? Go and read "Flyboys" and keep a bucket nearby so you don't have to walk far when you puke after reading about what the Japanese did in China, or to some of our aviator shot down at Chi Chi Jima. How do you like your liver? I like mine in me and not on my enemy's dinner plate, thank you.
"Again, have a conversation with a Vietnam vet."
Good advice. Find some that didn't spend their time in the rear with the gear, smoking dope and shooting up heroin. Talk to some who had to do the work for those who fled to Canada and Sweden.
How about ask a history book or two about how far JFK and LBJ got us into Vietnam? How about look at the timing of the elections of LBJ and the just afterwards major troop deployment he made. It is interesting, indeed, to see how he out maneuvered the will of the people and Congress, too.
You are old enough to know life isn't a simple series of how it feels decisions. There are tough ones to make. Peoples lives are put at risk, on our streets, and on the battle field.
I have an idea. If you want to run this war, there's a way to do it. It's simple and in the Constitution: Be over 35, a US Citizen and then you can be the president. Quit your bitching and get ready for 2008. If you're good, then you can change history, and do it your way. If you're not up for that, then realize you will have to settle for whining the rest of your life.
Gee Moogirl. Now the 101st Fighting Keyboarders with too much time on their hands are hanging over here. There goes the cul de sac.
Thanks Roy, I really half expected to get slammed for this post, especially after being told to drop dead.
Xformed, thank you for the time you obviously spent writing your comment. I’ll try to answer your questions in the order you asked them
1. First off, I believe the poll was designed to agitate people. If you answer no, I don’t think we’re obligated to send more troops on behalf of the soldiers who’ve already died, then you sound ungrateful and insensitive. And if you’re against this war being prolonged, then you couldn’t answer yes. Why would anyone who was against this war answer yes to this poll?
That’s why I believe if 53% answered no, then it’s because they’re against the war, troop support doesn’t even enter into the equation.
2. President Bush is the president of the country I live in, he is not my president. Regan was my president, hell even Bush Sr. was my president. But George W.? Never. You asked if I would be ok if someone I liked in the Whitehouse was treated the same way in the media and or Internet. He was. His name was Clinton, and the republicans crucified and vilified him. I lived.
I don’t feel Bush was legally elected. I believe he is mentally ill. He is not now nor has he ever been my president.
3. Unjustified, hmmm. Good question. Yes, I believe we were justified to go into Afghanistan, but not Iraq. The Taliban was in Afghanistan. Osama was supposed to be in Afghanistan. Remember Osama?
Bush lied to start the war in Iraq. Yeah, yeah, I know Saddam was a bad ass and needed to taken out. But Saddam has been with us a long, long time, and there are bad asses all over the world who are much more dangerous them him. He had NOTHING to do with 911, he had no WMDs. Bush lied, Cheney lied, Rumsfeld, lied, Rice lied. That is the very reason that this an unjustified war.
We are less safe now, not more. We were safer on September 12, 2001, than we are right now. This war has stoked the flames of hatred for the US all over the world. The entire world was behind us after 911. Now we’re the scourge of the planet. And the war in Iraq is simply breeding a whole new generation of terrorists who will be flying planes into our buildings tomorrow.
4. I agree with the war on terror if it’s being waged on those who actually pose a threat. I agree with the war on terror if it actually makes us safer. I’m not against war. I’m against war being waged for personal reasons that mostly have to do with greed and posturing. I’m against having my leg peed on and being told it’s raining. I’m against innocent people (both soldiers and Iraqis) dying for a government who does not care about them. But I’m not against war in general.
5. You’re right about the people who give. When I talk about support for the soldiers, I’m not necessarily talking about monetary support. I’m talking about, oh, how shall I put it? I’m talking about standing behind the soldiers, supporting the fact that they’re doing their job and most of them believe in their hearts that the war is the right thing to do. Many don’t, but most do. But there are also soldiers who see this war for what it is and are totally against it.
The soldiers did not start this war. They have no power. They’re just doing their jobs as best they can. They’re serving their country and their commander in chief. It’s the commander I have a problem with, not the soldiers.
I’ll relent on the statement that “I, and others like me, support the soldiers MORE than the people who are still in favor of the war in Iraq.” I simply meant that the people who want this war to end, want it to end now so no more soldiers will die needlessly. I’m a big girl and can admit when I’m wrong. I was wrong to make that blanket statement.
6. I find the military’s procedures for doing things pretty fascinating, but having never been in the military I’ll just have to take your word for how things work.
You made the statement “How about you talk to those who are currently doing the work for you…” They are not doing the work for me; they are doing it for the president. I never asked them to fight this war. I’ve been against it from the beginning. If they are doing it for me, tell them they can stop now.
7. You said I sounded condescending when I said, “I believe you believe your leaders”. There’s nothing condescending about that statement. I DO believe the soldiers believe every word coming out of the president’s mouth. There are a lot of people who believe the president. I think at last count it was about 21% of the American people. There was no hidden meaning in my statement. I think the soldiers believe whatever the president tells them.
8. You say I’m painting soldiers as some kind of moronic robots. You say they are required NOT to carry out orders that violate the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and I’m sure that’s true, in theory. But if that were true, then why does the soldier who blew the whistle on the whole Abu Graib debacle have to live with his wife and kids in hiding now because of threats made against him by his fellow soldiers?
War is hell, people do bad things. Just like I can’t paint all soldiers as mindless robots, you can’t paint the entire military as honorable choirboys. I thought following orders without question was basic training 101.
9. My whole point in mentioning the Vietnam War vets was to bring up the point of how they were treated when they came home, not only by the public, but also by the very government who sent them to war. The government is still screwing them as far as benefits go. Our government is famous for forgetting all about vets and denying them the very support and services they need. All evidence points to the fact that our new vets will be no different. Not only will the gov. screw them when they come home, they won’t even equip them to do the job while they’re fighting.
I agree that most vets are proud of their service. Now ask them how proud they are how they were treated once home.
10. You said, “I suppose you second guess any professional you meet, like your doctor and dentist and car mechanic.” You bet! I don’t go to a doctor because I don’t trust them. I have a homeopathic doctor for anything more serious than the flu. I had the flu a couple months ago that I ignored until it turned into pneumonia simply because I don’t trust doctors.
And you don’t ever want to ask a woman how she feels about mechanics, especially a blonde woman. A mechanic sees me coming and his eyes roll back in his head and he starts deciding where he’d like to send his kid to college. Mechanics screw women. Mechanics and car salesmen.
So we’ve established that I don’t trust doctors or mechanics because I am at their mercy. I don’t tell them they’re wrong because I don’t know if they are or not, but I do know that most of them are out to take as much of my cash as possible. That goes for both doctors and mechanics.
10. Yes I have a job, I own my own business. As a photographer, I’m working for the customer. They tell me what they want, I try to do it. They never call me stupid. I didn’t call anyone stupid. Except the president, I may have called him stupid. Don’t put words in my mouth.
11. You seem to have a problem with my perception that in the military, the soldiers are trained to follow orders, no questions asked. Exactly what part of that perception is wrong? Perhaps my perception is completely out of line and the military is full of free thinkers all doing whatever they want.
No, I have never served in the military. So if you say that following orders is not A#1 on the list of things they teach you, I’ll have to take your word for it. But I’d bet you’d have a lot of people disagree with you.
12. Your arguments about Saddam are falling on deaf ears. What ever facts you have on him still do not negate the fact that this war was built on lies. It still doesn’t change the fact that he had nothing to do with 911, that he had no weapons of mass destruction and that this war has very little to do with terrorism.
All you have to do is ask yourself, ARE WE ANY SAFER? The answer is no. The threat to the US didn’t come from Saddam. There are worse dictators and maniacal nut jobs in the world right now, but we don’t seem to be too worried about them. But then again, they’re not sitting on an oil-rich desert. If it was all about crazy leaders who are threatening America, then why aren’t we doing anything about North Korea?
Face it, your president lied to you. The war in Iraq wasn’t waged to make us safer, which is a good thing, because we’re not.
13. The 79% are not pissed because we didn’t scorch the earth. They’re pissed because of the facts I stated above. And they are jumping on my train, not the other way around.
14. As far as the next questions of mine that you supposedly answer, these are issues that have been raised by soldiers themselves, not by me. The soldiers say they don’t have enough armor to protect themselves from IEDs. The soldiers say they can’t pay their families bills. Do you have any idea how many families of soldiers serving in Iraq right now are one food stamps and depending on churches and donations for feeding their children and paying their bills?
15. If you don’t think that knowing your enemy is important, then perhaps it’s a good thing you’re not fighting. But then again, it’s only important if you want to WIN the war, which I don’t think was ever a priority for Bush. The fact that he said they’ll welcome us as liberators is proof enough that he had no idea what he was getting us into. If you don’t know your enemy, then how can you possibly expect to defeat him?
I believe the goal should be to kill the Taliban, but if you don’t even understand who the Taliban is, then you will most likely be killed and therefore lose the war. If you want to win a war, you MUST understand who the enemy is. How can you even have a strategy if you don’t know whom you’re fighting?
And you are right, no one person can possibly grasp it all. But I expect our leaders to at least know more than the average person on the street. Otherwise you have no right to put others in harms way.
16. You say the troops have been told the truth about their mission. I say bullschnit. No one was told the truth about this mission.
17. Don’t try to make me feel like a bad feminist for being against the war. Do I have the guts to grit my teeth? Sure do, if what we’re doing is working, which it isn’t. And I think it’s very arrogant on our part to think that if we “win” this war, it will magically change thousands of years of deep seeded religious beliefs.
You want to talk to me about women’s rights, then talk to me about Darfur, where genocidal, ethnic cleansing is going on even as we speak. I’m sorry, but it’s hard to get worked up about a woman having to wear a burkha when there’s a whole race of women being gang raped and mutilated because of the tribe they belong to. And what is your president doing about that? Nothing. Why? Is their skin too dark, or do we just not have any interests at risk? Oh that’s right, there’s no oil in Darfur.
18. The people I know and are related to who are in the service are both smart and educated. I never said anything to the contrary. And both are doing exactly what they want. So what’s your point? I never said the people in the service are not intelligent.
As I wrap this up, I can tell you that I will not be running for president in the near future. Nor will I be lying down to let a president run roughshod over my rights that are in the Constitution that you mentioned. I do know that life is not simple.
It’s just a shame that our president is...
I know, I know, Alex. I was told to drop dead before I even had my morning coffee.
But except fot RTO Trainer, everybody seems to be playing nice. So it's probably the little known, better mannered 102nd Fighting Keyboarders.
You start out explaining how I have not understood you. Then you display that you have zero understanding of the military, much less me as in individual.
(You go singled out because you posted in the past three days with the phrase "shared sacrifice." That's how I found your post. Given that you expressed endorsement of Frank Rich's POV, I'll stand by my characterization, barring some more indepth caveat.)
We don't follow blindly. We are required to question those above us. We have to have a clear understanding of the mission and its ramifications. You can throw out all the garbage that follows from contradicting these statements.
And I have a number of Vietnam Vets, who somehow overcame the betrayals of them by their countrymen 30 years ago and are still serving, right here. Their lament is much like mine, except that it's much more a "Please, Lord, not again."
Can you really still be trotting out the armor trope? I wasn't true in 2003. It's not true now.
There is a very small number of troops taht end up in financial straits. Of course we want that number to be zero, but you need to look into how pervasive it is before you present it as universal. Speaking only for myself, I'm going to fall short by less than $4000 of six figures income for this deployment.
The mission can only fail if we go home.
For your consideration:
Your leaders are lying to you.
The war is wrong and illegal.
You cannot win.
This is the same message that Tokyo Rose used to broadcast.
Consider how supportive it is. Consider how supported we feel.
"But except fot RTO Trainer, everybody seems to be playing nice."
53% of Americans started it. When they say that those who have already given all, don't matter, then they get planted firmly in my sights.
Here's the clue: 70 odd percent (for argument sake let's call it 73%) said go to Iraq in early 2003. Now it's taking longer than they'd like and they've been jumping ship since Iraqis actually started shooting back.
20% of Americans, then, 1 in 5, are clueless about employing the military. Essentially, you don't send us in anywhere if the mission isn't worth killing for and dying for. We aren't a deterrent, we are a weapon. You don't point a gun at someting you don't intend to kill or destroy.
We didn't screw it up. THe Presidnet didn't screw it up. The American people screwed it up when they said, "go..no, wait come back." 'Do somehting!... But not that!"
Madness.
A final point. I live in Texas. I'm from Oklahoma. I serve in 45th Infantry Brigade, Oklahoma Army National Guard. Maybe you've heard of us?
Gosh Moogirl. Sounds like someone has a crush on you. ;)
I think you're mistaking someone who wants to CRUSH me, not have a crush ON me. :>
weight loss pill
weight loss tip
weight loss plan
weight loss
fast weight loss
meridia weight loss
weight loss drug
easy weight loss
low cholesterol diet
high cholesterol diet
phentermine diet pill
diet plan
diet program
diet supplemental
diet pill
best diet pill
diet plan
diet food
diet hoodia pill
diet patch
adipex diet pill
diet
diabetic diet
weight loss pill
weight loss tip
weight loss plan
weight loss
fast weight loss
meridia weight loss
weight loss drug
easy weight loss
low cholesterol diet
high cholesterol diet
phentermine diet pill
diet plan
diet program
diet supplemental
diet pill
best diet pill
diet plan
diet food
diet hoodia pill
diet patch
adipex diet pill
diet
diabetic diet
clomid
cyclobenzaprine
diet food
diet
diabetic diet
diet plan
diet pill
diet patch
easy weight loss
diflucan
diet program
elavil
effexor
estradiol
fast weight loss
famvir
evista
fioricet
flonase
flexeril
high cholesterol diet
fosamax
fluoxetine
ionamin
imitrex
hoodia diet pill
Post a Comment