"If all that Americans want is security, they can go to prison. They’ll have enough to eat, a bed and a roof over their heads. But if an American wants to preserve his dignity and his equality as a human being, he must not bow his neck to any dictatorial government."
--Dwight Eisenhower, 1949
The President's speech was exactly what we thought it was going to be. I have no comments about it. However, here is an interesting article on the whole testimony this week from the Seattle Times. Representative Sestak (D-PA, former 3 star Admiral) makes an excellent point in the article:
"By not having a bipartisan approach, Congress has defaulted and let the whole tone of this debate be set by a military man's report," said Rep. Joe Sestak, D-Pa., a former three-star admiral and adviser in the Clinton administration. "Regardless of one's position on the war, it's profoundly dangerous to have the military make decisions on war and peace, and to some extent, that's what we've done."
I chose to watch MSNBC's coverage of the speech. Shortly after the speech was over MSNBC interviewed Republican candidate for President, Mike Huckabee. Of course, Huckabee thought the speech was really good. At one point he said something along the lines of, "this is about whether or not WE have the will to fight the extremists."
I really can't stand when I hear people like Huckabee (Republican or Democrat) refer to 'we' and fighting in Iraq. Mike Huckabee is not fighting anyone in Iraq. He is just another politician using our service members to help himself politically.
I will start this thread by saying that I am in no way defending Iran's President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The guy is a complete ass.
What I will say is that I do not believe in taking advantage of language gaps by misquoting and spinning quotes from Ahmadinejad. This is what Republicans love to do.
For example, I had the chance to sit down for a bit and watch the Patreaus debacle from the live stream on cspan.com. For the first time in my life I was looking at my computer hoping that Comcast's shitty service would knock out my internet. Senator/Comedian James Inhofe (R-OK) started off his ten minutes of questioning by droning on and on about the influence of Iran in Iraq. He was all proud of himself for finding a recent quote by Ahmadinejad. Inhofe said,
"Ahmadinejad recently stated, 'Soon, we will see a huge power vacuum in the region. Of course, we are prepared to fill the gap.'"
Yes, Mr. Inhofe. Ahmadinejad did, in fact, make that statement. However, it was part of a longer quote. A quote that you decided cut in half because you didn't like the rest of the quote. Here is the entire quote from Ahmadinejad:
“Soon, we will see a huge power vacuum in the region. Of course, we are prepared to fill the gap, with the help of neighbors and regional friends like Saudi Arabia, and with the help of the Iraqi nation.”
Mr. Inhofe left off the entire last part of the quote because it allowed him to spin the quote to make him look like a hotshot in front of GEN Petreaus. In reality, it sounds like Ahmadinejad wants to bring in the various parties in the region to help his own cause. Sounds a bit like what we have been trying to do the last 4 years.
You will also hear the misinformed claim that Ahmadinejad proclaimed, "We need to wipe Israel off the face of the map." This is one of their favorite quotes to sing while beating the drums of war with Iran. When you hear someone make this claim can you please instruct them that "face of the map" is an English phrase. This is what he actually said in Farsi:
Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).
Basically, he said, "Khomeini said this occupying regime in Israel must be vanished from the page of time." This quote takes on much different meaning than the version we so often hear. The misquote is used to scare people into thinking that Iran is developing nuclear weapons so that they can bomb Israel off the face of the map.
I realize that not everyone has the benefit of being surrounded by fluent Persian speakers, like I do (commence wiretapping), but this information can be found other places. For those of you that don't believe my Persian sources...figure out the shit for yourself here.
We've already been persuaded into one war based on misinformation and false pretenses. Please don't let it happen again.
The founder of VoteVets.org, Jon Soltz, is an Iraq war veteran. He came home from Iraq, reflected on his experiences, became enraged the more he learned about the war, and is now trying to expose the Republican party's claim that that they are "pro military." His story is similar to mine, except all I have is this lousy website, while he has created a powerful political force to be reckoned with. In fact, many people credit VoteVets for being a main reason that Senators George Allen (R-VA) and Rick "the prick" Santorum (R-PA) both lost re-election last year. Here is their ad that exposed Santorum:
There are 22 seats in the Congress and one very important Presidential spot up for grabs in the next election. VoteVets is gearing up:
With a database of more than 40,000 supporters and donors, he is planning to take on GOP presidential candidates in 2008, targeting their claim that they are better guardians of national security. Soltz stated, "Our goal is to be the No. 1 player on the No. 1 issue facing the country."
Here is a video of Congressmen Brian Baird just a few short months ago (February) arguing against the surge and further occupation in Iraq:
Here he is getting his ass chewed by his constituents this week back home in Vancouver, WA after he came out and said that the surge is working:
In the first video Baird makes a powerful statement,
"It is irresponsible to allow a Commander in Chief...to continue to sacrifice the lives, bodies, and families of our troops in a mission that lacks a clear end point or successful strategy."
How in the world do you change your mind so drastically in 6 months? How do you go from believing in a statement as powerful as the one I listed above, to believing in a prolonged surge through April 2008?
Also, take note of the pictures of Baird in the second video taken of him in Iraq. He is not wearing a kevlar helmet or vest. It is impossible to evaluate the surge without wearing kevlar and traveling outside of fortified Army bases. I would love to see the list of places this guy visited while he was there. Just so you know, the guy was on ground in Iraq for 2 days. In 2 days he came to the realization that the surge is working.
I applaud the people of Vancouver who showed up for this town hall meeting. This guy is an embarrassment to the Democratic party.
President Bush was in the Seattle area for about 2 hours yesterday. A video of the event can be found on Komo 4's website. The video is pretty much what you would expect of any presidential visit. It shows Air Force One screwing up the flights for the day, the motorcade blocking traffic during rush hour on some of the busiest highways in America, and Bush telling a crowd of his most loyal fans that, "we need to fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here."
Of course, the video also shows the hundred or so protesters that were there from the time he arrived until well after he was gone. There were also a few Bush supporters in the crowd outside the hotel. These must be Bush's poor fans because they didn't pay the $1,000-$10,000 to see him speak inside the hotel. One of these poor fans was a kid named Timothy. I only know his name because they put it up on the TV screen during his interview. Mr. Timothy had the nerve to make the following statement in regards to the protesters:
"They're saying this an illegal war and innocent people are dying. Not that many people have died compared to World War I, or World War II, or Vietnam."
Holy shit. I had to take a few deep breathes so that I didn't throw my remote control across the room. College football season is coming up, I need my remote control.
A quick myspace search of Timothy reveals that he is an even more hurting than his interview on TV made him out to be. His profile picture, found here, shows him holding a sign that reads, "US out of Iraq and Into Iran." Of course, Timmy doesn't list any military experience in his profile. He appears to be one of the many college aged Republicans who would rather spend their time at protests rather than actually helping us win the "war on terror."
In the meantime, forty minutes down the road at Fort Lewis, there was a memorial held for 2 Special Forces soldiers killed in Iraq this week. I guess that wasn't an important enough event for George Bush and Timmy to attend.
The British are preparing a complete withdrawal from Iraq and they don't seem to concerned about the comparisons to pulling out of Saigon that supporters of the war in Iraq love to claim. For example, one of President Bush's closest military advisers, Stephen Biddle, recently stated:
"Britain won't be able to pull all its troops out through the airport, which is why they will have to fight their way out. It will be a hard withdrawal. It will be ugly and embarrassing."
As an American, I find his comments to be completely embarrassing. Unfortunately, Mr. Biddle isn't just some insignificant blogger or talking head. He actually has power and influence over military decisions made by our administration and he is making us look bad.
Obviously, the British took offense to these statements. Lord Byce, the former Chief of the Defense Staff in the British military, thinks these comments by Biddle are unwarranted. In response to Biddle he claimed:
"I don't think it's sensible to draw any parallels between Saigon and Basra. The British are not facing what the Americans were facing in Saigon, which was a well-equipped army as opposed to disparate murderers and terrorists."
Lord Byce isn't the only Brit who thinks the British can successfuly pull out of Iraq. Michael Clarke, the director of the Royal United Services Institute, said yesterday:
"The idea that the US would have to deploy two brigades to protect a British withdrawal is overwritten. Our own troops can do the job. It would take about a month, and it might need a short tactical deployment of extra forces to cover it, but we have the numbers for it."
In my mind, our administration should be wishing the Brits good luck and offering our help to remove all 5,500 of their troops safely. Instead we have Mr. Biddle acting like a school kid who hopes it rains on another kid's birthday party just because he didn't get invited. Of course it's much worse than that because he seems to be hoping British soldiers are killed in order to help prove his point.
As for Mr. Biddle...he may have a PhD from Harvard, but he never served a day in Vietnam or Iraq.
People in America are always looking for the truth of what is really going on in Iraq. Conservatives are always skeptical of mainstream media so they turn to pundits like Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity (who have the combined military experience of parent's 8 month old puppy). Liberals also like to claim bias in the mainstream media and flock to blogs like the Daily Kos and moveon.org. Well, for anyone interested in an accurate assessment written through the eyes of soldiers who have lived through an Iraq deployment, please read this New York Times published Op-Ed entitled "The War as We Saw It." This piece was written by 7 soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division who are about to return from a 15 month deployment. Here are some quotes from the article:
To believe that Americans, with an occupying force that long ago outlived its reluctant welcome, can win over a recalcitrant local population and win this counterinsurgency is far-fetched. As responsible infantrymen and noncommissioned officers with the 82nd Airborne Division soon heading back home, we are skeptical of recent press coverage portraying the conflict as increasingly manageable and feel it has neglected the mounting civil, political and social unrest we see every day...Coupling our military strategy to an insistence that the Iraqis meet political benchmarks for reconciliation is also unhelpful. The morass in the government has fueled impatience and confusion while providing no semblance of security to average Iraqis. Leaders are far from arriving at a lasting political settlement. This should not be surprising, since a lasting political solution will not be possible while the military situation remains in constant flux.
This article is not only important because of the content, but also because of the consequences these soldiers will probably face for voicing their opinion. This article was clearly not censored by the military and submitted without the permission of their superiors. Judging by their rank, these soldiers are mid career non-commissioned officers that have a lot to lose by submitting this piece to a major US newspaper. Undoubtedly, these soldiers sat around and discussed the ramifications of sending this article to the New York Times. In the end they chose to stand up for what they believe in regardless of what consequences might come their way. Do these soldiers a favor and take the ten minutes to read their honest opinion: LINK TO ARTICLE
Snipers are not just a buzzword you see in the paper. Snipers are not just found in video games. Snipers are not just pretending to shoot at stuff for a CNN video clip. Snipers are real.
I found out yesterday that a good friend of mine was shot by a Sniper in Iraq. In an instant, a single bullet to the neck paralyzed him from the neck down (hopefully not permanent).
This was his second tour in Iraq and he planned on getting out of the Army when he got home in a few months.
Please say a prayer for him and all soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Next time you hear a politician try to justify the continuation of the war in Iraq by comparing it to World War 2, please use this blog post to shut them up.
Today the USA Today released a story that summarized the fielding of the military's upgrade to the HMMWV (Hummer). The Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle (MRAP) is the latest innovation in troop transport and its invention is a direct response to the ineffectiveness of the HMMWV in protecting soldiers from mines and IEDs. The new Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, was quoted as saying:
Armored Humvees were "the best we had," Gates said. "Now we have something better, and we're going to get that to the field as best we can."
The article then goes on to state that the Army has 18,000 HMMWVs in Iraq and only 1,100 MRAPs. This small number of MRAPs doesn't really make sense when you read the memo sent out by Gates last week that stated:
Getting the MRAPs is "the highest priority Department of Defense acquisition program," Gates said in a memo last week to the secretaries of the Army and Navy.
If that is really the highest priority, then how come the Army has only 1,100 MRAPs in Iraq right now? What does this have to do with World War 2? Well, during WW2 President Franklin Roosevelt banned the production of civilian automobiles so that the car manufacturing plants could dedicate 100% of their effort to churning out as many tanks as possible to support the soldiers overseas (another reason was to save on rubber). Take a look at the picture below:
This is a picture of women building tanks at the Richmond Ford Motor Plant. I'm not saying we need to ban the production of all civilian cars; but, please ask yourself if our government is doing everything they possibly can to protect our soldiers by getting them the best possible equipment as soon as possible. Then, when you realize that they aren't, please hold them accountable.
I have a good idea. I think that Congress should work on passing a law that would require all American males to shave their face, each and every day. I hate shaving. The other day I was thinking about how awful it was when I was in Iraq and I had to shave every single day for an entire year. That is when it dawned on me that we should force all American males shave everyday to honor our service members and reflect about the sacrifices they face each day.
In theory this law would pass unanimously because both Democrats and Republicans would be able to see the purpose in it. I feel that Democrats, who contrary to what Rush Limbaugh might say, do support our troops. I think they would be happy to pass this legislation.
The legislation might be a tough sell with Republicans because they don't really like to have their daily life interrupted by the war on terror and the war in Iraq. They just like to flip on Hannity for a few minutes and make sure that Al-Qaeda hasn't invaded Ohio yet. However, I have a plan to get Republicans online with this. I will put wording in the bill that would make it clear that the reason we are doing this is a direct response to the Taliban. The Taliban is famous for forcing men to have facial hair, specifically long beards. I will explain to the Republicans that by forcing American males to shave everyday we are spitting in the face of the Taliban! This will fool them and the bill would be passed into law!
In all seriousness. I think if all Americans had to reflect on the war and suffer for even five minutes a day our troops would probably be coming home a lot sooner.
