DIALOGUE ON MILITARY ACTION
Two old soldiers
We need to get and take out Gaddafi. How to do it? You better believe we have contingencies. The longer it goes on, the worst it's going to be. Gadafi has time on his side. He has the weaponry and as the reporting has said, in and around Tripoli, the people are as delusional as him. I watched women chanting on his behalf nightly. Middle age women. Why not? He is all they have known. Life, often in these situations is a simple matter, self preservation. We are going to be criticized regardless. Immediately establish a "no fly zone." It will not be perfect but if our highly trained pilots and aircraft can't handle this, what the hell! Get it done and quickly. Just as an aside, different than Iraq or Afghanistan. We let Iraq become a debacle--stupid on our part. Afghanistan, goal was to expel those who perpetrated 9-11. Consequently unrelated as I see it. By waiting, we invite disaster. The people have already spoken. Get rid of Gaddafi.
Response: Funny. I agree with you on glad France is taking lead. They have lots at stake with the oil. What fascinates me about this whole thing is how fast the UN acted. I thought they would be farting around for ages and it would all be over in Libya and Quadafi would be firmly in control. Amazing. The pundits keep talking about a strategy and there's a point. I hope we have one.
So, Brother, here's my rationale for not doing anything about Libya. It's another no win situation, another tar baby. Once we get into a place we seem to have a very difficult time extricating ourselves. If we go in we have to plan to be there for a very long time; you know to train up their security forces, restore their infrastructure etc. And, yes, the Libyans want our help today. But just wait until we go in and have a few cases of civilian collateral damage. Then we'll be on this "yes we want you - no we don't" teeter totter. Now I know the Arab League has asked the UN to establish a no-fly zone. You know what? The countries that form the Arab League have the resources to impose a no-fly zone. Let them impose it. And the bigger question is do we then intervene in Bahrain, Yemen and these other countries that are clamoring for democracy? Where do we draw the line, or do we?
And I have to say Brother, I'm surprised you feel the way you do (you actually agree with Chris believe it or not) given your views on Iraq and Afghanistan.
I'm probably inconsistent as heck but anybody with any common sense and looking at Afghanistan has to conclude it is a fast train to nowhere. Watching Paetreus testify before Congress on how we're making progress is nauseating. It is like we are looking at two different universes. I have liked him as it appeared that he was willing to face the truth but I don't get it. The culture is just too much against us. Iraq has been an investment of blood with no payback as
The more I go along in this life the more I'm inclined toward isolationism. I know it's not practical or even possible, but it sure has some appeal.
Anyway Brother, right or wrong those are my thoughts for today.
RESPONSE: And, brother, I definitely fit in the isolationist category. We are a day late and a dollar short for sure in Libya. I would definitely not go for any troops, a no fly zone, arms to the rebels: as clandestine as possible. My overall feeling is if we don't deal with them now, we'll gave to later. Qudafi is crazy and that makes it a little different. We will look bad regardless. France and England are taking the lead in this and we should let them. We don't have any choice as I see it. Our history dictates supporting freedom whether it is always best or not is another story.
THE GENERALS AND CONGRESS
Am
a little mystified at Petraeus and you are right, I think. His job.
Still amazed. What surprised me for the first time with him in a
sense was his total lack of defense of McChrystal. In another view
that I've thought of for some time, there's a kind of disconnect in
all things military and the White House and even Congress. My view
which may be way out but we now have a president and congress who
have had no military experience and don't understand the nuances
of the structure of the military. Consequently, the top levels of the
military get lots of press that we hear a great deal about. It is
just the times I think or my total aghast at seeing the
generals before congress with all those awards and decorations. Since
they can prescribe their own uniform, why not just a few or jump
wings, or medic badge or CIB Combat Infantry’s Badge). I guess it
fits the category of "the military loves patches and badges."
reminds me of this joke: I'm sure I've told you: this major has
medals much like we see the generals on TV and somebody says to him,
"Major,
what was your job in the war?"
"Oh, I was in charge of
awards and decorations."
I am amazed: Patreous and other commanders are appearing before congress when they ought to be with their troops. I don't know. In some ways, it's hard to know. I first started thinking about this relationship between Congress and the "brass" when I watched the full hearing on the Pat Tillman death and cover-up. I had seen the movie and then watched the hearing. It was a "lovefest" between the congress and the generals. Honestly, it was almost embarrassing. The various congressmen spent long statements praising the generals and thanking them for their service. Almost nothing was said about Tillman. I kept thinking what is this? Then it dawned on me. The Congressmen don't understand the chain of command or much about the military, none of the stuff that goes on in combat for sure; I will say this for Gates: he occasionally gets irritated in hearings. I heard him say once, "the last time I looked, the military was under civilian control."
DONALD RUMSFELD
Listening to Donald Rumsfeld being interviewed on NPR (National Public Radio) by Robert Siegel was absolutely embarrassing. It was to me anyway. The interviewer kept trying to nail him down. It was like "p...ing in the wind." It couldn't be done! The former SecDef could not be nailed down. And, it wasn't just a feisty 78 year old justifying the decisions he's made that infuriates me but it's the total lack of hearing any remorse for the lives of young soldiers who died. It is what happens to those like Rumsfeld, instead of sitting around attempting to come up with some reason why you f ...ed up, wring your hands and saying, I'm damn sorry, they write a f..king book. Even McNamara stepped up, albeit, way down the road and said I was wrong. It is almost like Rummy and his bud, Chaney--Simply, they live in parallel universes. And, they get reinforced by the kind of politics that put them where they are. What Rumsfeld did, I think, was misguided all the way around. One of the little known things he did was reorganize the Army. He closed very strategic posts. There really is no saving of money. By the time the installation is ready to be turned over to civilians, it is at best a wash. What most don't know and may not care, by closing a military post, the government takes out of the community any vestige of the uniform. For a society that is already removed from any involvement with the soldiers that fight our wars, this is another nail in the coffin.
OUT OF IRAQ
Listening to the generals talking about how they need to stay in Iraq, my comment is, "What the hell!" What the f..k is this? A chance to get out and the generals want to hang in. I guess it is is a take on the "always need more troops" view. Iraq says, "we want the Americans out." What about this don't we get? The generals want to convey a success story which the media has bought, i. e., Iraqis can do it on their own. OK, whether we believe this or not, let's go! Bombings, civilian loss of life still happens seemingly with impunity. Therefore, success is relative but let's go with it and get the hell out. At this stage, I don't see anything gained myself. After the loss of thousands of young Americans, millions of dollars, generals need to wake up and smell the roses. OUT OF IRAQ!!!!
PRIVATE FIRST CLASS MANNING
Listening to Private First Class Manning's (of Wikileaks fame) Dad being interviewed recently was heart breaking. He said his son was receiving bad treatment (my words, can't remember his). For the dad, he was feeling torture. But, it got me to thinking. Why do we think that somehow we have to treat our prisoners so harshly.
I've often thought this doesn't speak well of us as a so called "Christian" nation. I can understand how we don't want to serve up a Sunday school environment for prisoners but those who haven't been convicted, different story--what is it? Even with those at Guantanamo, who so want to kill us or maybe have tried but even with that reasoning, we ought to be better than this. Some of it may be the nature of mankind, struggling with our own humanity. Or, maybe man's inhumanity to man. A chance to treat someone badly, we do.
When I first came in the Army, I was assigned duty at the stockade (prison). Somebody told me , "it will be no time until you're not be able to know guards from prisoners.” And, guess what?--they were right.
Christianity comes in for a sound round of hypocrisy, especially with politicians who get way more press than they should and their sleazy attribution of most everything to God, even their bad actions. But, unfortunately the politicians don't know the Scriptures very well and surely those who establish the policy on how we treat prisoners. If they did halfway know the Bible and were able to quote it correctly, they would discover that Jesus lumped a type of universal treatment plan for prisoners, along with other poor and downtrodden and generally blessed them. He conveyed to them a degree of compassion as much as the widows or the homeless or the hungry.
And, really a weird thing is that somewhere along the way, we have erroneously thought that if we treat our prisoners badly, it is OK or they are going to love us, be more forthcoming, renounce their ways. What sort of bull...t is this? In the case of PFC Manning, he should be getting some slack. He's not been convicted of anything and he's a soldier. What in the f..k is this? If he is convicted, maybe we ought to think about a medal as opposed to jail time. He's stripped away much of the hypocrisy of our foreign policy and that has to be a good thing.
If I have been disappointed in anything with our president, it has been that he has become somewhat of a typical politician. I had hoped for better. He relies on the generals and bureaucrats too much. What about doing the right thing and on occasion telling some to go f..k themselves.
On
the TV show, Sixty Minutes, Julian Assange surely didn't come across
as some egomaniac national security threat as he's been portrayed. He
came across as a fervent evangelical for transparency (overused
concept, how about just honest) in government. And, will have to say
this, his interviewer, Steve Croft didn't throw him any
softballs either. I'm no Julian Assange trumpeter but I am for
telling it like it is. Let's establish blame here. In my way of
thinking, it is hard to say. But, the government has to come in for a
good hit. Bradley Manning ,the young soldier that did the leaking,
supposedly, surely, but give me a break, a lower ranking enlisted
soldier with the capacity to have assess to all this classified
material. Come on, the government types who are in charge of secrets
have got to be better than that. Manning, who knows computers, etc.,
probably but come on, he's a midget in the system for God's sake. In
some ways, anybody who has been associated with the military knows
that it is almost the nature of the beast for lower ranking enlisted
types to get to hating the Army (Navy, Marines) or at least the
decisions they've made. This is all speculation, but you get some kid
without much direction but very computer savvy joins the military.
Some recruiter has talked him into it, sounds good, gets a bonus. A
couple of years down the road, he's looking at four or five more
years in the military. He's bored, has a computer job, maybe a less
than aware boss in turns of authority. Who knows! He decides to play
some games, get back at the military for probably some inexplicable
reason. Who knows but for him to even have assess to some of this
material is unfathonable to me.
So, now what. The government,
military needs to suck it up. We f...ed up. Eric Holder who seems
less than the brightest bulb in the lot, needs to quit threatening.
Fall on your sword. Remedy the problem so this can't happen again and
get a grip on really what is classified. I often wonder what in the
hell happens to people. I guess it is a "group think." The
government slaps a "classified" label on things that don't
need it and they throw around terms like national security when it is
bullshit. Any of us who have spent any time around the government or
the military get it quickly.
Do I think that the military in
particular will learn any lessons. Hell no. Instead of falling on
their sword, saying we f...ed up, they be hollering national
security, court martialing Manning, overall putting their brains in
formaldehyde. Think Pat Tillman, Abu Grabib, all kinds of other "who
is watching the store" mentality.
I've talked to lots of
my buddies of all different persuasions--to a person, they came away
from the Sixty Minutes segment on the Assange interview with a
favorable impression of someone who might be basically embracing old
time American ideals which we may have ourselves let slip.
So,
what's going to happen? Well, it's going on for years. The government
probably should negotiate with Assange if there really are some
honest to goodness national security issues which I doubt or
especially if naming names will put someone's life in jeopardy.
Manning. Give him an Article Fifteen, which is a slap on the wrist
and discharge him with a general discharge under less than honorable
conditions. Will that make any difference. Only that somebody in the
military had used good common sense and when Manning writes his book,
the military will look better.
This sounds like a big-time
putdown of the military in particular. Not so as I see it. The
military overall is more fair than most gigantic organizations and
are not victims of the whims of money (it is taxpayer money anyway).
Unfortunately, as I see it, not enough real thinkers get to the
decision making point who can say, we f...ed up and I'm sorry. But,
overall, if we could, we'd be better off in the long run if we could
learn this lesson. MY OPINION.
WAR IS NO DAY AT THE BEACH
The sad case of the three GIs accused of killing an innocent civilian (I doubt innocent and like Vietnam, "everybody is in somebody's Army)" is the direct result of being on the Afghan fast train to nowhere. Compounding what is already a bad situation, the young soldiers
pose with the body of the civilian they allegedly killed. And they do it with what looks like measured callousness.
War is a messy business and things like this happen. Young soldiers get accustomed to death and don't see the repercussions of what they do and are often simply stupid. It is even worse when they see the futility of trying to fight a war they can't win. This is not to condone wrongdoing or even stupidity rather to attempt to understand how soldiers get so stupid. Try merely being in Afghanistan.
Let's establish blame. The President. I would like to blame the former president and all the idiots he listened too but you blame the present leadership. By any measure, Afghanistan, like Iraq, and Vietnam are sorry wars. We learn nothing. And we put our soldiers in untenable positions. They just can't be soldiers, close with and engage the enemy. They have to have rules of engagement and be diplomats. In Vietnam we dealt with it by establishing Free Fire Zones. Civilians were moved out and then anybody caught in the FFZ was the enemy. Did it work? In war terms, surely better that what is happening in Afghanistan.
It is impossible for young, mostly emotionally unsophisticated men and women in uniform to deal with the inherent processes of urban warfare. What 18-25 year old can handle these complexities. At a time when they ought to be thinking about getting laid, they are constantly in life and death situations.
There really is only one solution. Get the hell out. If we stay in Afghanistan a hundred years we can't change the mentality, the culture, the tribe loyalty. I say this over and over, those much smarter than me, who've been in the country, say it. Not the generals, they live in parallel universes. Example: a spade of suicide bombings and assassinations. To the generals, shows we are winning because the bombings and assassinations indicate the enemy's desperation What in the f..k kind of logic is this if not a parallel universe.
If we had any chance in Afghanistan, soldiers would still do stupid things but we might could live with it. With no chance, all I can think--get the f..k off this train to nowhere.
DISHONORED MARINE
The supreme Court offing a decision giving a pass to the idiots protesting at a young Marine's funeral, seems so "left field." He gave his all for the likes of these misguided MFers. What is good enough for these emotionally spent stupid fundamentalist neanderthals? I don't know but we have to give them a pass. It is our unique brand of freedom. Even to idiots like these, we have to accord the freedom that, in an ideal world, the young Marine so dishonored by them, died for.
UNIQUE AMERICAN CULTURE
The idiot pastor in Florida who burned the Quran(aka Kuran, Koran) is beyond stupid. Simply, beyond the pale. But hold on here. This is our culture and if somebody wants to be an “idiot, stupid, imbecilic, over the top, crazy,” they can do it as long as they don’t threaten. What the pastor did was an act of stupidity. Most thinking and rational caring Americans would agree, I think.
The Florida nut case may be an idiot and need his “arsh” kicked until his nose bleeds but in this country, he has freedom of speech and can do whatever the f____ he wants, stupid as it is. Most Americas didn’t even know the egomaniac had surfaced again until the Taliban in Afghanistan started killing innocents. Who the f____ do they think they’re kidding? Well, our news media for one—I heard an NBC report and you would think they are afraid of offending the Afghans based on the softball nature of the item. The Taliban probably planned to kill the UN Workers anyway but then seized on this “route step” nut.
What about if the one digit IQ pastor burned a hundred Bibles. Would we get upset? I don’t think so. We would call him stupid, but he can do what the hell he wants. This is America the last time I looked. Hell, the Supreme Court just decided in favor of those numbnuts protesting at the funeral of the patriotic Marine who died fighting for his country. Not literally for his country but the country that sent him to war. Thinking Americans and those that care would say nothing is too good for these imbeciles, to include the Florida so called pastor. And, get this: the young Marine died so, in a sense, these two misguided “dolts” could do and say as they did. MFers! And, I for one resent those like generals and even the President apologizing for these assholes. But, it is our culture and it reinforces again how stupid we are to find ourselves in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. These people don’t have a clue about individual freedom. Stoning women in particular is still in their arsenal of ignorance. We are just as stupid to continue to be involved where we have to defend our own culture.
Moving in the military is a "given." It happens. My younger daughter's reminder to me on occasion is that in twelve years of school, she moved 13 times. For military families, it is simply a way of life. I can only empathize with today’s soldiers and families: fighting two wars, constant deployment or the threat thereof. In all wars, the families are the real sufferers. For the men, war is what they've been trained for and at least initially, they're doing their thing.
It's
hard to compare being at war now and my own war in Vietnam. So
different, mainly because of things like social media, email, cell
phones. This is all new. In Vietnam, a soldier could go days without
anything from home. In earlier wars, it was worst. When I was a
civilian pastor, I heard the story of one of my faithful parishioners
who went off to war and for five year, nothing. One day, at lunch,
someone looked out the window and Custis came walking up. Now, a
soldier can be talking by cell while the battle rages.
However,
the moving from one installation to another one is still the same. I
recently had one of those nostalgic moments of my post military life
which I thought was long gone: moving. My wife and I decided sometime
ago that minimizing was the way to go. She will throw out
things in a millisecond. I am a little more reluctant as 29 years in
the military left me with a few mementoes. But, I became convinced of
the whole "downsizing" advantage when our younger daughter
(the one of 13 moves in twelve years) and her new husband took a job
in the Bay area and suddenly we had the opportunity to do something
we'd always wanted to do: move into the City (San Francisco). They
could move into our place. Since they were just starting out, they
could take the house and what was in it. A great deal all around. We
would take a few select things and leave the rest. Suddenly my
bragging was that we had reduced our "stuff" to thirteen
pieces. This worked well until recently when my daughter and husband
decided on a major renovation. As part of it, they would be getting
rid of our things. What! The clock that we lovingly bought in Germany
and had hauled around for years. What about the Begium cabinet and
coffee table that we loved. Not to mention the Korean chest and desk.
What about the china cabinet from Greece. And the table from Italy
where the customs to get it home costs more than the table. The
Mexican vases bought in Juarez or what about the antiques from New
England and the beautiful blanket that the wonderful lady from King's
Park, Long Island, made. All of it is going.
I was not
depressed. I agreed to it. It was the right thing to do. My daughter
and family needed to make our former place their own. They could not
do it with our things in the house. And, come on: we hadn't lived
with it for years, the clocks, the table, the paintings. We had a
philosophy too: we weren't going on to the great beyond leaving a lot
of things to sort out.
However, I stared into space and
mulled it over for days. What was wrong with me? I couldn't figure it
out. Then it hit me. The "ah hah" moment. In the military,
we get use to moving: war, new schools, new friends, different house.
We know what it means to see all your earthy possessions loaded in a
moving van time and time again. It goes into the great beyond but on
the other end, here it comes. It is unloaded and suddenly, it’s
Christmas, you are unwrapping all those things that are familiar to
you. Suddenly, God is on his heaven and all is right with the world.
Your things are the only "constant" in your life. That
painting, that rug, that Westminster clock that chimes at the wrong
time. Now, it's going. A stranger will haul out the Belgium table,
the Korean Chest. What to do? I hugged every piece and said, "thanks
for the memories."
