I stand with the United States Senate in their Resolution today "honor[ing] the service and sacrifice of the men and women who have lost their lives in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom and honors their families and loved ones."On paper, the Senate Resolution goes on for 264 pages. Each of the names of 4,009 servicemen and servicewomen who have died in Iraq and the 487 who have died in Afghanistan is listed.
There should not be a Number 4,010.
Bring them home. Now.
Iraq War | Military Deaths | Peace | Burning Taper | BurningTaper.com
may their loved ones find peace with their loses
ReplyDeleteI shall bow my head and we shall honor them at the golden gloves event this weekend.
"More Than 1,000 Iraqi Soldiers Quit During Basra Fight"
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/03/more-than-1000-soldiers-q_n_94989.html
I fear that though they may have died honorably, they may have died in vain!
If the United States left Iraq tomorrow what do you believe will happen in Iraq, in 3 months, in 1 year, in 3 years? Does it matter to the average American with oil at $100 a barrel at this point?
ReplyDeleteI don't know, Sec. What will happen in Iraq, in three months, a year, three years? Are these American servicemen and women dying in Iraq for oil?
ReplyDelete— W.S.
WS,
ReplyDeleteIt is without question sad that humans kill each one another over The Treasures of the Earth. All those who consume oil (me, myself, and I ) are in the end to blame really.
I do see a small ray of light though; with $100 per barrel of oil, the world esp. the highly efficient Japanese will lead the way in development of products using alternative energies. Alternatives are all right before us if we just looked up at high noon.
We broke it. We bought it. Now we have a moral obligation to fix it. It really does not matter how many of us have to die to do it.
ReplyDeleteWe should not have gone there. We ignored advice on what to expect if we did. We fired generals, cia officers, and state department employees who tried to point out the problems involved.
The State Department was forced to shelve a report on rebuilding Iraq for years until they were asked to drag it out when everything had gone to hell.
But we elected the people who decided to do this thing. And it has been done. We can not leave Iraq to the hands of militant religious nuts, hatemongers, and butchers.
We have to fix what we have done.
The cost to us does not matter.
cehawkes1 said...
ReplyDelete"But we elected the people who decided to do this thing. And it has been done. We can not leave Iraq to the hands of militant religious nuts, hatemongers, and butchers."
Agreed, as long as those Iraqi citizens that want a better life stand up as well.
We can't fix it if they keep breaking it!
I've been over once, I'm going back, didn't like it then, don't like it now.
ReplyDeleteI can accept death in war, I can accept price gouging by oil companies.
I cannot accept the way our leaders are behaving like children. I wouldn't let my children carry on this way. Blame has gotten us nowhere for five years. We should stop deploying more members of the Army and start deploying more members of the Corps of Engineers. We could pull out tomorrow and both their economy and ours will collapse.
Like it or not, and I'm a not, we now have to rebuild that country. We're going to take a lot of flak and abuse, but maybe its time we offered the other cheek and showed the world that we can be as good as we say we are. At this point its about integrity, something we as Freemasons should lead the way in showing how people as a local community, or a global community should act.
Having ranted all that I pray that I can live up to my mighty big talk.
It goes without question that the sacrifices the US has made in Iraq and Afghanistan ENTITLE this country to the natural resources of those two nations. The three million barrels of oil produced in Iraq would certainly help the situation at home. The American taxpayer is footing the bill for this ill-conceived war; the only way to make up for it is to take the oil. Period. Oh, and after W and Dick leave office, have them tried for treason.
ReplyDeleteThe Iraq war was only about oil insofar as it helped to RAISE prices by de-stabilizing the oil markets, helping Dick and W's oil buddies and ensuring them of jobs after they leave office. The Iraq war was really about the son of George H.W. Bush wanting to teach Saddam Hussein a Texas-style lesson. Saddam purportedly tried to get W's old man assasinated during a trip to the Gulf states after he left office. W just couldn't let it go and used the "war on terror" as a pretext to kill him and show him who was boss.
Now, as America teeters on economic collapse thanks in large part to high oil prices and debtor/lender ineptitude, the country should look back over the last 8 years at what a mistake we all made in 2000 (and I voted Libertarian, thank you).
John Galt, Jr.
Sad that the photo you included with this posting is of a sort that our Government spent several years suppressing.
ReplyDeleteAs a history teacher I am always pointing out that the gvernment did not always censor images of death. I think it is wrong and that pictures of dead military should be shown. I know this upsets many current and former military.
ReplyDeleteAn example of an official government production from the past:
http://www.archive.org/details/WiththeMarinesatTarawa
I know people say it is to hurtful to the families. I say it is too hurtful to all of us not to show it. And I supported the war and love our soldiers.
Brethren,
ReplyDeleteI don't mean to detract from the spirit of this conversation as putting humans in harms way for a good cause is an excellent debate. What is a good cause? When is it worth risking your own citizens?
Anyway I digress,
I'm constantly fascinated, as a Canadian, how Americans know so little about their Northern neighbors, except to blame us for letting terrorists into their country or whenever their politicians need a scapegoat for anything really (mad cow, cold weather, bad comedians). Just blame it on Canada.
So I read about oil and how you are fighting for oil. I don't think that's the reason, unless it's fighting for oil reserves owned by certain companies, who have certain shareholders (in public office), but I don't have evidence to support these comments so it's really just bar chat.
Where Oil comes from in todays world, however, I can support with some interesting sources.
Take a look at this, and maybe it will surprise you...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves
And for some US supporting stats:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html
Just doing my part to educate where your oil really comes from... Not Iraq!
In the meantime I do hope that US and Canadian soldiers serving abroad get home safely... On a policy level, I have no idea what the right answer is, a difficult debate for certain, but either go big or bring them home. Status quo doesn't work against an ideology. Perhaps that's the real issue? Do you use soldiers to fight a war against an ideology? The "enemy" numbers are increasingly fed with new supporters by the increase in levels of disgruntled citizens. Perhaps pulling out conventional soldiers is the best plan, and then ship politicians over there to confuse them to hell. Great place to put politicians... now there is a position I'll have little argument on I bet.
Well I'm done with my opinions tonight. I think I've typed more than I should have, but I hope it spurns some constructive discussion and civil debate. Cheers!
As a veteran who served with the MNF in Beirut, Lebanon back in 82 - 83, I have seen first hand what unclear objectives, a shitty ROE and complete ignorance of the political and cultural landscape will do. It's a pity that Bush and company ignored that painful lesson.
ReplyDeleteI have also seen what happens when you pull the plug.
The invasion of Iraq was nothing short of criminal. It had nothing to do with Al Qaeda, oil or WMD's. The only way we will ever know is to subpoena Bush, Cheyney and the entire neocon crew who thought that this was in our best interest and hope that they actually tell the truth about it.
I'm won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen
That being said, christian and cehawkes1 are dead on; even though it was a mess and broken before we invaded them, we have a moral obligation to set it straight.
What will happen in Iraq, in three months, a year, three years?
Well, if the Iraqi's prove that they cannot get their religious, political and cultural issues in order, then we will have to stop playing cowboy and get the world involved. Hell - I am all for breaking it up into 3 countries with UN guarded borders if that settles the problems.
That is why this election is so important. Unfortunately, as much as I admire McCain, I can't in good conscience vote for him if he thinks that the current strategy is the way to go. Obama and Hillary are either lying when they say that they will draw down the troops or they are insane. There is no workable exit strategy at this point. If you really want to ensure that these men and women died in vain, pulling the plug is a good start.
WS - I feel your frustration, and I would love to bring every kid home ASAP. However, it is not a realistic option and many of the kids over there would be the first to tell you that.
Many of our service people in Iraq and Afganistan have been sent back for repeat tours 3,4, even 5 times!
ReplyDeleteDid that happen in Vietnam, Korea or elsewhere? These Kids are fighting the law of odds and they know it.
They say that there is no draft in the US, but there is. Indifinite extensions of a serviceman's contract (in a volunteer force)even in time of War is not right. Until all US citizens consider sending their own family members to War as viable; they should in my opinion not take a side favoring extending this conflict.
OBama and Clinton may say "Bring the troops home" but they will be faced with a phased exit.
McCain offers no such shift in Executive strategy.
I think of our children in Iraq daily and pray for their safe return.
Liteseeker:
ReplyDeleteI feel the need to clarify a few things. First, as I stated, I was against the war from the beginning. I felt that it was misguided, would accomplish nothing in terms of security and would eventually hurt us as a people in the end.
It has done all of the above.
Now, looking beyond that, we removed the infrastructure (as evil as it was) of a country that was (and remains) a nest of tribal and religious hatreds.
As someone else previously observed: we broke it, we bought it. We have a moral obligation to the people who are counting on us to help them. Especially those who have risked everything to create a new government.
I want to now address a few things that you mentioned.
Many of our service people in Iraq and Afganistan have been sent back for repeat tours 3,4, even 5 times!
First, you need to remove Afghanistan from the equation. That was a valid and legitimate action that we are fumbling because of our Iraq commitment.
Second, to the best of my knowledge, a typical Army unit will do anywhere from 13 - 15 months per tour (including pre-deployment training). There were some units that were extended throughout the conflict.
Given those numbers, it would be impossible to do 4 or 5 tours in a single 4 year enlistment. Thus, if someone has done 4 or 5 tours, then they have re-enlisted and knew that they would be doing multiple tours. BTW, I could be wrong, but I think that you would be hard pressed to find anyone who has done 4 or 5 tours.
For the Marines, well, I believe that they follow their standard rotation of 7 months, so they will most likely do 2 -3 tours in a 4 year enlistment. Keep in mind that their individual tours are much shorter than the Army.
Finally, this country went to war in Afghanistan in 2001. Anyone who joined the armed services after 2001 knew that they would probably serve in a war zone. Thus, if you joined in August 2001 for college money, you might have gotten more than you bargained for. It also stands to reason that anyone who has joined after 2003 knew that they would most likely end up in Iraq.
The kids who are there today chose to be there. Nobody forced them to sign on the dotted line.
They say that there is no draft in the US, but there is. Indifinite extensions of a serviceman's contract (in a volunteer force)even in time of War is not right.
Actually, no one ever signs up for a standard 4 year active duty hitch. All contracts -- at least when I was in -- held you for 6 years. 3 or 4 years active duty and the rest in the active or inactive reserves. So the government is not breaking any laws or playing dirty pool. The enlistee knows what he is signing.
Until all US citizens consider sending their own family members to War as viable; they should in my opinion not take a side favoring extending this conflict.
Between my siblings, we have over 40 years of combined military service. In addition to that, we have 3 of our next generation (nephews/husbands of nieces) who have done tours in Iraq. (Army reserves: 1 tour, Marines: 2 tours, Air Force: 1 tour). My boys are too young, but I would not dissuade them if they chose to serve.
So, have I earned the right to my opinion?
OBama and Clinton may say "Bring the troops home" but they will be faced with a phased exit.
Which amounts to lip service.
I want to see plans -- good solid plans -- before I take any of them at their word.
LVX, all enlistments are now for a total of 8 years. Have been since at least before I was commissioned in1994.
ReplyDeleteSure, there are 2x6, 4x4 etc ... but the fine print in the contract, which I read to all of my cadets, is that it's 8 years. If they want to keep you on active duty for 8 years, the wording of the contract allows that.
So, 4-5 deployments in one enlistment hitch is quite probable.
I know someone who
deployed to Kuwait in May 02, returned in November 02.
deployed to Kuwait again in January 03 and went across the border up thunder road.
Came back to USA in August 03.
Deployed to Iraq in January 05, returned to USA in February 06.
Deployed to Iraq in March 07, should be coming home soon.
That's four deployments in 6 years. 3 of them direct combat.
His daughter just turned four, and she knows how to say Iraq. Knew it a year ago.
LVX, all enlistments are now for a total of 8 years. Have been since at least before I was commissioned in 1994.
ReplyDeleteI got out in 1985 when it was just 6. Thanks for the correction.
That's four deployments in 6 years. 3 of them direct combat.
Interesting. I can understand that many deployments if he was active duty followed by active reserves or the guard. How long was his active hitch and was he called back from the IRR?
I have known many people who have completed their hitches with about 2 deployments under their belts. 4 or 5 deployments does not sound normal under the typical 4 year active, 4 year IRR contract. Has the military changed that as well? Are they now demanding active reserve or guard time after the initial active duty service?