Eight years ago our military forces were committed to freeing the Iraqi people from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein & Company. Suddenly I find myself wondering, "Did the people of Iraq even desire our help, or did we - once again - just assume the mantle of the Global Police Force?".
The Allied Coalition Forces in Iraq have sacrificed a total of approximately 4,700 ±1% young lives to "free" the Iraqi people. Eight years later we are still there trying to accomplish the task and.or maintain some level of "freedom". And, from the look of things, we may still be there in 2017! Could it be that the majority of Iraqis just don't give a rats ass about our brand of freedom, and just wanted to be out from under Hussein's thumb? Perhaps their idea of freedom is the freedom to be ruled by the Taliban - or some other Islamic fundamentalist concept. The South Vietnamese people had essentially the same situation - and demonstrated the same attitude. The South Vietnamese goverment wanted help holding on, but the people in general didn't seem to care who was running the show, so long as they had their own little farm or rice paddy to work in. And they demonstrated this lack of interest in the way they "fought" against the North Vietnamese. The Iraqi's seem to have a corrupt government (but then, who doesn't?), and military and police forces that are largely in confused disarray! The Iraqi people either don't care, or are content to let the outsiders do all the fighting for them. The battles seem to be primarily composed of western outsiders fighting Arabic outsiders - the "western invaders" vs. the "Islamic incursionists". Where are the Iraqi forces?
Of those roughly 4,700 Coalition Forces lives lost, 4,375 (94%) are the lives of young Americans!
Then we got sucked into Afghanistan chasing Taliban and al Qaeda phantoms. Judging only from the pictures I have seen, Afghanistan has an unearthly appearance about it. There is virtually nothing green in the entire country! It's probably 90% dirt and dirt derivatives -sand, dirt, mud and rocks, occasionally interspersed with rocks, mud, dirt and sand. This desolate landscape looks like it belongs more on the Moon than it does on planet Earth. No wonder their main export is opium... anything else refuses to grow under those conditions! In Afghanistan the figures are 1,533 total Coalition fatalities, with 930 being American deaths (rounds off to 61%).
Why do I have an extremely difficult time believing that the CIA, Britain's MI-5 and MI-6, and Israel's Mossad - supposedly the top intelligence agencies in the free world - have no idea where Osama bin Laden is hiding? How easy can it be to hide a really ugly 6'4" Arab who needs daily dialysis, and is surrounded by a couple of dozen men carrying sub-machine guns? Somebody knows exactly where he is - it's just not profitable enough to divulge that information at this point in time. Since $25,000,000 isn't enough of a reward, money must not be the required currency. What else is there? Political currency is most probably the preferred method of payment... power! Our own intelligence agencies (FBI, CIA, NSA, etc,) are so territorial that they don't even share information between them at the inter-agency level. That being said... how can we be so naive as to expect the exchange of intelligence information at the international level?
So we now have a substantial investment in human lives, as well as an astronomical financial investment in the world's largest sandbox. Investments that the permanent occupants of the region don't seem willing to make themselves! Is that not UNBELIEVABLE? Are we the dumbest people on the planet, or what?
What we seem to have there is the philosophy of our Welfare System on STEROIDS! "Give to those who are incompetent, illiterate, or just too lazy to provide for themselves." We can train their military and police forces - we can teach them the mechanics of democracy. What we cannot do is supersede 1,500 years of culture and religious tradition, nor can we instill in them the desire and the motivation to cast off the shroud of religious and social tyranny in favor of freedom. America's type of freedom is a concept with which the bulk of Arabs have little or no familiarity, and for which they have virtually no respect. The mindset seems to be one of: "To endure the constraints which others force upon you as freedom is strength. To be free to choose those things which make up one's life is surely a sign of weakness."
I support our troops and their efforts wherever they may be deployed. But those deployments can only be successful when there is the full commitment of our government behind them, not some half-assed, namby-pamby political CJ telling the battlefield commanders how they may fight the battle. THEY SHOULD ALWAYS BE ALLOWED TO FIGHT TO WIN! We should have learned that from the Korean "police action"... but we didn't. We should have learned that lesson from Vietnam War... but, apparently we didn't. Politicians (the scum of the Earth) dictated the conditions under which our military commanders would fight. Both encounters were non-victories - and at tremendous cost! Let the warriors do that which they have trained for - fight and win wars, and let the politicians do what they do best - plunder the treasury and nothing! Let the Generals command, and the politicians observe.
The Obama "Rules of Engagement" are basically ridiculous! Rules like these could not possibly be set forth by anybody who wished to win a military confrontation:
There will be no night or surprise searches.
Villages have to be warned prior to searchers.
U.S. soldiers may not fire on the enemy unless the enemy is preparing to fire first.
U.S. forces could not engage the enemy if civilians are present, and troops can fire at an insurgent if they catch them placing an IED but not if they're leaving the site of where they just placed one.
These Rules of Engagement (ROE) are not that far from those given during Vietnam. The idiocy of such "rules" becomes especially clear since the enemy has only one rule - Kill as many of the infidel dogs as you can! I'm surprised there's not a ROE stating:
"You cannot attack if you suspect the enemy has inferior weaponry." or
"You cannot attack if you think the enemy has poor dental hygiene."
A government that does not give it's military complete support will find itself without the support of that military in time of need.
Showing posts with label Iraq war. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iraq war. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Lt. Colonel Allen B. West - AMERICAN PATRIOT AND LEADER WITH INTEGRITY!
A few days ago I received the below in an email from a friend. I was struck what I read, and was moved to do some research on the author - Lt. Col Allen B. West, US Army, Retired. The results of my research follow this open letter by a man who "tells it like it is". I post this with the Colonel's kind permission:
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
Lieutenant Colonel Allen B West (US Army, Ret) Statement on Fort Hood
Shooting.
"Tragedy at Ft Hood"
This past Thursday 13 American Soldiers were killed and another 30 wounded at a horrific mass shooting at US Army installation, Ft Hood Texas. As I watched in horror and then anger I recalled my two years of final service in the Army as a Battalion Commander at Ft Hood, 2002-2004.
My wife and two daughters were stunned at the incident having lived on the post in family housing. A military installation, whether it is Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine, or Coast Guard, is supposed to be a safe sanctuary for our Warriors and their families. It is intended to provide a home whereby our "Band of Brothers and Sisters" can find solace and bond beyond just the foxhole but as family units.
A military installation is supposed to be a place where our Warriors train for war, to serve and protect our Nation. On Thursday, 5 November 2009 Ft Hood became a part of the battlefield in the war against Islamic totalitarianism and state sponsored terrorism.
There may be those who feel threatened by my words and would even recommend they not be uttered. To those individuals I say step aside because now is not the time for cowardice. Our Country has become so paralyzed by political correctness that we have allowed a vile and determined enemy to breach what should be the safest place in America, an Army post.
We have become so politically correct that our media is more concerned about the stress of the shooter, Major Nidal Malik Hasan. The misplaced benevolence intending to portray him as a victim is despicable. The fact that there are some who have now created an entire new classification called; "pre-virtual vicarious Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)" is unconscionable. This is not a "man caused disaster". It is what it is, an Islamic jihadist attack.
We have seen this before in 2003 when a SGT Hasan of the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) threw hand grenades and opened fire into his Commanding Officer tent in Kuwait. We have seen the foiled attempt of Albanian Muslims who sought to attack Ft Dix, NJ. Recently we saw a young convert to Islam named Carlos Bledsoe travel to Yemen, receive terrorist training, and return to gun down two US Soldiers at a Little Rock, Arkansas Army recruiting station. We thwarted another Islamic terrorist plot in North Carolina which had US Marine Corps Base, Quantico as a target.
What have we done with all these prevalent trends? Nothing. What we see are recalcitrant leaders who are refusing to confront the issue, Islamic terrorist infiltration into America, and possibly further into our Armed Services. Instead we have a multiculturalism and diversity syndrome on steroids. Major Hasan should have never been transferred to Ft Hood, matter of fact he should have been Chaptered from the Army. His previous statements, poor evaluation reports, and the fact that the FBI had him under investigation for jihadist website posting should have been proof positive.
However, what we have is a typical liberal approach find a victim. No , not the 13 and 30 Soldiers and Civilian, but rather the poor shooter. A shooter who we are told was a great American, who loved the Army and serving his Nation and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) stating that his actions had nothing to do with religious belief.
We know that Major Hasan deliberately planned this episode; he did give away his possessions. He stood atop a table in the confined space of the Soldier Readiness Center shouting "Allahu Akhbar", same chant as the 9-11 terrorists and those we fight against overseas in the Iraq and Afghanistan theaters of operation.
No one in leadership seems willing to sound the alarm for the American people; they are therefore complicit in any future attacks. Our Congress should suspend the insidious action to vote on a preposterous and unconstitutional health care bill and resolve the issue of "protecting the American people".
The recent incidents in Dearborn Michigan, Boston Massachusetts, Dallas Texas, and Chicago Illinois should bear witness to the fact that we have an Islamic terrorism issue in America. And don't have CAIR call me and try to issue a vanilla press statement; they are an illegitimate terrorist associated organization which should be disbanded. We have Saudi Arabia funding close to 80% of the mosques in the United States, one right here in South Florida, Pompano Beach. Are we building churches and synagogues in Saudi Arabia? Are "Reaffirms" and "Infidels" allowed travel to Mecca?
So much for peaceful coexistence.
Saudi Arabia is sponsoring radical Imams who enter into our prisons and convert young men into a virulent Shabbiness ideology, one resulting in four individuals wanting to destroy synagogues in New York with plastic explosives. Thank God the explosives were dummy. They are sponsoring textbooks, which present Islamic centric revisionist history in our schools.
We must recognize that there is an urgent need to separate the theo-political radical Islamic ideology out of our American society. We must begin to demand surveillance of suspected Imams and mosques that are spreading hate and preaching the overthrow of our Constitutional Republic... that speech is not protected under First Amendment, it is sedition and if done by an American treason.
There should not be some 30 Islamic terrorist training camps in America that has nothing to do with First Amendment, Freedom of Religion. The Saudis are not our friends and any American political figure who believes such is delusional.
When tolerance becomes a one way street it certainly leads to cultural suicide. We are on that street. Liberals cannot be trusted to defend our Republic, because their sympathies obviously lie with their perceived victim, Major Nidal Malik Hasan.
I make no apologies for these words, and anyone angered by them, please, go to Ft Hood and look into the eyes of the real victims. The tragedy at Ft Hood Texas did not have to happen. Consider now the feelings of those there and on every military installation in the world. Consider the feelings of the Warriors deployed into combat zones who now are concerned that their loved ones at home are in a combat zone.
Ft Hood suffered an Islamic jihadist attack, stop the denial, and realize a simple point… the reality of your enemy must become your own.
Steadfast and Loyal,
Lieutenant Colonel Allen B West (US Army, Ret)
_________________________________________________
What I discovered through my own research made me like him even more!"An officer in Iraq who used shock interrogation tactics to thwart an impending attack on American soldiers was punished with forfeiture of two month's pay, according to his lawyer.
Previously faced with the possibility of a court martial, Lt. Col. Allen B. West accepted Article 15 non-judicial punishment from the commanding general of the 4th Infantry Division at a hearing today in Tikrit, Iraq, said Neal A. Puckett, a retired Marine officer.
Puckett said the loss of pay amounts to $5,000.
"I'm pleased that it's over with," West told WorldNetDaily by telephone from San Antonio, Texas. "But I thought that taking $5,000 away from a guy who is about to retire was a little bit unnecessary."
"I didn't think that needed to be part of a sentence in order to send whatever message the commanding general thought he needed to send," he continued.
"Simply a letter of reprimand should have done it," Puckett insisted.
At his preliminary hearing, West acknowledged he allowed two soldiers to beat an Iraqi policeman who refused to reveal details of an ambush plot and fired his pistol near the man's head, threatening to kill him.
As WorldNetDaily reported, under threat of an attack, West took charge of the interrogation of an Iraqi policeman, Yahya Jhodri Hamoody, determined to flush out details as he warned subordinates "it could get ugly." Threatening to kill the Iraqi if he didn't talk, West fired a pistol near the policeman's head.
The scared policeman then immediately disclosed the information, leading to the arrest of two Iraqis last August and cessation of attacks on West's 4th Infantry Division battalion.
At the hearing last month, West was asked by his defense attorney if he would do it again.
"If it's about the lives of my men and their safety, I'd go through hell with a gasoline can." he said.
YA GOTTA LOVE A GUY LIKE THIS!
He is presently running for election as the Congressman from Florida's 22nd Congressional District... GOOD LUCK to him!!
THEN VOTE FOR THE CHANGES YOU DO WANT!
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
"May You Live In Interesting Times" - ancient Chinese curse
Interesting times, indeed! Any point in time is "interesting" for somebody... whether they are struggling for their life, or fly fishing in a quiet stream. Interesting is a relative term - relative to humdrum or boring. Our present time is one I find quite interesting.
Among those things of interest to me are the troubles in the middle East, the world-wide recession, the election of a socialist as the President of the United States and his appointment of various incompetents to Cabinet posts, "swine flu"/H1N1 virus, what is essentially the nationalization of two-thirds of the US automotive industry and many of our financial institutions, and the preference a 2" long fish is given over the jobs of 80,000 farm workers - causing an immediate and critical shortage of American grown vegetables from California. Let's look at them one-by-one.
The middle East of which I write consists primarily of Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Pakistan and all the other, relatively calm, "flyover" countries in between.
Afghanistan has its own unique set of problems. For decades (perhaps centuries) Afghanistan's main cash crop has been heroin, and the leadership had been primarily Islamic fundamentalists. The paradox is that, even in a major narcotic producing country such as Afghanistan, drug abuse is illegal. And punishments for breaking their drug laws are much more Draconian than our own. Death is about as severe as a penalty can... get short of perhaps death by torture. Add to that problem a heavy influx of Western military personnel, bringing with them a perception (real or not) of invasion, and a reactive, militant Taliban, and you have a fine recipe for chaos! The intelligent thing for the Taliban to do? Sit quietly and do nothing. Sooner than later, the Western forces will depart, and then Aghanistan can go back to business as usual. Turn that blind eye toward the heroin poppy crops and drug "smuggling" (nudge-nudge, wink-wink), reinstate Sharia law, subjugate females again ... all the fun things of Islam.
Iraq gets the same recommendation: cool your heels until the West leaves, then complete your struggle for control against the democratically elected government. They will quickly fold, and you win! Why fight against a multinational force with superior technology, weaponry, and training. You have something they don't... the desire to be there! Leave them alone and they will get bored and go back to wherever they came from. They are not there to take over your country. Besides... who but you would want it? I see it as nothing more than a gigantic litter box!
Pakistan... what can I say about Pakistan? They're having some internal strife, caused by the Taliban in the Swat valley. They also seem to have the motivation, and the forces and necessary logistics ability, to deal with that strife. The West should just sit back and watch from afar, as the situation there develops. Let the Pakistanis decide their own destiny. If the government asks for assistance perhaps provide logistical support, but no "boots on the ground".
The real problem in the middle East is Iran. Perhaps not the people of Iran, but the mentally deranged leadership of Iran. Their "elected" president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and their religous leader - who is the actual power in Iran - Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, are two nuts from the same tree. First of all, they believe that Israel should be "wiped from the face of the Earth", which is a position that sounds pretty much non-negotiable right now. It's almost as if "Kill the Jews, and Death to The Great Satan (that's the USA)" has become their national motto. Add to that attitude, the fact that today, May 20th 2009, Iran announced the successful launch of a Sajjil-2 missile with approximately a 1,200-1,550 mile (2000-2500km) range, which can easily reach into Israel. Now, throw in Iran's unmonitored, super-secret nuclear program, and Israel has a genuine reason for concern. In the past, the surrounding Arab nations have discovered that Israel does not like surprises from outside their country. In fact, when it comes time for somebody to jump up and yell, "SURPRISE!!", it's the Israelis who prefer that role. It is not outside the realm of belief that, for some time, Israel has been busying themselves developing strategies to deal with just that type of situation before it becomes a problem for them. Can you say preemptive strike? History has shown that the Israelis don't start trouble where there is none - they specialize in ending those troubles!
And, speaking of surprises... did the world-wide recession come as a surprise to you? It caught me off-guard, for sure. Luckily, I have no personal investments, or at least no direct personal investments to watch evaporate. I'm sure my credit union has some going with my money, but I still feel that it's relatively safe, even though my money may be inflated more than the Goodyear blimp. For decades, The USA has been the world's largest consumer of those things we call "consumables". We have done our part! Our consuming of consumables made consumption by lesser consumers look miserly. So what happened? Unfortunately, I do not have even a tenuous grasp of international economics, so I can't make an educated guess. What I can do is provide this quote attributed to Abraham Lincoln:
Eliminating the critical irrigation system to the largest single produce-growing area of our country - California - to save a 2" long freshwater smelt! However, smelt are not naturally freshwater fish, but were introduced into the freshwater ecosystem by man! Isn't that interesting? Somebody needs to start a "SAVE THE HUMANS" campaign!
There is always a chance I could be wrong about this, but we certainly do live in "interesting times".
Among those things of interest to me are the troubles in the middle East, the world-wide recession, the election of a socialist as the President of the United States and his appointment of various incompetents to Cabinet posts, "swine flu"/H1N1 virus, what is essentially the nationalization of two-thirds of the US automotive industry and many of our financial institutions, and the preference a 2" long fish is given over the jobs of 80,000 farm workers - causing an immediate and critical shortage of American grown vegetables from California. Let's look at them one-by-one.
The middle East of which I write consists primarily of Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Pakistan and all the other, relatively calm, "flyover" countries in between.
Afghanistan has its own unique set of problems. For decades (perhaps centuries) Afghanistan's main cash crop has been heroin, and the leadership had been primarily Islamic fundamentalists. The paradox is that, even in a major narcotic producing country such as Afghanistan, drug abuse is illegal. And punishments for breaking their drug laws are much more Draconian than our own. Death is about as severe as a penalty can... get short of perhaps death by torture. Add to that problem a heavy influx of Western military personnel, bringing with them a perception (real or not) of invasion, and a reactive, militant Taliban, and you have a fine recipe for chaos! The intelligent thing for the Taliban to do? Sit quietly and do nothing. Sooner than later, the Western forces will depart, and then Aghanistan can go back to business as usual. Turn that blind eye toward the heroin poppy crops and drug "smuggling" (nudge-nudge, wink-wink), reinstate Sharia law, subjugate females again ... all the fun things of Islam.
Iraq gets the same recommendation: cool your heels until the West leaves, then complete your struggle for control against the democratically elected government. They will quickly fold, and you win! Why fight against a multinational force with superior technology, weaponry, and training. You have something they don't... the desire to be there! Leave them alone and they will get bored and go back to wherever they came from. They are not there to take over your country. Besides... who but you would want it? I see it as nothing more than a gigantic litter box!
Pakistan... what can I say about Pakistan? They're having some internal strife, caused by the Taliban in the Swat valley. They also seem to have the motivation, and the forces and necessary logistics ability, to deal with that strife. The West should just sit back and watch from afar, as the situation there develops. Let the Pakistanis decide their own destiny. If the government asks for assistance perhaps provide logistical support, but no "boots on the ground".
The real problem in the middle East is Iran. Perhaps not the people of Iran, but the mentally deranged leadership of Iran. Their "elected" president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and their religous leader - who is the actual power in Iran - Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, are two nuts from the same tree. First of all, they believe that Israel should be "wiped from the face of the Earth", which is a position that sounds pretty much non-negotiable right now. It's almost as if "Kill the Jews, and Death to The Great Satan (that's the USA)" has become their national motto. Add to that attitude, the fact that today, May 20th 2009, Iran announced the successful launch of a Sajjil-2 missile with approximately a 1,200-1,550 mile (2000-2500km) range, which can easily reach into Israel. Now, throw in Iran's unmonitored, super-secret nuclear program, and Israel has a genuine reason for concern. In the past, the surrounding Arab nations have discovered that Israel does not like surprises from outside their country. In fact, when it comes time for somebody to jump up and yell, "SURPRISE!!", it's the Israelis who prefer that role. It is not outside the realm of belief that, for some time, Israel has been busying themselves developing strategies to deal with just that type of situation before it becomes a problem for them. Can you say preemptive strike? History has shown that the Israelis don't start trouble where there is none - they specialize in ending those troubles!
And, speaking of surprises... did the world-wide recession come as a surprise to you? It caught me off-guard, for sure. Luckily, I have no personal investments, or at least no direct personal investments to watch evaporate. I'm sure my credit union has some going with my money, but I still feel that it's relatively safe, even though my money may be inflated more than the Goodyear blimp. For decades, The USA has been the world's largest consumer of those things we call "consumables". We have done our part! Our consuming of consumables made consumption by lesser consumers look miserly. So what happened? Unfortunately, I do not have even a tenuous grasp of international economics, so I can't make an educated guess. What I can do is provide this quote attributed to Abraham Lincoln:
1. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
2. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
3. You cannot help small men up by tearing big men down.
4. You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
5. You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
6. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.
5. You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
6. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.
7. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
8. You cannot establish sound social security on borrowed money.
8. You cannot establish sound social security on borrowed money.
9. You cannot build character and courage by taking away a man's initiative and independence.
10. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves.
Abraham Lincoln
Since the 1940s these “Ten Points” attributed to Lincoln have been widely reprinted. They have appeared in such places as magazines, Christmas cards, and the Congressional Record. However, the Library of Congress and Lincoln scholars believe that any connection made between Lincoln and the “Ten Points” is spurious. On the other hand, they are "good ol' homespun, common sense" statements - the type for which Lincoln was known.
As for the President and his Cabinet appointments - what is, is! Sadly, the American people must now live (hopefully) with it. I find Obama's apparent lack of birth certification interesting...
"Swine flu"... SCARY! Well worth being aware of, but not worth putting oneself into panic-overdrive. It's interesting that there have been relatively few fatalities from the H1N1.
Nationalizing private industry and financial institutions is socialism at its finest! Next will be the unsuccessful attempts at firearms confiscation, control of food supplies by banning home gardens, rationing of fuels, national health care, etc. It will be interesting to see just how all that plays out.
10. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves.
Abraham Lincoln
Since the 1940s these “Ten Points” attributed to Lincoln have been widely reprinted. They have appeared in such places as magazines, Christmas cards, and the Congressional Record. However, the Library of Congress and Lincoln scholars believe that any connection made between Lincoln and the “Ten Points” is spurious. On the other hand, they are "good ol' homespun, common sense" statements - the type for which Lincoln was known.
As for the President and his Cabinet appointments - what is, is! Sadly, the American people must now live (hopefully) with it. I find Obama's apparent lack of birth certification interesting...
"Swine flu"... SCARY! Well worth being aware of, but not worth putting oneself into panic-overdrive. It's interesting that there have been relatively few fatalities from the H1N1.
Nationalizing private industry and financial institutions is socialism at its finest! Next will be the unsuccessful attempts at firearms confiscation, control of food supplies by banning home gardens, rationing of fuels, national health care, etc. It will be interesting to see just how all that plays out.
Eliminating the critical irrigation system to the largest single produce-growing area of our country - California - to save a 2" long freshwater smelt! However, smelt are not naturally freshwater fish, but were introduced into the freshwater ecosystem by man! Isn't that interesting? Somebody needs to start a "SAVE THE HUMANS" campaign!
There is always a chance I could be wrong about this, but we certainly do live in "interesting times".
Monday, May 11, 2009
"U.S. Soldier In Iraq Shoots Dead Five Comrades"
A headline from today's Reuters News Service online edition, broadcasts that an Army Sergeant killed five other U.S soldiers at Camp Liberty, "a sprawling military base northeast of Baghdad airport that houses thousands of U.S. troops." The article goes on to say, "The soldier walked into a center for soldiers who are experiencing stress and opened fire, killing the five." A later television news report said that the Sergeant had his weapon taken away from him earlier in the day after an argument, but that he apparently found another one. Exactly where is the surprise in that accomplishment? A soldier in a combat zone, with thousands of other armed personnel around him, managed to access a weapon other than his own... SURPRISE! (As I continue, I will use the term "soldier" as all-inclusive - embracing Army, Navy, Marine and Air Force personnel.)
Where did the soldier do this? "A center for soldiers who are experiencing stress." The initial "guesses" are that he was suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, or PTSD. Ya THINK? Am I the first person to realize that not everybody, no matter how big and macho they seem, can wrap their mind around the stresses of prolonged combat. I think this is especially true of those who serve multiple tours in a war zone. Many members of our military services have literally "dodged the bullet", and many have also done it more than once.
Would it not be "normal" for a soldier to have a significant increase in apprehension each time he was reassigned to Iraq or Afghanistan? Some soldiers have served three or more tours in those areas of armed confrontation, and they can force themselves to perform the routine physical tasks required of them because those tasks are necessary to their survival. The body continues to function, even as the mind suffers - and in some cases the mind cracks - under the psychological weight of the things that soldier has had to do to protect himself and his friends. A normal person will reconcile those acts under the intellectual heading of "it was him or me", but how and where do those acts get reconciled emotionally... or do they?
Existing in a war zone is something that has to be experienced to be fully understood. The first thing a soldier has to come to grips with is that there is a very distinct possibility that he could be killed at any given instant 24 hours a day. Your first thought now is, "That's true everywhere, not just in a combat zone! I could get hit by a car crossing the street, or slip and fall in the bath, or an elephant could fall out of a tree and come crashing through my roof and kill me." The difference is that the car wasn't aimed at you, your bathtub didn't have a landmine in it, and the elephant was a ridiculous example you just made up to try to put me off my game. Violent, intentional, man-made death - the inhumanity of one person toward another, wantonly extinguishing the life of another human being that you don't even know - is not something we "civilized" folks easily accept on an emotional level, therefore we have to intellectualize it. Seeing human beings reduced to pieces and parts on a routine, day-to-day basis will eventually effect most psyches, the only difference is to what degree.
The other things a soldier in Iraq or Afghanistan must deal with are blisteringly hot 140ยบ summer days, spiders the size of a Frisbee, erratic mail from home, concerns about family, and all the other normal concerns that most people have. To the American soldier serving in that part of the world, sleeping in a tent is often considered a luxury. And, any day nobody that you knew was killed, is a better than average day.
Today at Camp Liberty, there were six victims. Five are dead, and one is at least temporarily lost... even to himself. The stressors were more powerful than was his ability to resist and reconcile them. Tonight six families grieve the result of an unexpected, unreasonable, and totally incomprehensible act, perpetrated by an American soldier against his brothers in arms.
In war there are no winners... the victor simply loses less than the vanquished... and second place doesn't get a red ribbon.
Where did the soldier do this? "A center for soldiers who are experiencing stress." The initial "guesses" are that he was suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, or PTSD. Ya THINK? Am I the first person to realize that not everybody, no matter how big and macho they seem, can wrap their mind around the stresses of prolonged combat. I think this is especially true of those who serve multiple tours in a war zone. Many members of our military services have literally "dodged the bullet", and many have also done it more than once.
Would it not be "normal" for a soldier to have a significant increase in apprehension each time he was reassigned to Iraq or Afghanistan? Some soldiers have served three or more tours in those areas of armed confrontation, and they can force themselves to perform the routine physical tasks required of them because those tasks are necessary to their survival. The body continues to function, even as the mind suffers - and in some cases the mind cracks - under the psychological weight of the things that soldier has had to do to protect himself and his friends. A normal person will reconcile those acts under the intellectual heading of "it was him or me", but how and where do those acts get reconciled emotionally... or do they?
Existing in a war zone is something that has to be experienced to be fully understood. The first thing a soldier has to come to grips with is that there is a very distinct possibility that he could be killed at any given instant 24 hours a day. Your first thought now is, "That's true everywhere, not just in a combat zone! I could get hit by a car crossing the street, or slip and fall in the bath, or an elephant could fall out of a tree and come crashing through my roof and kill me." The difference is that the car wasn't aimed at you, your bathtub didn't have a landmine in it, and the elephant was a ridiculous example you just made up to try to put me off my game. Violent, intentional, man-made death - the inhumanity of one person toward another, wantonly extinguishing the life of another human being that you don't even know - is not something we "civilized" folks easily accept on an emotional level, therefore we have to intellectualize it. Seeing human beings reduced to pieces and parts on a routine, day-to-day basis will eventually effect most psyches, the only difference is to what degree.
The other things a soldier in Iraq or Afghanistan must deal with are blisteringly hot 140ยบ summer days, spiders the size of a Frisbee, erratic mail from home, concerns about family, and all the other normal concerns that most people have. To the American soldier serving in that part of the world, sleeping in a tent is often considered a luxury. And, any day nobody that you knew was killed, is a better than average day.
Today at Camp Liberty, there were six victims. Five are dead, and one is at least temporarily lost... even to himself. The stressors were more powerful than was his ability to resist and reconcile them. Tonight six families grieve the result of an unexpected, unreasonable, and totally incomprehensible act, perpetrated by an American soldier against his brothers in arms.
In war there are no winners... the victor simply loses less than the vanquished... and second place doesn't get a red ribbon.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
The Great "Can't Afford It Giveaway" of the Obama Administration
The Palestinian Prime Minister is seeking $2.8 BILLION to rebuild Palestine after Israel retaliated for continued shelling of Israeli settlements from Palestine. In what parallel universe does this make sense? Rewarding the aggressor for creating an unwinnable situation for themselves makes absolutely no sense at any level, yet - according to Time Magazine - the cash-strapped U.S. is expected to provide approximately $900,000,000 (roughly 1/3) of that money. Where are the oil-rich Arab nations, who have gouged the entire world for years on the price of oil? Why are they not providing ALL the money to repair the damage done to Palestine?
I have no sympathy whatsoever for those who provoke a confrontation of any kind, and then come out on the short end. They, by their direct actions, have earned whatever fate befalls them, be it victory or defeat. Had Palestine been victorious, and crushed Israel, there would be rejoicing and celebrations throughout the Muslim world. As things stand, the Palestinians have just provided one more embarrassment to the Arab nations since the Six-Day War of 1967. In that war tiny Israel defeated the armies of the neighboring states of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, even with the nations of Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria contributing troops and arms to the other Arab forces. At the war's end, Israel had gained control of the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights. The results of that war still affect the geopolitics of the region to this day, although Israel has released control of most of those lands.
There is no reward for "Second Place" in a war. There are only victors and the vanquished. The U.S. has been among the recipients of victory in most conflicts/confrontations in which it participated, with two notable exceptions - North Korea, which was more or less called a "draw", and Vietnam, where American politicians lack of support lost the war for us.
Until this year, there had been no incident in the history of the world, where those captured in combat were given civil trials, provided with civilian attorneys, and allowed all the Constitutional rights of a citizen. The Military Tribunal has always tried captured enemy forces (as military if in uniform, and as spies if not in uniform). Spies have always been the recipients of swifter and more severe (i.e. - firing squad) punishment, perhaps just for lacking the courage to don a uniform.
"Assassins" go back to the beginning of recorded history, although the classification of a crime intentionally resulting in the loss of one human life as an "assassination" has, until recently, been restricted to political leaders. John Lennon wasn't "assassinated" - he was murdered. Assassins generally work alone and have only one particular target to deal with at a time. Julius Caesar was assassinated - oddly enough by multiple assassins.
Obama has chosen to disuse the term "enemy combatant" also - perhaps he plans to replace it with "misdirected ally" or "misunderstood friend". Euphemisms change nothing! A spade is still a spade, a shovel is a shovel, and one whom you engage in combat is still an ENEMY COMBATANT!
It follows that the next terms to become politically incorrect are "terrorist" and "terrorism". Granted, one mans' terrorist is another mans' freedom fighter, but when you are on the receiving end of an attack by one or more persons dressed to blend in with the local population, and wearing explosive underwear, parking a bomb-laden vehicle, or firing full-automatic weapons, you often fail to see the "freedom fighter". If commandeering airplanes and flying them into heavily-populated buildings, or setting off bombs in crowded civilian areas, or beheading other human beings are not designed to induce terror within a specific population, by definition becoming terrorism, and making those who comited those acts de facto terrorists, then I do not understand the term at all!
Have I digressed from my topic? No - not really. Palestine has a relatively high concentration of non-uniformed spies, paramilitary combatants, and civilian sympathizers/supporters. Why is our government providing them with $900 million - which we can ill-afford, and which could very easily be redirected from "humanitarian aid" to "insurgent support"? Where does our money come from? Primarily we borrow it from CHINA of all places! So we're borrowing money, to give away to people who at the very least dislike us (and who, if given the opportunity, would probably kill us all as we slept in our beds). Why does an idea like this seem so intellectually foreign to me?
I could be wrong about this ... and the Supreme Leader of Iran , Grand Ayatollah Ali Hoseyni Khamenei, could be a closet Catholic ... but I seriously doubt it!
I have no sympathy whatsoever for those who provoke a confrontation of any kind, and then come out on the short end. They, by their direct actions, have earned whatever fate befalls them, be it victory or defeat. Had Palestine been victorious, and crushed Israel, there would be rejoicing and celebrations throughout the Muslim world. As things stand, the Palestinians have just provided one more embarrassment to the Arab nations since the Six-Day War of 1967. In that war tiny Israel defeated the armies of the neighboring states of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, even with the nations of Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria contributing troops and arms to the other Arab forces. At the war's end, Israel had gained control of the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights. The results of that war still affect the geopolitics of the region to this day, although Israel has released control of most of those lands.
There is no reward for "Second Place" in a war. There are only victors and the vanquished. The U.S. has been among the recipients of victory in most conflicts/confrontations in which it participated, with two notable exceptions - North Korea, which was more or less called a "draw", and Vietnam, where American politicians lack of support lost the war for us.
Until this year, there had been no incident in the history of the world, where those captured in combat were given civil trials, provided with civilian attorneys, and allowed all the Constitutional rights of a citizen. The Military Tribunal has always tried captured enemy forces (as military if in uniform, and as spies if not in uniform). Spies have always been the recipients of swifter and more severe (i.e. - firing squad) punishment, perhaps just for lacking the courage to don a uniform.
"Assassins" go back to the beginning of recorded history, although the classification of a crime intentionally resulting in the loss of one human life as an "assassination" has, until recently, been restricted to political leaders. John Lennon wasn't "assassinated" - he was murdered. Assassins generally work alone and have only one particular target to deal with at a time. Julius Caesar was assassinated - oddly enough by multiple assassins.
Obama has chosen to disuse the term "enemy combatant" also - perhaps he plans to replace it with "misdirected ally" or "misunderstood friend". Euphemisms change nothing! A spade is still a spade, a shovel is a shovel, and one whom you engage in combat is still an ENEMY COMBATANT!
It follows that the next terms to become politically incorrect are "terrorist" and "terrorism". Granted, one mans' terrorist is another mans' freedom fighter, but when you are on the receiving end of an attack by one or more persons dressed to blend in with the local population, and wearing explosive underwear, parking a bomb-laden vehicle, or firing full-automatic weapons, you often fail to see the "freedom fighter". If commandeering airplanes and flying them into heavily-populated buildings, or setting off bombs in crowded civilian areas, or beheading other human beings are not designed to induce terror within a specific population, by definition becoming terrorism, and making those who comited those acts de facto terrorists, then I do not understand the term at all!
Have I digressed from my topic? No - not really. Palestine has a relatively high concentration of non-uniformed spies, paramilitary combatants, and civilian sympathizers/supporters. Why is our government providing them with $900 million - which we can ill-afford, and which could very easily be redirected from "humanitarian aid" to "insurgent support"? Where does our money come from? Primarily we borrow it from CHINA of all places! So we're borrowing money, to give away to people who at the very least dislike us (and who, if given the opportunity, would probably kill us all as we slept in our beds). Why does an idea like this seem so intellectually foreign to me?
I could be wrong about this ... and the Supreme Leader of Iran , Grand Ayatollah Ali Hoseyni Khamenei, could be a closet Catholic ... but I seriously doubt it!
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Israeli Shells Kill 42 at UN School - Hamas Cowards Hide
"GAZA (Reuters) – Israeli shelling killed more than 40 Palestinians on Tuesday at a U.N. school where civilians had taken shelter, medical officials said ..." and, of course, the liberal media is blaming Israel for the collateral damage in its retaliation against Hamas rocket attacks on Israel.
Why is it that the international press - collectively - choose to defend the wrong side in almost every encounter between the forces of good and evil? Hamas continues to provoke Israel, at every opportunity and, personally, I'm tiring of the whiny liberal media implying (when not simply stating outright) that Israel is the bad guy here! This is the same, warped, left-wing reasoning they used when they implied that the US was the initiator of the September 11th, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center! Where is the international outrage over Robert Mugabe's tyrannical rule of Zimbabwe, which he retains against the expressed will of the Zimbabwean people? Where is the hue and cry over Hamas' rocket attacks and homicide bombings against Israel? I use the word "homicide" as opposed to the PC word, "suicide", because if the Hamas Muslim cowards could get away with it they would not sacrifice their own lives to kill anybody. And I use the word "cowards" because they do not wear uniforms so they may blend in with, and hide - like the yellow dogs they are - within the civilian population. That is the root cause of all collateral damage in Gaza! Any moral government will go to extreme lengths to avoid inflicting civilian casualties, and extreme means withholding the full power of their military to the point that their own people's lives are placed in even greater danger. The cowards of Hamas know this, and use it to their advantage. There comes a point at which any sovereign government being attacked by terrorists must say "ENOUGH!", or be ready to forfeit their sovereignty. And, when it comes down to "fight or flight", the Israelis are totally unfamiliar with the "flight" portion.
Since Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, there have been over 5,000 rocket and mortar attacks launched into Israel by Hamas, with the year 2008 accounting for a full 50% of those attacks. The time for ENOUGH has arrived, and Hamas is now paying the price for their continued terrorist aggression. I doubt that you'll see these statistics in the media - print or broadcast - so here they are:
(The spelling of "mortar" is not mine - it belongs to the Israeli government. I'm certain they can count much better than they spell in English! I can't do either in Hebrew.)
I could be wrong about this ... but I'm NOT!
Sunday, October 12, 2008
How to End The Conflict(s) In the Middle East ...
Here's a quick fix for the armed conflicts throughout the Middle East! Build one squadron of 'crop dusters' with oversize spray nozzles. Fill their tanks with liquefied bacon grease, and spray the entire Middle East with it. The Muslim faithful will then have to stay indoors, thereby limiting their ability to engage in combat ... and their ability to eat for an extended period! Eventually they will starve to death - problem resolved.
It works for ME!
It works for ME!
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Terror Suspects Can Challenge U.S. Detention: Court
The 4th U.S. Court o f Appeals , in Richmond, VA, today ruled that the President can order the imprisonment of an al Queda suspect in the United States, but the detainee must be able to challenge his status as an "enemy combatant." This has some interesting implications:
1. Are people engaged in combat against U.S. Military forces not de facto enemy combatants?
2. If not, then why were they carrying AK-47 assault rifles, and shooting at our soldiers? Did they confuse the 1st Infantry Division with a very large, noisy mob of rabbits?
3. If their capture was not the product of direct combat (i.e. not shooting or involved in obvious guerrilla activities, such as storing weapons, making/planting IEDs, etc.), but rather captured on reliable intelligence information indicating that they were enemy agents, should they be tried by a military tribunal, or in the civilian court system?
Let's assume that conditions 1 & 2 are both met, and the people we're talking about are genuine 'enemy combatants.' Historically, and in keeping with established U.S. military tradition and regulations, Prisoners of War (POW's) have been incarcerated without further legal proceedings for the duration of the conflict, whether it was 6 days or 10 years.
Suddenly somebody wants to change 200+ years of legal precedent to accommodate the uniqueness of the ongoing Iraq War. They want these terrorist hairballs to be tried in civilian U.S. courts! Could it be that shyster attorneys see an opportunity to make a lot of taxpayer money by defending these POS? Oh - my error - POWs! Another historical precedent is that anybody engaging in actions against the military, who was not wearing the uniform of the opposing military, was considered a spy and summarily executed - post haste! None of these cowardly, bottom-feeding scumbags wears a uniform of any kind (but if you're a left-wing, bleeding-heart, commie pinko, 'blame America first', Jane Fonda liberal, you've probably convinced yourself that the consistent lack of a uniform is their uniform, and should therefore be accepted as such).
Absurd actions, such as trying these bozos in civilian courts, will not only clog our Federal Court System, but will burn up tens of millions of our tax dollars that could otherwise be put to much better use. If they were involved in any manner working against our forces, then they are not 'civilians', but enemy combatants, and should be dealt with as such according to military law! But that's just my thoughts on the matter ... KILL 'EM ALL, and let their mythical Allah sort 'em out!
1. Are people engaged in combat against U.S. Military forces not de facto enemy combatants?
2. If not, then why were they carrying AK-47 assault rifles, and shooting at our soldiers? Did they confuse the 1st Infantry Division with a very large, noisy mob of rabbits?
3. If their capture was not the product of direct combat (i.e. not shooting or involved in obvious guerrilla activities, such as storing weapons, making/planting IEDs, etc.), but rather captured on reliable intelligence information indicating that they were enemy agents, should they be tried by a military tribunal, or in the civilian court system?
Let's assume that conditions 1 & 2 are both met, and the people we're talking about are genuine 'enemy combatants.' Historically, and in keeping with established U.S. military tradition and regulations, Prisoners of War (POW's) have been incarcerated without further legal proceedings for the duration of the conflict, whether it was 6 days or 10 years.
Suddenly somebody wants to change 200+ years of legal precedent to accommodate the uniqueness of the ongoing Iraq War. They want these terrorist hairballs to be tried in civilian U.S. courts! Could it be that shyster attorneys see an opportunity to make a lot of taxpayer money by defending these POS? Oh - my error - POWs! Another historical precedent is that anybody engaging in actions against the military, who was not wearing the uniform of the opposing military, was considered a spy and summarily executed - post haste! None of these cowardly, bottom-feeding scumbags wears a uniform of any kind (but if you're a left-wing, bleeding-heart, commie pinko, 'blame America first', Jane Fonda liberal, you've probably convinced yourself that the consistent lack of a uniform is their uniform, and should therefore be accepted as such).
Absurd actions, such as trying these bozos in civilian courts, will not only clog our Federal Court System, but will burn up tens of millions of our tax dollars that could otherwise be put to much better use. If they were involved in any manner working against our forces, then they are not 'civilians', but enemy combatants, and should be dealt with as such according to military law! But that's just my thoughts on the matter ... KILL 'EM ALL, and let their mythical Allah sort 'em out!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)