America uber Alles!
19 February 2007 by Naomi[Sorry, godRon, but this isn't exactly about gawd, unless "little tin gawds" and "toy soldiers" qualify...]
Before watching this video, I advise you to do some deep breathing exercises. It is safe for viewing at work, as there are no deaths, no injuries, no blood or gore, no torture–just our Grande Armee, traversing a major city in Iraq…
After watching this video, repeat the deep breathing routine.
As a truck driver, I have spent (cumulatively) many, many hours in harrowing traffic situations. To show for my thirteen years behind the wheel, I have received this many tickets: zero. And I have never rear-ended a vehicle, by accident or by design. Although I have wanted to, and although I have secretly thought some drivers deserve it, I have never even come close to “kissing bumpers”.
My silly fantasy notwithstanding, this video appalled me! But then, I’m just another “terrorist-loving, America-hating, bleeding-heart Lib’rul”, I guess…
From DownWithTyranny blog:
“My friend Adam sent me a video today that he watched on Olbermann’s show. It shows how American troops have to drive down the streets of Iraq just to survive– to avoid being blown up when stuck in traffic. Watch it and ask yourself, “If this were troops from some occupying country driving down my streets, how would I feel towards them?” In fact, more than anything else it reminded me of a science fiction movie where aliens from another galaxy have come to earth, taken over, and regard the inhabitants as little more than the way we regard insects.”
Yes, there is the security issue–a stopped vehicle is a fixed target. But why do I feel that this is just one more instance of American arrogance? That the armored vehicle’s driver would like to go my fantasy one better–not just nudge the car ahead of it, but to drive over top of it? It’s hard to imagine that the average citizen of any occupied country would welcome us as “liberators”!
The proper answer to all questions is: We should not even BE in Iraq!
19 February 2007, on 7:43 am
It’s not a good look. And bound to piss the locals off.
19 February 2007, on 11:19 am
If some assholes were driving like that all the time where I live, I’d be planting bombs at road sides too.
19 February 2007, on 12:18 pm
Seriously! I wouldn’t think twice about blowing that asshole up!
19 February 2007, on 2:55 pm
Oddly, it’s the last statement that bothers me most. It displays the contempt he has for Iraqis, ALL Iraqis. And his fear.
19 February 2007, on 3:19 pm
Without any background or commentary I’m reticent to condemn what we’re seeing.
I could hear their horn going off constantly, which means to me that they’re in an emergency situation, trying to get to a specific place for a specific purpose, as opposed to just wanting not to stop for fear of being a target.
I think we’re a bit too quick to judge. Personally, the lackadaisical attitude most of the civilians seemed to have for a military vehicle with its horn blaring and driving in such a way struck me as more arrogant.
Regardless of whether we should be there in the first place, our young men and women are dying for them, and Iraqis seem to give a fuck. I’m all for pulling out completely and letting them implode.
19 February 2007, on 3:24 pm
Yes, Naomi, I saw the clip on Keith’s show.
My version of the proper answer to all questions, is just a variation in the verbal tense:
“We should have never BEEN in Iraq!” There were other ways of dealing with Saddam. We’ve, more than once, been complicite in cooperation with dictators; and we can disagree…without invading a sovereign nation.
Chalmers Johnson [on a BookTV call-in] yesterday talked about the “Industrial/Military Complex” and its machinations in all this; he mentioned Eisenhower’s warning about it from the 1950s, and said in a comment, something similar to my own contention:
Democracy is not spread at the point of a gun!
Johnson was discussing [with call-ins]: “Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic,” the third installment of his trilogy on the American empire.
Here are some other quotes from the BookTV Site about his discussions on his various books & ideas:
“Blowback”: The book was first published in 2000 and examines the results of American foreign policy during the cold war. Blowback is a term referring to the unintended negative consequences of foreign & military policy that in Chalmers’ view exploited many peoples and nations for the sake of stability…The problems of spreading democracy to non-democractic nations.
In his “The Sorrows of Empire”, Johnson likens the United States to a modern-day Roman Empire, a nation thriving on fear and military domination. He argues that the ultimate purpose of US military bases is not to maintain stability or promote democracy, but to defend US hegemony. He traces US world domination from the Cold War to today, then claims America militarism is irreversibly damaging its Constitution and the trust of its people.
I find his ideas, a complete mesh with my own…’life evolved’…opinions.
I suggest getting a ‘taste’ of his ideas from this YouTube interview clip:
“The Sorrows of Empire – Chalmers Johnson” [length 07:06]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgnKZ5UgYS0
19 February 2007, on 3:28 pm
These guys are wavering on the brink of being too scared to be effective and are alienating everyone they encounter.
Some of the vehicles they tail-ended couldn’t have got out of their way any sooner without injuring other vehicles or people, yet still these bully-boys in the APC rammed them, apparently just because they could with impunity.
How not to win ‘hearts and minds’.
Hey, I sound like another god-hating, commie, anti-USA, homo-liberal, but by now this post will have been flagged by Carnivore and Echelon so I’d better sleep in clean pyjamas tonight so that I’ll be presentable when they kick my front door off at 03:00 Zulu.
19 February 2007, on 3:52 pm
I agree, we need to get our kids outta there and let Iraq sink or swim on its own without our presence. I don’t even know if redeployment and a slow withdrawal, or just yanking them out all at once is best, just as long as we start seeing soldiers coming home to stay – unmutilated.
I also heard about Johnson on the radio this morning, ChuckA, but I note that very few people refer to the rest of what Eisenhower said in that famous speech about the industrial/military complex: he wasn’t advocating the termination of it, but the “proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.”
Personally, I interpret this as meaning control and use it, not give it authority and power over us (which, of course, the Shrub Administration is doing by scaring us). Star Fleet in the Star Trek universe comes to mind as a good example of might used for right – in most cases, and may the political pedants forgive me for inserting a sci fi reference!
But then, what do I know? I’m still learning about human beings as political creatures; when I was still a believer, albeit a pretty liberal and mostly deistic one, I was far less politically and economically aware than I am now, and boy do I have a long ways to go!
19 February 2007, on 4:09 pm
Unfortuantely that is how our troops have to drive there for fear of being ambushed. I know this for a fact cuz my husband has been over there twice so far. It is not a fear of being blown up it is a fear of being ambushed. My husband was ambushed many many times while he was over there. He was there the first time when the war first kicked off and the ambushing began the minute they got into Iraq. Not because they had been there too long or where driving through the streets like mad men. That kind of shit has been going on from the get go! If they get stuck in a traffic jam they are sitting ducks and it isnt fair to them, nor is if fair to the Iraqies, but they have no choice! I hold no judgment towards our troops for their behavior. YOU ALL would do the same if you were there too! They are only trying to survive! And really this just shows us that we just don’t belong over there! But, dont blame our troops, believe me they would much rather be here at home then over there! Blame Bush and his war mongering friends!
19 February 2007, on 4:29 pm
Talking to my husband about this, he reminded me that the troops have to worry about being ambushed as well as blown up. Either way its not a good situation for either! We just don’t belong over there, PERIOD!
19 February 2007, on 4:34 pm
Without any background or commentary I’m reticent to condemn what we’re seeing.
I could hear their horn going off constantly, which means to me that they’re in an emergency situation, trying to get to a specific place for a specific purpose, as opposed to just wanting not to stop for fear of being a target.
I have to agree with both Revenant and SNTC, who point out we don’t have any background or commentary about what we are seeing in the video. They could have been called to an emergency situation, or it could be they didn’t want to be stuck in traffic like sitting ducks. I know I would not want to be sitting still knowing that I could be ambushed at any time. It isn’t fair to the Iraqi’s to have to be bullied out of the way, but on the other hand the soldiers are trying to survive so they won’t be sent home in a wooden flag-draped box. My husband was in the Air Force the last years of the Vietnam war and worked in communications that coded and decoded messages so he was spared from combat. However, we know people who were in other branches of the military during that war and they had to do some crazy ass things to survive…and they were really “jumpy” and “paranoid” even upon their return to the U.S. All they can think about while they are there is staying alive while doing what they have been ordered to do.
And really this just shows us that we just don’t belong over there!
I strongly agree. Like Vietnam, nothing will ever be accomplished there.
19 February 2007, on 5:13 pm
Wow, this post got my husband attention and his pen moving! Thanks Chuck my husband wrote down all those books.
Also, the troops move through the streets like that not only for themselves, but for the civilians as well. Those people that ambush and bomb our troops do NOT care who they hurt and many civilian Iraqis are killed EVERYTIME our troops are targeted.
19 February 2007, on 5:40 pm
Naomi
I understand, your’s and others frustration, because here we just wouldn’t tolerate that kind of behavior. But over there, it is a whole nother mind set and we can’t point fingers at our troops for something that we can’t fathom. I feel sorry for our troops being stuck over there, even the ones who have done horific acts. War makes good people do crazy shit. Boy are we going to have our hands full when our troops get back and we have to deal with all their emotional problems. War is not a natural human condition contrary to popular belief. War has a fairly short history of only 6000 years brought on by extreme enviroment changes that our species wasnt able to adapt to fast enough, thus leading to a more barbaric more male dominated societies. If anyone doesnt believe me, I challenge anyone to find evidence of war prior to 4000 bc.
I’m not trying to start shit, I’m only trying to raise awareness. So please no condesending and belittling attitudes. I am not delusional nor do I have fanciful wishes of a utopia. I have looked into the origins of war and so far I have found that war is only about 6000 years old and originated in the desert areas of the middle east and asia.
Amy
19 February 2007, on 5:44 pm
Actually they weren’t in an APC or Tank, but in a HMMWVV (Hummvee). And while some of them may have added armor, they aren’t classified as armored vehicles. Just jeeps with big bumpers.
19 February 2007, on 6:06 pm
Actually they weren’t in an APC or Tank, but in a HMMWVV (Hummvee). And while some of them may have added armor, they aren’t classified as armored vehicles. Just jeeps with big bumpers.
But a lot bigger and better than the soft-skinned Land Rovers that our guys are expected to patrol in much of the time.
Frankly, the whole scenario is a debacle, and none of us should be there.
19 February 2007, on 6:08 pm
I challenge anyone to find evidence of war prior to 4000 bc.
That’s because the universe hadn’t been created before then! (That is a joke, BTW!
)
19 February 2007, on 6:16 pm
I understand, your’s and others frustration, because here we just wouldn’t tolerate that kind of behavior. But over there, it is a whole nother mind set and we can’t point fingers at our troops for something that we can’t fathom.(sic)
They used the same sort of excuses to justify our troops behaviour in Northern Ireland too, but it isn’t really defensible.
Armies of occupation always try to justify their behaviour, but in the final analysis their very presence contributes to the problem, and ultimately becomes the problem.
The same sort of crap was used to justify the abuse and even murder of prisoners and innocent civilians by both US and Brit troops in Iraq – and the only reason the latest Court Martial in the UK delivered ‘Not Guilty’ verdicts is because a senior staff officer was indicted along with the squaddies who actually committed the crime.
19 February 2007, on 6:24 pm
Oops, I should have said alleged crime.
But what in some ways was even more sickening was all the Generals over here who said that it was an affront to our forces that Brit troops be charged with ‘war crimes’!
So, there you have the official attitude – only the enemy can commit a ‘war crime’; what our ‘lads’ do is always justifiable for one reason or another.
19 February 2007, on 7:32 pm
Old Git, I’ve gotta wonder what you think the alternative should be. I’m not taking a side here, because frankly I don’t care. I’m not a “support the troops” groupie, but my heart isn’t bleeding over the Iraqi plight, either.
But if it’s truly a matter of tapping a few bumpers, or risk being blown up… gosh, I know which one I’m in favor of.
19 February 2007, on 7:56 pm
TOG said:They used the same sort of excuses to justify our troops behaviour in Northern Ireland too, but it isn’t really defensible.
Armies of occupation always try to justify their behaviour, but in the final analysis their very presence contributes to the problem, and ultimately becomes the problem.
The same sort of crap was used to justify the abuse and even murder of prisoners and innocent civilians by both US and Brit troops in Iraq – and the only reason the latest Court Martial in the UK delivered ‘Not Guilty’ verdicts is because a senior staff officer was indicted along with the squaddies who actually committed the crime.”
——————
I agree COMPLETELY with you. Don’t get me wrong I don’t condone what they are doing, but they are at war and anytime there is war there is going to be horrible things done. Would they behave that way were they not at war? I don’t think so. Our troops are being traumatized by this war and it will bring out the VERY WORST of behavior! That is why I am and everyone else here agrees that this war (or any war, me anyway) is wrong. However, we are not talking about the treatment of POW’s or things happening on the battle field, we are talking about how our troops have to drive through the streets in order to survive and not have civilans killed in the prossess as well.
You also said: That’s because the universe hadn’t been created before then! (That is a joke, BTW!) You didnt miss a beat. LOL!
19 February 2007, on 7:58 pm
I give Naomi a lot of credit for being honest.
Radicals continue to lend dictators and terrorists and infinite amount of moral capital, no matter what the crime. In contrast, radicals show not the slightest bit of charity for their fellow citizens, even in trivial matters such as the video shown above in this thread.
‘Supporting the troops and hating the war’ has always been a big crock anyway. Radicals call the war illegal. They say the military commits war crimes. They say American aggression is causing the problems in the middle east, not revolutionary Islam. And they say the war is a tool for the almighty corporations.
Okay, so the world is seen in Leninist terms. Fair enough. But — in the same breath, radicals say they support people who volunteer **knowing** they will be fighting in an illegal enterprise, **knowing** that they will be supporting aggression against noble third-world peoples, **knowing** that they will be doing the dirty work of the corporations, and **knowing** that any damage that fighting the enemy causes is a war crime. This implies the soldiers are just as complicit as Bush in the imperialist, racist, misogynist, homophobic war to oppress the peaceful, noble savages to give our richers more beautiful sweet money.
In the traditional language, this is called a *contradiction*. Either you support the troops and their greedy racist imperialist mission or you don’t. Today, people accept both sides of the contradiction and call it nuance. It is a form of BS akin to what homophobes say– hate the sin, not the sinner.
19 February 2007, on 8:06 pm
But if it’s truly a matter of tapping a few bumpers, or risk being blown up… gosh, I know which one I’m in favor of.
Why stop there?
Why not just shoot anyone you don’t like the look of – after all, they probably don’t like you anyway, so they’re better off dear. Right!
The fact is that the invasion of Iraq was a criminal act, but the rest of the world did not have the balls to stand up to Bush and tell him to go fuck himself.
As for the alternatives – either expect a long and expensive war of attrition that will eventually wear out the American and British people, or withdraw right now and let the fuckers waste each other. Either way is a huge can of worms, but you have that Doolally Bastard Bush who thought it was a super wheeze to steal Iraqi oil and prop-up the US economy in one fell swoop.
And remember this, Julie, not every Iraqi is an enemy, yet, but all it needs is some self-justifying frightened squaddie treating innocent people without respect to change all that.
19 February 2007, on 8:06 pm
…better off dead, that should read above. Sorry.
19 February 2007, on 8:47 pm
I’m deeply confused here. I wasn’t asking about whether or not the war is justified. You didn’t answer my question at all. Intead you took an enormous leap from the morality of something that doesn’t harm anyone at the risk of people dying, to shooting someone in the face when there is no there is no threat.
My question was, if the motivations behind rear-ending other drivers are truly as dire as SNTC suggests, and the soldiers do this to avoid being attacked, then what do you propose instead of the rear-ending?
19 February 2007, on 8:54 pm
Well, I for one support our troops. Why? Because the MAJORITY of people in the military join to get an education or they can’t find work else where. I know that is why my husband joined. Another reason is because we need a strong National defence to aviod being attacted by other rogue countries. As long as there are countries ruled by theocracies, other countries are at risk of being attacted.
However, I am VERY ashamed that our country has become a theocracy under the shrub and is misusing our troops!!!!!! And yes, I get into it all the time with other military families(especially wives) who are gun ho about supporting Bush. I am a STAUNCH supporter of MFSP(military families speak out) and I will not just sit back while the Shub and his buddies misuse our troops, but I will not denounce or spit or any of the other horrible things that people did to the troops durring Vietnam! They are only doing what they are told and brainwashed to believe and do. If I did that, I might as well start spitting on every christian I know and meet and I’m just not going to stoop to that level!
19 February 2007, on 8:57 pm
Oops, I meant MFSO.
19 February 2007, on 9:06 pm
When it comes down to it, we are tribal in our assessment of a situation. Those who identify strongly with the people in the humvee getting from place to place in a dangerous place, will see the actions as justifiable.
Those who identify with the other people trying to use the road, either as pedestrians or as part of the traffic, will view the actions of those in the humvee with distain.
At some point, both tribal reactions increase the possibility of violence.
19 February 2007, on 9:45 pm
LET’S GET THOSE KIDS OUTTA THERE!
No, it doesn’t make me feel any better, but sometimes I just have to shout it.
On the proactive side, those of you here in the US who have been politically involved longer than I have, what can we do and keep on doing to try to make this happen? I’ve signed petitions, sent letters (missed the march in January, though), talked to people galore, and I still feel incredibly helpless.
Also, say no to christ, have you a link to that group you mentioned so that I can read more about it?
19 February 2007, on 10:04 pm
I’ve seen some war crimes on youtube videos committed by Us troops. Namely firing at enemy combatants with large caliber weapons (.50 cal and above), which is a violation of the Geneva convention. Of course the running “joke” about that when I was in was that you COULD shoot at their gear, which they just happen to be wearing.
Bottom line is, war is hell. And any attempt to fight it in a civilized manner will always end in failure. One would think people would be thankful, however, that we’re not fighting this like WWII, and leveling cities from 5 miles up and worrying about casualties later.
I’m not justifying or condemning the actions of those in the video, I’m saying we don’t have enough information to make any judgements about it. I find it surprising, however, that only one even remotely derogatory comment was made during the whole thing.
19 February 2007, on 10:10 pm
You can say what you want about this and other videos like this, but the sad reality is that these are kids over there, driving around in tanks, Hummers or whatever. If our boys had some real dicipline from their commanders, they most likely wouldn’t act out like a bunch of fucking bullies. Most likely, their direct supervisors have no passion or real support for the job they are purportedly doing over there, which is why our boys (and girls too) are so poorly behaved in these unpopular wars, (see Vietnam). But yes, we do not belong in Iraq.
On a side note, my new favorite activity lately is doing my grocery shopping wearing my “Who Would Jesus Torture” t-shirt. I highly recommend it to anyone, especially if you bring your kids along…
19 February 2007, on 10:16 pm
I’ve seen similar actions by local police when trying to get from one place to another with sirens and lights going. Expecting you to get out of the way even though you have no place to go. The only reason they don’t bump people is because the city/county/state would get sued, and officers would probably have to pay for damage to their own vehicles out of their pockets.
19 February 2007, on 10:16 pm
Our troops are brainwashed in basic training. How many come out with their basic humanity intact? And that’s where many of our problems start.
They are taught that Iraqis are subhuman and covert, if not overt, terrorists. The “kill reflex” is reinforced to be as close to 100% as possible–and that only means that the hesitation most humans feel, when confronted with danger, is bred out of them in basic. It’s “shoot first, ask questions later” and “forgiveness is easier to gain than permission” and “it’s him or me”.
They are paired up in basic, with each partner literally responsible for the other’s life! The two train, eat, sleep, learn, cover for and generally be a siamese twin to each other. If left to oneself, one might run from the field–but one’s loyalty to one’s twin-self keeps one on the field, no matter what.
And that “twinning” is then grown to include the unit and so on…
IT’S A MIND-FUCK, although TOG could provide a more clinical term.
I understand the philosophy of all that; I understand the need for a strong military, loyalty and esprit de corps; I understand national security and the fucking brinksmanship of corrupt politicians! What I cry for is the cost to the human still inside the soldier. S/He’s the one who comes home forever changed; who may have killed or injured a child in Iraq–and then cries each time cuddlling his/her own; or worse, is no longer able to cuddle… S/He’s the one who comes home–only to be ignored by OUR government. The PTSD, the physical injuries, the ticking time bomb of exposure to chemicals and depleted uranium munitions!
Lt. Watada is the bravest soldier I’ve ever heard about. And he will pay the price. He’ll be given the “Hanoi Jane” and “John Kerry” treatment until the day he dies…
20 February 2007, on 12:55 am
Eve
http://www.mfso.org/
My husband and I are members. It’s a great organization and we have managed to get to at least get Rumsfield canned.
———-
Naomi
I couldn’t agree more! It absolutely goes against human nature to kill one of our own and it absolutely takes a great deal of brainwashing to get our troops to kill and behave that way. Even my husband will tell you that. Last year on the no god blog some idiot tried to tell me that our troops werent being brainwashed and that war was a natural part of human evolution and behavior. And at least all of us here can see that, that just isn’t so.
Also it is good to see that we can debate this topic amonst ourselves and be civil and in the end, on the same side. I know we all want to see our troops come home and this unjust war ended. Unfortunately it wont be without psychological damage to our troops. And I think we all can agree on that!
You guys are GREAT! Big group hug!
Amy
20 February 2007, on 12:57 am
Oops again, man I can’t type today!It’s a great organization and we have managed to get to at least get Rumsfield canned.
What I meant was….at least we managed to get Rumsfield canned.
20 February 2007, on 1:24 am
Thank you, Amy. This is an important issue. We ignore it at our peril. And this is how we repay our soldier’s service…
You might be interested in Our Latest National Shame, from the blog, Welcome to Pottersville. It’s about the Walter Reed Building #18 that is never shown in a photo-op…
20 February 2007, on 5:18 am
Julie, you said re my response…
With respect, I DID answer you, but could have been clearer, admittedly.
First, smashing people’s vehicles out of the way DOES harm others, and to claim otherwise is simply not true.
Second, just because a soldier is frightened, or running a risk of being hurt or killed, is NOT a justification, per se, for them taking aggressive action against others who are not displaying any aggression against them.
Third, whilst all wars contain atrocities, the idea is to minimise those, hence we have developed rules of engagement. Unfortunately these do not fit too well with ‘asymmetrical wars’, which is why commanders are supposed to stress the ‘win hearts and minds’ aspect to the occupation forces.
Fourth, you do not win hearts and minds by wrecking an innocent person’s vehicle, destroying their home, or physically abusing them.
Fifth, signing up for the armed forces means that one is prepared to take risks with one’s safety, yet so many seem to forget that, or claim that they joined for other reasons – an education, sport, to travel, learn a trade (presumably other than killing, that is).
Sixth, and I reiterate, being frightened for ones’ own safety is not justification for unwarranted aggression towards anything other than legitimate targets – but even in that case, there are supposedly rules to be followed, so one does not have carte blanche to do what one might like.
Having said all that, there is no doubt in my mind that the forces of occupation will not subdue the Iraqis, nor will they win hearts and minds, and the sooner that fact is realised the better. The only sensible option is complete withdrawal, immediately, and to let Iraq work out it’s own problems. Whist that will undoubtedly have repercussions for the rest of us, that was obvious even before Georgie Porgie decided that his ‘crusade’ was a good way to bolster his shabby regime and ailing economy.
But, hey-ho, all this will become merely an academic exercise, once Bushy-boy launches his pre-emptive strikes on Iran.
20 February 2007, on 5:24 am
blockquote>…And this is how we repay our soldier’s service…
You might be interested in Our Latest National Shame, from the blog, Welcome to Pottersville. It’s about the Walter Reed Building #18 that is never shown in a photo-op…
Shocking, isn’t it, the way that we treat the personnel whom we order to carry-out our dirty work.
Over here, our gallant lads have been sent to civilian hospitals for treatment. In certain parts of the country, this has meant badly-wounded soldiers lying in general wards surrounded by large numbers of Muslim patients, who have abused and tormented them whilst they are unable to defend themselves.
20 February 2007, on 6:10 am
I sincerely hope that we (the United Kingdom) will not be joining USA in Iran TOG.
I’d even offer a prayer to Gawd and Jeebus and the hula hoop Esprit, if I thought it would help in avoiding getting caught up in another illegal attack to fatten the pockets of the military industrial complex of USA at the expense of everyone elses humanity.
20 February 2007, on 7:02 am
RE revenant
I see no positive solution to the problem. Where there is a lack of trust in either the humvee drivers or a lack of trust in the pedestrians or other traffic, this suspicion on both sides can only escalate the violence.
20 February 2007, on 9:46 am
I have to disagree with you, Naomi. Having gone through US Army basic training (admittedly 26 years ago), I do not feel that it took any of my humanity away. I feel that it matured me more quickly than “normal”, but basic training then is different than it is now.
Now, from what I understand, Drill Instructors can’t even curse at recruits. Physical requirements have gone way down. Basically the military today isn’t as tough as they were during WWII or even Viet Nam.
Is it a mind game? Certainly. You have to get into a specific frame of mind to be a soldier. But does it take away your humanity? I don’t think so.
Most of the guys I came across while I was in were there for a free ride, putting up with the BS in he meantime. It always turned out that the ones you’d LEAST expect became lifers.
While I never engaged in war, nor had to fire a weapon in anger, I DID always find it difficult to aim a real weapon (loaded with blanks) at fellow soldiers during field exercises. There are guys who DIDN’T find it difficult. To me that’s the individual, not the training.
Not sure who Lt Watada is, but if he’s the one who refused to deploy to Iraq, then he is wrong, plain and simple. He’s an officer, he can choose to resign his commission if he doesn’t want to go to Iraq. But to disobey a lawful order, he should be punished. He signed up knowing the risks.
20 February 2007, on 10:05 am
Perhaps so. I DID mention that I felt we should just up and leave. If they want to kill each other, I’m all for it.
20 February 2007, on 3:45 pm
Thank you, Amy, I’ll check it out.
I’ve got to share this, because sometimes I get so wound up I feel like I’m going to explode! Driving to work and listening to Ed Schultz (a progressive radio talk show host), I heard a woman call in who described herself as “hard right-wing” right off the bat: “pro-life,” would never vote for a Democrat, etc. She expressed her concern over Iran and its religious extremism (which I think probably most of us agree with), but felt that the only thing to be done was to “nuke ‘em” (which I know we don’t all see eye-to-eye on):
Schultz (host): Nuke ‘em, huh?
Caller: Yeah – I mean, I’m a good xian, and I don’t believe in killing people–
Schultz: Whoa, whoa, you’re saying you don’t believe in killing people, but you just said you wanted to blow them up!
Caller: I mean, I don’t believe in killing people without a good reason…
As always, hypocrisy, thy name is Christian…
20 February 2007, on 4:04 pm
Right on, Eve.
After all, their so-called ‘holy book’ is all about killing people who do not share their views – and that applies to all the Abrahamic religions.
Evil bastards, the lot of them.
20 February 2007, on 8:40 pm
I’m so fed up with religion, Old Git, I often run out of words on the subject…