Scripps article uncritically reported that RNSC attack ad contains quotes from U.S. troops
In an April 26 article, Scripps News Service reported that Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) would not criticize the recent assertion by his state's Democratic colleague, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, that the Iraq war "is lost," which Reid followed up by stating that the war "can only be won diplomatically, politically, and economically." The article noted that the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which Ensign heads, recently released an "Internet advertisement that used Reid's words to campaign against Senate Democrats up for reelection in 2008." Scripps asserted that the ad features "written comments from U.S. troops" and then uncritically reported the claim by an NRSC spokeswoman that the comments were taken from letters "sent to a blogger who asked troops to write in to tell the majority leader how they felt about his comment." Yet the article did not mention that the "blogger" the NRSC spokeswoman referred to is right-wing pundit Michelle Malkin or that two of the five quotes used in the ad came from letters sent to Malkin signed by one person who included only a first name and another who used only initials. The other two identified themselves as "LT Jason Nichols, USN" (who was quoted twice in the ad) and "SPC Matthew S Gangwer."
Moreover, the article reported that one of the quotes from the ad read: "To be brief, your words are killing us." However, it did not mention that the quote came from Nichols, according to Malkin's weblog. Nichols founded Appeal for Courage, which describes itself as "a non-partisan, grass-roots effort to communicate to Congress the troops' desire to remain in Iraq until [their] mission is complete." The organization encourages active duty military to sign a petition which reads:
As an American currently serving my nation in uniform, I respectfully urge my political leaders in Congress to fully support our mission in Iraq and halt any calls for retreat. I also respectfully urge my political leaders to actively oppose media efforts which embolden my enemy while demoralizing American support at home. The War in Iraq is a necessary and just effort to bring freedom to the Middle East and protect America from further attack.
The article noted that "Reid and Ensign have an agreement not to criticize each other publicly" and that Ensign had a hand in editing the ad. Ensign was quoted as saying, "One of the first drafts that came out was directly going after him." The article then noted specific details about the ad:
The first ad, which went up on the Republican committee's Web site Sunday, chastises Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, who is considered one of the more vulnerable Democrats in 2008.
Landrieu's face is on the ad, but Reid provides the voice. His "this war is lost" quote is repeated 10 times as written comments from U.S. troops flash across the screen. "To be brief, your words are killing us," reads one.
Similar ads targeting other senators started running online Monday.
Although the ad says the letters were "to the Democrat majority leader," they actually were sent to a blogger who asked troops to write in to tell the majority leader how they felt about his comment, a spokeswoman for the Republican committee said.
The ad cites "michellemalkin.com" as the source of the quotes it attributes to U.S. troops critical of Reid's statement. One quote reads: "I am appalled at your callous disregard for the impact of your words." According to an April 20 post on Malkin's weblog, this quote appears to be part of a letter from "Reader Karl," who described himself as a "disabled veteran." Another quote is taken from a letter by "CMK" posted in the same entry. In that letter, "CMK" identified herself* as "a 26 year veteran, Senior Master Sergeant in the Michigan Air National Guard."
* CORRECTION: This sentence originally read: " 'CMK' identified
himself or herself as 'a 26 year veteran, Senior Master Sergeant in the Michigan Air National
Guard,' " suggesting that "CMK" had not identified her
gender in her letter posted
at michellemalkin.com. In fact, in the letter, "CMK" identified
herself as "a wife and a mother." Media Matters for America
regrets the error.
"To be brief, your words are killing us,"
No, George Bush's idiotic fantasyland policies are killing you.
with a little help from drooling zombies like Malkin.
To be Michelle Malkin is a Hack and shouldn't be sited as a source for anything.
Malkin the one of the most hateful people in media today . I rank her up there with Coulter.
So, readers of Michele Malkin don't support the efforts of our representatives in Congress?
Is that supposed to surprise us?
1. Listeners/readers of Malkin are not representative of the military at large.
2. One could find virtually any opinion about our military in Iraq if one tried hard enough!
BTW, even if a deadline for lgetting out of Iraq was set, I don't think these Malkin fans would be forced to leave.Not that I think these are real quotes from troops, but if they are...
If you listen to John McCain, who "talks to the troops all the time," you'll find that they support the mission and want to stay until it's completed (whatever that means).
If you listen to Congressman Murtha, who also "talks to the troops all the time," you'll hear the opposite.
The troops, like the country, are divided on this, but I think that they probably are more closely divided than the nation as a whole.
I'm pretty sure, however, that a majority of them have seen the futility of this war.
OK!! Swift boat- round two! Now it's called 'internet hoax'...
I'm sure the only line wanted from troops is to be pro-Iraq, however, their opinions shouldn't matter because the ones that are in uniform and against this war are reminded not to speak out against the glorious commander-in-chief. Bush and all the other right wing fringe want the American people to think the military supports this load of crap. It's over nut jobs! the war is lost and any more loss of life is ...... just heartbreaking....
I'm currently reading the book, "In the Company of Soldiers" about the 101st Airborne at the start of Iraq. And there is one thing that really stood out for me in this book. The author, while using the latrine, notices some graffiti in there, and takes note of it. It says:
"If you had voted for Gore, you wouldn't be here."
I do recommend reading this book though. I haven't finished it yet, but I think it does give a good impression as to how Gen. Petraeus' mind works, as it is mostly about him, and since he's now leading the whole thing over there now, it's worth taking a look at. Actually, even if he wasn't leading the whole thing, it's still worth a look.
Back on topic. Anyone who uses Malkin for sourcing, well, they're asking for trouble and or inaccuracies galore. Now, if you want an opinion, direct from her, yes, by all means, source her then, but on actual facts, she's a bit "suspect" I might say.
Hey, let's have some respect for Malkin! Let's give her the support she deserves. After all, she's one of the troops. Anyone as gung-ho as her has to be over there, putting her life on the line.
What? She doesn't serve? She just wants others to serve? To lose their limbs and their lives?
Never mind. Keep loading the howitzers with derision and fire at will.
She is willing to cheerlead...
[link to wonkette.com]
Truly frightening.
Yikes, Mick! That is one of the saddest spectacles I've ever seen.I wonder whose idea that video was. I'm guessing BilldO suggested the cheerleader outfit, and I don't even want to think about how "hot" this probably is to old Republicans.
Whatta loser. I mean, respected pundit.
Geez, that was Murtha and Kerry that were described as chickens.
Meanwhile, Bush, Cheney, and Malkin are gutsy...as long as someone else's guts are spilling into the sand.
The rich got their tax cuts. The neocons decided on their decider. The Young Republicans got to watch the smart bombs on the Discovery Channel. Now, it's time for the rich, the Bush voters, and the Young Republicans to report. That way, the troops can come home. Now, move it, recruits, move it!
"...your words are killing us,"
I'm having a little trouble following this logic. The argument went that if timetables were set for troop withdrawals then the "enemy" would simply sit back and wait until we left Iraq and then mount its winning offensives. How are Harry Reid's comments that if we follow Bush's (non)plan then the military "war is lost" killing our troops at the moment? Emboldening the enemy, they say? The enemy was already emboldened... we never have maintained permanenet control over the contested areas of Iraq. As soon as we get an area settled down we leave, and then the violence starts up all over again. Look at Talafar as but one example. It's a no-win situation, militarily speaking. Had Bush sent 400,000 troops into Iraq from the get-go we wouldn't be in this mess. But noooo... Rumsfeld knew what he was doing when he called for only 140,000 troops, huh?
Maybe a differing opinion will count if it's from a card-carying lib so how's this one?
With all due respect, I strongly disagree. Senator Reid’s statement is not based on military facts on the ground in Iraq and does not advance our cause there. - Sen. Joe (former dem VP candidate) Lieberman
But I guess he doesn't since he's officially an independent. Then again he DID do a numeber on the democrat he faced in his re-election race. Personally, I'd like to see us get out of Iraq but then again, I'm prepared for the potential diasaster that might happen after we leave. The question you have to ask yourself as a "compassionate" lib is - are you prepared for what will happen if we pull out too soon?
"are you prepared for what will happen if we pull out too soon?"
Yes...
What will happen when we leave? The same thing that is happening while we are there, without billions of dollars going unaccounted for.
It's simple, do I think the administration can turn this around? No.
Is it fair to let the Iraqis battle it out for a government of there choosing? Yes.
she wont be pregnant its called the catholic method
Lieberman's a Republican, he just hasn't filed the papers.
As far as what will happen if we pull out too soon, when is too soon?
And what is going to happen? Are the so-called terrorists going to follow us back to the US of A as McCain keeps saying? I think not. How are they going to get here? Are they going to bomb us with their "air force" or mount an invasion force using their "navy". I keep hearing these doomsday predictions of what happens if we leave too soon, except nobody can provide any backing as to what these scenarios are going to be. How, on one hand, as the current administration keeps telling us, that we're winning the war on terror. That we have them on the run. Yet, on the other side of their mouth they're also saying that if we leave too soon the terrorists are going to come and get us. So which is it? Are we winning? Or are the terrorists going to come and get us? Because it can't be both at the same time. Anyway, the chances, statistically, of someone getting killed inside the USA by a terrorist are so remote and so staggeringly unlikely that it isn't something the average American should even worry about.
Does this mean we stop pursuing terrorists? No, we don't. We hunt them down, and either kill them, or toss them into prison somewhere. Are the terrorists in Iraq? Not many of them. I'd start by snooping around Pakistan and Saudi Arabia a little more if I were the US Government.
Magnolia, I don't think this was a "following us home" theme, but the "Post-Vietnam Cambodia" theme.
I know, it's hard to keep up with the propaganda .That's why I tune into Rush sometimes when I'm on the road.Even when the talking points aren't repeated well, I can figure out which ones they're trying to use.
Yeah, the thing that stands out the most is that they can't quite define exactly what a "terrorist" is. Some claim it mean only Al-Qaeda, which in itself is very nevulous and vague. Others that it's any insurgent fighting the hated US invader, even others claim it's all moslems.
In the end, it all looks like a bunch of racist propaganda meant to keep the sheep at home terrified of anything islamic or arab, as Israel wants us to be.
I have two questions
1) Did you REALLY cited Joe Lieberman as a card carrying lib?
2) Are you kidding me?
The question we have to ask is why should we believe that things will get worse if we leave from the same people who have been telling us that things were getting better, the reporters we not giving us a true picture of the "progress" that's being made. And the BEST one of all was "We are winning" from junior November 2006. Can you count the troop deaths since that statement? And you want us to trust you again?
When you have lied for 4 years straight it's hard to believe ANYTHING that comes from your mouth.
what will happen if we pull out too soon
And what is that, exactly? We are not now stopping Sunni from killing Shiite and Shiite from killing Sunni. So, if we leave, presumably Sunni and Shiite will go on killing each other, only people like you will get to blame it on Nancy Pelosi.
I mean, too bad for Nancy, but that's a price I for one am willing to pay to stop the dismemberment, dehumanisation and death of young Americans...
Hey SavageRocks,
You don't have a clue about Connecticut politics or why Lieberman won. It had nothing to do with the war. Joe's been a good earner for the state. that's what matters in local politics.
Joe also had all of the resources of the Republican party in connecticut. the same party that abandoned it's own candidate.
I'm prepared for any outcome of our leaving Iraq. What I'm not prepared for is the lose of one more American life so that the Chickenhawks in power can show us that now that they're old men, they've all of a sudden grown a pair.
As a Marine combat veteran of Afghanistan, who is preparing to deploy to Iraq next year I offer you this:
The American People are defeating the American Military in Iraq.
Media matters? You're damn right it does.
Thanks for nothing B.A.
Semper Fidelis.
Capt. Mike Hendrickson, USMCR
First, if you are a vet, and are deploying, thank you for your service (I have to be skeptical because this is a site where many imposters have said they were in the military and turned out to be video game characters instead).
The only thing that I want to happen is for you to not have to deploy and go back into harm's way. I believe, along with a lot of other people, that what we're doing right now in Iraq is not helping our country and instead is hurting it more. And the media is not "bringing defeat" to our troops, our current administration is. The media does not win or lose wars, how they are persecuted wins wars.
The American people don't want our troops (YOU) dying for the wrong reasons. We don't want you sent to risk your lives on false pretenses and lies. We don't want you on 15 month deployments under the comand of an imbecile. We don't want policing other nations when it has nothing to do with your countries security. We don't want our military stretched so thin that they couldn't be ready if something truly popped of in another part of the country or at home for that matter.
Thanks for your services and if you truly believe you are deploying for the right reasons so be it. Stay safe and watch your back over there. Please understand there are those of us who care about you and don't want your lives put in Jeopardy unless absolutely necessary, this war is not necessary and I fear many of our young men and women are dying in vain.
The American people not only have a RIGHT to decide what policies to support and which to oppose. It is our obligation. The American military does NOT get to dictate to us what we must or mustnt say, believe or protest. The American PEOPLE are the top layer of government NOT the American Military did you miss that in civics class? What policies deserve support do NOT depend on weak attempts at emotional blackmail by ANYONE in or out of the military. The military is under civilian control and the civilian government is OF the people BY the people and FOR the people not dictated by the military.
The war crime in Iraq was lost the second it started. It's a huge corporate piracy raid...send in the Marines and steal the oil fields! How's it feel to be a low-paid, expendable merc for ExxonMobil and Halliburton?
To :Captain Mike Henderson. Nope, I think it is Iraqis that are defeating you. So much for "mission accomplished" "shock and awe" ect. I cannot believe that the American people busy as they are shopping ect. have the time to build and put all those roadside bombs on the roadsides and the suicide bombers.Did the American People sneek over at lunch when I was sleeping?Very tricky of them to make it look like the media did it.Hey lets all stop media ing right away. If we stop mediaing over here will they follow us over there? Blame who ya want dude. The truth is you were let down by your comander and chief.At ease.
Roadside bombs and IEDs will not defeat us in Iraq. Snipers will not defeat us in Iraq. Terrorism will not defeat us in Iraq. The simple fact is that there is not a military, militant or terrorist organization capable of defeating the American military in either Iraq or Afghanistan. The only way we loose, is if you Magnolialover and you Markcyst, convince the rest of America that we should surrender.
It’s easy for both of you to point the finger at the administration and blame George Bush for Iraq because you don't understand the history of warfare. Have you studied Clausewitz, Sun Tzu and Mao? Do you understand "People's War" and the concept of "defeating the superior with the inferior?" Have you taken the time to study the North African debacle of 1942, and how close we came to being defeated by the Nazis?
You can question my service; I don't care. But you and the rest of liberal America needs to turn the map and ask yourselves - what is the impact of success in Iraq? What does the future hold for the middle east and the world? If I supported the work being done in Iraq what kind of impact could it have on a lasting peace? What if Iraq became a moderate Islamic regime allied with Jordan, Egypt and the United States and Europe?
The critical vulnerability for the United States in Iraq is our national will. It can also be a force multiplier.
I would submit to you that publicly supporting a stable democratic Iraq, would be the difference between victory and defeat. Victory equals lasting peace in the middle east. Surrender guarantees that we will be fighting in the sandbox again 10 years from now. If you don't understand that dynamic, you are merely a narrow minded ideologue, ignorant of the lessons of history.
Semper Fidelis
"It’s easy for both of you to point the finger at the administration and blame George Bush for Iraq because you don't understand the history of warfare."
What is the function of the United States Military? How does the coincide with the occupation of Iraq?
For what reasons should the US military be sent to war?How does the coincide with the occupation of Iraq?
Why was the military sent to war with Iraq?
Is it the duty of the US military to police nations?
Is it the duty of the US military to install governments?
If the Iraqis elect a radical regime into power will we support the peoples choice or will we still try to force a moderate Islamic regime?
I am really interested in your opinion on these questions.
"Surrender guarantees that we will be fighting in the sandbox again 10 years from now. "
What do you think is going to happen if we give this administration what they really want? Who said anything about surrendering?
You dont speak for the entire military you speak only for yourself. Since the Stars and Stipes published a poll of those CURRENTLY SERVING IN IRAQ which said 72% of them wanted withdrawl from Iraq within a year. I would say your opinion is a small minority
http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=34538&archive=true
WASHINGTON — Seventy-two percent of troops on the ground in Iraq think U.S. military forces should get out of the country within a year, according to a Zogby poll released Tuesday.
Thanks for covering that beat, Solon! As usual, your edict is the best judgement of the situation. Although not at the end, it most certainly delivers the final word.
Thank you Conley
If indeed you are who you say you are, then on your return to Iraq, we all hope you are able to return home after your tour in one piece. Unfortunately, were you not sent to Iraq to save the US from an imminent threat from that looming mushroom cloud? How do you feel about some of you being sent over without all the necessary equipment? How do you feel about your tours being extended? How do you feel about the scandalolous treatment your comrades faced when they returned wounded? You speak all the great republican talking points. Do you really believe everything you wrote because if you do then you really don't know the history of that region at all. Do you realize why Saddam was successful in ruling with an iron fist because the two religious factions have been at each other for over a thousand years. Do you really think that your little adventure will EVER bring stability to the country or region? For all of you so gung ho on trying to ridicule the democrats for being the only ones wise enough to realize you can not win this militarily, then do you plan on staying over there til the job is done? Will you give up your leave, time home etc., and being so desperate to succeed, just stay there til the job is finished? How do you feel about patrolling the streets while the Iraqi Govt. has two months holidays? And finally, do you really think that the job will ever be done while Bush is in office - of course not, because he wants to leave the job and leave the real proper running of it to the next President. Hopefully it will be someone who puts your interests before his own legacy and stubborness and his inability to admit that he has let a failed policy go on for 4 years and is just now trying to run out the clock. And before you say I have no say being Canadian, I have someone close fighting in Afghanistan right now - the place where you left before the full job was over.
We can see naked imperialism and blatant corporate greed when it rears it's ugly head. Success in Iraq means that the oil industries and the war profiteers make their fortunes on the blood and tears of the Iraqi and American people. Invading and occupying Iraq is a WAR CRIME by the Nuremburg definitions. We attacked an INNOCENT nation that was NOT a threat to us, merely to steal it's resources, install a puppet government, and engage in some racist mass murder. It is a crime AGAINST peace.
Meanwhile, the hunt for bin Laden was abandoned back in 2002. All in the name of the PNAC agenda to grab them oil fields! We know exactly what's been going on.
mxh1818231, I feel bad for you, as I do for all of our troops in Iraq, and I understand how frustrated you must feel, but that does not change the fact that this is not a winnable war.
What is VICTORY, even if we can acheive it? A puppet democracy. If the Iraqi people were allowed to have a "western style" democracy, within 10 years a leader would be voted in that made Saddam Hussein look like Strawberry Shortcake. This is the nature of the people in that region. And, historically, it has worked for them. (This is, of course, keeping in mind that despite the best interests of the military industrial complex in this country -- and people coincidentally ALWAYS tied to the Bush family -- we have NEVER successfully installed a truly successful leader in the Middle East).
The people of this region DO NOT UNDERSTAND our style of Democracy and DO NOT WANT IT ANYWAYS.
And as for the vagaries of the history of war, they are not applicable here -- this is either (pick one) a misguided war against an ideology (which CANNOT work), or an attempt to democratize the Middle East (which REALLY CANNOT work).
Face it -- the only reason we're still in Iraq is to run out the clock and pass the mess on to the next president. Bush's entire life is a series of failures, and by allowing him to control the shiny war toys, we've allowed him to screw up everything.
What is "Victory in Iraq?" Is that when Al Sader and his Hezbollah linked, US hating militia finally takes over? If the war hadn't been lost already, it was lost when we failed to suppress his and the other militias.
This war is an excercise in futility - an extended game of "whackamole."
At one time partition held some slight chance of success; as things stand we run around ineffectually supporting a "government" that controls nothing.
"Victory" involves measurable goals and progress towards them. What are they? We can't even provide basic services like electricity - - that's gonna continue to make us lots of friends as summer approaches.
What have we accomplished there? The entire educated class (and everybody else who can scrape a few bucks together) is fleeing the country. What's left? A whole lot of people who want to kill Americans for one thing.
This situation has been steadily deteriorating for years - how much worse does it have to get before it's as bad as the pullout is predicted to be?
A whole lot more Iraqis are going to die no matter what we do. Why should we also destroy our military while presiding over this disaster?
More importantly, what indication have the fools in Washington given that they are competent to execute a winning strategy - even if one existed?
Hey don't feel sorry for me; I sure as hell don't. I don't need rescuing, neither do the marines that I serve with that volunteered to return to Iraq.One of the posts above laid out all the screwed up things that we have to deal with, as members of the military - substandard equipment, mediocre health care, etc. Guess what? I've been dealing with all of that for my entire 14 years in the Marine Corps. Where was your concern for me 13 years ago when my pay sucked, base housing sucked, health care sucked and my equipment sucked? When I came into the Marine corps as a PFC, President Clinton was in office. Did I blame him? No. Why? Because we have been the bastard step children of the military for the last 231 years. What makes our organization great is that we make marines and win battles, not because of our technological superiority, but because of our esprit de corps, dedication and commitment to victory. That is our history. That is how we attack challenges.I could blame Presidents, Congress and my military leadership all day long, but I don't. I believe in the mission because it is the best chance to impose a lasting peace in the middle east. I understand that no plan survives first contact with the enemy. I understand that mistakes are made in war because people are fallible. I understand that imperfection is compounded on the battlefield because it is the most demanding, dangerous and unforgiving environment on the planet. And I also understand that war is horrific because mistakes cost lives; for both those who fight and those caught in the cross-fire. Again, I ask - why is it impossible for you to turn the map? Why can't you understand the potential benefit of a democratic Iraq? Why have you completely lost perspective on what it will take to be successful in Iraq? This is not about republican talking points, it’s about lasting peace; it’s about the only viable course of action to defeat extremism and terrorism. You can cite a poll from March 2006 and try to tell me that my friends, comrades in arms and fellow servicemen and women don't support the mission. But in the end, you are citing a poll and I am basing my beliefs on real flesh and blood marines, soldiers, sailors, airmen and coastguardsmen. We want to win in Iraq. We want to save our sons and daughters from fighting in the future. We want peace to break out. We want to fight, bleed and risk our lives to make that happen. I am willing to go to Iraq, despite the fact that I leave behind a wife, a daughter of 3 and a daughter of 2. Do you really think I am so stupid and gullible that I would risk leaving them fatherless for some bs talking points?I guess it is easy for you to believe that. You don't know me. You probably don't even know anyone like me. You watch the news and cry for my fallen brothers and sisters, but you don't sympathize; you don't really care about us. If you did, you would support us. You would steal the will of the militant, terrorist and insurgent. You would crush the hope of those who wish that we will be forced to leave Iraq. You would save our lives. But you won't. You’ll continue to cling to pessimism and defeatism. You'll continue to undermine us. You’ll continue to tell yourselves that you support the troops because you don’t want us to suffer. But I will choose to follow my leaders, lead my marines and believe in the man that issued the quote found below: "Hard is not hopeless." - General David H. Petraeus, USASemper Fidelis
Actually I do sympathize. MY father was a 20 year marine and a DI at Parris Island. You make good points about substandard pay and healthcare both things I have supported putting money into for a long time. Your geopolitical analysis I dont buy. I dont think invading the most secular Islamic country in the region did ANYTHING to bring stability whatsoever. Especially since the EXCUSES Bush used were so transparently wrong. EXCUSES not reasons. Since when do you bring democracy anywhere at the end of a gun? Some things cannot be accomplished militarily. Why cant YOU understand that increasing the instability in the region and the hostility to US interference of any kind, which the invasion HAS accomplished isnt the best way for us to foster democratic development especially if that government is seen as a puppet for US interests. I have head this argument before and the blowback has been worse than the problem every time so far. Did overthrowing Mossedegh, in 53 Iran, Arbenze in 54 Guatemala, Goulart in 64 Brazil, or Allende in 73 Chile bring the stability to those regions we claimed it would? No it further DESTABALIZED the regions every time. So now we are basically hearing well it never has worked out so far but hey, THIS TIME, we will bring peace to the valley and prosperity for all and every country in the region will fall in line as soon as we get Iraq to do what we want. Except that is never going to happen. The people see us as occupiers, invaders and aggressors. They arent going to co-operate with out vision for them. They arent going to suddenly decide WE have THEIR best interest in mind. The longer we stay the MORE hostility and resentment we will foster. The neocon wetdream of a domino effect of democracies was REALLY based on the idea we will SCARE them into doing what they are told. It ought to be clear now that that pipedream was ill concieved from the beginning. The military doesnt get to tell civilians what policies to support. I am DEFINITLY supporting the our soldiers. It is reasonable to request we do, I DONT suppor the mission and you have NO right to demand we do. I see my obligation this way. Once a soldier signs up he gives up all rights to question the mission, the ONLY mechanism that exists to keep an unscrupulous politician for using our soldiers lives for anything other than what is crucial to our nation, is public opinion. If I think the mission is not in Americas best interest it OBLIGATES me to support the troops in the way I think best to demand they come home. Whatever your group of peers think the only real way to gauge the opinions of a large group of people is a poll. That is real evidence. The poll says YOUR opinion is in the minority. In demanding the troops be brought home we are supporting them in the way the HUGE MAJORITY of them WANT to be supported.
"Since when do you bring democracy at the end of the gun?"
solon / Tuesday May 1, 2007 01:26:55 PM EST
Since 1944 in the Pacific and 1945 in Europe.
Be advised - 63 years later, the United States still has military forces stationed in Japan and Germany.
The poll you refer to was published in March of 2006 and taken between January and February 2006. I could refer to a number of polls, including one published in the current issue of the Marine Corps Gazette that supports an opposite conclusion; namely that most American's oppose a withdrawl from Iraq before the mission is completed.
Having said that, I do not put much stock in polling numbers as an accurate representation of anything except how a random number of people feel about an issue over a given period of time. Trying to prove a point with numbers that are 14 months old is neither a reliable nor scientific method of analysis.
The bottom line for me - My primary source of information is reporting from military people who are/have been there; marines who I work for; and marines who work for me. If you are getting your information solely from the American press, you don't have the whole picture.
Check out Michael Yon's website. Check out the Multi-National Force Iraq website. Check out the RCT-6 blog. Start rooting through the milbloggers out there. Actually read the stuff you don't agree with. You might even want to check out my blog - www.therosegarden.typepad.com. My views might surprise you.
Semper Fidelis.
I did go and read your blog and found it very interesting. I enjoyed seeing the image of the troops holding up that crazy sign after Republicans made a heyday out of John Kerry's botched joke. I also enjoyed your article "Why I voted for Rick Santorum. I just wanted to enquire though when you say you are going to Iraq next year, in what capacity? Your March 6/07 blog piece says you had involvement with Walter Reed in 1992 prior to boot camp, with Water Reed and Bethesda in 2005 and also with Veteran's Affairs during your discharge from active duty in 2006. So does that mean you have volunteered to go back on active duty and go to Iraq to fight or will you be serving in some other capacity since you seem to mention you have had dealings with veteran"s affairs now?
Canadian1106:
I left active duty in 2006 to assist in the care of a terminal ill family member.
When I left active dury, I was required (like every othe service member) to go through the VA claims process. Prior to leaving active duty, while I was stationed in Quantico, VA, I recieved treatment at both Walter Reed and Bethesda. Prior to boot camp, like every other American wanting to join the military, I was required to go through the Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) which was my first experience with military medicine. Combat medicine is excellent. Support medicine is hit or miss.
After being in the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR) for about 2 months, I was contacted and offered a company commander position at a USMCR Anit-Terrorism unit in New York State. Although it would have been a great opportunity, I decided to take a position at a Rifle Company closer to my home. I will likely deploy as a Rifle Platoon Commander.
As a related side bar: you may recall that the Marine Corps decided to recall members of the IRR to active duty last summer. It may interest you to know that that was the second time that the IRR was recalled since 2001. The first time - the Marine Corps had 3000+ volunteers. After a discussion with USMC personnel managers, I decided to go volunteer to go back to the Active Reserve for 2 reasons: 1) Because of my family issues, I didn't want to risk being recalled to active duty after just leaving active duty. I was probably the only recent EWS graduate and Infantry Officer in the IRR who could slide right into a Company Commander billet with virtually no follow on training. Technically I was "untouchable" because I was on my first year in the IRR, however USMC personnel told me that it was only a matter of time before someone realized my qualifications; and 2) I would much rather have had time to train with a unit, do the pre-combat deployment work-ups and deploy with a rifle company that I knew well; snapping into a new company in Iraq was not something I relished.
Hope that answers your question.
As for the VA - the VA takes care of all former active duty service members, including active reservists and guardsmen not on active duty. Those reserve members who have been called to active duty for combat assignments, also rate VA services once they return from active service.
How does it feel to be a low-paid merc for Halliburton and Cheney's stock portfolio? Do you think they'll care if you get your testicles blown off by an IED? You can shout Semper Fi even when you're laying in a pool of your own blood, staring at what remains of your legs, but it won't change the fact that you've been used and abused by a bunch of psychopathic politicians to make their buddies richer at your expense.
You want to serve your nation and help your fellow Marines? Refuse to participate in a war crime and demand they be brought home NOW!
"You can shout Semper Fi even when you're laying in a pool of your own blood, staring at what remains of your legs, but it won't change the fact that you've been used and abused by a bunch of psychopathic politicians to make their buddies richer at your expense."
redking75687 / Tuesday May 1, 2007 10:03:46 PM EST
Nice post. You are a true patriot.
Why don't you find Marine Staff Sergeant Marcus Golczynski's son (seen here acepting the flag from his father's casket http://www.blackfive.net/main/2007/04/marine_staff_se.html) and tell him the same thing.
I'm just thankful that people like you refuse to serve.
Semper Fidelis.