News for Real / By Stephen Pizzo
comments_imageCOMMENTS: 132

Permission to Speak Freely, Sir

Those who have never served in the military don't understand how extraordinary it is for career military officers to say the things they're saying.
April 14, 2006  |  
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.

 
 
Advertisement
 
I am sorry that high school and college kids no longer have to face a couple of years of mandatory military service. That may be a strange thing to say for a guy who protested the draft back in the '60s. Maybe it's the inevitable aging process. Or maybe it's the perspective you get from the higher altitude of experience.

What got me thinking about this were the extraordinary statements being made by recently retired U.S. generals. Those who have never served in the military don't understand how extraordinary it is for career military officers to say the things these guys are saying about their former civilian superiors.

I hit Marine Corps bootcamp on July 7, 1965, a wimpy kid from suburbia. The first thing we were told was that we were the lowest forms of life on earth -- and that meant lower than civilians. I was to learn as time went on that this was not just drill instructor blather. It was a genuine, deeply ingrained belief that permeated the highest ranks of the military for civilian control. We were repeatedly told that the lowest civilian we met on the street outranked the highest grade military officer. And that was not show. They believed it, not just as a principle, but a sacred trust.

Those who never served will likely see that as corny, empty rhetoric, window dressing, quaint -- at best. But those who did serve know of what I speak. We get it. That's one reason I bemoan that two generations of kids have since been spared a stint in uniform. It changed my life in ways I now understand and appreciate in ways I could not back then.

This is not a column about reinstituting the draft. I just want to make the case that you pay close and respectful attention to the recent statements by retired top Pentagon brass. Because never in my life did I ever expect to hear these kinds of things coming out of the mouths of such men. Never. Here's a sampler:

  • "[Donald Rumsfeld] has proved himself incompetent strategically, operationally and tactically. Mr. Rumsfeld must step down."
    --General Paul Eaton, who oversaw training of Iraqi army troops, 2003-2004


  • "I really believe that we need a new secretary of defense because Secretary Rumsfeld carries way too much baggage with him. Specifically, I feel he has micromanaged the generals who are leading our forces there."
    --retired Maj. Gen. Charles Swannack, former commander of the 82nd Airborne Division.

  • "I think we need a fresh start … We need leadership up there (the Pentagon) that respects the military as they expect the military to respect them."
    --Maj. Gen. John Batiste, commander 1st Infantry Division in Iraq, 2004-2005


  • We won't get fooled again … Rumsfeld and many others unwilling to fundamentally change their approach should be replaced."
    --Marines Lt. Gen. Gregory Newbold, director of operations of Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2000-2002


  • "The problem is that we've wasted three years … absolutely, Rumsfeld should resign."
    --Marines Gen. Anthony Zinni, former chief of U.S. Central Command


  • "A lot of them [other generals] are hugely frustrated. Rumsfeld gave the impression that military advice was neither required nor desired" in the planning for the Iraq war.
    --Lt. Gen. Wallace Gregson, former commander of Marines forces in the Pacific Theater


  • "Everyone pretty much thinks Rumsfeld and the bunch around him should be cleared out. [Rumsfeld and his advisers have] made fools of themselves, and totally underestimated what would be needed for a sustained conflict."
    --Army Maj. Gen. John Riggs


The administration is trying to counter these devastating statements by noting that none of the generals voiced such reservations during the lead-up to the war. And, because so many Americans now lack any direct experience with the military, the tactic may just work. After all, it's easy to dismiss these retired generals just that easily. "So, where were your qualms when we really need them, general?"

I know the answer to that question -- and it's not the answer the Bushies want you to get.

When an officer has a particularly sticky problem with the actions or orders of a superior officer, s/he can "request permission to speak freely, sir."

Well, that was tried, by Army Gen. Eric Shinseki, who was promptly and unceremoniously "shit-canned." (Another term my fellow vets may find familiar.)

The Pentagon's civilian leaders sent a clear message to the rest of the Pentagon brass: "Do what we want, or we'll find a junior officer who will."

With the "permission to speak freely" option off the table, the brass was left only with their prime directive: Civilians rule.

So, their silence leading up to war was not cowardice or careerism, as some have suggested. It was instead the manifestation of that deeply ingrained principle that civilians not only outrank them, but that the most dangerous thing that can happen in a democracy is for the military to start preempting civilian leadership.

We can quibble over that notion, of course. We can wave around the Nuremberg principle that "just following orders" is no defense for wrongdoing. I agree. But let me tell you, my experience in the military left me with a deep respect for the way the American military views its place in our democracy. They really do believe civilians rule. I would have it no other way. And neither should you.

Which is why we old vets understand better than most how gut-wrenching it must have been for these recently retired officers to go public. I am certain it was not the way they wanted to end their lifetimes of service to their country. Because, as far as these men are concerned, under normal circumstances, such behavior smacks of treason.

Retired two-star Maj. Gen. John Batiste, who commanded the Big Red One (the Army's 1st Infantry Division) in Iraq until November, said Rumsfeld must go for ignoring and intimidating career officers. "You know, it speaks volumes that guys like me are speaking out from retirement about the leadership climate in the Department of Defense. (Full Story)

So, no one should take their statements lightly. This is serious business … especially at the very moment these same civilian leaders are grunting eagerly over satellite images of Iran.
  • 1
View as a single page
 
Stephen Pizzo is the author of numerous books, including "Inside Job: The Looting of America's Savings and Loans," which was nominated for a Pulitzer.
Email
Print
Share
Post on reddit
Post on stumbleupon
Post on facebook
Post on digg
Post on twitter
Post on delicious
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email

comments COMMENTS ( 132 )
READ COMMENTS
LOGIN OR REGISTER TO POST A COMMENT
 

Comments are closed-

A stint in the forces is good for everybody
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Bobsays on Apr 14, 2006 2:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am also not a militerist or lover of war. In fact, I have absolutely no illusions about war: it is a disgusting business and is the ugliest thing on the planet. But I do know this: some of the best people I have known in my life, some of the most noble characters, were in the military.

The only other place in my various careers that I have seen people come close has been in international development and working in hospitals.

The things I learned in the military have stayed with me. I view everything through a different lens than my friends. I always ask myself: am I being true to my beliefs, am I bravely standing up for what's right, am I loyal? These are questions that most civilians don't first ask in a job. Most civilians usually ask: what's in it for me, how much money do I get, is it going to be always fun?

I wish young people would be given the choice to do the following after college or university: two years service either in the military, public services or international development. Three choices and no get out clause. We would have a different generation of people out there if this occured. I look around my neighbourhood and see the sad specimens that are today's youth. Ravaged by attention deficit disorders, selfish, crude and rude, lazy, slobby, abusing drugs, and think that this is not going to make a great future.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Not buying this one...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: greentime on Apr 14, 2006 4:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is no way you will ever convince me that it takes a stint in the military to make a person brave, loyal, and true to their beliefs. What it takes is a head-heart connection and service to others. You don't need the military to experience humility or love.

If we spent as much time teaching empathy, peace and good stewardship of the planet, and as much time providing for that to happen, we would need a lot less military of all kinds.

This "need for military experience" argument is unsound at best. I think if we stop playing at peace and really try to make it happen, it will take more strenght of character than you would ever learn by bullying and killing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Not buying this one... Posted by: Prophit
» RE: Not buying this one... Posted by: dbarber
» RE: Not buying this one... Posted by: Prophit
» RE: Not buying this one... Posted by: douglashoyt
» RE: Not buying this one... Posted by: greentime
» RE: Not buying this one... Posted by: aonghus36
» RE: Not buying this one... Posted by: Elmowilcox
» RE: Not buying this one... Posted by: greentime
» Well Said... Posted by: woodford54

Comments are closed-

Yes, but...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Pete123 on Apr 14, 2006 5:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look at what conservative trends in the political culture have installed in part by us learning the lessons of losing the Vietnam War and patriotism: 1) elected arguably the worst U.S. president in history, 2) put Rumsefeld in charge of the military and 3) supported the war in Iraq past the point of no return in the Middle East. The generals (i.e. Colin Powell) are a little late in speaking up, folks, wouldn't you say? This seems like an ironic time to be flogging the virtue of enlisting in the military and singing the praises of a civilian-led military. I get it, because I enlisted in the military in 1971, but the "lessons" of manhood that are supposedly taught to boys through military service eluded me. I think they are mainly myth and nostaglic hindsight that perpetuate the power of these morons like Bush and these scary, evil assholes like Rumsfeld.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

ECLECTICIST, S. JIM RODRIGUEZ
[Report this comment]
Posted by: SJR505 on Apr 14, 2006 5:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
AS A FORMER VIET-NAM VETERAN WITH TWO MEMBERS OF OUR FAMILY AS RECIPIENTS OF THE MEDAL OF HONOR, I AM COMPELLED TO STATE THAT WHATEVER SCHOOL, WHATEVER UPBRINGING, WHATEVER EXPERINCES BUSH "SILVERFOOT' 43 HAD, HE AND HIS CORRUPTED CRONIES - " EVERYTING IS FOR SALE ...", STILL DO NOT GET IT RIGHT...I HAVE TO BELIEVE THAT THE FOLLOWING THOUGHTS APPLY TO OUR " TURD BLOSSOM " ADMINISTRATION :

"One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions." -- Admiral Grace Hopper

"Every gun that is made, every warship that is launched, every rocket that is fired signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those that are cold and not clothed." -President Dwight Eisenhower

AND, HAVE IGNORED AND FAILED TO READ AND MEMORIZE THE TENETS OF JUST WAR THEORY :

• Cause must be just, often limited to self-defense or to redress injury. Scholars dispute whether preemptive or preventive war can be a just cause.
• Public declaration by a lawful authority.
• No ulterior motives. War must be pursued with right intention - justice - not self-aggrandizement or vengeance
• Reasonable probability of success.
• More good done than harm.
• Use of force only as last resort.
• Avoid harming noncombatants.
• Proportionality - use of the least destructive force possible.
• Intention to restore a just peace.

S...JIM...RODRIGUEZ+++ECLECTICIST SEEKER+++

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

You're doing a great job, Rummie
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bookwoman on Apr 14, 2006 5:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder if this is what Bush will say in the face of the increasing criticism of Donald Rumsfeld's performance in running the war in Iraq.

I should point out that none of the officers so far have been active officers. Each is retired, either of their own volition or in the kind of forced retirement brought on by contrived performance evaluation reports which force an officer to realize that he or she is being told to leave. Two star General, John Riggs (he used to be three star ****) has stated that he was forced to retire, with a loss in rank, after being accused of inconsistencies in his relationship with contractors. He never got the chance to challenge these charges, and they appeared after he criticized the size of the armed troops which were sent to maintain peace after Iraq was taken. It should be noted that General Riggs worked closely with General Eric Shenseki and was, in effect, echoing the same concerns which got General Shenseki fired.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

I was beyond surprised myself
[Report this comment]
Posted by: funtime42 on Apr 14, 2006 5:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm a vet from a family of vets, and more than one conversation has been had about how stunned we were at the public airing of opinions by these gentlemen. Every time another one speaks out, I get a call from my mother, or father, or brother or nephew saying "Can you believe they're going public?"

Of course, I've disagreed with the administration's stand from the start. I've marched, I've posted signs, I've donated time and money to the peace movement. And every time someone asks how a veteran can show such a "lack of loyalty" to our troops, I want to scream. How can supporting the end of an immoral conflict be wrong? I'm not a pacifist - I can understand the need for armed defense, but this is a war being fought for oil, Haliburton, and revenge because the first one run by Daddy didn't get him a second term in office.

You don't have to serve in the military to understand courage and loyalty - that isn't the point of this article at all - but only a veteran can understand the courage it takes for any soldier to make such statements.

I'm proud of them, and hope their voices are heard.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I was beyond surprised myself Posted by: douglashoyt

Comments are closed-

This Marine isn't buying it
[Report this comment]
Posted by: reddeer on Apr 14, 2006 6:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I passed through Marine Corps Recruit Depot San Diego in Janurary, 1969 (Platoon 120). Arrived in Da Nang, South Vietnam in April, 1969. After about 2 months of perimeter guard duty and loading napalm onto F-4 Phantom's I decided to quit contibuting to death and destruction and demanded to my superiors that I be transfered to civic action duty which meant being assigned to a Marine CAP Unit based in a small rural village south of Da Nang. Going through the chain of command, I finally reached my Commanding Officer where by I told him that I could no longer be party to dropping nape on villages or otherwise killing innocent civilians. My C.O. commented that he respected my views and that he would have my transfer papers ready with his signature on them next day, which he did. I did all this as a 20 year old Lance Corporal with no college education and the only political insight I had came from the Stars and Stripes. My mother and Sunday school teacher taught me everything I needed to know about not killing innocent women and children. Now you want to give the most powerful men in our military, those who could have made a difference in the outcome of this mess, a freaken pass for keeping their mouths shut about what they knew and believed, while thousands of Iraqi's along with the sons and daughters of our neighbors have been slaughtered -- in our names, no less. I think not. In my mind these military elite's are no better than the Enron executives who put their career's and financial futures ahead of human decency and honor.
Will Gilmore, U.S.M.C. Vietnam 1969-70

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: This Marine isn't buying it Posted by: zap2scott
» RE: This Marine isn't buying it Posted by: LanternBearer
» WOW! Posted by: giles

Comments are closed-

I'm not buying it either.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: guleblanc on Apr 14, 2006 7:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm a civilian, and have never served, so I may not have the standing to judge the culture of the military. But when you say that respect for civilian control is deeply ingrained in the military culture, I have a lot of trouble believing that. I have met too many ex-military officers who believe the exact opposite, that military authority supercedes civilian authority. In fact, I have had many conversations with former officers, mostly Jr officers I think, who believe that in a state of emergency military officers outrank any civilian police or elected authority, and that in the case of an emergency, the military has the right to detain or punish civilians at their discretion. I've never understood how this could possibly be true, but no amout of argumentation has changed their minds. In fact, on more than one occasion, arguing seemed like a good way to get a broken head, so I agreed pretty quickly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I'm not buying it either. Posted by: aonghus36
» RE: I'm not buying it either. Posted by: redskin69

Comments are closed-

muggles5
[Report this comment]
Posted by: kenhymes on Apr 14, 2006 7:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The military is as diverse as any other institution in our society. Despite the heavy dose of indoctrination to which new recruits are subjected, and the pervasive culture of closing ranks rather than questioning policy in public, many officers and enlisted men find that their brains and hearts continue to function, often to their great pain and inconvenience.

It can't be said accurately that military people act or react in any particular way.

What is powerfully reflected in the public comments of these generals is an emerging sense that responsibility to the Constitution and the well-being of the country ultimately must outweigh loyalty to PARTICULAR appointed civilians. Those who worry that this is a threat to elected democracy should remember that Rumsfeld et al were not elected.

The left does not have to buy into any notions of military valor or jingoistic patriotism in order to heartily welcome the authentic resistance of military insiders, both officers and enlisted men. The writer, whom I disagree with about the value of military service, makes the important point that it is truly significant that these guys are speaking out. They need support, not sniping. Save that for the Rumsfelds and Abizaids. Not to mention the Bushes and Cheneys.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

History
[Report this comment]
Posted by: richardpmendola on Apr 14, 2006 8:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the end, only the German generals (talk about a military culture!) could have stopped Hitler, but they came with too little too late. There are interesting and frightening parallels between those evil times and these.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: History Posted by: tcx2
» RE: History Posted by: zipper696

Comments are closed-

support for the generals
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bobdotj on Apr 14, 2006 8:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
while i support this people that are attempting to set the record straight one must know that had this same people voiced concern prior to the plan we may well not have gon to war.in an attempt to be fair to the generals i understand that their careers would be ruined had the voiced their concerns,so what does this say about rethugs,war,bush,cheney,america,democracy,etc.etc.maybe the next time america votes we should make sure of the competency of the people we are voting for,check their m.o`s.in 08 we have another bushite in mccain,maybewe should think twice about this warhero,maybe we should think twice about clinton.are they qualified to be president?i think not.lets vote for a real president next time,one thats for americans.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Draft Dodgers, College Deferrments, Champagne Units and Never Serveds Running a War
[Report this comment]
Posted by: NoPCZone on Apr 14, 2006 8:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The profession of arms is something hard to fathom for those who have not been part of it and it should be noted that only Rumsfeld has served on active duty, and that as a Navy pilot.

We are engaged in a protracted ground insurgency war, largely run by people who have never served in any branch of the armed forces. Most of those who have served have come from the Navy and Air Force. Only with the recent promotion of General Pace to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has someone with land combat experience (US Marines) been in any position of prominence. This was, is and continues to be a serious mistake.

Not to slight the Navy or Air Force, but the overwhelming majority of people who are exposed to the enemy on a regular basis are from the US Army and, to a lesser extent, the Marine Corps. Soldiers and Marines have carried most of the load, taken most of the casualties, been asked to make the greatest sacrifice and have had the least voice in the halls of power in Washington. I do not make light of the Sailors and Airmen serving in Iraq, but their numbers and exposure to the enemy are miniscule compared to that of the primary ground components of our armed forces.

I find it telling that this administration castrated the senior leadership of the US Army on the eve of, and the early hours of, a ground war. General Shinseki, with over 30 years of service and expertise, was cast aside like so much trash because he did his advisory job and told Bush's people what they did not want to hear. You would think that any Secretary of Defense would listen to a war veteran, wounded in combat, with experience in every facet of ground warfare. They didn't and when Retired General White, as Bush's appointed Secretary of the Army, backed up General Shinseki--he got canned as well.

This administration has populated the DoD and NSC with civilians who are enamored of push-button warfare, a condescending attitude toward soldiers and a know-it-all attitude. If they would have listened to Secretary White and General Shinseki, the most knowledgeable and experienced people in the senior ranks of the Pentagon about such things, we probably would not be having this discussion right now. Either the invasion would have been called off or prosecuted far differently. The great tragedy is that they did their job and were punished for it.

Nobody hates war more than a soldier that has seen it close up. I had the honor of serving with Army Colonel (then LTC)Robert Howard back in the 1980's in Germany. At that time Col Howard was the most decorated person serving on active duty in the Armed Forces of the US. 5 tours in Vietnam. Congressional Medal of Honor. After entering as a Private, he worked his way through the enlisted ranks to Master Sergeant and then the Officer ranks from Lieutenant to Colonel. He was no PX soldier and no warmonger. Just a professional soldier who quietly and professionally led by example. The opposite of the clowns who have put our Soldiers and Marines in this untenable position.

History is not going to be kind to 'W' and his boys and shouldn't be. The harm they have done in so many ways to our nation, it's reputation and institutions is incredible. I hope that someday General Shinseki writes or speaks about what happened inside the Pentagon, NSC and White House prior to the launching of this fiasco. He owes it to himself, the Army, the nation and history.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Bob Handy
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bobhandy on Apr 14, 2006 8:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To some extent I agree, Gen. Eric Shinseki didn't wait one, two or three years to voice his concern. Maj Gen Batiste didn't wait. As a parent of a soldier I expect more from the stars. What happend to "Be all that you can be" or " A few good men", ot "The few, the proud" etc etc
What happend to the UCMJ "Obey all lawfull orders"
Curtis LeMay is crdited with saying words to the effect...if we lost world war 2, he would have been tried as a war criminal....
A lot of warriers, American, coalition and Iraqi plus countless civilians have died because they "Didn't take permission to speak FREELY sir.
Bob Handy
USN Ret

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

military officers speaking freely
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ralph223 on Apr 14, 2006 9:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The following quote is from US Marine general Smedley Butler. It would appear that things have not changed much in a century or more.

I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902–1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: military officers speaking freely Posted by: dangerouslysane

Comments are closed-

CAUSE FOR DESPAIR OR HOPE?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: BradKennedy on Apr 14, 2006 10:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whether cause for despair or hope, the soul-searching, patriotism, and wisdom evident in this article and each differing comment written above in response to it, lead me to reflect that any one of these writers would have better served America as president than the current incumbent.

Brad Kennedy, Author of "HEROES or Something"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: CAUSE FOR DESPAIR OR HOPE? Posted by: mwildfire

Comments are closed-

Don't underestimate how angry I am
[Report this comment]
Posted by: badkitty on Apr 14, 2006 10:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, "We can wave around the Nuremberg principle that "just following orders" is no defense for wrongdoing." This is an illegal war, and there is no excuse for wrongdoing on the part of our military, command or ordinary soldiers--for participating in this war. I'm only the daughter, niece and daughter-in-law of WWII veterans, so I have no direct connection with the military (my friends during Vietnam did actually understand the difference between right and wrong, and went to jail or are now Canadian citizens), but I see no reason why our military (all volunteer, too) so willingly followed illegal orders to fight this war in Iraq. If it was up to me, we'd dissolve our military and I, at least would have the option to have my taxes directed to purposes other than veterans benefits/medical care for Iraqi veterans. Really, don't underestimate how angry I am about this war. Our military has dragged the reputation of our country through the mud (and people still support our soldiers after seeing those pictures from Abu Ghraib) and by following these illegal orders, has endangered our country.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Thank You
[Report this comment]
Posted by: trapplean on Apr 14, 2006 11:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you for writing this article. Although I was aware that it is a very big deal, and highly unusual, for the retired generals to be speaking out, I couldn't really put this knowledge into words. That is, I didn't really understand the basis, why this is such a big deal. And without this understanding, I was at a loss to explain it to others.

Your article gave me some of the reasoning I sorely needed to explain the importance of what the retired generals are now saying. In other words, you just helped me strengthen the argument I'm making to some of the war (and administration) supporters around me, in what often feels like a hopeless upward battle to help them see that another side to the argument both exists, and has some validity.

And for that, I thank you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Ex-hippie turns stuffed shirt
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ostropaw on Apr 14, 2006 12:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am sorry that high school and college kids no longer have to face a couple of years of mandatory military service. That may be a strange thing to say for a guy who protested the draft back in the '60s.

No, it's not strange; it's consistent with writing an article in praise of military commanders who have decided to change their tune just a tad bit late.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Protect the retirement at all costs
[Report this comment]
Posted by: robchapman on Apr 14, 2006 2:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read the statement in Time Magazine by retired Marine General what's his name the Counterculturist.
I sure am glad that no one in my family or any of my friends' families are under the command of pusilianimous careerists like him.
The halls of the Pentagon may well have rung with the complaints of the highest brass when it came time to send the kids to the battlefields, but they are there and they are dying.
Worse than that, they are killing.
They are killing thousands of Iraqis who would never lift a hand against an American unless that American invaded Iraq to plunder its oil.
Now that he is collecting his fat retirement check, good old Marine Major General Counterculture can tell Time that he should said something sooner.
WOW GENERAL IF YOU SPOKEN OUT SOONER YOU SURE WOULDN"T BE GETTING THAT RETIREMENT CHECK WOULD YOU!!!!!!
SEMPER FI YOU!!!!!!!!!!

Robert Chapman
Lansing, New York

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

The war that WAS NEVER MEANT TO BE WON
[Report this comment]
Posted by: xbj on Apr 14, 2006 2:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The military top brass know it. Bush's defiant refusal to jettison Rumsfeld is not loyalty, it is DESPERATION, because Rumsfeld is WELL AWARE that this war WAS NEVER MEANT TO BE WON.

EVER.

It is designed to be a moneyminting SCAM to fleece America of tax dollars and military lives.

NOTHING MORE.

NOT A DAMN THING MORE.

And at that, Rumsfeld has been a roaring success and has carried out the Administration's plans PERFECTLY.

The military Top brass realize this.

DO YOU?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Forgot one thing........
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Panzerman on Apr 14, 2006 3:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good article, but Mr. Pizzo forgot one thing. All members of the military swear an oath to the Constitution of the United States of America, NOT to whatever sleazeball politician who happens to occupy the White House. Their oath is to support, protect and defend the Constitution against ALL enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC. The actions of Bush and Co, and those of Clinton and Co before him, are in direct violation of the Powers vested in the Executive Branch by the Constitution, and thus any and all orders which proceed from unlawful actions are null and void.

What we need is for those in the military to obey their oaths, refuse to participate in unlawful actions, and arrest those who violate the Constitution. Ultimately their duty is to We the People, NOT our servants in government. It's about time Americans remembered who the bosses are and who the servants are in this country. Best dust off your Constitutions and reread the rule book, boys and girls. Your country is being stolen from you.

And yes, I have served. 14 years in the Army--active, Nat Guard and Reserves.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Forgot one thing........ Posted by: brunowe
» No I don't. Posted by: brunowe
» RE: No I don't. Posted by: Prophit
» RE: Forgot one thing........ Posted by: TheJamea

Comments are closed-

H. Melton
[Report this comment]
Posted by: HM on Apr 14, 2006 5:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I went through the military beginning in 1965 through 1969. I had no desire to make a career out of it but with hind-sight it was the best experience of my life. I still remember those years vividly.

Those who were never in the military really can't propose an opinion regarding this subject. They just don't get it....

Support our troops and may God Bless America...
Semper Fi

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: H. Melton Posted by: greentime

Comments are closed-

Is The War Immoral Or Just Unwinnable
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mkghandi on Apr 14, 2006 6:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wouldn't expect any career military or retired career military officers to take a stand that the Iraq war is pure naked agggression and therefore unlawful under the Nuremberg standards. My guess is that all the career military retired generals speaking out against this war have come to realize that it is unwinnable--regardless of its moral value, and it should be stopped for that reason, or that the civilians in charge should just give them all the resources they need and a free hand to use them to win the war. The only retired American general who has credibility with me is Smedley Butler who made moral judgments about his experiences in what he called 'this racket'.

The generals we hear criticizing their civilian overseers are above all career bureaucrats, looking out for their own careers first, and for their country second (or third or fourth or anywhere else but first--even in retirement--when they have nothing to lose). They are as corrupt as the system they are a part of and should not be held as examples of virtue when they criticize civilians who govern them. Actions speak louder than words. If they were true patriots they would rise up and overthrow their fascist overlords, returning the country to rule by law in the Constitution. But I wouldn't even trust them to do that because they are likely to impose their own version of fascism, as did the Generals in Argentina. As long as they continue to obey orders coming from a criminal regime, no one on planet earth is safe.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Is Enron insider and US Army Secretary Thomas E. White
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ordaj on Apr 14, 2006 7:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...still in this Administration? Didn't approximately 50 Enron people join the administration?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Aside from that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tkwilson on Apr 14, 2006 8:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So far I haven't heard anyone on here really "get it"; not the vets and not the civilians either.

As far as I know, boot camp is designed to teach you two things 1) how to follow orders in spite of any thoughts you might have had to the contrary & 2) how to survive long enough to kill as many enemy soldiers as possible, at the direction of your superiors, for whatever reason.

Any of the rest of it is just bullshit and excuses.

What I don't get is how any civilian has the gall to critisize a soldier (who voluntarily or involuntarily has been thoroughly brainwashed at great effort and expense by experts in the field) for doing what they're taught to do, when none of you are willing to put your own bodies and freedom on the line to stop what you deem to be unconscienable on the part of the punk bureaucrats in charge.

Every soldier was a civilian first, and all soldiers are extensions of the society formed by civilians at large.

The idea that there's some special knowledge and/or privelige imbued or conferred by being a vet is the same as saying that there is special knowledge derived from being a former convict, sexual assault victim, cop or any other traumatic soul rending experience. It may be true, but what's your point?
Is there really anything to be gained by the distinction?

We all bleed.

If you really want this shit to stop, stop it yourself and quit looking for excuses and blaming other people for not doing it for you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Rummy is giving Bush the war he wants.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: art_chippendale on Apr 14, 2006 11:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Given Bush's unequivical support for the Rum once more, you have to ask: Why? With Bush's popularity in the toilet and taking heat from all sides about getting rid of this def sec., why is is sticking to his guns? Besides Bush's obvious character trait issues, we are left with the conclusion that he approves of the way the war is going. Long, Protracted, bogged down? That's just the way and Bush/Cheney want it. Its a way to keep Americans and the media focused on the evil bad guys while they steal all the oil money out the back door. Diversionary smoke and mirrors. And the saber rattling with Iran? Same agenda. Piss off Iran and get them to cut off the oil. Then watch American Big Oil Company profits soar. That's real supply-side economics.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Missing the Whole Point....
[Report this comment]
Posted by: CatDad on Apr 14, 2006 11:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Cheney/Bush/Rumsfeld did not ignore the advise of battle-hardened Pentagon Brass out of incompetence, but rather of sheer, devious cynicism. They knew the WMD excuse for war was a load of crap, but it was the best they could find. Cheney/Rumsfeld and the Neocons knew that they had to move FAST to execute their war plans before their WMD cover was blown. There was no time for more thorough planning, such how to secure the peace after major combat operations were over...or how to deal with indigenous insurgencies...and there definitely wasn’t time to get an additional 150K troops on the ground. Dealing with these issues could have added months to the war’s beginning, and the whole WMD scam might have been found out during this time.
They had to move fast...get the war started even without adequate manpower or adequate metal shield for the Humvees.

This Iraq fiasco is not from incompetence...it’s deliberate. The Cheney/Bush regime has co-opted the Malcom-X slogan “by any means necessary” in all matters...political and military. This lot of arm-chair, wannabe macho laptop warriors does not waste time grieving over dead soldiers like LBJ agonized over the fallen in Vietnam.

They ultimately got what they wanted: access to the world’s second largest reserves of oil. The fact the they’ve broken Iraq and our nation’s credibility doesn’t really matter to them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Histroy Repeats Again
[Report this comment]
Posted by: braxxian on Apr 15, 2006 1:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm trying to remember the name of one other so called leader who refused to listen to his Generals and thought he knew better than them on military matters, his orders eventually leading to the defeat of his army. What was his name agian.....oh yes I remeber now.......Adolf Hitler.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Certain Generals should NOT be allowed to retire yet
[Report this comment]
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 15, 2006 8:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This may seem backwards, but it is important that the worst of the generals, the ones who were behind Gitmo and Abu Grahib, not be allowed to retire or resign. Due to their extensive toadying up to Rumsfeld, they need to be held accountable - it is time to court-martial a few generals for their abuses, instead of just NCOs. Then I'll believe what you are saying about the military being on the right side.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Go Read Greg Palast! Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: Go Read Greg Palast! Posted by: saywhat?

Comments are closed-

RE: Don't dissolve the military, dissolve the hippies!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: CatDad on Apr 15, 2006 3:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How pitiful....American white males are so oppressed in this society! They just control 99% of the governement, military and business power structures. Gosh darn it...they just need to get that 1% back! Feminazis, hippies and homos....take pity on the opressed, white male in America.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

RE: Don't dissolve the military, dissolve the hippies!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: djtyg on Apr 16, 2006 8:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well, considering that 75% of the Reservists between the ages of 18-24 end up on unemployment when they come home from war, if you had you're way you and BadKitty would be in a win-win situation.

After all, we only served our country, why should we get any assistance, right?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

ironic bush said he listens to his generals
[Report this comment]
Posted by: fuzypupy on Apr 15, 2006 1:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
another lie , no doubt

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Amen, brother.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: djtyg on Apr 15, 2006 2:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't worry about BadKitty, she's just a troll disguising herself as a liberal. You see that type of stuff on the blogs all the time. A guy will start posting on liberal blogs like dailykos or mydd and start bashing the troops in the hopes that they can get the rest of us to chime in and agree. They hope that in doing so they can use any badmouthing of Soldiers against liberals in posts over at RedState or The Drudge Report.

BadKitty is an example of this. She once wrote that every Soldier in Iraq should be locked up for war crimes. Fortunately the UN doesn't agree, so I don't have too much to worry about (I'm writing this from Iraq right now).

The problem is it doesn't work. Liberals see right through it. And American liberals don't bash American Soldiers. Liberals are under such suspicion of hating America as it is that they wouldn't waste their time giving Sean Hannity any ammunition.

Anyway, even if there was someone so ignorant as to believe those things, you can be sure they never wanted to be in or understand our position anyway, to be fighting in a war that we think is b.s. for reasons that have nothing to do with politics. So in the end their opinions really don't matter.

Besides, they'd never have the balls to say this stuff to our face anyway.

"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously."-From Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Amen, brother. Posted by: thoughtcriminal

Comments are closed-

Better Late than Never
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Maryanne on Apr 15, 2006 3:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That these generals are speaking up now and at last, at least draws attention to the fact that this administration is rattling sabers in the direction of Iran. If the observations of these generals at a minimum makes people think about the failures in Iraq and the people responsible for them, they can perhaps prevent/ discourage support for attacks on Iran- especially since Mr. Bush thinks Mr. Rumsfeld is the man for the job in these "critical times." And who created the critical times? Read Project for a new American Century.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Better Late than Never Posted by: aussidawg

Comments are closed-

And if
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Maryanne on Apr 15, 2006 3:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And if this administration is serious about attacking Iran, perhaps the speaking up of the generals will give courage to those officers remaining to rebel against another irresponsible invasion of another country that has done nothing to us- and maybe never would.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Useless dissent
[Report this comment]
Posted by: steveba on Apr 15, 2006 4:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The problem with this whole line of dicussion is that these miltary types are not objecting to the war in Iraq on moral grounds, they are not objecting to empire building, and all the destruction of humanity and planet attending that, they are objecting to the the tactics used to fight this war. Rumsfeld et al. are not condemned for crimes against humanity, as they should be, but for being "incompentent" in pursuing an altogether illegal, immoral war. These "heroic" military leaders would be singing praise to the same "defense" department were it using what they would consider to be a winning strategy in Iraq (and elsewhere). Implicitly, then, replacing Rumsfeld with a more "competent" Sec. of Defense would be a step that we should agree would be in the right direction. This simply is not a useful line of dissent.

And, no, I don't agree that all citizens should be required to serve in the military. It has been a long time, if ever, since a miltary was used for a purpose to better mankind. Instead, we need to outgrow our adolescent provincialism and nationalism and start moving toward a truely global community wherein militarism is obsolete. How do we do that? Start THINIKING it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Useless dissent Posted by: richardpmendola

Comments are closed-

A Stint in the Military
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Celtic Warrior on Apr 15, 2006 4:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a Vietnam War Era Veteran, I agree with Stephen Pizzos. I went into USAF one month after high school graduation (1962). At times I wish I had remained with USAF and had gone on to secure the officer's commission I so coveted at age 19. I did not.

However, the Military gave to me a strong sense of self-confidence. During those four years I "came into my own", and I regard those four years as among the best four years of my life.

In my position I meet a lot of young college students. Many of them, perhaps too many of them in my book, lack the sense of discipline, regimen, respect and sense of community that are central to military training. More young men (and, women) than I care to talk about would do well to experience that trained discipline, that respect for authority, regard for one's superiors (and, elders) and to understand that this life is a shared-space event. "Me-ism" has taken over much of the 20 to 30-something generation.

Some rightfully blame the parents (my "Boomer" generation) for being far too doting and overly-nurturing. That may well be true. I run into way too many young people (especially American youth, as I also am exposed to a number of international students) who are selfish, self-centered, foul-mouthed and arrogant beyond the pale. And, most of these kids are from well-to-do to very well-to-do families.

Some of our Military branches have had to increase the length of boot camp because their new enlistees are in such poor mental and physical condition that they could not meet Military requirements under the original, shorter training periods. We have become nation of sloth and gluttony. I for one believe Military training, especially boot camp, could help to change much of that. Mandatory Military participation, even if on weekends for two years as is done in many other countries, would be a helpful tool toward framing our young Americans into better future citizens.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Support the generals / yes / the 60 % dissenting americans yes/but where are they? watchting TV?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: saywhat? on Apr 15, 2006 5:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it is a welcome suprise that the generals are expressing dissent especially when they are the leaders defending the american population....i can only hope more will come out and that the american government will be won back by the people and the constitution it represents....perhaps the generals will give confidence for those who want to dissent but don't..........

because the american public has grown so dull we know not any of our consequences of our actions....this is a new world in which the american public would do well to educate it self ,,,not only intellectually but practically, in preparing for the world events yet to come...we are no longer the entitled ones...we'd do best by learning to get along, yet keep still and place our own backs in line...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Romanticized horse crap
[Report this comment]
Posted by: IntnsRed on Apr 15, 2006 7:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sorry for the harsh title, but that sums up my feelings on the article.

Yes, after 3 years of slaughter, some generals are moaning about the fact that the US is losing the war and pointing fingers at one (note they're not criticizing Bush!) incompetent who is responsible.

So what?

Let's cut to the chase. Every GI in the military is taught that it is their duty to question and disobey illegal orders.

So how come the US has tortured people and is still torturing people? That doesn't sound like an "honorable" military.

The US Constitution calls treaties the "supreme law of the land". The US gov't had duly and legally ratified the Geneva Conventions and UN Charter treaties.

US GIs are sworn to uphold and to defend the US Constitution. Logic would dictate those soldiers would therefore follow the "supreme law of the land" -- the UN Charter and Geneva Conventions.

So how come US GIs willfully participated in a war of aggression in violation of the UN Charter? Why are GIs participating in Geneva Convention violations?

Is that "bravery"? No, that is cowardice -- it's the American equivalent of being a "Good German."

The brave soldiers are the ones who refused to fight in a war of aggression and to defecate on the Constitution. These generals who are now criticizing Rumsfeld are just as much war criminals as the GIs and generals who are still in Iraq committing war crimes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Right on!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Bobsays on Apr 16, 2006 7:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Finally, some clear thinking. Real military people who have seen war and its harm up close, do not see going to war as a lighthearted endeavour. I served in the army and trained as a sniper and as a special forces corporal. I spent my youth before the army in the army cadets, and became a competition marksman for the Olympic team.

I had no, absolutely no illusion what war does to people. Having been nearly killed by a stray bullet, which landed a few centimetres above my head, I know the violence of the whole thing. When in the forces, our commanders were deeply honest about what war does: we would watch all the graphic medical films that were made by the military during the Vietnam war. This is the stuff that civilians never get to see; it is that dramatic and disturbing.

We need some people who know these things in power, not the pansy brigade, either liberals of the ilk of Blair or Clinton, or slimy neo-cons who use their rich friends to keep them out the firing line.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Generals just want a new coach.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ANCHOR1 on Apr 16, 2006 12:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am glad to hear that your Drill Instructors were such libertarians. Mine were not. Our performance at Parris Island was compared to: excrement, young girls, homosexuals, hogs, and civilians back on the block that needed to climb a lamp post to defecate. Our ability to follow orders without question was being rated, not our respect for civilians or our constitutional republic.

Civilians, to put it kindly, were just bad examples. “Rats” and draftees were also scorned at the time. “Rats” were recruits who were transferred to “Rat Platoon” where they could be held up to ridicule because complaints, about their mistreatment, reached a Congressman’s attention. Draftees were taking the blame for being, in the eyes of the Marines, insultingly unsuitable candidates forced on them by lawful civilian order.

Our Senior Drill Instructor tried to forestall “Rats” in his platoon the first week by shouting questions at us about our connections to anyone who could, pierce the Corps thick institutional hide, embarrass his chain of command, fine him his “pro” pay or get him relieved.

Not long after our Senior knocked me out, he drew blood from another recruit and was relieved for suspected brutality. So, I have to hand it to the “Rats” and draftees; they all graduated despite the additional abuse. They made it. We all made it. We were young men and not children when we hit the “yellow foot prints”. In real life, The Corps builds young men into Marines. Better men, a boy into a man? That’s not their job. Occasionally, both figuratively and literally, boys got chewed up at Parris Island.

The Corps built us into living nightmares, willing at a lawful order, to destroy anything in our path,. Later, in Vietnam, we just needed something in our path. Now I live with the constant knowledge that I was part of the “we” and that the “we” were nineteen and twenty year old murderers. I wouldn’t wish this knowledge on, never mind force it on, anyone.

I’m skeptical of officers, retired or not, who bite their handlers. What motivates an officer? Promotions come faster in war time. A war that you are winning is a popular war and even better promotion wise. I think the generals still want to play the game. They just want to dump a loosing coach.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

JOSHUADUDD - INTERNET WHORE!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: cerveny1 on Apr 16, 2006 3:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Funny thing about Alternet.org . . . There is this little click of self-righteous moderators who unilaterally determine what is right and wrong. Those in particular who don't agree with one JOSHUA LUDD and his brand of democracy may find themselves banished to Alternet's Gulag. I don't mind anymore. I have determined that a site frequented by an arrogant, gutless little prick like JOSHUA LUDD is hardly worth my time. I managed to break all of Alternet's fascist and seemingly self-contradictory rules of engagement but then again so did Joshua so I can only conclude that he is some kind of moderator or just a little bitch. Probably both. I'm sure that many of you who have debated with this self-important little prick understand. Having a left-leaning site like this is great and all but when assholes like JOSHUA LUDD run the show it ends up being a My Way or the Highway circle jerk eh JOSH? There can be no dissenting voice with JOSHUA LUDD. He silences you if he disagrees with you – sound familiar? All this discussion about the problems Americans are facing, censorship being one of them, and Fascistnet.org ends up being a microcosm of that very problem.

I challenge Joshua on every occasion because I disagree with him and his beliefs. He and I have both exchanged ad-hominem attacks – he seems to be a real tough guy though, given to Lee Marvin-esque outbursts but yet he whines to a friend and poof I’m gone or maybe he is the BIG PRICK who moderates the whole thing. In any event he actually represents much of what is wrong with this site and to a greater extent, what is wrong with America. We are discussing such topics as War, Racism, Fascism, Sexism, Capitalism, Socialism, etc. and yet are asked to keep the kid gloves on. Funny, one would think that people with enough conviction to come in here and discuss these topics would have thicker skin, and apparently most do except that little BITCH ASS TRICK JOSHUA LUDD. Keep him in mind when he attacks you personally and calls you a “reprehensible, murderous hypocrite” or this little pearl he threw out there – “Good for you. You still didn't serve. As my grandfather... a WW2 vet would say "close only counts in hand grenades and horseshoes". Either you served or you didn't, and you, you chickenhawk piece of shit, DID NOT.” Funny Josh is beyond reproach much like our own president and the man he was criticizing in that thread – Colin Powell. Who is going to censure or ban you Josh? What about that post wasn’t a personal attack and profane?

I think many of you would be interested in knowing that Little Joshie is running a pseudo-intellectual pyramid blogging scam – fucking hilarious Josh!!!! What is it called Josh – Blogging for Bucks?? LMAO!!!
No I understand why you have this incestuous little relationship with Alternet.org. You are giving each other the reach-around eh JOSHUADUDD? You’re nothing but a little blog twink are you? This is the real progressive thinker you all are dealing with. WHAT A FUCKING LOSER!! Here’s his pitch spoken like a good little Neo-con:

“Write a blog. Make Money.
There are millions of people who want to work from home but don't know how.There are millions of people who know how to write.There are millions of people who know how to write, but don't know how to make money with it.We KNOW how to make money with content people write. This site was designed to allow YOU to write content which WE will market and we will ALL make money.We'll make the money for you!
Then, we split the money,
50/50. Not only that but we'll also place your ads on the blogs of people you refer to writingUp.”
Check it out here - maybe you can make a buck or two - LMAO!!!
http://www.writingup.com/write_a_blog_make_money

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

athene
[Report this comment]
Posted by: athene on Apr 16, 2006 11:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm grateful for the comments and personal stories from the vets here. Please, please continue to share your stories and your thoughtful reasoning with everyone you know, whereever you live across the country. You are probably some of the few people who can help open the minds of those voters who are still considering voting for Republicans in the next few years. The military has high status in the minds of these voters, and you can really affect them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: athene Posted by: kryptx

Comments are closed-

Ex-Army speaks
[Report this comment]
Posted by: dadzilla on Apr 18, 2006 10:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As someone who did his time I understand how profound the generals speaking out is. Not only is it unprecedented, it flies against military culture as a whole.

I can only surmise these few who have come out are saying what many others are thinking but don't feel they can say.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Permission to speak freely, sir.......
[Report this comment]
Posted by: sidewinder on Apr 18, 2006 8:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You state that you were taught that the lowest civilian was better than the highest ranking military officer. You were taught this in boot camp? That's odd, I was a drill instructor in 1960 - 1961 and I never taught that to any of my recruits. Perhaps that's the reason you turned out to be such a non-effective.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

The generals should now speak out about how and why we can never win
[Report this comment]
Posted by: reddeer on Apr 20, 2006 6:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After serving with the Marines in Vietnam in 1970 I was assigned to instructor duty in what was called "Pre-deployment School". It was designed to give Marines who had just been orders to to Wes-Pac (Vietnam) a quick overview in what to prepare for and expect upon their arrival there. I taught 2 courses; Vietnamese Customs, Culture and Religions and Personal Response. The first two-hour session was taught using personal slides I had taken while serving with a Marine Civic Action (CAP) unit and the second resulted from training I had had while still in Vietnam. Both courses attempted to impress on Marines the fact that displays of prejudice, rascism or unjustified aggression on their part could literally cost them or another Marine their life. Personal response was about knowing each of us has basically the same response when we or our loved ones are oppressed, threatened or otherwise have our basic human rights violated - we react in whatever way is most effective and we feel is neccessary -- and that often means taking up arms against the oppressor. In other words, the Marines have long known that guerilla warfare relies on the abusive tactics of invading (aka liberating) armies for their recruitment. I would say to the troops during my lecture"an abusive or even unkind word or gesture could result in that person becoming your enemy - or in the very least becoming sympthetic to their cause". How in Gods name could the military be so congnizant of these basic facts as a result of our experience in Vietnam, more than 30 years ago, and seem to never even consider the effects torture, civilian casualties and house-to-house raids on the homes of innocent families would have on U.S. casualties. The troops handing out candy or giving away soccer balls to children will never erase the pain and resentment Iragi's must feel over the devastation this war has caused them, personally and as a nation; i.e. sorry we raided your house last night causing your children severe and perhaps life long truama - now here's a soccer ball. For more information about Marine CAP Units see Corson, William, The Betrayal, W.W. Norton 1968. This title is a great read for anyone interested in anti-guerilla warfare in Vietnam-- written by a Marine's Marine Officer who did speak out and was willing to ruin his career over doing so. I can talk more about my experiences if there's interest.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Permission Granted
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tanstaafl28 on Apr 20, 2006 10:52 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." -Issac Asimov

I spent six years in the U.S. Navy. My family has a long and rich history of military service that stretches all the way back to the American Revolution. I do not regret my service, but I do not think I could serve the current administration with a clean conscience. Edward Abbey said it best:

"A patriot is someone who is willing to defend his country against his government."

These men are indeed courageous to speak out against their former masters. Corrupt politicians have tarnished the good name of our nation, as well as the very sense of honor and duty that called these men to serve their country in the first place. Most saddening of all is the fact that the military is no longer serving the interests of the country, but rather the interests of a elitist cabal of immoral and greedy men.

I fear the damage is done. The policies created by the Bushaviks have come to fruition, just as they planned them. No matter how they go out, these people (and their corporate sponsors) have profited greatly from wholesale slaughter. There

Rumsfield, in particular, has been involved in a lot of "shady deals" going back years before he became SecDef. If there is a hell, he's already earned himself a special place there.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

r
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mananahoyt on Oct 31, 2006 5:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]

Comments are closed-

e
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mananahoyt on Oct 31, 2006 5:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]

Comments are closed-

e
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mananahoyt on Oct 31, 2006 5:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]

Comments are closed-

e
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mananahoyt on Oct 31, 2006 5:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]

Comments are closed-

r
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mananahoyt on Oct 31, 2006 5:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]

Comments are closed-

e
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mananahoyt on Oct 31, 2006 5:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Alternet Comments:

Comments are closed-

A stint in the forces is good for everybody
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Bobsays on Apr 14, 2006 2:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am also not a militerist or lover of war. In fact, I have absolutely no illusions about war: it is a disgusting business and is the ugliest thing on the planet. But I do know this: some of the best people I have known in my life, some of the most noble characters, were in the military.

The only other place in my various careers that I have seen people come close has been in international development and working in hospitals.

The things I learned in the military have stayed with me. I view everything through a different lens than my friends. I always ask myself: am I being true to my beliefs, am I bravely standing up for what's right, am I loyal? These are questions that most civilians don't first ask in a job. Most civilians usually ask: what's in it for me, how much money do I get, is it going to be always fun?

I wish young people would be given the choice to do the following after college or university: two years service either in the military, public services or international development. Three choices and no get out clause. We would have a different generation of people out there if this occured. I look around my neighbourhood and see the sad specimens that are today's youth. Ravaged by attention deficit disorders, selfish, crude and rude, lazy, slobby, abusing drugs, and think that this is not going to make a great future.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Not buying this one...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: greentime on Apr 14, 2006 4:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is no way you will ever convince me that it takes a stint in the military to make a person brave, loyal, and true to their beliefs. What it takes is a head-heart connection and service to others. You don't need the military to experience humility or love.

If we spent as much time teaching empathy, peace and good stewardship of the planet, and as much time providing for that to happen, we would need a lot less military of all kinds.

This "need for military experience" argument is unsound at best. I think if we stop playing at peace and really try to make it happen, it will take more strenght of character than you would ever learn by bullying and killing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Not buying this one... Posted by: Prophit
» RE: Not buying this one... Posted by: dbarber
» RE: Not buying this one... Posted by: Prophit
» RE: Not buying this one... Posted by: douglashoyt
» RE: Not buying this one... Posted by: greentime
» RE: Not buying this one... Posted by: aonghus36
» RE: Not buying this one... Posted by: Elmowilcox
» RE: Not buying this one... Posted by: greentime
» Well Said... Posted by: woodford54

Comments are closed-

Yes, but...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Pete123 on Apr 14, 2006 5:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look at what conservative trends in the political culture have installed in part by us learning the lessons of losing the Vietnam War and patriotism: 1) elected arguably the worst U.S. president in history, 2) put Rumsefeld in charge of the military and 3) supported the war in Iraq past the point of no return in the Middle East. The generals (i.e. Colin Powell) are a little late in speaking up, folks, wouldn't you say? This seems like an ironic time to be flogging the virtue of enlisting in the military and singing the praises of a civilian-led military. I get it, because I enlisted in the military in 1971, but the "lessons" of manhood that are supposedly taught to boys through military service eluded me. I think they are mainly myth and nostaglic hindsight that perpetuate the power of these morons like Bush and these scary, evil assholes like Rumsfeld.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

ECLECTICIST, S. JIM RODRIGUEZ
[Report this comment]
Posted by: SJR505 on Apr 14, 2006 5:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
AS A FORMER VIET-NAM VETERAN WITH TWO MEMBERS OF OUR FAMILY AS RECIPIENTS OF THE MEDAL OF HONOR, I AM COMPELLED TO STATE THAT WHATEVER SCHOOL, WHATEVER UPBRINGING, WHATEVER EXPERINCES BUSH "SILVERFOOT' 43 HAD, HE AND HIS CORRUPTED CRONIES - " EVERYTING IS FOR SALE ...", STILL DO NOT GET IT RIGHT...I HAVE TO BELIEVE THAT THE FOLLOWING THOUGHTS APPLY TO OUR " TURD BLOSSOM " ADMINISTRATION :

"One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions." -- Admiral Grace Hopper

"Every gun that is made, every warship that is launched, every rocket that is fired signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those that are cold and not clothed." -President Dwight Eisenhower

AND, HAVE IGNORED AND FAILED TO READ AND MEMORIZE THE TENETS OF JUST WAR THEORY :

• Cause must be just, often limited to self-defense or to redress injury. Scholars dispute whether preemptive or preventive war can be a just cause.
• Public declaration by a lawful authority.
• No ulterior motives. War must be pursued with right intention - justice - not self-aggrandizement or vengeance
• Reasonable probability of success.
• More good done than harm.
• Use of force only as last resort.
• Avoid harming noncombatants.
• Proportionality - use of the least destructive force possible.
• Intention to restore a just peace.

S...JIM...RODRIGUEZ+++ECLECTICIST SEEKER+++

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

You're doing a great job, Rummie
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bookwoman on Apr 14, 2006 5:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder if this is what Bush will say in the face of the increasing criticism of Donald Rumsfeld's performance in running the war in Iraq.

I should point out that none of the officers so far have been active officers. Each is retired, either of their own volition or in the kind of forced retirement brought on by contrived performance evaluation reports which force an officer to realize that he or she is being told to leave. Two star General, John Riggs (he used to be three star ****) has stated that he was forced to retire, with a loss in rank, after being accused of inconsistencies in his relationship with contractors. He never got the chance to challenge these charges, and they appeared after he criticized the size of the armed troops which were sent to maintain peace after Iraq was taken. It should be noted that General Riggs worked closely with General Eric Shenseki and was, in effect, echoing the same concerns which got General Shenseki fired.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

I was beyond surprised myself
[Report this comment]
Posted by: funtime42 on Apr 14, 2006 5:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm a vet from a family of vets, and more than one conversation has been had about how stunned we were at the public airing of opinions by these gentlemen. Every time another one speaks out, I get a call from my mother, or father, or brother or nephew saying "Can you believe they're going public?"

Of course, I've disagreed with the administration's stand from the start. I've marched, I've posted signs, I've donated time and money to the peace movement. And every time someone asks how a veteran can show such a "lack of loyalty" to our troops, I want to scream. How can supporting the end of an immoral conflict be wrong? I'm not a pacifist - I can understand the need for armed defense, but this is a war being fought for oil, Haliburton, and revenge because the first one run by Daddy didn't get him a second term in office.

You don't have to serve in the military to understand courage and loyalty - that isn't the point of this article at all - but only a veteran can understand the courage it takes for any soldier to make such statements.

I'm proud of them, and hope their voices are heard.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I was beyond surprised myself Posted by: douglashoyt

Comments are closed-

This Marine isn't buying it
[Report this comment]
Posted by: reddeer on Apr 14, 2006 6:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I passed through Marine Corps Recruit Depot San Diego in Janurary, 1969 (Platoon 120). Arrived in Da Nang, South Vietnam in April, 1969. After about 2 months of perimeter guard duty and loading napalm onto F-4 Phantom's I decided to quit contibuting to death and destruction and demanded to my superiors that I be transfered to civic action duty which meant being assigned to a Marine CAP Unit based in a small rural village south of Da Nang. Going through the chain of command, I finally reached my Commanding Officer where by I told him that I could no longer be party to dropping nape on villages or otherwise killing innocent civilians. My C.O. commented that he respected my views and that he would have my transfer papers ready with his signature on them next day, which he did. I did all this as a 20 year old Lance Corporal with no college education and the only political insight I had came from the Stars and Stripes. My mother and Sunday school teacher taught me everything I needed to know about not killing innocent women and children. Now you want to give the most powerful men in our military, those who could have made a difference in the outcome of this mess, a freaken pass for keeping their mouths shut about what they knew and believed, while thousands of Iraqi's along with the sons and daughters of our neighbors have been slaughtered -- in our names, no less. I think not. In my mind these military elite's are no better than the Enron executives who put their career's and financial futures ahead of human decency and honor.
Will Gilmore, U.S.M.C. Vietnam 1969-70

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: This Marine isn't buying it Posted by: zap2scott
» RE: This Marine isn't buying it Posted by: LanternBearer
» WOW! Posted by: giles

Comments are closed-

I'm not buying it either.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: guleblanc on Apr 14, 2006 7:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm a civilian, and have never served, so I may not have the standing to judge the culture of the military. But when you say that respect for civilian control is deeply ingrained in the military culture, I have a lot of trouble believing that. I have met too many ex-military officers who believe the exact opposite, that military authority supercedes civilian authority. In fact, I have had many conversations with former officers, mostly Jr officers I think, who believe that in a state of emergency military officers outrank any civilian police or elected authority, and that in the case of an emergency, the military has the right to detain or punish civilians at their discretion. I've never understood how this could possibly be true, but no amout of argumentation has changed their minds. In fact, on more than one occasion, arguing seemed like a good way to get a broken head, so I agreed pretty quickly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I'm not buying it either. Posted by: aonghus36
» RE: I'm not buying it either. Posted by: redskin69

Comments are closed-

muggles5
[Report this comment]
Posted by: kenhymes on Apr 14, 2006 7:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The military is as diverse as any other institution in our society. Despite the heavy dose of indoctrination to which new recruits are subjected, and the pervasive culture of closing ranks rather than questioning policy in public, many officers and enlisted men find that their brains and hearts continue to function, often to their great pain and inconvenience.

It can't be said accurately that military people act or react in any particular way.

What is powerfully reflected in the public comments of these generals is an emerging sense that responsibility to the Constitution and the well-being of the country ultimately must outweigh loyalty to PARTICULAR appointed civilians. Those who worry that this is a threat to elected democracy should remember that Rumsfeld et al were not elected.

The left does not have to buy into any notions of military valor or jingoistic patriotism in order to heartily welcome the authentic resistance of military insiders, both officers and enlisted men. The writer, whom I disagree with about the value of military service, makes the important point that it is truly significant that these guys are speaking out. They need support, not sniping. Save that for the Rumsfelds and Abizaids. Not to mention the Bushes and Cheneys.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

History
[Report this comment]
Posted by: richardpmendola on Apr 14, 2006 8:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the end, only the German generals (talk about a military culture!) could have stopped Hitler, but they came with too little too late. There are interesting and frightening parallels between those evil times and these.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: History Posted by: tcx2
» RE: History Posted by: zipper696

Comments are closed-

support for the generals
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bobdotj on Apr 14, 2006 8:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
while i support this people that are attempting to set the record straight one must know that had this same people voiced concern prior to the plan we may well not have gon to war.in an attempt to be fair to the generals i understand that their careers would be ruined had the voiced their concerns,so what does this say about rethugs,war,bush,cheney,america,democracy,etc.etc.maybe the next time america votes we should make sure of the competency of the people we are voting for,check their m.o`s.in 08 we have another bushite in mccain,maybewe should think twice about this warhero,maybe we should think twice about clinton.are they qualified to be president?i think not.lets vote for a real president next time,one thats for americans.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Draft Dodgers, College Deferrments, Champagne Units and Never Serveds Running a War
[Report this comment]
Posted by: NoPCZone on Apr 14, 2006 8:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The profession of arms is something hard to fathom for those who have not been part of it and it should be noted that only Rumsfeld has served on active duty, and that as a Navy pilot.

We are engaged in a protracted ground insurgency war, largely run by people who have never served in any branch of the armed forces. Most of those who have served have come from the Navy and Air Force. Only with the recent promotion of General Pace to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has someone with land combat experience (US Marines) been in any position of prominence. This was, is and continues to be a serious mistake.

Not to slight the Navy or Air Force, but the overwhelming majority of people who are exposed to the enemy on a regular basis are from the US Army and, to a lesser extent, the Marine Corps. Soldiers and Marines have carried most of the load, taken most of the casualties, been asked to make the greatest sacrifice and have had the least voice in the halls of power in Washington. I do not make light of the Sailors and Airmen serving in Iraq, but their numbers and exposure to the enemy are miniscule compared to that of the primary ground components of our armed forces.

I find it telling that this administration castrated the senior leadership of the US Army on the eve of, and the early hours of, a ground war. General Shinseki, with over 30 years of service and expertise, was cast aside like so much trash because he did his advisory job and told Bush's people what they did not want to hear. You would think that any Secretary of Defense would listen to a war veteran, wounded in combat, with experience in every facet of ground warfare. They didn't and when Retired General White, as Bush's appointed Secretary of the Army, backed up General Shinseki--he got canned as well.

This administration has populated the DoD and NSC with civilians who are enamored of push-button warfare, a condescending attitude toward soldiers and a know-it-all attitude. If they would have listened to Secretary White and General Shinseki, the most knowledgeable and experienced people in the senior ranks of the Pentagon about such things, we probably would not be having this discussion right now. Either the invasion would have been called off or prosecuted far differently. The great tragedy is that they did their job and were punished for it.

Nobody hates war more than a soldier that has seen it close up. I had the honor of serving with Army Colonel (then LTC)Robert Howard back in the 1980's in Germany. At that time Col Howard was the most decorated person serving on active duty in the Armed Forces of the US. 5 tours in Vietnam. Congressional Medal of Honor. After entering as a Private, he worked his way through the enlisted ranks to Master Sergeant and then the Officer ranks from Lieutenant to Colonel. He was no PX soldier and no warmonger. Just a professional soldier who quietly and professionally led by example. The opposite of the clowns who have put our Soldiers and Marines in this untenable position.

History is not going to be kind to 'W' and his boys and shouldn't be. The harm they have done in so many ways to our nation, it's reputation and institutions is incredible. I hope that someday General Shinseki writes or speaks about what happened inside the Pentagon, NSC and White House prior to the launching of this fiasco. He owes it to himself, the Army, the nation and history.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Bob Handy
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bobhandy on Apr 14, 2006 8:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To some extent I agree, Gen. Eric Shinseki didn't wait one, two or three years to voice his concern. Maj Gen Batiste didn't wait. As a parent of a soldier I expect more from the stars. What happend to "Be all that you can be" or " A few good men", ot "The few, the proud" etc etc
What happend to the UCMJ "Obey all lawfull orders"
Curtis LeMay is crdited with saying words to the effect...if we lost world war 2, he would have been tried as a war criminal....
A lot of warriers, American, coalition and Iraqi plus countless civilians have died because they "Didn't take permission to speak FREELY sir.
Bob Handy
USN Ret

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

military officers speaking freely
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ralph223 on Apr 14, 2006 9:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The following quote is from US Marine general Smedley Butler. It would appear that things have not changed much in a century or more.

I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902–1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: military officers speaking freely Posted by: dangerouslysane

Comments are closed-

CAUSE FOR DESPAIR OR HOPE?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: BradKennedy on Apr 14, 2006 10:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whether cause for despair or hope, the soul-searching, patriotism, and wisdom evident in this article and each differing comment written above in response to it, lead me to reflect that any one of these writers would have better served America as president than the current incumbent.

Brad Kennedy, Author of "HEROES or Something"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: CAUSE FOR DESPAIR OR HOPE? Posted by: mwildfire

Comments are closed-

Don't underestimate how angry I am
[Report this comment]
Posted by: badkitty on Apr 14, 2006 10:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, "We can wave around the Nuremberg principle that "just following orders" is no defense for wrongdoing." This is an illegal war, and there is no excuse for wrongdoing on the part of our military, command or ordinary soldiers--for participating in this war. I'm only the daughter, niece and daughter-in-law of WWII veterans, so I have no direct connection with the military (my friends during Vietnam did actually understand the difference between right and wrong, and went to jail or are now Canadian citizens), but I see no reason why our military (all volunteer, too) so willingly followed illegal orders to fight this war in Iraq. If it was up to me, we'd dissolve our military and I, at least would have the option to have my taxes directed to purposes other than veterans benefits/medical care for Iraqi veterans. Really, don't underestimate how angry I am about this war. Our military has dragged the reputation of our country through the mud (and people still support our soldiers after seeing those pictures from Abu Ghraib) and by following these illegal orders, has endangered our country.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Thank You
[Report this comment]
Posted by: trapplean on Apr 14, 2006 11:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you for writing this article. Although I was aware that it is a very big deal, and highly unusual, for the retired generals to be speaking out, I couldn't really put this knowledge into words. That is, I didn't really understand the basis, why this is such a big deal. And without this understanding, I was at a loss to explain it to others.

Your article gave me some of the reasoning I sorely needed to explain the importance of what the retired generals are now saying. In other words, you just helped me strengthen the argument I'm making to some of the war (and administration) supporters around me, in what often feels like a hopeless upward battle to help them see that another side to the argument both exists, and has some validity.

And for that, I thank you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Ex-hippie turns stuffed shirt
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ostropaw on Apr 14, 2006 12:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am sorry that high school and college kids no longer have to face a couple of years of mandatory military service. That may be a strange thing to say for a guy who protested the draft back in the '60s.

No, it's not strange; it's consistent with writing an article in praise of military commanders who have decided to change their tune just a tad bit late.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Protect the retirement at all costs
[Report this comment]
Posted by: robchapman on Apr 14, 2006 2:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read the statement in Time Magazine by retired Marine General what's his name the Counterculturist.
I sure am glad that no one in my family or any of my friends' families are under the command of pusilianimous careerists like him.
The halls of the Pentagon may well have rung with the complaints of the highest brass when it came time to send the kids to the battlefields, but they are there and they are dying.
Worse than that, they are killing.
They are killing thousands of Iraqis who would never lift a hand against an American unless that American invaded Iraq to plunder its oil.
Now that he is collecting his fat retirement check, good old Marine Major General Counterculture can tell Time that he should said something sooner.
WOW GENERAL IF YOU SPOKEN OUT SOONER YOU SURE WOULDN"T BE GETTING THAT RETIREMENT CHECK WOULD YOU!!!!!!
SEMPER FI YOU!!!!!!!!!!

Robert Chapman
Lansing, New York

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

The war that WAS NEVER MEANT TO BE WON
[Report this comment]
Posted by: xbj on Apr 14, 2006 2:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The military top brass know it. Bush's defiant refusal to jettison Rumsfeld is not loyalty, it is DESPERATION, because Rumsfeld is WELL AWARE that this war WAS NEVER MEANT TO BE WON.

EVER.

It is designed to be a moneyminting SCAM to fleece America of tax dollars and military lives.

NOTHING MORE.

NOT A DAMN THING MORE.

And at that, Rumsfeld has been a roaring success and has carried out the Administration's plans PERFECTLY.

The military Top brass realize this.

DO YOU?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Forgot one thing........
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Panzerman on Apr 14, 2006 3:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good article, but Mr. Pizzo forgot one thing. All members of the military swear an oath to the Constitution of the United States of America, NOT to whatever sleazeball politician who happens to occupy the White House. Their oath is to support, protect and defend the Constitution against ALL enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC. The actions of Bush and Co, and those of Clinton and Co before him, are in direct violation of the Powers vested in the Executive Branch by the Constitution, and thus any and all orders which proceed from unlawful actions are null and void.

What we need is for those in the military to obey their oaths, refuse to participate in unlawful actions, and arrest those who violate the Constitution. Ultimately their duty is to We the People, NOT our servants in government. It's about time Americans remembered who the bosses are and who the servants are in this country. Best dust off your Constitutions and reread the rule book, boys and girls. Your country is being stolen from you.

And yes, I have served. 14 years in the Army--active, Nat Guard and Reserves.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Forgot one thing........ Posted by: brunowe
» No I don't. Posted by: brunowe
» RE: No I don't. Posted by: Prophit
» RE: Forgot one thing........ Posted by: TheJamea

Comments are closed-

H. Melton
[Report this comment]
Posted by: HM on Apr 14, 2006 5:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I went through the military beginning in 1965 through 1969. I had no desire to make a career out of it but with hind-sight it was the best experience of my life. I still remember those years vividly.

Those who were never in the military really can't propose an opinion regarding this subject. They just don't get it....

Support our troops and may God Bless America...
Semper Fi

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: H. Melton Posted by: greentime

Comments are closed-

Is The War Immoral Or Just Unwinnable
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mkghandi on Apr 14, 2006 6:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wouldn't expect any career military or retired career military officers to take a stand that the Iraq war is pure naked agggression and therefore unlawful under the Nuremberg standards. My guess is that all the career military retired generals speaking out against this war have come to realize that it is unwinnable--regardless of its moral value, and it should be stopped for that reason, or that the civilians in charge should just give them all the resources they need and a free hand to use them to win the war. The only retired American general who has credibility with me is Smedley Butler who made moral judgments about his experiences in what he called 'this racket'.

The generals we hear criticizing their civilian overseers are above all career bureaucrats, looking out for their own careers first, and for their country second (or third or fourth or anywhere else but first--even in retirement--when they have nothing to lose). They are as corrupt as the system they are a part of and should not be held as examples of virtue when they criticize civilians who govern them. Actions speak louder than words. If they were true patriots they would rise up and overthrow their fascist overlords, returning the country to rule by law in the Constitution. But I wouldn't even trust them to do that because they are likely to impose their own version of fascism, as did the Generals in Argentina. As long as they continue to obey orders coming from a criminal regime, no one on planet earth is safe.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Is Enron insider and US Army Secretary Thomas E. White
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ordaj on Apr 14, 2006 7:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...still in this Administration? Didn't approximately 50 Enron people join the administration?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Aside from that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tkwilson on Apr 14, 2006 8:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So far I haven't heard anyone on here really "get it"; not the vets and not the civilians either.

As far as I know, boot camp is designed to teach you two things 1) how to follow orders in spite of any thoughts you might have had to the contrary & 2) how to survive long enough to kill as many enemy soldiers as possible, at the direction of your superiors, for whatever reason.

Any of the rest of it is just bullshit and excuses.

What I don't get is how any civilian has the gall to critisize a soldier (who voluntarily or involuntarily has been thoroughly brainwashed at great effort and expense by experts in the field) for doing what they're taught to do, when none of you are willing to put your own bodies and freedom on the line to stop what you deem to be unconscienable on the part of the punk bureaucrats in charge.

Every soldier was a civilian first, and all soldiers are extensions of the society formed by civilians at large.

The idea that there's some special knowledge and/or privelige imbued or conferred by being a vet is the same as saying that there is special knowledge derived from being a former convict, sexual assault victim, cop or any other traumatic soul rending experience. It may be true, but what's your point?
Is there really anything to be gained by the distinction?

We all bleed.

If you really want this shit to stop, stop it yourself and quit looking for excuses and blaming other people for not doing it for you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Rummy is giving Bush the war he wants.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: art_chippendale on Apr 14, 2006 11:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Given Bush's unequivical support for the Rum once more, you have to ask: Why? With Bush's popularity in the toilet and taking heat from all sides about getting rid of this def sec., why is is sticking to his guns? Besides Bush's obvious character trait issues, we are left with the conclusion that he approves of the way the war is going. Long, Protracted, bogged down? That's just the way and Bush/Cheney want it. Its a way to keep Americans and the media focused on the evil bad guys while they steal all the oil money out the back door. Diversionary smoke and mirrors. And the saber rattling with Iran? Same agenda. Piss off Iran and get them to cut off the oil. Then watch American Big Oil Company profits soar. That's real supply-side economics.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Missing the Whole Point....
[Report this comment]
Posted by: CatDad on Apr 14, 2006 11:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Cheney/Bush/Rumsfeld did not ignore the advise of battle-hardened Pentagon Brass out of incompetence, but rather of sheer, devious cynicism. They knew the WMD excuse for war was a load of crap, but it was the best they could find. Cheney/Rumsfeld and the Neocons knew that they had to move FAST to execute their war plans before their WMD cover was blown. There was no time for more thorough planning, such how to secure the peace after major combat operations were over...or how to deal with indigenous insurgencies...and there definitely wasn’t time to get an additional 150K troops on the ground. Dealing with these issues could have added months to the war’s beginning, and the whole WMD scam might have been found out during this time.
They had to move fast...get the war started even without adequate manpower or adequate metal shield for the Humvees.

This Iraq fiasco is not from incompetence...it’s deliberate. The Cheney/Bush regime has co-opted the Malcom-X slogan “by any means necessary” in all matters...political and military. This lot of arm-chair, wannabe macho laptop warriors does not waste time grieving over dead soldiers like LBJ agonized over the fallen in Vietnam.

They ultimately got what they wanted: access to the world’s second largest reserves of oil. The fact the they’ve broken Iraq and our nation’s credibility doesn’t really matter to them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Histroy Repeats Again
[Report this comment]
Posted by: braxxian on Apr 15, 2006 1:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm trying to remember the name of one other so called leader who refused to listen to his Generals and thought he knew better than them on military matters, his orders eventually leading to the defeat of his army. What was his name agian.....oh yes I remeber now.......Adolf Hitler.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Certain Generals should NOT be allowed to retire yet
[Report this comment]
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 15, 2006 8:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This may seem backwards, but it is important that the worst of the generals, the ones who were behind Gitmo and Abu Grahib, not be allowed to retire or resign. Due to their extensive toadying up to Rumsfeld, they need to be held accountable - it is time to court-martial a few generals for their abuses, instead of just NCOs. Then I'll believe what you are saying about the military being on the right side.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Go Read Greg Palast! Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: Go Read Greg Palast! Posted by: saywhat?

Comments are closed-

RE: Don't dissolve the military, dissolve the hippies!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: CatDad on Apr 15, 2006 3:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How pitiful....American white males are so oppressed in this society! They just control 99% of the governement, military and business power structures. Gosh darn it...they just need to get that 1% back! Feminazis, hippies and homos....take pity on the opressed, white male in America.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

RE: Don't dissolve the military, dissolve the hippies!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: djtyg on Apr 16, 2006 8:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well, considering that 75% of the Reservists between the ages of 18-24 end up on unemployment when they come home from war, if you had you're way you and BadKitty would be in a win-win situation.

After all, we only served our country, why should we get any assistance, right?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

ironic bush said he listens to his generals
[Report this comment]
Posted by: fuzypupy on Apr 15, 2006 1:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
another lie , no doubt

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Amen, brother.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: djtyg on Apr 15, 2006 2:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't worry about BadKitty, she's just a troll disguising herself as a liberal. You see that type of stuff on the blogs all the time. A guy will start posting on liberal blogs like dailykos or mydd and start bashing the troops in the hopes that they can get the rest of us to chime in and agree. They hope that in doing so they can use any badmouthing of Soldiers against liberals in posts over at RedState or The Drudge Report.

BadKitty is an example of this. She once wrote that every Soldier in Iraq should be locked up for war crimes. Fortunately the UN doesn't agree, so I don't have too much to worry about (I'm writing this from Iraq right now).

The problem is it doesn't work. Liberals see right through it. And American liberals don't bash American Soldiers. Liberals are under such suspicion of hating America as it is that they wouldn't waste their time giving Sean Hannity any ammunition.

Anyway, even if there was someone so ignorant as to believe those things, you can be sure they never wanted to be in or understand our position anyway, to be fighting in a war that we think is b.s. for reasons that have nothing to do with politics. So in the end their opinions really don't matter.

Besides, they'd never have the balls to say this stuff to our face anyway.

"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously."-From Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Amen, brother. Posted by: thoughtcriminal

Comments are closed-

Better Late than Never
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Maryanne on Apr 15, 2006 3:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That these generals are speaking up now and at last, at least draws attention to the fact that this administration is rattling sabers in the direction of Iran. If the observations of these generals at a minimum makes people think about the failures in Iraq and the people responsible for them, they can perhaps prevent/ discourage support for attacks on Iran- especially since Mr. Bush thinks Mr. Rumsfeld is the man for the job in these "critical times." And who created the critical times? Read Project for a new American Century.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Better Late than Never Posted by: aussidawg

Comments are closed-

And if
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Maryanne on Apr 15, 2006 3:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And if this administration is serious about attacking Iran, perhaps the speaking up of the generals will give courage to those officers remaining to rebel against another irresponsible invasion of another country that has done nothing to us- and maybe never would.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Useless dissent
[Report this comment]
Posted by: steveba on Apr 15, 2006 4:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The problem with this whole line of dicussion is that these miltary types are not objecting to the war in Iraq on moral grounds, they are not objecting to empire building, and all the destruction of humanity and planet attending that, they are objecting to the the tactics used to fight this war. Rumsfeld et al. are not condemned for crimes against humanity, as they should be, but for being "incompentent" in pursuing an altogether illegal, immoral war. These "heroic" military leaders would be singing praise to the same "defense" department were it using what they would consider to be a winning strategy in Iraq (and elsewhere). Implicitly, then, replacing Rumsfeld with a more "competent" Sec. of Defense would be a step that we should agree would be in the right direction. This simply is not a useful line of dissent.

And, no, I don't agree that all citizens should be required to serve in the military. It has been a long time, if ever, since a miltary was used for a purpose to better mankind. Instead, we need to outgrow our adolescent provincialism and nationalism and start moving toward a truely global community wherein militarism is obsolete. How do we do that? Start THINIKING it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Useless dissent Posted by: richardpmendola

Comments are closed-

A Stint in the Military
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Celtic Warrior on Apr 15, 2006 4:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a Vietnam War Era Veteran, I agree with Stephen Pizzos. I went into USAF one month after high school graduation (1962). At times I wish I had remained with USAF and had gone on to secure the officer's commission I so coveted at age 19. I did not.

However, the Military gave to me a strong sense of self-confidence. During those four years I "came into my own", and I regard those four years as among the best four years of my life.

In my position I meet a lot of young college students. Many of them, perhaps too many of them in my book, lack the sense of discipline, regimen, respect and sense of community that are central to military training. More young men (and, women) than I care to talk about would do well to experience that trained discipline, that respect for authority, regard for one's superiors (and, elders) and to understand that this life is a shared-space event. "Me-ism" has taken over much of the 20 to 30-something generation.

Some rightfully blame the parents (my "Boomer" generation) for being far too doting and overly-nurturing. That may well be true. I run into way too many young people (especially American youth, as I also am exposed to a number of international students) who are selfish, self-centered, foul-mouthed and arrogant beyond the pale. And, most of these kids are from well-to-do to very well-to-do families.

Some of our Military branches have had to increase the length of boot camp because their new enlistees are in such poor mental and physical condition that they could not meet Military requirements under the original, shorter training periods. We have become nation of sloth and gluttony. I for one believe Military training, especially boot camp, could help to change much of that. Mandatory Military participation, even if on weekends for two years as is done in many other countries, would be a helpful tool toward framing our young Americans into better future citizens.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Support the generals / yes / the 60 % dissenting americans yes/but where are they? watchting TV?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: saywhat? on Apr 15, 2006 5:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it is a welcome suprise that the generals are expressing dissent especially when they are the leaders defending the american population....i can only hope more will come out and that the american government will be won back by the people and the constitution it represents....perhaps the generals will give confidence for those who want to dissent but don't..........

because the american public has grown so dull we know not any of our consequences of our actions....this is a new world in which the american public would do well to educate it self ,,,not only intellectually but practically, in preparing for the world events yet to come...we are no longer the entitled ones...we'd do best by learning to get along, yet keep still and place our own backs in line...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Romanticized horse crap
[Report this comment]
Posted by: IntnsRed on Apr 15, 2006 7:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sorry for the harsh title, but that sums up my feelings on the article.

Yes, after 3 years of slaughter, some generals are moaning about the fact that the US is losing the war and pointing fingers at one (note they're not criticizing Bush!) incompetent who is responsible.

So what?

Let's cut to the chase. Every GI in the military is taught that it is their duty to question and disobey illegal orders.

So how come the US has tortured people and is still torturing people? That doesn't sound like an "honorable" military.

The US Constitution calls treaties the "supreme law of the land". The US gov't had duly and legally ratified the Geneva Conventions and UN Charter treaties.

US GIs are sworn to uphold and to defend the US Constitution. Logic would dictate those soldiers would therefore follow the "supreme law of the land" -- the UN Charter and Geneva Conventions.

So how come US GIs willfully participated in a war of aggression in violation of the UN Charter? Why are GIs participating in Geneva Convention violations?

Is that "bravery"? No, that is cowardice -- it's the American equivalent of being a "Good German."

The brave soldiers are the ones who refused to fight in a war of aggression and to defecate on the Constitution. These generals who are now criticizing Rumsfeld are just as much war criminals as the GIs and generals who are still in Iraq committing war crimes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Right on!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Bobsays on Apr 16, 2006 7:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Finally, some clear thinking. Real military people who have seen war and its harm up close, do not see going to war as a lighthearted endeavour. I served in the army and trained as a sniper and as a special forces corporal. I spent my youth before the army in the army cadets, and became a competition marksman for the Olympic team.

I had no, absolutely no illusion what war does to people. Having been nearly killed by a stray bullet, which landed a few centimetres above my head, I know the violence of the whole thing. When in the forces, our commanders were deeply honest about what war does: we would watch all the graphic medical films that were made by the military during the Vietnam war. This is the stuff that civilians never get to see; it is that dramatic and disturbing.

We need some people who know these things in power, not the pansy brigade, either liberals of the ilk of Blair or Clinton, or slimy neo-cons who use their rich friends to keep them out the firing line.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Generals just want a new coach.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ANCHOR1 on Apr 16, 2006 12:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am glad to hear that your Drill Instructors were such libertarians. Mine were not. Our performance at Parris Island was compared to: excrement, young girls, homosexuals, hogs, and civilians back on the block that needed to climb a lamp post to defecate. Our ability to follow orders without question was being rated, not our respect for civilians or our constitutional republic.

Civilians, to put it kindly, were just bad examples. “Rats” and draftees were also scorned at the time. “Rats” were recruits who were transferred to “Rat Platoon” where they could be held up to ridicule because complaints, about their mistreatment, reached a Congressman’s attention. Draftees were taking the blame for being, in the eyes of the Marines, insultingly unsuitable candidates forced on them by lawful civilian order.

Our Senior Drill Instructor tried to forestall “Rats” in his platoon the first week by shouting questions at us about our connections to anyone who could, pierce the Corps thick institutional hide, embarrass his chain of command, fine him his “pro” pay or get him relieved.

Not long after our Senior knocked me out, he drew blood from another recruit and was relieved for suspected brutality. So, I have to hand it to the “Rats” and draftees; they all graduated despite the additional abuse. They made it. We all made it. We were young men and not children when we hit the “yellow foot prints”. In real life, The Corps builds young men into Marines. Better men, a boy into a man? That’s not their job. Occasionally, both figuratively and literally, boys got chewed up at Parris Island.

The Corps built us into living nightmares, willing at a lawful order, to destroy anything in our path,. Later, in Vietnam, we just needed something in our path. Now I live with the constant knowledge that I was part of the “we” and that the “we” were nineteen and twenty year old murderers. I wouldn’t wish this knowledge on, never mind force it on, anyone.

I’m skeptical of officers, retired or not, who bite their handlers. What motivates an officer? Promotions come faster in war time. A war that you are winning is a popular war and even better promotion wise. I think the generals still want to play the game. They just want to dump a loosing coach.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

JOSHUADUDD - INTERNET WHORE!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: cerveny1 on Apr 16, 2006 3:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Funny thing about Alternet.org . . . There is this little click of self-righteous moderators who unilaterally determine what is right and wrong. Those in particular who don't agree with one JOSHUA LUDD and his brand of democracy may find themselves banished to Alternet's Gulag. I don't mind anymore. I have determined that a site frequented by an arrogant, gutless little prick like JOSHUA LUDD is hardly worth my time. I managed to break all of Alternet's fascist and seemingly self-contradictory rules of engagement but then again so did Joshua so I can only conclude that he is some kind of moderator or just a little bitch. Probably both. I'm sure that many of you who have debated with this self-important little prick understand. Having a left-leaning site like this is great and all but when assholes like JOSHUA LUDD run the show it ends up being a My Way or the Highway circle jerk eh JOSH? There can be no dissenting voice with JOSHUA LUDD. He silences you if he disagrees with you – sound familiar? All this discussion about the problems Americans are facing, censorship being one of them, and Fascistnet.org ends up being a microcosm of that very problem.

I challenge Joshua on every occasion because I disagree with him and his beliefs. He and I have both exchanged ad-hominem attacks – he seems to be a real tough guy though, given to Lee Marvin-esque outbursts but yet he whines to a friend and poof I’m gone or maybe he is the BIG PRICK who moderates the whole thing. In any event he actually represents much of what is wrong with this site and to a greater extent, what is wrong with America. We are discussing such topics as War, Racism, Fascism, Sexism, Capitalism, Socialism, etc. and yet are asked to keep the kid gloves on. Funny, one would think that people with enough conviction to come in here and discuss these topics would have thicker skin, and apparently most do except that little BITCH ASS TRICK JOSHUA LUDD. Keep him in mind when he attacks you personally and calls you a “reprehensible, murderous hypocrite” or this little pearl he threw out there – “Good for you. You still didn't serve. As my grandfather... a WW2 vet would say "close only counts in hand grenades and horseshoes". Either you served or you didn't, and you, you chickenhawk piece of shit, DID NOT.” Funny Josh is beyond reproach much like our own president and the man he was criticizing in that thread – Colin Powell. Who is going to censure or ban you Josh? What about that post wasn’t a personal attack and profane?

I think many of you would be interested in knowing that Little Joshie is running a pseudo-intellectual pyramid blogging scam – fucking hilarious Josh!!!! What is it called Josh – Blogging for Bucks?? LMAO!!!
No I understand why you have this incestuous little relationship with Alternet.org. You are giving each other the reach-around eh JOSHUADUDD? You’re nothing but a little blog twink are you? This is the real progressive thinker you all are dealing with. WHAT A FUCKING LOSER!! Here’s his pitch spoken like a good little Neo-con:

“Write a blog. Make Money.
There are millions of people who want to work from home but don't know how.There are millions of people who know how to write.There are millions of people who know how to write, but don't know how to make money with it.We KNOW how to make money with content people write. This site was designed to allow YOU to write content which WE will market and we will ALL make money.We'll make the money for you!
Then, we split the money,
50/50. Not only that but we'll also place your ads on the blogs of people you refer to writingUp.”
Check it out here - maybe you can make a buck or two - LMAO!!!
http://www.writingup.com/write_a_blog_make_money

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

athene
[Report this comment]
Posted by: athene on Apr 16, 2006 11:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm grateful for the comments and personal stories from the vets here. Please, please continue to share your stories and your thoughtful reasoning with everyone you know, whereever you live across the country. You are probably some of the few people who can help open the minds of those voters who are still considering voting for Republicans in the next few years. The military has high status in the minds of these voters, and you can really affect them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: athene Posted by: kryptx

Comments are closed-

Ex-Army speaks
[Report this comment]
Posted by: dadzilla on Apr 18, 2006 10:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As someone who did his time I understand how profound the generals speaking out is. Not only is it unprecedented, it flies against military culture as a whole.

I can only surmise these few who have come out are saying what many others are thinking but don't feel they can say.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Permission to speak freely, sir.......
[Report this comment]
Posted by: sidewinder on Apr 18, 2006 8:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You state that you were taught that the lowest civilian was better than the highest ranking military officer. You were taught this in boot camp? That's odd, I was a drill instructor in 1960 - 1961 and I never taught that to any of my recruits. Perhaps that's the reason you turned out to be such a non-effective.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

The generals should now speak out about how and why we can never win
[Report this comment]
Posted by: reddeer on Apr 20, 2006 6:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After serving with the Marines in Vietnam in 1970 I was assigned to instructor duty in what was called "Pre-deployment School". It was designed to give Marines who had just been orders to to Wes-Pac (Vietnam) a quick overview in what to prepare for and expect upon their arrival there. I taught 2 courses; Vietnamese Customs, Culture and Religions and Personal Response. The first two-hour session was taught using personal slides I had taken while serving with a Marine Civic Action (CAP) unit and the second resulted from training I had had while still in Vietnam. Both courses attempted to impress on Marines the fact that displays of prejudice, rascism or unjustified aggression on their part could literally cost them or another Marine their life. Personal response was about knowing each of us has basically the same response when we or our loved ones are oppressed, threatened or otherwise have our basic human rights violated - we react in whatever way is most effective and we feel is neccessary -- and that often means taking up arms against the oppressor. In other words, the Marines have long known that guerilla warfare relies on the abusive tactics of invading (aka liberating) armies for their recruitment. I would say to the troops during my lecture"an abusive or even unkind word or gesture could result in that person becoming your enemy - or in the very least becoming sympthetic to their cause". How in Gods name could the military be so congnizant of these basic facts as a result of our experience in Vietnam, more than 30 years ago, and seem to never even consider the effects torture, civilian casualties and house-to-house raids on the homes of innocent families would have on U.S. casualties. The troops handing out candy or giving away soccer balls to children will never erase the pain and resentment Iragi's must feel over the devastation this war has caused them, personally and as a nation; i.e. sorry we raided your house last night causing your children severe and perhaps life long truama - now here's a soccer ball. For more information about Marine CAP Units see Corson, William, The Betrayal, W.W. Norton 1968. This title is a great read for anyone interested in anti-guerilla warfare in Vietnam-- written by a Marine's Marine Officer who did speak out and was willing to ruin his career over doing so. I can talk more about my experiences if there's interest.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Permission Granted
[Report this comment]
Posted by: tanstaafl28 on Apr 20, 2006 10:52 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." -Issac Asimov

I spent six years in the U.S. Navy. My family has a long and rich history of military service that stretches all the way back to the American Revolution. I do not regret my service, but I do not think I could serve the current administration with a clean conscience. Edward Abbey said it best:

"A patriot is someone who is willing to defend his country against his government."

These men are indeed courageous to speak out against their former masters. Corrupt politicians have tarnished the good name of our nation, as well as the very sense of honor and duty that called these men to serve their country in the first place. Most saddening of all is the fact that the military is no longer serving the interests of the country, but rather the interests of a elitist cabal of immoral and greedy men.

I fear the damage is done. The policies created by the Bushaviks have come to fruition, just as they planned them. No matter how they go out, these people (and their corporate sponsors) have profited greatly from wholesale slaughter. There

Rumsfield, in particular, has been involved in a lot of "shady deals" going back years before he became SecDef. If there is a hell, he's already earned himself a special place there.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

r
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mananahoyt on Oct 31, 2006 5:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]

Comments are closed-

e
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mananahoyt on Oct 31, 2006 5:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]

Comments are closed-

e
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mananahoyt on Oct 31, 2006 5:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]

Comments are closed-

e
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mananahoyt on Oct 31, 2006 5:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]

Comments are closed-

r
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mananahoyt on Oct 31, 2006 5:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]

Comments are closed-

e
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mananahoyt on Oct 31, 2006 5:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
 
Advertisement
From The Blog
 
The Hollywood Double Standard: Tiger gets cooked, Charlie Sheen gets another free pass
 
Is Greece the New AIG?
 
Confused About Nutrition? Eat Food!
 
Insurer Denies Life-Prolonging Treatment To Five-Year-Old Boy With Cancer
 
Budget Paranoia
 
Why Does the U.S. Assassinate Americans?
 
Jon Stewart: Why Does Sarah Palin Need a Cheat Sheet?
 
We Must Lift the Veil on US Troops in Pakistan
 
Pushing for “Zero Tolerance” on Sexual Violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo
 
Updated: Obama Calls GOP Bluff on Health-Care Reform
 
MORE 
ALL BLOGS 
 
 
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
  1. Why Are Americans Passive as Millions Lose Their Homes, Jobs, Families and the American Dream?
  2. 5 Ways Techno-Gadgetry Is Bringing Out the Worst in Humanity
  3. Why Has the FDA Allowed a Drug Marked 'Not Safe for Use in Humans' to Be Fed to Livestock Right Before Slaughter?
  4. Shadow Elite: How the World's New Power Brokers Are Upending Our Democracy
  5. New Poll Results Are Proof That Republicans Don't Think
  6. White "Savior-Afflicted" Christians, Black Haitian Babies: This Won't End Well
  7. Why I Had to Stop Making Hardcore Porn
  8. It's Now More Dangerous to Give Birth in California Than It Is in Kuwait or Bosnia
  9. Sarah Palin Aims to Bust Up the Republican Party -- And the Tea Party Movement
  10. The Newest Diet Trend: What Would Jesus Eat?
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS
ABOUT DIGG