All Iraq Ain't All Bad

[Desertrat]

http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/thanks-and-praise.htm

"A Muslim man had invited the American soldiers from “Chosen” Company 2-12 Infantry to the church, where I videotaped as Muslims and Christians worked and rejoiced at the reopening of St John’s, an occasion all viewed as a sign of hope.

The Iraqis asked me to convey a message of thanks to the American people. ” Thank you, thank you,” the people were saying. One man said, “Thank you for peace.” Another man, a Muslim, said “All the people, all the people in Iraq, Muslim and Christian, is brother.” The men and women were holding bells, and for the first time in memory freedom rang over the ravaged land between two rivers."

'Rat

[Queso]

Sadly if that picture gets widespread circulation I don't give St. John's church much time at all.

[mactastic]

Well that's it then. Smashing success.

Can we bring the troops home now? Or has it been such a success that we'll need to keep troops there for 50 years?

[leekohler]

Looks like it's all over! Can my cousin come home now, please?

[Mac OS X Ocelot]

http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/thanks-and-praise.htm

"A Muslim man had invited the American soldiers from “Chosen” Company 2-12 Infantry to the church, where I videotaped as Muslims and Christians worked and rejoiced at the reopening of St John’s, an occasion all viewed as a sign of hope.

The Iraqis asked me to convey a message of thanks to the American people. ” Thank you, thank you,” the people were saying. One man said, “Thank you for peace.” Another man, a Muslim, said “All the people, all the people in Iraq, Muslim and Christian, is brother.” The men and women were holding bells, and for the first time in memory freedom rang over the ravaged land between two rivers."

'Rat

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED

[saltyzoo]

Well that's it then. Smashing success.

Can we bring the troops home now? Or has it been such a success that we'll need to keep troops there for 50 years?

Yes, I mean the troops in Germany came home the day after WWII ended, right?

[ucfgrad93]

Yes, I mean the troops in Germany came home the day after WWII ended, right?

Lets not forget about Korea. ;)

[mactastic]

Yes, I mean the troops in Germany came home the day after WWII ended, right?
I believe there were some extenuating circumstances involved there. As conservatives like to note, WWIII began right about that time.

Lets not forget about Korea. ;)
Ah yes. Another smashing military success, no?

[mactastic]

"It's sad and interesting that nobody even questions that the OP might exaggerate or take things out of context, but there's no problem accepting the premise of the thread."

Hmmm....

[ucfgrad93]

Ah yes. Another smashing military success, no?

I'd say the South Koreans would think so. They were the ones invaded, and we led the U.N. to throw out the invaders.

[mactastic]

I'd say the South Koreans would think so. They were the ones invaded, and we led the U.N. to throw out the invaders.
And 50 years later we're still at war with the invaders. Sounds like the definition of military success to me.

[Iscariot]

What's that song again? Oh yeah...

America! **** YEAH!

[solvs]

Well that's it then. Smashing success.

Can we bring the troops home now? Or has it been such a success that we'll need to keep troops there for 50 years?
Looks like it's all over! Can my cousin come home now, please?
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED
That was my first thought too. Great. We won. Let's leave.

Yes, I mean the troops in Germany came home the day after WWII ended, right?
Lets not forget about Korea. ;)
We don't still have hundreds of thousands of active combat troops currently coming and going from either of those places right now do we? In war zones? With another couple of hundred thousand paid militia... er, I mean, contractors?

Of course NK already has nukes, so it's obvious we need to focus on real threats, places that might have had weapons related programs like Iraq... I mean, Iran.

[Desertrat]

I don't see where this is in any way more than an indicator that what's being done is making improvements over the way things have been there. This item merely corroborates what a lot of the GIs there are saying. Nobody is pretending that it's all wonderful all over the country.

From the comments, it sounds like a lot of folks are hoping that we'll leave and a civil war will break out, providing a lot of dead bodies as proof of the cleverness of the naysayers.

It's pretty obvious that the purely military strategy worked. It's also obvious that the occupation strategy sucked. Well, you don't go to someone's house, puke on the carpet and then just leave and go home. You stay and help clean up the mess. Cleaning up the mess is a slow process. It's obviously too slow for an instant-gratification society...

'Rat

[Iscariot]

I don't see where this is in any way more than an indicator that what's being done is making improvements over the way things have been there. This item merely corroborates what a lot of the GIs there are saying. Nobody is pretending that it's all wonderful all over the country.

From the comments, it sounds like a lot of folks are hoping that we'll leave and a civil war will break out, providing a lot of dead bodies as proof of the cleverness of the naysayers.

It's pretty obvious that the purely military strategy worked. It's also obvious that the occupation strategy sucked. Well, you don't go to someone's house, puke on the carpet and then just leave and go home. You stay and help clean up the mess. Cleaning up the mess is a slow process. It's obviously too slow for an instant-gratification society...

'Rat

But this line of thinking assumes that a) a civil war at this point is avoidable and b) a civil war will be more destructive than continued occupation. Upon assuming those two premises to be true, we encounter a third premise; the occupation is capable of defeating the terrorists/stopping violence and preventing a civil war. Regardless of the first two, I think the third is, at this point and time, demonstrably false, without a dramatic change is tactics.

[Genghis Khan]

I can't help thinking that the Us propaganda department was working overtime to circulate that photo:rolleyes:

Put simply, i'm against the Iraq war, and it should end now...there's nothing the US army can do now

[Thomas Veil]

Yes, I mean the troops in Germany came home the day after WWII ended, right?No, they had to stay because they got involved in a quagmire between different German religious-political-ethnic groups, with terrorist fanatics egging them on. For years after WWII ended, thousands more of our soldiers died trying to prevent this, but we just got in deeper and deeper.

Great argument. :rolleyes:

[leekohler]

I don't see where this is in any way more than an indicator that what's being done is making improvements over the way things have been there. This item merely corroborates what a lot of the GIs there are saying. Nobody is pretending that it's all wonderful all over the country.

From the comments, it sounds like a lot of folks are hoping that we'll leave and a civil war will break out, providing a lot of dead bodies as proof of the cleverness of the naysayers.

It's pretty obvious that the purely military strategy worked. It's also obvious that the occupation strategy sucked. Well, you don't go to someone's house, puke on the carpet and then just leave and go home. You stay and help clean up the mess. Cleaning up the mess is a slow process. It's obviously too slow for an instant-gratification society...

'Rat

Well gosh 'rat, sorry for wanting instant gratification for a war that should never have happened in the first place. Never mind the fact that NOT ONE of the reasons for going there were true either. And never mind the fact that no matter when we leave, there's going to be a civil war. All the groups involved hate each other and have for centuries. Do you really think we're going to fix that in even 10 years or even 20? No way.

[Desertrat]

leekohler, it doesn't matter about being wrong in going in. We went. We're there. For all that it would be good to not be there, it's not just the Bushies who foresee a worse situation if we leave any time soon.

Dislike of war and dislike of our presence in Iraq does not justify denigration of any positive indicators. (I don't want to downplay negatives or over-hype the positives.)

Without objective and honest reporting of the good as well as the bad, we don't and can't know if things would be better or worse if we left.

My opinion, FWIW, is that most of the reporting has ignored the good things. Too many first-hand reports from servicemen indicate more good than is being told us via the news.

'Rat

[leekohler]

leekohler, it doesn't matter about being wrong in going in. We went. We're there. For all that it would be good to not be there, it's not just the Bushies who foresee a worse situation if we leave any time soon.

Dislike of war and dislike of our presence in Iraq does not justify denigration of any positive indicators. (I don't want to downplay negatives or over-hype the positives.)

Without objective and honest reporting of the good as well as the bad, we don't and can't know if things would be better or worse if we left.

My opinion, FWIW, is that most of the reporting has ignored the good things. Too many first-hand reports from servicemen indicate more good than is being told us via the news.

'Rat

Really? Which servicemen? The ones I know say it isn't worth one more drop of American blood. This is coming from a 20 year vet and my cousin who's 21, not to mention a few other friends who've managed to come back in one piece. I have another cousin who just left. Frankly, I'm sick of sending people off for W's lies. That place isn't going to be fixed by the military, period.

[Desertrat]

Sorta doubt a "my folks vs. your folks" is worthwhile. I will say I had a very strongly negative attitude about the Korean deal, but history shows it was not a bad thing. I came off occupation duty there in 1955, and would have cheerfully sold you my share of the place for a nickel. Maybe less...

I wandered off to go through the mail, an hour back. Fareed Zakaria's "World View" column in the Nov 12th issue of Newsweek includes:

"More U.S. troops have meant better security. But they are not at the heart of current improvements in Iraq. The key is that Petraeus has been willing to do what no American official has until now: accept Iraq for what it is and not what Washington wants it to be. Searching for a stable order, Petreaus has allied himself with whoever, within reason, could produce that order."

'Rat

[solvs]

This item merely corroborates what a lot of the GIs there are saying.
Like who, most of what I've seen and heard says the opposite.

From the comments, it sounds like a lot of folks are hoping that we'll leave and a civil war will break out, providing a lot of dead bodies as proof of the cleverness of the naysayers.
It's not what we want. It's merely the reality of what we see. There already is a civil war, and we haven't been helping in the years we've been there. 2007 was the bloodiest of them all BTW.

Well, you don't go to someone's house, puke on the carpet and then just leave and go home.
Well, you shouldn't have puked in the first place, but if you keep puking, don't be surprised if they ask you to leave. Then get forceful when you don't. Especially if you're making everyone else puke too. They want us gone 'rat. Have for awhile now. The rest of us would like to stop puking too.

leekohler, it doesn't matter about being wrong in going in.
Of course it matters. The same people who got us there for dubious reasons, and have screwed everything up since, are the ones wanting us to stay, saying things are getting better. Just like they have for the last couple of years, despite that not being the case. Pardon our skepticism.

Dislike of war and dislike of our presence in Iraq does not justify denigration of any positive indicators. (I don't want to downplay negatives or over-hype the positives.)
But you are overplaying the positives and downplaying the negatives, which BTW far outweigh what little good may happen. We aren't trying to downplay anything. We just don't see the progress to justify continued occupation. There is no political process. The best we can hope for is more of the same by continuing to stretch our military beyond it's unsustainable limits.

Without objective and honest reporting of the good as well as the bad, we don't and can't know if things would be better or worse if we left.
There's far more bad than good, but I guess if you go looking, you can find anything to justify your view.

My opinion, FWIW, is that most of the reporting has ignored the good things.
That's because what little good that does come doesn't justify the bad, which there is still a lot of.

Too many first-hand reports from servicemen indicate more good than is being told us via the news.
Again, what about all the bad coming first hand?

Sorta doubt a "my folks vs. your folks" is worthwhile.
Then why did you bring it up? That's pretty much your whole argument. Some good things are happening, and you're saying you'd heard it from those who've been there. We're not allowed to say we've heard the opposite now because it disagrees with your "folks"? Here are more "folks" who've been there who disagree:

http://www.alternet.org/asoldierspeaks/65353/

[Genghis Khan]

i find it hard to believe that any soldier comes back from a warzone and says anything good about it.........

[solvs]

i find it hard to believe that any soldier comes back from a warzone and says anything good about it.........

If things were going well, they might.

[Desertrat]

"We're not allowed to say we've heard the opposite now because it disagrees with your "folks"?"

No, that was not my intent at all.

A lot of one's dislike is a function of when the service occurred. My occupation term in Korea wasn't boo-diddly compared to the guys who fought their way out of the Chosin Reservoir--and I knew that at the time. I really doubt that any of those guys ever wanted to do a second tour. I still didn't like Korea, but I knew our presence meant that the North Koreans would not be running the show. To a certain extent, the same sort of evolvement is occurring now in Iraq.

Guys who served in Iraq from after the first combat phase on into the next couple of years saw a whole different, miserable, and very frustrating deal from what's being seen in these last few months.

So what guys saw in 2004-2006 is a different picture from this latter part of 2007.

More and friendlier interaction at the man on the street level with our guys is occurring; that's a fact. Fewer IEDs and other terrorisms; that's a fact. That says that life for the average Iraqi is improving. And now we've helped set up a system where that average Iraqi has the right to bitch and his sheikh has some say in what goes on.

'Rat

[solvs]

No, that was not my intent at all.
Sure seemed that way. You use nothing but "some soldiers who've been there" several times in your posts, then when someone else points out that others who've been there are saying the opposite, you suddenly say we shouldn't turn this into a "my folks vs. your folks". If that was the case, you shouldn't have brought up "your folks" in the first place as some sort of proof and not expected us to respond with our own. Believe what you want, but I posted a link for "my folks" who have been there, and if you read the link, you'd see they disagree with your assertions. And just because a bunch of politicians with a personal stake are saying things are turning around, just like they have for the last couple of years, doesn't mean they are. Especially considering how bloody 2007 has been, and how we've heard they're cooking the numbers, ie not counting deaths if they died in certain ways. For the record, like lee I also know someone who just came back recently, and he could tell you the same. And since we can't keep stretching our military as we are now, how would we continue to sustain it if that's what's needed anyway?

BTW 'rat, please learn to use the quote button.

[Desertrat]

Sheesh! This is seming really nit-picky!

Look: It doesn't matter--in my opinion, anyway--whether various GIs liked or didn't like what was happening in the past. That has zero, zilch, zip, nada to do with today. My whole point is that things are improving as compared to a few months back--and a helluva lot more than a year or three ago. Guys who are there now report more positive stuff than anybody did in the past.

Enuf. I've said my say...

'Rat

[mactastic]

Sheesh! This is seming really nit-picky!

Look: It doesn't matter--in my opinion, anyway--whether various GIs liked or didn't like what was happening in the past. That has zero, zilch, zip, nada to do with today. My whole point is that things are improving as compared to a few months back--and a helluva lot more than a year or three ago. Guys who are there now report more positive stuff than anybody did in the past.

Enuf. I've said my say...

'Rat
Things are improving because the ethnic cleansing is largely complete. Dunno whether you are counting that as a good thing or a bad thing.

And it sure seems like some folks in here desire greater numbers of Americans dead.

[solvs]

Well, I guess your folks who've been there recently are still more important than ours who have as well. And the administration's fuzzy math where they don't count certain deaths sure helps too. Still haven't gotten an answer as to how we're going to sustain things if it is working though. Or how we shouldn't leave if we aren't needed anymore. Or how any of this changes the political progress that's still practically nonexistent. But things are getting better. Just as it has for the last couple of years. Pardon our skepticism. And again, 2007 has actually been the bloodiest year yet.

But no, I actually did wish things were improving, so we could finally leave.

[solvs]

Three-Tour Iraq Vet: ‘Our Troops Need To Come Home Now’ (http://thinkprogress.org/2007/11/15/debate-iraq/)

More video here (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/11/15/3-tour-iraq-vet-at-dem-debate-our-troops-need-to-come-home-now/).

[leekohler]

Three-Tour Iraq Vet: ‘Our Troops Need To Come Home Now’ (http://thinkprogress.org/2007/11/15/debate-iraq/)

More video here (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/11/15/3-tour-iraq-vet-at-dem-debate-our-troops-need-to-come-home-now/).

I'm sure 'rat and others will just insist that we need to "stay the course" no matter what our vets say.

[solvs]

I'm sure 'rat and others will just insist that we need to "stay the course" no matter what our vets say.
Yes, we only have to support the troops if they agree with us. If they don't, well they obviously aren't seeing the upside of being shot at and blown up. Less people died, except they actually didn't, and there's still no political progress, but we're winning now apparently because the same people who said the same things for the last couple of years are telling us we are. No really, this time it's true. Really.

[Desertrat]

Just can't avoid wanting a vote of go vs. stay among GIs, seems like. :D

But there are guys signing on for another tour. of their own accord. So, that means that some do think that their presence and efforts are making an improvement.

I don't know that "stay the course" means much to me as some sort of supportive idea of policy. What I do believe, however, is that if you make a mess, you do your best to clean it up.

I don't believe in, "Oops, sorry I screwed up your world. But I gotta go, now. Tough."

'Rat

[Iscariot]

But there are guys signing on for another tour.

Lots of people signed up for extra tours of Viet Nam. Lots of people sign up for medical testing. Lots of guys do coke off the backs of Thai hookers.

Just because lots of people are are making a decision doesn't mean it's a good one.

[obeygiant]

Lots of people signed up for extra tours of Viet Nam. Lots of people sign up for medical testing. Lots of guys do coke off the backs of Thai hookers.

Just because lots of people are are making a decision doesn't mean it's a good one.

You really want to compare doing coke off hookers to serving in the armed forces?

What's wrong with you?

[Iscariot]

You really want to compare doing coke off hookers to serving in the armed forces?

What's wrong with you?

I wasn't making a direct comparison (which I'm sure you knew). I was pointing out that there's no implicit correlation between the popularity of a decision and it's value.

[obeygiant]

I wasn't making a direct comparison (which I'm sure you knew). I was pointing out that there's no implicit correlation between the popularity of a decision and it's value.

Actually you are. You are comparing the recklessness of doing coke off hooker's backs with serving another tour in Iraq/Viet Nam. That it has no value. The men and women in the military should AT LEAST be respected for their decision to serve and their commitment. Besides, who ever said deciding to stay in the military was a "popular" decision?

[Iscariot]

Actually you are. You are comparing the recklessness of doing coke off hooker's backs with serving another tour in Iraq/Viet Nam. That it has no value. The men and women in the military should AT LEAST be respected for their decision to serve and their commitment. Besides, who ever said deciding to stay in the military was a "popular" decision?

No, I'm really not. But I have a feeling you're going to interpret it that way regardless of what I have to say.

[obeygiant]

No, I'm really not. But I have a feeling you're going to interpret it that way regardless of what I have to say.

Yeah, BS. Don't want to own up to what you've said or explain the real meaning?. Its right up there in black and white. You've really done nothing to explain or backup your irresponsible statement.

[pseudobrit]

But there are guys signing on for another tour. of their own accord.

$

Trust me.

[pseudobrit]

Yeah, BS. Don't want to own up to what you've said or explain the real meaning?. Its right up there in black and white. You've really done nothing to explain or backup your irresponsible statement.

Yes, yes, keep pouring on that mock outrage! I am shaking my fist in anger!

[Desertrat]

I generally don't like to use emails as "evidence", as we all know about the credibility problem. I'll cite a part of one, however, since I know the sender and he claims to know the Marine officer.

"Here is the million dollar question I have been asked repeatedly since I
have arrived, 'How is it compared to the last time you were in Iraq?' Well,
I was in Hit, the main city within our AO, last October and daytime
operations were limited to tanks and BFVs driving around the outskirts of
the city because to venture inside meant a certain attack by an IED, RPG,
small arms, or all of the above. Recently, I went on a 3 hour dismounted
patrol through town in the middle of the afternoon and my biggest worry was
having enough candy for all the children that came up to me to say hello and
shake my hand.

I stopped in stores and talked to the merchants to see how business is
doing. They told me business is good and improving everyday. I even went to
a few shops to look for a carpet for my office and enjoyed myself as I tried
to get the price lowe red from 'rich' American prices to normal Iraqi prices.
I wasn't successful but will keep trying!

I stopped in one of the police stations in the city so I could make plans
with the Station Chief to remove a number of the cement barriers on the
street in order to open traffic back up. Those barriers were a must before
as there was a constant threat of a suicide vehicle ramming into the station
in an attempt to kill as many of the police officers as possible.

While that threat still exists, the security provided by the police and my
Marines has allowed us to take risks in certain areas as we try and balance
security needs and normalcy.

I spend many hours working with the numerous city counsels and Mayors in my
AO to address and solve many issues, problems, and to plan for the future. A
year ago, the city councils would not show up to work because if they did,
they were killed as they were seen as 'agents' of the Americans by AQI. Now,
they look forward to my arrival so issues like schools, rubble removal,
water treatment plants, sewage repairs, repairs of the electrical grids,
infrastructure modernization, and an assortment of other issues can be
worked out, prioritized, and assets allocated for them to begin work.

I also spend a great deal of time with the major Sheiks in my AO.

They are some of the most gracious hosts you have ever met. My Marines and I
are treated liked royalty every time we arrive. Delicious lamb, goat,
sheep, kabobs, fresh fruits and vegetables are served in amounts we could
never finish and we always eat first and get the seats of honor closest to
the Sheik. We then adjourn for Chi tea and discuss issues that require my
attention such as security, economic stimulation, tribal reconciliation,
local government issues, and of course stories of past battles and
fights...all embellished but they make great stories anyway .

Three brothers in the town of Baghdadi, one of whom who happens to be the
Police Chief and is known as the 'Lion of Al Anbar', are particularly
gracious hosts. They were some of the first to stand up against AQI and to
stand with the Marines. They have suffered greatly for choosing to fight AQI
and for freedom. The Police Chief, Colonel Shab'an has had no less then 7
direct assassination attempts against him. I was here last year and saw him
after one attack against him was nearly successful. One of his brothers was
killed, a brother-in-law was tortured and beheaded, and one of his younger
brothers lost his legs in a mortar attack. Yet, he remains committed to a
free and independent Iraq. His talks to me about freedom, democracy, and his
loyalty to Iraq and justice are inspiring.

Colonel Shab'an has become a sort of folk hero to his community and his
willingness to stand up for their freedom and safety has inspired thousan ds
of Iraqis. His two brothers, one a Sheik and the other a local businessman
are also servants to their community. The Sheik is the City Council Chairman
and has almost single handedly reorganized the local government from a board
of obstructionists to a functioning and effective governing body who work
almost non-stop to improve the lives of the people within their area.

The other brother is a very successful businessman who has donated tens of
thousands of dollars to fix water treatment plants, to pay of the salaries
of the police before the national government could or would, and his source
network has led to the successful capture of many terrorists and criminals.

The nights in their neighborhood are particularly enjoyable as we sit
outside to eat and the children in the neighborhood run around, laughing,
and sneaking up to listen to me talk or to try and get some more candy from
me. They are so proud of the security th ey have established for their
families, their tribe, and the people in their community. I am proud just to
be considered their friend.

Overall, the folks I have met are good people who want to raise their
families, farm their land, and just have the ability to choose their own
future for one of the few times in their country's history. Their admiration
and appreciation to us and to the American people for the opportunity we
have offered them is genuine and heartfelt.

While there has been a great deal of progress, there is still much to do."


Which is the sort of thing implicit in the original post, and in line with what I said--before I received this email.

More:

"The bottom line is this...we are winning the counter-insurgency fight here
in Al Anbar. We are winning as a result of the past 5 years of work by
thousands of Marines, Sailors, and Soldiers who worked tirelessly to get us
where we are today. This didn't happen overnight and we lost many good men
and women to achieve it. We have put the enemy on the run and we are not
letting the pressure off. We continue to hunt him down and provide him no
rest. My Marines, actually your Marines, are patrolling in the cities, in
the desert, and on the river to find the enemy and destroy him. And the
Marines do not patrol alone. Almost every operation we do has Iraqi Police,
Army, or both with the Marines. They are brave, committed to winning, and
they try as hard as they can to emulate the Marines they are serving with.
At the same time we continue to build our relationships with the local
leaders, Sheiks, and most importantly the Iraq people."


That last sentence is what is new since Petraeus took charge. They're working from the bottom up instead of from the top down, and that's what makes the difference. And it's what was not done thirty-five years ago...

This style is similar to what Kaplan has written about in his "Imperial Grunts" and its sequel, "Hog Pilots, Blue Water Grunts". His admiration for the men is much less important than the almost-uniwtting commentary as to success or its lack in how dealing with local people and governments is done.

'Rat

[zap2]

Yeah, BS. Don't want to own up to what you've said or explain the real meaning?. Its right up there in black and white. You've really done nothing to explain or backup your irresponsible statement.

No, he wasn't. But you are right, it is up there in black and white...and anyone can read it, and tell what he meant :rolleyes:

Just because you misunderstood him, doesn't make him wrong.

[obeygiant]

No, he wasn't. But you are right, it is up there in black and white...and anyone can read it, and tell what he meant :rolleyes:

Just because you misunderstood him, doesn't make him wrong.

Maybe you could be kind enough to explain the connection between the "popularity" of doing coke of hooker's backs and re-enlisting.

[solvs]

But there are guys signing on for another tour. of their own accord. So, that means that some do think that their presence and efforts are making an improvement.
I'm not going to say some of them don't think that. But most of the ones I know who re-upped did so because their buddies are still there and people don't seem to be stepping up to help as much as we need. Granted though, most of those I know who've been there got out at soon as they could and pray they never have to go back. It those soldiers though, and the ones who come back with issues (or don't come back at all) that we're worried about.

What I do believe, however, is that if you make a mess, you do your best to clean it up.
I used to believe that too. But I don't see things getting that much better. Politically things have not improved. It's still a mess over there. Even if people were dying less, which they really aren't overall, people are still dying at alarming rates. The violence is still worse there than it should be. The infrastructure is still a mess too. If we were making things better, fixing what we screwed up, then we should stay. But we've been there for years now making things worse. They want us to leave, we want us to leave.

So we should do a slow pull out, keeping some troops around the borders and ready in case of issues. Take out the contractors that are making things worse, giving reconstruction jobs to locals who need money and employment. We outsource and subcontract anyway. And ready the troops for future deployment, giving them significant rest time and bettering their equipment. Especially the armor. Giving far more oversight would help too. I'm not saying we completely pull everyone out now, but as you said, staying the course ain't a strategy.

Oops, sorry I screwed up your world.
Maybe we shouldn't have screwed up their world in the first place. ;)

Yes, yes, keep pouring on that mock outrage! I am shaking my fist in anger!
Well I'm outraged that you're outraged that he's outraged.

Ha, beat that!

[solvs]

This bothered me too:

Army Desertion Rate Up 80 Pct. Since '03 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20071116/military-deserters/)

Soldiers strained by six years at war are deserting their posts at the highest rate since 1980, with the number of Army deserters this year showing an 80 percent increase since the United States invaded Iraq in 2003.

While the totals are still far lower than they were during the Vietnam War, when the draft was in effect, they show a steady increase over the past four years and a 42 percent jump since last year.

"We're asking a lot of soldiers these days," said Roy Wallace, director of plans and resources for Army personnel. "They're humans. They have all sorts of issues back home and other places like that. So, I'm sure it has to do with the stress of being a soldier."
Not expecting them to be at zero, but all the re-uppers in the world (and there are even fewer of those) doesn't change this.

[obeygiant]

Lots of people signed up for extra tours of Viet Nam. Lots of people sign up for medical testing. Lots of guys do coke off the backs of Thai hookers.

Just because lots of people are are making a decision doesn't mean it's a good one.

An American soldier who was seriously wounded during a bomb attack in Iraq on Nov. 13 re-enlisted just hours after the ambush, telling Army officers he still had a job to do, the Army reported Monday.

Spc. Christopher Hoyt, an infantryman from California with the 4th Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, based out of Fort Lewis, Wash., was injured after an improvised explosive device — or IED — exploded near him while he was out on a foot patrol near Zaganiyah, Iraq.

Two of Hoyt’s fellow soldiers were killed in the attack. Hoyt was rushed to the emergency room at Logistics Support Area Anaconda where he was treated for cuts to his legs and body.

It was there, after having witnessed the deaths of his comrades, that Hoyt decided to re-enlist for four more years.

"He said he wasn’t finished," Hoyt’s battalion commander Lt. Col. Mark Landes said.

Landes conducted the re-enlistment himself. "He said, ‘I still have a job to do.' "

Command Sgt. Maj. John Troxell, the brigade’s top non-commissioned officer, who was also present during Hoyt’s re-enlistment at Anaconda, said Hoyt was the epitome of what a soldier should be.


"It takes a person of very strong character to go through an incident where another soldier five feet away was killed, and he was severally wounded, and still say 'I believe in what we are doing and I want to stay on the team. I want to support the United States Army and my country,' " Troxell said.

"He is a model for what all men and women should be, and that is very patriotic and very selfless," Troxell said.

Hoyt is currently recovering in an Army hospital in Germany.link (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312226,00.html)

I bet he thought "Well everyone else is doing it, I guess I should too." :rolleyes:

I doubt that coming to a decision to re-enlist is made as casually or as foolhardy as deciding to do coke off a hooker's back.

[shikimo]

I'd say the South Koreans would think so. They were the ones invaded, and we led the U.N. to throw out the invaders.

That's a simplistic, high-school history take on the Korean Conflict. If it were that simple, South Koreans today would not be so anti-American:

http://hnn.us/articles/3740.html

http://www.jpri.org/publications/workingpapers/wp93.html

[both of these are peer-reviewed publications]

nor would they view the US government as a central obstacle on the road to Korean independence, something overwhelmingly supported, at least in theory, by the South Korean public:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/02/08/news/korea.php

The Korean Conflict was many, many things, but the model of a mighty and altruistic US military leading a benevolent rescue mission of an oppressed minority is largely a fabrication of cold-war propaganda. This book review--and the book which is reviewed, if you're really interested--is a great place to start:

http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.cgi?path=32511095097607

It is a fantastic presentation of scholarship in the field circa 2004, and contains articles by many of the scholars currently writing on the Korean Conflict in English.


I don't believe in, "Oops, sorry I screwed up your world. But I gotta go, now. Tough."

Agreed, in theory...but the list of countries/regions in which the US has done precisely that is too long for us to play the 'we're doing the right thing' card. We do the right thing when it suits our interests--and occasionally the wrong thing when it REALLY suits our interests--regardless of the consequences for others.

I don't think anybody can say whether or not Iraq is better off with or without the US military right now, but one thing is certain: the true proportions of the consequences of our government's warmongering lies with regards to starting the Iraq War will not be fully revealed until we've been out of the country for a while. As an American I want it to be done now, both to spill less blood and to begin a painful reintegration into international politics, but as a historian I have a keen sense of the consequences of rash actions...and I fear an immediate pullout might be as ill-advised as the invasion that started this mess.

[Desertrat]

Here's a followup to the opening post:

http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/come-home.htm

"Shlemon Warduni, an auxiliary bishop for the Catholic Diocese, performed the first Mass held at that church since it was shut down.

From the article:
Today, Muslims mostly filled the front pews of St John’s. Muslims who want their Christian friends and neighbors to come home. The Christians who might see these photos likely will recognize their friends here. The Muslims in this neighborhood worry that other people will take the homes of their Christian neighbors, and that the Christians will never come back. And so they came to St John’s today in force, and they showed their faces, and they said, “Come back to Iraq. Come home.” They wanted the cameras to catch it. They wanted to spread the word: Come home. Muslims keep telling me to get it on the news. “Tell the Christians to come home to their country Iraq.”

All good things must begin at the grass-roots level. Sure, we've no idea if this is unique or common, but it beats heck out of IEDs.

shkimo, drifting slong with you, off-topic about Korea, remember that the NK folks were all set up for an invasion well before Dean Acheson's words were taken to mean we wouldn't be concerned about that part of Asia. Had it not been for Truman, Korea would indeed have been unified--but under Kim Il Sung. Instead of the economic powerhouse that South Korea has become, the entire peninsula would be as well-fed as are North Koreans today.

That subject is one of my "Elmer Keith moments", from his book "Hell, I Was There". I was US-bound on a passenger freighter, two days out of Yokahama when the NK invaded. Friends went. I went, but, fortunately, merely occupation duty in 1954/1955.

One might not like US policy with respect to South Korea in these more recent decades, but never believe we had 50,000 dead in three years for no good reason.

It would be wonderful if self-proclaimed historians could leave their own axe-grinding, ox-goring and political views out of their writings. Too often it's not history as it actually happened; it's revisionism.

'Rat

[mactastic]

Maybe you could be kind enough to explain the connection between the "popularity" of doing coke of hooker's backs and re-enlisting.
Ah yes, the fake outrage. For political gain no less.

Let me ask you the same question Saltyzoo was unable to answer: If I compare the vastness of the ocean with the vastness of the desert, am I saying the desert and the sea are identical?

[shikimo]

shkimo, drifting slong with you, off-topic about Korea, remember that the NK folks were all set up for an invasion well before Dean Acheson's words were taken to mean we wouldn't be concerned about that part of Asia. Had it not been for Truman, Korea would indeed have been unified--but under Kim Il Sung. Instead of the economic powerhouse that South Korea has become, the entire peninsula would be as well-fed as are North Koreans today.

Sure...you are almost certainly right about that, and I never wrote that NATO forces were wasting their time in Korea. However, as I'm sure you are aware, the historical situation is hella-complicated (anyone who looked at the book review in my last post has a taste of this), and I was merely pointing out that there was a lot more going on there than a Superman-America rescuing the South Koreans from the evil North Koreans.

That subject is one of my "Elmer Keith moments", from his book "Hell, I Was There". I was US-bound on a passenger freighter, two days out of Yokahama when the NK invaded. Friends went. I went, but, fortunately, merely occupation duty in 1954/1955.

We've been here before, you and I :cool:. Listen, I respect the service you gave to our country through the military. I mean that. But that doesn't mean that the anecdotal stories and observations of one soldier or officer can give an accurate historical picture of the social-political-military climate of Asia in the 1950s. I like reading what you have to say...I just don't like it when you pass your experiences off as universal fact.

It would be wonderful if self-proclaimed historians could leave their own axe-grinding, ox-goring and political views out of their writings. Too often it's not history as it actually happened; it's revisionism.

'Rat

Agreed...but to whom are you referring? To the scholars I cited above? To me, for describing myself as an historian (a word which does in fact figure as part of my job title)? In any case, there is no 'history as it actually happened'; the second a historical event is concluded it immediately fractures into as many viewpoints as there are people who lived or observed it...thus the need for historical researchers with as few presuppositions as possible.

[mactastic]

It would be wonderful if self-proclaimed historians could leave their own axe-grinding, ox-goring and political views out of their writings. Too often it's not history as it actually happened; it's revisionism.
Ah yes, the cult of Reagan comes to mind.

[hulugu]

link (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312226,00.html)

I bet he thought "Well everyone else is doing it, I guess I should too." :rolleyes:

I doubt that coming to a decision to re-enlist is made as casually or as foolhardy as deciding to do coke off a hooker's back.

Actually, that's not the story you might want. This is someone who just experienced a harrowing emotional experiences, and legally speaking, this could infer a less than rational state of mind. Really, the local CO should keep the recruiters away from his guys, especially after combat.

[hulugu]

Great.

[leekohler]

Ah yes, the cult of Reagan comes to mind.

I still don't get what they liked about him so much. He's responsible for a lot of bad policy, such as "borrow and spend". Who was the person who told America to break out the credit card and borrow the economy back into shape? You guessed it- the Gipper. Now that same mentality is about to put a lot people out of their homes.

[skunk]

Sure...you are almost certainly right about that, and I never wrote that NATO forces were wasting their time in Korea.I would hope not, as NATO had nothing whatever to do with it.

[solvs]

Too often it's not history as it actually happened; it's revisionism.
So is thinking the Iraq war is going to go down as anything other than a fiasco.

I still don't get what they liked about him so much.
Same reasons as the current guy. Some see his as some kind of religious savior, even though he was anything but. Others just made lots of money. Screw the rest of us.

Plus, gov is bad, and who else proved that so well?

[shikimo]

I would hope not, as NATO had nothing whatever to do with it.

OK, if you insist I will be precise: in the interests of saving space I chose not to write "the forces, including troops from a majority of the 12 countries who had signed NATO into existence in April 1949, whose coordination under the leadership of the United States military in the Korean Conflict ushered in a new era of military strategy on the part of the US-led anti-communist movement that would define world politics for decades, and whose cooperation would be one of the reasons for the creation of the Warsaw Pact in May of 1955, and whose failures in said conflict would drive NATO to increase both its strength and level of coordination."

You are technically correct that it was not an official NATO activity, and I apologize for not being sufficiently precise; however, you are wholly incorrect in suggesting that NATO had nothing to do with it.

[Swarmlord]

<snip> Others just made lots of money. Screw the rest of us.<snip>

This is recurring theme with you. If it's so obvious to you what's happening, why haven't you figured out how to benefit financially rather than always bending over and then complaining about it?

You know, even a dog figures out to avoid people that kick it eventually.

[skunk]

You are technically correct that it was not an official NATO activity, and I apologize for not being sufficiently precise; however, you are wholly incorrect in suggesting that NATO had nothing to do with it.The Korean War may have affected the development of NATO and the Warsaw Pact, and may have been contributed to by NATO members, but was of course technically a UN affair, including as it did troops and supplies from Australia, NZ, South Africa, Ethiopia, Thailand, Colombia, Sweden and the Philippines.

[solvs]

If it's so obvious to you what's happening, why haven't you figured out how to benefit financially rather than always bending over and then complaining about it?

I'm doing fine, but I have this little thing called empathy where I see others who aren't. You're ok with the richer getting richer, at the cost of the poor getting poorer, and the weakening of the middle class. I'm not.

Not to mention all the war profiteering, which is what I actually was mainly referring to going on right now that's causing problems, putting making money over doing the right thing, which for some reason you still don't have a problem with.