|
Links and resources
Take Action to Support Our Troops and Veterans
|
Check out this discussion I took part in dealing with Rumsfeld, Fake Fascism, and a "Hail Mary" thrown by an Administration that Doesn't have a playbook (except Rove's) and has no clue what's going on on the field. We are ready for a new game in town!
UPDATE 9/13: (Via Huffpost)
I have always been a fan of Russ Feingold's - right on the war, right on campaign finance reform, right on lowering the defecit and many more. I saw him a week or so ago out in California and he came and spoke to young folks who weren't giving him money - not bad, right? Anyway, it appears he is reading Citizen Hunter as well, we love it! I was complaining about the use of this word last week. President Bush and the English language have never been close friends though.
This is the first of a recurring guest blog series by Michael Zacchea, who will be commenting on some of the latest headlines emerging from the military.
What chutzpah! What bald-faced, unmitigated gall! When our mendacious Secretary of Defense refers to his speech to the American Legion in Salt Lake City, he fails to mention his ill-advised and erroneous comparison of critics of his mis-begotten war strategy to Nazi appeasers. He remembers being at the Pentagon on 9/11...what about the thousands of Americans who have died or been wounded because of his poorly planned and poorly executed war in Iraq??? On 9/11, 3001 Americans died, 10000+ were injured, and the US economy suffered a loss of 400 billion dollars. In the two wars the country has fought since then, one necessary, the other by choice, the US has lost 3000 soldiers, had 25000 wounded, and has spent (squandered) 400 billion dollars with almost no positive effect. Its all good and well to say the US is a force for good in the world. I believe that. But his inept management, poor leadership, and incompetent strategic and operational plans fail to live up to the billing that the US is a force for good in the world. Its hard to sell that bill of goods to the world when he fails to take responsibility for war crimes on his watch, like Abu Ghraib, and the extra-legal mistreatment of enemy prisoners of war in Guantanamo Bay and "black" prison cites around the world. The US is a force for good, but Donald Rumsfeld, mendacious reprobate and incompetent strategist, is not.
This is the first of a recurring guest blog series by Michael Zacchea, who will be commenting on some of the latest headlines emerging from the military.
What chutzpah! What bald-faced, unmitigated gall! When our mendacious Secretary of Defense refers to his speech to the American Legion in Salt Lake City, he fails to mention his ill-advised and erroneous comparison of critics of his mis-begotten war strategy to Nazi appeasers. He remembers being at the Pentagon on 9/11...what about the thousands of Americans who have died or been wounded because of his poorly planned and poorly executed war in Iraq??? On 9/11, 3001 Americans died, 10000+ were injured, and the US economy suffered a loss of 400 billion dollars. In the two wars the country has fought since then, one necessary, the other by choice, the US has lost 3000 soldiers, had 25000 wounded, and has spent (squandered) 400 billion dollars with almost no positive effect. Its all good and well to say the US is a force for good in the world. I believe that. But his inept management, poor leadership, and incompetent strategic and operational plans fail to live up to the billing that the US is a force for good in the world. Its hard to sell that bill of goods to the world when he fails to take responsibility for war crimes on his watch, like Abu Ghraib, and the extra-legal mistreatment of enemy prisoners of war in Guantanamo Bay and "black" prison cites around the world. The US is a force for good, but Donald Rumsfeld, mendacious reprobate and incompetent strategist, is not.
Here's a guest blog from Sgt. Joe Duran.
A few years ago, I walked away from a comfortable job to fulfill a personal obligation to serve my country. It was also a family tradition as my father, grandfather, and uncles had served in every branch of the military. But I was running out of time. Had it not been for an age waiver granted to me by the Marine Corps, I would’ve come close to missing my chance. But that was then. According to the changes made by Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, David Chu, the age limits have been raised. A 42 year old can now, with an age waiver, enter the service as a soldier. We are healthier and living longer he says. Over the weekend I thought about how I felt about this change, and I’ve decided it depends on whether I see it as a Marine, a Citizen, or my father’s son.
If You Can’t Meet the Goal, Lower the Goal
As a Marine, I wish the Army recruiters well. They had missed their goals last year, recruiting almost 7,000 below their target. So it is understandable that in addition to beefing up their recruiting and referral incentives, hiring a new add agency, and lowering their recruiting goal by 8,000, the Army made their target this year by relaxing their age standards as well. But as stated in the excellent blog by Steven Urbanski, “With recruiters struggling to meet enlistment goals, the recruiters have begun looking the other way.” Now they won’t have to. Along with the acceptance of an older generation of men and women, the Army has to accept their past. According to the Army’s own numbers, waivers concerning prior misdemeanor criminal offenses, drug or alcohol issues or medical problems have been required by 15.5 percent of recruits compared with 12 percent for 2004 and 2003. Last year, when they did not meet their goal, they were at 15 percent.
In addition to the relaxation of age, medical, and criminal standards for recruits, the Army has also relaxed their testing standards, signing up those who score below 30 out of 99 on their aptitude test. The acceptance rate was 2%. Now it is 4%. In an article by the Wall Street Journal, Army General Rochelle said, “I am confident we will not be above the DoD goal of 4%. My advice to the General if it doesn’t pan out: If you can’t meet the goal, lower the goal.
Support the Troops, Join the Army
As a citizen, I remember the pride I felt putting the new Marine Corps Sticker on the bottom left corner of my rear window. With the lowering of the age standard, according to the Army's estimates, 22.6 million men and women will have the chance to feel the same pride and lend a hand. Now, instead of supporting the troops with a yellow ribbon on their car, they can drive their car down to the recruiting station and play an integral part in the foreign policy they are responsible for. That is honor, courage, and commitment. But since the lowering of the age standard, the Army has recruited only 5 soldiers aged 40 and over, and 324 people aged 35 and older since June. Maybe the word hasn’t gotten out yet. But, regardless of whether or not we get 22.6 million new recruits or a thousand, my hats are off to them for the sacrifice they make on behalf of others.
Not My Dad
But as a son, my perspective changes and the change in policy gets a little more difficult to accept. It is heartbreaking to watch the faces of the war dead as I read their names and see their relatively young ages on the roll call of those killed in action. I think of the ultimate sacrifice they and their mothers and fathers have made and the future they will no longer share. Today, as I spoke to my father about this subject and about the time he spent in the Army, I also thought of the change in policy and how we are slowly adding another generation to the rolls of those who may someday not come home to make up for someone elses misjudgments. Although it is happening now with the older reservist pulling more than their share of the load overseas, and dying, it is still hard to imagine a young 20 or 30 something losing a parent. Especially if that parent is yours. So this new standard change, like most policies, is okay as long is it doesn’t affect me. Right? Wrong! Now we have possibly 22.6 million more men and women, to serve proudly, as best they can, and hopefully come home too. Somehow, as a son, it doesn’t comfort me.
Wanted to be sure everybody got a chance to read this guest blog from Steve Urbanski.
"Ever since my youth --- when I watched WWII footage and saw how well-disciplined and sharply dressed the German forces were --- I have wanted to be a soldier. Joining the American military was as close as I could get." These are the haunting words spoken by Army engineer Jon Fain, who joined the military and fought in the invasion of Iraq.
Unfortunately, he is not alone in today's United States Army. With recruiters struggling to meet enlistment goals, the recruiters have begun looking the other way --- a sort of "don't ask, don't tell" policy on recruits with violent, extremist, and racists views.
Fortunately, someone is doing something about it. The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is stepping up the pressure on the Department of Defense to stop allowing the United States military to be a training ground for neo-Nazi and other extremists groups. The SPLC was founded in 1971 as a small civil rights law firm. Today, the Center is internationally known for its tolerance education programs, its legal victories against white supremacists and its tracking of hate groups.
The SPLC has been active in this cause for many years. In 1986, the SPLC, urged then Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger to "prohibit active-duty members of the armed services from holding membership in groups like the Klan or from taking part in their activities." Weinberger responded by issuing this directive: "Military personnel must reject participation in white supremacy, neo-Nazi and other such groups which espouse or attempt to create overt discrimination. Active participation, including public demonstrations, recruiting and training members, and organizing or leading such organizations is utterly incompatible with military service." Former Defense Secretary William Perry used stronger language when he updated the policy during his tenure at the Department of Defense.
The problem we are encountering now is that these directives are being ignored. Commanders in some a Army units have turned a blind eye to the problem. This cannot continue.
Department of Defense investigator Scott Barfield confirmed that the threat is great today. He said: "Today's white supremacists in the military become tomorrow's domestic terrorists once they're out. There needs to be a tighter focus on intercepting the next Timothy McVeigh before he becomes the next Timothy McVeigh. (Referring to the Oklahoma City bomber who was a Gulf War veteran.)"
Comment and Take Action: Contact the SPLC to help.
I have written before about the sad fact that the unemployment rate among Veterans is in some cases double that of their non-veteran counterparts. Last year, 15.6% of 20-to 24 year-old vets were unemployed, peaking at 18.7%. As Representative Rush Holt, the sponsor of the Bill, said, "these aren't just numbers--these are men and women who put on our country's uniform to protect each and every one of us."
We must serve our veterans as honorably as they have served us. Making sure we help them find good paying jobs is a must! This Bill will hopefully prompt renewed focus on the importance of taking care of our veterans when they come home. It will remind employers, in the private and public sector, of the importance of hiring veterans and also the value in doing so.
Don't forget to visit the Support and Defend section where there are lots of ways you can make a difference by contributing to organizations that help our veterans transition to life at home.
Iraq Veterans Call for Answers in State of the Union Speech
NEW YORK - The nation's largest organization for Veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan released the following list of points that the President should make in his State of the Union address this evening:
1) This Nation's Veterans are a Priority: This past year has been a discouraging one for Veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In August, the VA revealed that it had underestimated its budget needs for 2005 by more than $1-billion, with a further shortfall of nearly $1.5-billion expected in 2006. Congress passed an emergency spending bill to bridge the gap, but the incident was yet another disheartening example of the VA's inability to handle this influx of new Veterans. Current services for Veterans continue to be woefully inadequate, as was revealed in one recent study that found only one-in-five calls to the VA helpline is answered correctly. The President must present a plan for fixing this broken system.
2) The Current Problem of Military Overextension Will End in 2006: A recent Pentagon report found that the current pace of military operations in Iraq is unsustainable. This is something that our Troops and Veterans have known for years. If the President is serious about Homeland Security, he'll offer concrete solutions to this dangerous problem.
The current rate of deployment is a serious deterrent to new enlistment; a problem that the Defense Department has chosen to address by lowering recruiting standards. If the American military is to remain a strong and vital force, this trend must be reversed.
3) Here are the Benchmarks for Success in Iraq: For nearly three years, the President's outlook on the war in Iraq can be summed up in three inadequate words: "Stay the Course." This has never been an acceptable plan of action for the men and women who have lived this war firsthand, many of whom still face the prospect of second or third tour in Iraq. If we are to continue sending our Troops into harm's way, then we must give them basic guidelines to gauge their progress on a tangible course to success. The President must tell our Troops what he plans to do differently in guiding the future of the American military presence in Iraq.
4) Never Again Will our Troops be Sent to War Without Proper Equipment: Early this year it was revealed that hundreds of Troops might have been saved if they'd been wearing the latest body armor. Three years too late, the Pentagon has finally ordered more than 200,000 sets of this additional armor. It will still take another year for that armor to reach the Troops in the field. From un-armored humvees, to shortages of water, to Soldiers forced to buy their own body armor, this war has been an exercise in bad preparation. The President must commit the full resources of this government to an investigation of what went wrong and what needs to be done to prevent similar problems in the future.
For years we have been told we are fighting the Bad Guys. Al Qaeda. Terrorists. Fighting them over there so we wouldn't fight them over here. So we fought and died, trained our Iraqi allies, and depleted our resources to provide the Iraqis with democracy and freedom. Just a few days ago, 2 of our finest were tortured and brutally murdered by evil men drawn to Iraq for the sole purpose of killing Americans. Never before has the face of our global enemy revealed itself in these acts of depravity. Against this foe, we were the Freedom Fighters, the liberators in the "noble cause". It was our duty to rid Iraq and the world of their savagery and lawlessness. It was a Global War on Terror, after all, and they were the enemies of civilization.
Why does the U.S. inprison them here while our "ally" seeks to pardon them over there?
On one hand, the U.S. government is fighting tooth and nail to indefinitely hold enemy combatants of the same sort who mercilessly tortured and killed PFC's Menchaca and Tucker. The Geneva Convention has been cast aside to keep these terrorist away from the "central front of the war on terror". Meanwhile the Iraqis, with our acquiescence, are considering the pardon of these same killers right on our front lines. In the words of the Iraqi leadership, those that kill Americans are guilty only of "legitimate acts of resistance and defending their homeland." That same high-ranking official went on to say, "These people will be pardoned definitely, I believe". There is a contradiction here, and it doesn't make sense.
What has changed?
What has changed is the element of time for we have over-stayed our welcome and purpose. Now, after years of "stay the course" and 2,500 of our best killed, our allies on this Global War on Terror now have "turned the corner" on us claiming that those who shed American blood are now the Freedom Fighters. Killing Americans is now their "noble cause". Liberate and leave has changed to liberate and languish and those that killed PFC Menchaca and PFC Tucker can expect a full pardon providing they had not shed Iraqi blood if the Iraqi government has its way.
How did we go from liberators to "the enemy"?
Liberators liberate and leave. That's what we do and we are good at it. But because we have not begun to drawdown and redeploy as we should, Jack Murtha's toughly worded but honest assessment that we have "become the enemy" has become tragically real to the families of PFC's Menchaca and Tucker. When the majority of the Iraqi people believe it is justified to kill Americans, this pardon/amnesty would make the torture and killing of servicemen like those young men legal. The proposed Iraqi pardon of those who have shed American blood is concrete proof of his honest assertion and will cost us lives and credibility. We know we are not the enemy. We know we were there to give the Iraqis a better life, but a line has to be drawn somewhere when the very same Iraqis believe we are "the enemy" and their government takes steps to legitimize that belief.
...Who Needs Enemies?
We should pull out to the periphery, test the Iraqi national will and allow a government emboldened to pardon whomever they please to finally stand for themselves. If they falter we will be close enough to strike in the same way we struck Zarquawi but far enough away to cease being targets. But to keep our troops where they are, in the service of a foreign government where American lives are just collateral damage is irresponsible and indefensible. We must not allow the enemy that has destroyed the lives of our servicemen and their families a chance to torture and kill again and we must not allow the Iraqi government to legitimize evil in order to keep a fractured country together. With friends like that, who needs enemies?
Here's a message from Joe Duran, giving us some perspective on the proposal to provide amnesty to ex-insurgents who may have killed Americans, but not Iraqis.
"Thunderstruck, bewildered, and pissed off."
That was pretty much the words you could use to describe the reaction of my fellow Marines and I as we discussed the latest news this morning.
The news that the freely elected Iraqi government is considering giving amnesty to those who have killed our servicemen and women hit us like a kick in the gut. The fact that they are even considering amnesty dishonors those brave young men and women who have sacrificed their lives to help them secure their freedom and endangers those still standing by emboldening the enemy to strike Americans. That hit a nerve, and hit it hard. You might say we were thunderstruck today, and that is not an easy thing to do to Marines. We are caught in the middle with no help from the Iraqi government we helped establish and protect.
After hearing the news this morning, some Gut Reactions:
"It's a B.S. move"
"It's a bad deal"
"What a bunch of As*&*$%*es"
"Give 'em an inch, they take a mile."
...and these are just for starters. A group that is relatively unmoved by their own government's decisions got fired up by a supposed ally on this Global War on Terror... Global unless you happen to kill an American in Iraq. Then you are a free man.
A majority of Iraqis believe it is justified to kill Americans. This amnesty would make it legal.
With friends like these, who needs enemies?
As the day progressed, the gut reactions developed into serious questions and nightmare scenarios.
One example: "So, we find these guys who made the IED that blew up my buddy. We take them prisoner and hold them. They are granted amnesty and are free to fight again as an insurgent in the streets, or infiltrate the Iraqi Security Forces and detonate a bomb in the very building that held them, killing more Americans and Iraqis."
Are they trying to piss us off? Or worse?
There can be no defense of this amnesty. To defend this would be to admit that this Global War on Terror is neither global, nor a war. To defend the Iraqis for suggesting this is to place their freedom to release terrorist over the welfare of our troops. And don't tell me that mission accomplishment has anything to do with releasing convicted terrorists. Isn't the reason we are told we are there is to fight those responsible for killing Americans on 9/11? What sense does it make, then, to release those very combatants for committing the very same act of murder on their soil? We disregarded the sovereignty of one regime unconnected to the events of 9/11 to avenge those deaths. Why are we stopping now?
So they can "reconcile"?
The word "reconcile" has been used by our leaders recently to put this outrage into a rosy and unrealistic light.
If we let them out to "reconcile," fine. Just get us out first. Then they "reconcile" each other to death. Leave us out of it, we did our part.
Here's a message from Joe Duran, giving us some perspective on the proposal to provide amnesty to ex-insurgents who may have killed Americans, but not Iraqis.
"Thunderstruck, bewildered, and pissed off."
That was pretty much the words you could use to describe the reaction of my fellow Marines and I as we discussed the latest news this morning.
The news that the freely elected Iraqi government is considering giving amnesty to those who have killed our servicemen and women hit us like a kick in the gut. The fact that they are even considering amnesty dishonors those brave young men and women who have sacrificed their lives to help them secure their freedom and endangers those still standing by emboldening the enemy to strike Americans. That hit a nerve, and hit it hard. You might say we were thunderstruck today, and that is not an easy thing to do to Marines. We are caught in the middle with no help from the Iraqi government we helped establish and protect.
After hearing the news this morning, some Gut Reactions:
"It's a B.S. move"
"It's a bad deal"
"What a bunch of As*&*$%*es"
"Give 'em an inch, they take a mile."
...and these are just for starters. A group that is relatively unmoved by their own government's decisions got fired up by a supposed ally on this Global War on Terror... Global unless you happen to kill an American in Iraq. Then you are a free man.
A majority of Iraqis believe it is justified to kill Americans. This amnesty would make it legal.
With friends like these, who needs enemies?
As the day progressed, the gut reactions developed into serious questions and nightmare scenarios.
One example: "So, we find these guys who made the IED that blew up my buddy. We take them prisoner and hold them. They are granted amnesty and are free to fight again as an insurgent in the streets, or infiltrate the Iraqi Security Forces and detonate a bomb in the very building that held them, killing more Americans and Iraqis."
Are they trying to piss us off? Or worse?
There can be no defense of this amnesty. To defend this would be to admit that this Global War on Terror is neither global, nor a war. To defend the Iraqis for suggesting this is to place their freedom to release terrorist over the welfare of our troops. And don't tell me that mission accomplishment has anything to do with releasing convicted terrorists. Isn't the reason we are told we are there is to fight those responsible for killing Americans on 9/11? What sense does it make, then, to release those very combatants for committing the very same act of murder on their soil? We disregarded the sovereignty of one regime unconnected to the events of 9/11 to avenge those deaths. Why are we stopping now?
So they can "reconcile"?
The word "reconcile" has been used by our leaders recently to put this outrage into a rosy and unrealistic light.
If we let them out to "reconcile," fine. Just get us out first. Then they "reconcile" each other to death. Leave us out of it, we did our part.
By Mike Zacchea
Mike Zacchea, from Long Island, NY, is a Marine Reserve Officer who served in Iraq from 2004 to 2005. He is also a member of the New York-based advocacy group IAVA: Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America
I am a reserve Marine officer. I served a year in Iraq as an advisor to the first Iraqi Army battalion trained by the US military. We participated in the assault on Fallujah in November 2004. I have served with the relieved battalion commander, LtCol Jeff Chessani, in garrison and in Iraq, in peace and war. I am completely comfortable in writing publicly that LtCol Chessani was among the Marine Corps' best and brightest officers, and had a sterling reputation and distinguished career until this incident. Significantly, Arwa Damon, a CNN reporter embedded with the battalion, has offered similar testimony.
I have been observing the media reports and shameless political grandstanding surrounding the allegations of a massacre of Iraqi civilians in Haditha in November 2005. There is much that disturbs me about these allegations, and the way they are being covered in the press. What concerns me is how the media, and the politicians, rush towards judgment, even before the facts have been made public. What concerns me even more is the lack of understanding of Iraqi culture, and the cultural dissonance between America and Iraq. Strike that. I was concerned about the allegations a week ago. Now these allegations are starting to royally piss me off. Here's why:
First, training in the Rules of Engagement and Law of Land Warfare is an annual training requirement in the Marine Corps, along with a number of other basic military skills. An integral part of Marine combat training includes target identification, and discerning friend from foe. It is difficult to overstate the Marine Corps' training emphasis on only engaging combatant targets.
Second, American troops receive extensive training in the Rules of Engagement and the Law of Land Warfare. During a unit's pre-deployment training, classroom instruction in these subjects is supported by application during field training in mock-Iraqi towns. Before entering Iraq, units going through Kuwait are given a general orientation to the theater of combat, including Rules of Engagement and the Law of Land Warfare.
Third, before every mission, the mission brief includes a review of applicable Rules of Engagement, including what to do with any enemy prisoners of war or detainees. This mission briefing occurs all the way down to the individual soldier/Marine level.
Fourth, I will stipulate that it is tragic when innocent Iraqis are killed, whether inadvertently or as a result of criminal behavior. But there is something profoundly offensive about a dynamic where American troops alleged to have killed an undetermined number of Iraqi civilians under hostile circumstances, while the insurgents are given a pass despite indiscriminately murdering dozens of Iraqis every day, hundreds of innocent Iraqis every month. Should Iraqis protest the killing of innocents? Absolutely. Should they give their own a pass, out of fear or sympathy? Hell no, that is completely and utterly unacceptable.
Fifth, there is what I call cultural dissonance between America and Iraq. The payment of money for damages is a staple of Iraqi culture, a society where there is an unreliable banking system, almost no civil court system, and no insurance system. In Iraq, the payment of cash for damages is the equivalent of our own "no fault" insurance. It is common for US units to compensate Iraqis for damages, whether a destroyed building, a car accident, or inadvertent injury or death. It is important to note, and this has not been reported by the American media, that the insurgents do not provide compensation to the families of those indiscriminately wounded or killed. By the rules of Iraqi culture, the insurgents are entirely beyond the pale of acceptable behavior. The American media wouldn't know this, and haven't bothered to report it.
Sixth, the insurgents are squeezing this story for every drop of publicity in their own information war. Whereas the American media's intended audience is the average American consumer, insulated from the war except as an abstract event, the insurgents' intended market for their information is the so-called Arab street, much of which is now experiencing the violence of occupation directly. For their cause, this story, regardless of the facts, has invaluable strategic value because it allows them to paint the American occupation of Iraq as criminal, and rally the Arab public to their cause.
Seventh, the pictures of the scene in Haditha and the interviews with Iraqis beg scrutiny, and more than a little skepticism. In a world where speaking to the media can be a death sentence, many Iraqis speaking to the American media have an ulterior motive. Unfortunately, the average American wouldn't know this. The average American will instead find a lamentable lack of journalistic balance. The average news consumer will form his or her opinion based on little more than rank speculation, incomplete facts, and overt sensationalism by ambitious journalists and politicians rushing to "get out in front of this."
Eighth, Americans don't understand that Iraqi society is in agony. Hundreds and hundreds or people are kidnapped, tortured, and indiscriminately murdered by a grim array of militias, security forces, criminal gangs, and foreign fundamentalists. For the average Iraqi, there is no where to hide from the spiraling violence. Those able to get out of the country, who can bribe the right officials to get a passport and set up a life in a neighboring country, the middle class and professional classes, are fleeing by the tens of thousands.
Iraqis should be enraged by the murder of innocents, whether by Americans or by Iraqi militia or by foreign fighters. Americans should be angry about the murder of innocents by American troops. I am angry about these allegations, and I will be angrier if they turn out to be true. Whatever did happen, indisputably, it is a tragedy for all those whose lives have been destroyed, Iraqis and Americans alike.
By Mike Zacchea
Mike Zacchea, from Long Island, NY, is a Marine Reserve Officer who served in Iraq from 2004 to 2005. He is also a member of the New York-based advocacy group IAVA: Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America
I am a reserve Marine officer. I served a year in Iraq as an advisor to the first Iraqi Army battalion trained by the US military. We participated in the assault on Fallujah in November 2004. I have served with the relieved battalion commander, LtCol Jeff Chessani, in garrison and in Iraq, in peace and war. I am completely comfortable in writing publicly that LtCol Chessani was among the Marine Corps' best and brightest officers, and had a sterling reputation and distinguished career until this incident. Significantly, Arwa Damon, a CNN reporter embedded with the battalion, has offered similar testimony.
I have been observing the media reports and shameless political grandstanding surrounding the allegations of a massacre of Iraqi civilians in Haditha in November 2005. There is much that disturbs me about these allegations, and the way they are being covered in the press. What concerns me is how the media, and the politicians, rush towards judgment, even before the facts have been made public. What concerns me even more is the lack of understanding of Iraqi culture, and the cultural dissonance between America and Iraq. Strike that. I was concerned about the allegations a week ago. Now these allegations are starting to royally piss me off. Here's why:
First, training in the Rules of Engagement and Law of Land Warfare is an annual training requirement in the Marine Corps, along with a number of other basic military skills. An integral part of Marine combat training includes target identification, and discerning friend from foe. It is difficult to overstate the Marine Corps' training emphasis on only engaging combatant targets.
Second, American troops receive extensive training in the Rules of Engagement and the Law of Land Warfare. During a unit's pre-deployment training, classroom instruction in these subjects is supported by application during field training in mock-Iraqi towns. Before entering Iraq, units going through Kuwait are given a general orientation to the theater of combat, including Rules of Engagement and the Law of Land Warfare.
Third, before every mission, the mission brief includes a review of applicable Rules of Engagement, including what to do with any enemy prisoners of war or detainees. This mission briefing occurs all the way down to the individual soldier/Marine level.
Fourth, I will stipulate that it is tragic when innocent Iraqis are killed, whether inadvertently or as a result of criminal behavior. But there is something profoundly offensive about a dynamic where American troops alleged to have killed an undetermined number of Iraqi civilians under hostile circumstances, while the insurgents are given a pass despite indiscriminately murdering dozens of Iraqis every day, hundreds of innocent Iraqis every month. Should Iraqis protest the killing of innocents? Absolutely. Should they give their own a pass, out of fear or sympathy? Hell no, that is completely and utterly unacceptable.
Fifth, there is what I call cultural dissonance between America and Iraq. The payment of money for damages is a staple of Iraqi culture, a society where there is an unreliable banking system, almost no civil court system, and no insurance system. In Iraq, the payment of cash for damages is the equivalent of our own "no fault" insurance. It is common for US units to compensate Iraqis for damages, whether a destroyed building, a car accident, or inadvertent injury or death. It is important to note, and this has not been reported by the American media, that the insurgents do not provide compensation to the families of those indiscriminately wounded or killed. By the rules of Iraqi culture, the insurgents are entirely beyond the pale of acceptable behavior. The American media wouldn't know this, and haven't bothered to report it.
Sixth, the insurgents are squeezing this story for every drop of publicity in their own information war. Whereas the American media's intended audience is the average American consumer, insulated from the war except as an abstract event, the insurgents' intended market for their information is the so-called Arab street, much of which is now experiencing the violence of occupation directly. For their cause, this story, regardless of the facts, has invaluable strategic value because it allows them to paint the American occupation of Iraq as criminal, and rally the Arab public to their cause.
Seventh, the pictures of the scene in Haditha and the interviews with Iraqis beg scrutiny, and more than a little skepticism. In a world where speaking to the media can be a death sentence, many Iraqis speaking to the American media have an ulterior motive. Unfortunately, the average American wouldn't know this. The average American will instead find a lamentable lack of journalistic balance. The average news consumer will form his or her opinion based on little more than rank speculation, incomplete facts, and overt sensationalism by ambitious journalists and politicians rushing to "get out in front of this."
Eighth, Americans don't understand that Iraqi society is in agony. Hundreds and hundreds or people are kidnapped, tortured, and indiscriminately murdered by a grim array of militias, security forces, criminal gangs, and foreign fundamentalists. For the average Iraqi, there is no where to hide from the spiraling violence. Those able to get out of the country, who can bribe the right officials to get a passport and set up a life in a neighboring country, the middle class and professional classes, are fleeing by the tens of thousands.
Iraqis should be enraged by the murder of innocents, whether by Americans or by Iraqi militia or by foreign fighters. Americans should be angry about the murder of innocents by American troops. I am angry about these allegations, and I will be angrier if they turn out to be true. Whatever did happen, indisputably, it is a tragedy for all those whose lives have been destroyed, Iraqis and Americans alike.
"Psychology, as I understand it, means knowledge of the soul. Yet, how shall we speak about the souls of others, when we do not even know our own? Is there a single one of us who can say with certainty how he will react to a certain event? Nevertheless, as leaders we must have some knowledge of the souls of our soldiers; because the soldier, the living man, is the instrument with which we have to work in war...no commander lacking in this inner knowledge of his men can accomplish great things."
- Adolph Von Schell, "Battle Leadership" (1933) Standard Marine Corps Reading
After spending billions of our dollars and lives Mr. Bush is slowly finding out what he could have learned for the price of a used book or a youth better spent:
Experienced troops need experienced leadership.
Never has a gap in a life's history become so apparent, and so dangerous, than now. Had he the experience of a warrior, he would truly understand what the military man needs to win a war. Had he the soul of one, he would have learned the role that faith in leadership plays in the hearts of our troops. Now, as his leadership moment passes into history, a chance of a lifetime to atone for missing time when he was needed most gone, he has chosen to align himself with something other than the soul of a soldier.
And this soldier's soul will never forget.
Guest blog by Michael Zacchea
Memory is painful. The more I remember, the more it hurts. There is a deep, dark part of me would rather not remember.
I was speaking to some veterans recently, from a variety of American conflicts. World War II. Korea. Viet Nam. The Gulf. And most recently, Iraq. They all admitted to similar feelings.
I spent a year in Iraq, from March 2004 to March 2005. Alone with my memories, I find myself starting to forget. I re-read my journal and saved e-mails to remember my experiences in Iraq, and the people I shared them with. I look at the pictures we took.
As soon as I am finished, the images and names begin to fade from my mind. Particularly of the fellows with whom I served who were grievously wounded or killed.
It's a weird phenomenon, one veterans of other wars have experienced. When a soldier or Marine is killed or grievously wounded in Iraq, it is the crisis of the moment - in the context of the event, whether an attack, and IED, a mortar or rocket attack, any number of ways the insurgents have figured out to kill the best and brightest America has to offer. And everyone around the unfortunate soldier or Marine responds with a sense of urgency appropriate to saving the life that hangs in the balance. In a half hour, the wounded soldier or Marine is on his or her way to the nearest Combat Surgical Hospital. Within 24 hours, he or she is being flown to Germany.
And that's the last we know of them, at least while we're in theater. Then we move on to the next immediate crisis, the next attack, the next suicide bombing. There might be some quiet talk, maybe a prayer for the departed (literally) soldier or Marine, and then the moving soldier's tribute to their fallen comrades. One day they are there, the next day they are not. And we move on to the next crisis.
I'm told that the fading of memory is a defense mechanism. I can understand that. How could any of us go on another convoy after seeing one of our own ripped to shreds and burnt by an IED, if we held the images in our minds? How could any of us raid an insurgent hide-out if we were thinking about a comrade shot in the face at close range by an AK-47?
Then there is the guilt. In our secret hearts, all of us say a silent prayer, thanking God it wasn't us. And that is not fair to those left behind of the soldiers and Marines killed or wounded, the parents and spouses and children, those left to try to put back together their shattered lives, and left with their own memories. The guilt is leisurely, because no one is shooting at us. There are no IEDs when we drive on the highways. We have the rest of our lives to feel guilty, and to grieve. In war, the guilt is assuaged by the immediate task at hand, the next mission, and its inherent danger. It could be any one of us next time.
Memorial Day is difficult for me, because memory is painful. It hurts to think of the men I served with who were killed, or traumatically wounded. Dylan Thomas wrote in his elegiac poem Fern Hill:
Citizen-soldier Mike Zacchea is a major in the reserves who has served In Iraq, Haiti and Somalia, receiving numerous medals including two Bronze Stars and a Purple Heart.
Let us not forget the sacrifices the First Americans made in the war in Iraq. Below is a link to a slide show honoring one such American Indian. One of the more beautiful ceremonies I have seen (PowerPoint Slide Show).
My girlfriend Linda sent this to me and I want to take the occasion to thank her publicly for the sacrifices she has made for us. We often forget to honor the loved ones of our soldiers and recognize all that they do.
Linda's brother, Erik Mathijssen is a Gunnery Sgt (USMC), and did two tours in Iraq with 1st Recon. He joined the Marine Corp when he was 18 and has been in for 14 years now!
Larry, her boyfriend, just retired from 4th Recon in January of this year. 24 years in the military - that is a lifetime. He is a complete Prince. Check this romance story out, they met because he replaced her brother over in Iraq and Linda kept sending her one of a kind care packages to him.
Linda's "adopted" son, Bryan - her son's best friend - did a year in Iraq and anticipates deploying again either to Afghanistan or Iraq possibly in the fall.
Thank you Linda for sharing this slide show with me and thank you for everything you do!
More thoughts from Sgt. Joe Duran:
The battling analogies...Fukuyama, a noted thinker and essayist likening the Iraqi pre-emptive war to committing a suicide to prevent a killing...a day later Rumsfeld, the right's version of Kennedy's best and brightest, comparing the notion of leaving Iraq now to giving Germany back to the Nazis...c'mon guys...
This is America. In America you use sports analogies when discussing geo-politics and anything else that isn't sports. It's March Madness for crying out loud! The NFL draft is just around the corner! We're thinking brackets, not BRAC! Draft selections, not Iraqi elections! So if Fukuyama or Rumsfeld, or anyone else important wants to get our attention about this war, we'll give you a hand with your analogies and make them something we can understand.
First of all, the Iraq war is not football, basketball, or any other game with a clock. Those games have a beginning and an end. This administration has decided that our opponent cannot know when this war ends, less they be emboldened to win. I have a hint for these smart ones. Our enemies know that if we are still there -- the game's not over!
The Iraq War is not a tennis, bowling, or baseball. While there are no clocks for these sports, there is a definite scoring system involved. This administration has not decided on any concrete way to measure victory. The Iraqi Security Forces are able to defend themselves as stand alone units? What does that mean to the sports fan? It means that the game isn't over until the JV suits up and takes over the game. I don't know about you, but if I were the other team, I would just wait for the JV to take the field, and then pound them. This definitely wouldn't happen in any sport I know.
So now they know which sports analogies not to use. Which leaves us with this last one. What sport has no scoring, no time clocks, and yet has a definite winner at the end that can claim "complete victory"? Only one.
And it was played over a thousand years ago in the Coliseum of Rome for an Emperor that watched as men wielded weapons that he had only seen and never touched. It is the ultimate sport that all sports analogies derive from. "Sudden death" or "complete victory". Only one man had the power to decide this with the up or down of a thumb. This, my friend, is the ultimate sports analogy, and one we should remember through this March Madness.
What we want is to win. The best way to win is to do it quickly. Not this cat and mouse game. The longer the insurgency goes on, the stronger it will become. History shows this. You see, in 10 - 20 years the fighters will be born into the insurgency, not just trained. That is a tough enemy to beat.
Your unique voice captured my attention, the very first time I heard it, and when you captured my attention last night I listened to you because I can relate to what you were saying. You're different. Ms. Sheehan too had the same unique voice and quality about her, and in her I saw my mother, a woman of conscience and courage. I felt a smear against her was a smear against all service-members mothers, including my own, and I spoke out publicly in her defense.
Now she is a celebrity of sorts, with an agenda that has grown with time. Her list of friends and supporters has grown from the concerned families who lit candles on the side of the road to what appears to be an industry, and this industry includes a man that has a serious beef with our administration. I still understand her big picture and as a citizen she has a right to speak out. But Ms Sheehan has traded in her once unique voice in return for a larger audience.
Sometimes smaller is bigger and "unique" always captures our imagination. Hanging with Chavez just stereotypes her. I thought her cause was bigger than that, and I'm disappointed. Ten years from now Chavez will be a memory if this admininstration has anything to do with it. I was hoping Cindy would've realized that. Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, and Cesar Chavez were unique too. Their message played to everyone and their voices were stronger than any world leader's stage. They made their own stage with their message. She may be trading in the legacy of one Chavez for another, and by that, diminish her truth. Unique people would never do that.
Flav- these are the things that effect morale. Not the truth, never the truth, but the ineptitude of policy-making that kills, maims, and wounds the heart.
James Glanz of the NYT writes:
"Sweeping statistics on insurgent violence in Iraq that were declassified for a Senate hearing on Wednesday appear to portray a rebellion whose ability to mount attacks has steadily grown in the nearly three years since the invasion.
The statistics were included in a report written by Joseph A. Christoff, director of international affairs and trade at the Government Accountability Office, who testified before the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee during a hearing on Iraq stabilization and reconstruction."
Here is a message I received today:
"I am a Marine currently serving at 4th Marine Aircraft Wing in New Orleans. Right now my fellow Marines and I are watching as we slowly slouch towards war with Iran. If deployed to the area, I promise you this: we will fight together, and we will fight valiantly. We will fight for those we do not know and for a cause we might not share. But we will fight. And when we come home, we may continue our fight, in the halls of power, the state capitols, and DC, if we so choose. We have earned it in blood and sweat. No one, and I mean no one, has the right to impugn our service, or our credentials without expecting a defense. I am defending Mr. Murtha because he did in Vietnam what others would not do. And I thank God for giving me the chance to make my mark as he has. And when I come home, will you be there to slander me too?"
It's a matter of trust.
Do we trust them when they tell us "mission accomplished"?
Do we trust them when they say they are in their "last throes"?
Trust. Confidence. Fidelity.
These are the things worth most to a Marine. When we have these things in our hearts, nothing can stop us. When these things are lost, its only a matter of time.
It is never too late to tell the truth. But it may be too late to recover our trust, confidence, and fidelity. And for a Marine, its a loss that we can never afford.
Here's another note I got from Sgt. Joe Duran:
Something I was thinking about on the ride home today after talking with the guys: You can tell Cheney never served by the way he's handled this last issue. Military guys tend not to wait to be handled. They go on guts. Bush waits. Cheney waits. They all wait. To bad Hackett pulled out. Not a very strategic guy, at first, but sometimes its good to let it all hang out, like Murtha did. Its more genuine. And in times like these, I think thats what we need. Its been so long since we've had bare-your-soul honesty, f*&* the polls, focus groups, and donor lists.
Hackett should've taken this quote to heart: "Don't just fight the fights you can win, fight the ones worth fighting." Its gotten so bad that people wouldn't know the truth when they hear it. They'd just assume they're being handled and spun.To quote a movie-again: "People don't drink the sand because they're thirsty. They drink the sand because they don't know the difference." I just hope people like you can help the rest of us make the distinction between strategy and honesty. They've been serving us sand margaritas for so long.
Hope your "gigs" are successful because your wins are the people's wins.
I don't think the Administration is on the cusp of losing the support and morale in any significant way, nor will the negative feeling spread in a way that effects our performance in any substantial way for 2 reasons.
The first reason is that the Marine Corps is very good at managing the education and informational input of its troops and by extension, what we think and feel. I first noticed this shortly after the attacks of 9/11 when the hallways of work were filled with professionally produced posters bearing the image of the burning and smoking Twin Towers in the middle and photos of Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein on either side of it. It was a very powerful image, and very wrong. It is no wonder that, "while 85% said the U.S. mission is mainly "to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks," 77% said they also believe the main or a major reason for the war was "to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq." (Zogby , 2/28/06).
These astounding percentages nearly 5 years after the attacks and over 4 years after the invasion of Iraq is a testament to the power of this administration’s management of information and education of its citizen soldiers. They have only begun to flex their power.
I can further describe what the Pentagon has created within its forces with this quote:
It is a "culture of silence - rather than being encouraged and equipped to know and respond to the concrete realities of their world, (the soldiers) are kept submerged in a situation in which critical awareness and response are practically impossible - and it becomes clear that the whole educational system was one of the major instruments for the maintenance of the culture of silence". (Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, 1970).
Freire’s culture of silence is an apt description of our current state of the union and or armed forces and how any negative feelings that you mentioned will not spread in any real way. No one talks about them. They come secondary to the task at hand.
The second reason the president has to do no further than what he has done to keep our morale at sufficient levels is more visceral to me. As the Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps, Sergeant Major Estrada, told a small room of NCO’s of which I was a part of today, "it comes down to doing our job, a job that not many people would step up for, one that we might be asked to kill, or be killed, doing. That is why we are the few, the proud." Almost 300 years of military tradition will squelch any significant negative feelings from spreading quickly throughout the military, and if it does, we are being trained to wear that hardship as a badge of honor. I could feel the goosebumps rise on my neck. It is a powerful antidote to bad news.
Flavia,
I just came back from visiting 3 young Marines at Brook Army Medical Center in San Antonio. I had never met them before that day, but I will never forget them. They are the young and the brave, and the best our country has to offer. They have done all that has been asked of them by leaders who have not done the same when it was their time to serve. Please honor these young Americans by continuing to do all you can, so when the last Marine comes home, you, along with Jack Murtha, can say: "We did not forget them. We did all we could."
Respectfully,
Sgt G.J. Duran
USMC, New Orleans
________________
We need to measure success with hard numbers. We are "bowling in the dark". Without metrics we cannot make the best decisions as it regards to drawing down. This "slow bleed" is hurting our families and can effect morale in a negative manner. This will lead to attrition of force numbers, a reduction in recruitment numbers, and it leaves the men and women in the field without adequate reinforcements. Something as simple as winning or losing is indiscernable to the average citizen. This is wrong.
We must keep our promises. The leadership in DC is attempting to impose commissions and spending bills that will ultimately reduce military benefits and the Department of Veteran Affairs funding. These programs are committments made--not welfare. The servicemen and women have worked hard keeping our promise to defend this country. All we ask is for the same committment from those who send us to war.
We need accountability. The last thing a soldier or his family should have on their mind is faulty equipment. As families ready for deployment, unfortunately it is in the back of our minds. It is the responsibility of our leadership to provide the best equipment to its troops and to correct deficiencies. We cannot fight this war "on the cheap". We owe it to the troops to hold those responsible for sending us into harms way with inadequate armor accountable for their actions and inactions. We owe it to the troops and their families to investigate this.
We need to increase the size of our force. Right now we are spread too thin. Many hardworking men and women are asked to go back for a second and third tour. This puts an undue strain on the military families at home. These military families have done more than their share and should not be penalized for a failure to plan ahead. Hurricane Katrina spotlighted the glaring gap in our readiness created by the over extension of forces. People like my wife, a first-responder as a sheriff's deputy, were tasked with jobs reserved for the National Guard. Inadequate force size leaves us vulnerable at home. It doesn't have to be this way.
We need to utilize all resouces available to the United States to avert war. Unending war only weakens this country. The economy, the environment, dependence on foreign sources of energy, healthcare and AIDS funding, and every issue that affects not just the people of Louisiana, but every American as they take a backseat to the funding of this war. By employing a strong and smart diplomatic effort, America can deal from a position of strength and increase her respect in the world. Respect and strength leads to a de-escalation of conflict, and allows America's leaders to focus on issues that need more attention.
We must take care of the military family. TRICARE should be extended to all servicemembers. As the National Gaurdsmen and reservist shoulder more of the load in this war, it is only fair to cover them and their families for the extraordinary service they have given to our country. It is the right thing to do and they deserve it. In addition, due to the increased responsiblity placed on our veterans, it is important that we recognize their years of hard work by lowering the retirement age to 55 from 60. It is also of vital importance that we institue a pay increase to reflect the current cost of living for our servicemembers. This will increase moral and show our committment to them for a job that only few would do.
I hope this helps. These are by and large needs and issues that should be bi-partisan, but its good to see the democrats take the lead on these issues that affect so many families living in our state and everywhere.
We must keep our promises. The leadership in DC is attempting to impose commissions and spending bills that will ultimately reduce military benefits and the Department of Veteran Affairs funding. These programs are committments made--not welfare. The servicemen and women have worked hard keeping our promise to defend this country. All we ask is for the same committment from those who send us to war.
We need accountability. The last thing a soldier should worry about is faulty equipment. The military families worry too. It is the responsibility of our leadership to provide the best equipment to its troops and to correct deficiencies. We cannot fight this war "on the cheap". We owe it to the troops and their families to hold those responsible for sending us into harms way without adequate armor. They must be held accountable for their actions and inactions. We owe it to the troops and their families to investigate this and bring it to the light of day.
We need to increase the size of our force. Right now we are spread too thin. Many hardworking men and women are asked to go back for a second and third tour. This puts an undue strain on the military families at home. These military families have done more than their share and should not be penalized for a failure to plan ahead. Hurricane Katrina spotlighted the glaring gap in our readiness created by the over extension of forces. People like my wife, a first-responder as a sheriff's deputy, were tasked with jobs reserved for the National Guard. Inadequate force size leaves us vulnerable at home. It doesn't have to be this way. We need to utilize all resouces available to the United States to avert war. Unending war only weakens this country. The economy, the environment, dependence on foreign sources of energy, healthcare and AIDS funding, and every issue that affects not just the people of Louisiana, but every American is neglected. By employing a strong and smart diplomatic effort, America can deal from a position of strength and increase her respect in the world. Respect and strength leads to a de-escalation of conflict, and allows America's leaders to focus on issues that need more attention.
We must take care of the military family. TRICARE should be extended to all servicemembers. As the National Gaurdsmen and reservist shoulder more of the load in this war, it is only fair to cover them and their families for the extraordinary service they have given to our country. It is the right thing to do and they deserv> e it. In addition, due to the increased responsiblity placed on our veterans, it is important that we recognize their years of hard work by lowering the retirement age to 55 from 60. It is also of vital importance that we institue a pay increase to reflect the current cost of living for our servicemembers. This will increase morale and show our committment to those who have raised their hands to defend America's freedom.
If these committments are kept by our leaders, we will retain our supremacy and strengthen our security in this time of terror and tribulation. Anything less would be a failure of responsibility.
Some veterans bear visible signs of their service; a missing limb, an aged scar, a certain look in the eye. Others may carry the evidence inside them: a pin holding a bone together, a piece of shrapnel in the leg, or perhaps another sort of inner steel - the soul's ally forged in the refinery of adversity. Except in parades or certain meetings, however, the men and women who have kept America safe wear no badge or emblem. You can't tell a vet just by looking.
What is a Vet? He is the cop on the beat who spent six months in Saudi Arabia sweating two gallons a day making sure the armored personnel carriers didn't run out of fuel. He is the barroom loudmouth, dumber than five wooden planks, whose overgrown frat-boy behavior is outweighed a hundred times in the cosmic scales by four hours of exquisite bravery near the 38th parallel. She - or he - is the nurse who fought against futility and went to sleep sobbing every night for two solid years in Da Nang. He is the POW who went away one person and came back another - or didn't come back AT ALL. He is the Quantico drill instructor that has never seen combat but has saved countless lives by turning slouchy, no-account rednecks and gang members into Marines, and teaching them to watch each other's backs.
He is the parade-riding Legionnaire who pins on his ribbons and medals with a prosthetic hand. He is the career quartermaster who watches the ribbons and medals pass him by. He is the three anonymous heroes in the Tomb Of The Unknowns, whose presence at the Arlington National Cemetery must forever preserve the memory of all the anonymous heroes whose valor dies unrecognized with them on the battlefield or in the ocean's sunless depths. He is the old guy bagging groceries at the supermarket, palsied now and aggravatingly slow, who helped liberate a Nazi death camp and who wishes all day long that his wife were still alive to hold him when the nightmares come.
He is an ordinary and yet an extraordinary human being, a person who offered some of his life's most vital years in the service of his country and who sacrificed his ambitions so others would not have to sacrifice theirs. He is a soldier and a savior and a sword against the darkness, and he is nothing more than the finest, greatest testimony on behalf of the finest, greatest nation ever known.
If only each time we would see someone who served our country, not just on days we are expected to, we would simply lean over and say "Thank you". That's all most people need and most times, it will mean more than any huge celebration or medals they could have been awarded or were awarded. Two little words that mean a lot, "thank you".
(Author Unknown)
Last night, I learned that the interpreter assigned to me while I was in Iraq, who went with us all through our combat operations, who was by my side the whole time, was assassinated. He had survived two assassination attempts since December, and still he wouldn't quit. This is a man who never took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of either Iraq or the US; a man with a wife and a mother and a 3-yr old son. He remained faithful to his duty, and to the cause of democracy and peace, despite the danger, and until the end.
I feel a mix of pride, and grief, and hope, and despair. Pride, that he was my friend, and we survived some of the worst Iraq had to offer, pride at his courage and commitment despite the mortal danger; grief, at the loss of a fine man and friend; hope, because Iraq produces such men, with commitment to a better future Iraq beyond our comprehension; and despair, that such men may be killed by insurgents and criminals.
Citizen-soldier Mike Zacchea is a major in the reserves who has served In Iraq, Haiti and Somalia, receiving numerous medals including two Bronze Stars and a Purple Heart.
A new PAC called Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America PAC launched and, announcing that an Iraq Vet from Pittsburgh, Jon Soltz will head it, while Wes Clark will lead its Board of Advisors. It's about time! It's ironic and sad that not a single elected official who has debated the war in Iraq actually served in it. IAVA PAC is trying to change that, by existing for the sole purpose of getting Iraq and Afghanistan Vets into elected office. There are 10 Iraq Vets running in 2006 for Congress, ten Dems and one Republican. Frankly, I don't care which party they come from, - as long as they are willing to cut through the BS coming out of Washington. The President has bungled this war, and the Democratic leadership refuses to put together a plan to get out. The more heroes from the war in Iraq get into Congress, the more the course we are on in Iraq can change, because only these Vets have the credibility to really move the debate and push for serious action.
IAVA PAC will only help those Iraq Vets who are willing to challenge the President on Iraq and demand a strategy with hard metrics to measure goals that will trigger a safe drawdown of Troops. They will be the new generation of Chuck Hagels and Jack Murthas.
They are trying to raise $25,000 in one week. It won't be easy. But for those of you out there who say you support the Troops, it's time to put your money where your mouth is and support this PAC!
See more about them at www.IAVAPAC.org
Today a new study by the Journal of the American Medical Association showed striking new findings about the severity of the mental health crisis facing returning Iraq veterans. One in five Iraq vets need mental health care. This may come as news to the politicians in Washington. But for anyone who’s been listening to Iraq veterans, this should be no surprise.
Right now, new veterans are facing a health care system that simply isn't ready for the influx. From hotlines that never get answered, to VA centers threatened by closure, to medical claims that get lost in the shuffle, the system designed to care for our Veterans needs a drastic overhaul.
The embers glowed softly, and in their dim light,
I gazed round the room and I cherished the sight.
My wife was asleep, her head on my chest,
My daughter beside me, angelic in rest
Outside the snow fell, a blanket of white,
transforming the yard to a winter delight.
The sparkling lights in the tree I believe,
Completed the magic that was Christmas Eve.
My eyelids were heavy, my breathing was deep,
Secure and surrounded by love I would sleep.
In perfect contentment, or so it would seem,
So I slumbered, perhaps I started to dream.
The sound wasn't loud, and it wasn't too near,
But I opened my eyes when it tickled my ear.
Perhaps just a cough, I didn't quite know,
Then the sure sound of footsteps outside in the snow.
My soul gave a tremble, I struggled to hear,
And I crept to the door just to see who was near.
Standing out in the cold and the dark of the night,
a lone figure stood, his face weary and tight.
A soldier, I puzzled, some twenty years old,
Perhaps a Marine, huddled here in the cold.
Alone in the dark, he looked up and smiled,
standing watch over me, and my wife and my child.
"What are you doing?" I asked without fear,
"Come in this moment, it's freezing out here!
Put down your pack, brush the snow from your sleeve,
You should be at home on a cold Christmas Eve!"
For barely a moment; I saw his eyes shift,
Away from the cold and the snow blown in drifts..
To the window that danced with a warm fire's light.
Then he sighed and he said "Its really all right,
I'm out here by choice. I'm here every night."
"It's my duty to stand at the front of the line,
That separates you from the darkest of times.
No one had to ask or beg or implore me,
I'm proud to stand here like my fathers before me.
My Gramps died at 'Pearl on a day in December,"
Then he sighed, "That's a Christmas 'Gram always remembers."
My dad stood his watch in the jungles of 'Nam',
And now it is my turn and so, here I am.
I've not seen my own son in more than a while,
But my wife sends me pictures, he's sure got her smile.
Then he bent and he carefully pulled from his bag,
The red, white, and blue... an American flag.
"I can live through the cold and the being alone,
Away from my family , my house and my home.
I can stand at my post through the rain and the sleet,
I can sleep in a foxhole with little to eat.
I can carry the weight of killing another,
Or lay down my life with my sister and brother..
Who stand at the front against any and all,
To ensure for all time that this flag will not fall."
"So go back inside," he said, "harbor no fright,
Your family is waiting and I'll be all right."
"But isn't there something I can do, at the least,
"Give you money," I asked, "or prepare you a feast?"
It seems all too little for all that you've done,
For being away from your wife and your son."
Then his eye welled a tear that held no regret,
"Just tell us you love us, and never forget.
To fight for our rights back at home while we're gone,
To stand your own watch, no matter how long.
For when we come home, either standing or dead,
To know you remember we fought and we bled.
Is payment enough, and with that we will trust,
That we mattered to you as you mattered to us.
WE ALL NEED TO PRAY FOR OUR MILITARY PERSONNEL EVERY NIGHT
This editorial from the Los Angeles Times cites that paper's interview with U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, in which he asserted the United States had "opened the Pandora's box" when it removed Saddam Hussein from power, creating the potential for widespread sectarian violence to lead to a civil war between Sunnis and Shiites. The editorial notes that this candor is out of the ordinary: "Usually such candor from high-ranking administration officials — about Iraq or anything else — comes only after the word "former" appears before their titles."
Below are thoughts from a soldier about his deployment, who at this point does not want to be identified. He did decide, however, that he wanted me to post them, as they might help others.
Anyway there will be billets for my MOS in plenty in July. That is good because it gives me more time to visit friends and family. They won't say it, when I visit, but they know and I know why I visit. Its to drink them in, too take in the way they smile and sound. The way they feel in my arms and hold onto it just in case I need it when I'm gone, and to give them a piece of me to hold. I wonder if other sons, daughters, husbands and wives, and mothers and fathers feel this way too before they leave. Of course they do and now it's my turn.
I did not think I would know what it feels like to deploy so soon. I thought it started on the tarmac, or when the plane touches down, but it has started now and I have been wrestling with this feeling, now for the first time after 6 years in. I could hear sadness in my baby sister Lisa's voice (she's 33 but she'll always be my baby sister.) My father said "Son, why?" I hadn't spoken to him in over 12 years. I called him yesterday. He called back and I answered "Sgt ---" on the phone. Imagine hearing your sons voice for the first time after that long. I was 24 years old then. He was 44 then, 8 years older than I am now. I suspect he knows why I called.
Flavia, this can be a sad business. It's not a game. What hurts, makes me scared I guess, is not what's over there, but the thought that I have people here that love me, in fear for me. I am awed by the people who have gone, come back, and have left again, and the families that they leave behind. Deployment has started now, I guess this is what it feels like. I just wanted to give you the feeling as it is happening, my first thoughts, as there is really no one else to share them with without upsetting them and I don't want to do that. it would be selfish. Hopefully, it can help you in some way with what you do. just for your eyes. I feel better for having written it and it is out. thanks