No Pull-Out, Says Iraq War Vets Group

[unhappycamper]

No Pull-Out, Says Iraq War Vets Group
April 09, 2008
Omaha World-Herald

WASHINGTON -- Iraq war veterans from across the country carried a message April 8 to Capitol Hill -- don't pull the troops out until the mission is over.

Among the group was Carl Hartmann, a Marine corporal who has completed three Iraq tours of duty and now serves with a Reserve unit in Omaha.

Hartmann said politicians should not be micromanaging the war but listening to the commanders in the field.

"I'm not going to tell a brain surgeon how he should operate on one of his patients," he said. "I'm going to take his word for it when he tells me that he has to operate this way to make me feel better."

Hartmann and other Nebraskans joined hundreds of members of Vets for Freedom who descended on Capitol Hill as Congress heard testimony from Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker. The two reported uneven but significant progress in Iraq, an assessment that was greeted with skepticism by several Midlands lawmakers.


Rest of article at: http://www.military.com/news/article/no-pullout-says-iraq-war-vets-group.html?col=1186032310810



uhc comment: This is the Vietnam debate, part II.

[still_one]

1. For those that remember, vets were saying the same thing about Viet Nam

and 10 years and 60 thousands Americans later the COUNTRY finally realized the terrible toll. Over a million people were killed because of Viet Nam

That was a war based on a LIE also.
That was a war which had no objective also.

HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD HAVE DIED IF WE NEVER INVADED VIET NAM?

[MADem]

9. That Swiftboat Vet buddy of Nixon's was big on that score, remember?

John O'Neill went up against John Kerry of VVAW in the same way.

So, does that make our Monkey Prez the 21st Century Nixon???

[still_one]

13. The difference is, more vets were for Viet Nam at the time then they are for this

at least if one is to believe the polls

Yes, I remember the apperance on Dick Cavet with O'Neill a John Kerry.

There shold be no ambiguity on this election. mccain has stated very clearly that we should have an unending commitment, i.e. war, in Iraq.

The only difference between Viet Nam and Iraq, is that mccain wants to expand it

This election will be about the Iraq war. It should also be about the Supreme Court, and other issues that will affect people

I would hope people realize that they are also being affected economically because of this war, and it is in an adverse way

[MADem]

16. That's not how I remember it. Nixon constantly carped about The Silent Majority

but they weren't the draftees who were over there--they were the Greatest Generation parents who had bought into the concept of the "invincible nation" that had "never lost a war."

They got over that shit quick once the body bags started coming home by the planeful every day.

Unless something BIG happens in Iraq, I do not think this election "will be about the Iraq War." I think the "body a day" paradigm is "OK" for most of America. I'm not a fan of it, but I don't make the decisions, here.

I don't think it will be about the Supremes, either. Or choice, or equal rights for women or minorities or the GLBT community, either. Those issues may be used as small barbs, but I don't think they'll override the Big Issue.

I think it will be about the ECONOMY. And not just the present downturn, but the Big Picture Economy. The fact that our kids and grandkids don't have as much opportunity as we did. The fact that health care is unaffordable. The fact that there are damn few jobs. The fact that the dollar is worth shit...

[still_one]

17. I was referring to the war through Johnson. When Nixon took over it started changing /nt

[MADem]

18. No one was griping until the latter part of Johnson's tenure. Johnson just

didn't want to be the "first" American President to "lose" a war. The debate about the domino theory was actually still a "respected" discussion point (the domino theory having been a favorite during JFK as well) on television, in magazines, and in the papers during much of LBJ's time in office. They felt that they had to push back those Russkies, and stop them from gaining influence, else the rest of the countries in southeast asia would fall like dominoes.

The difference now is that staying in Iraq isn't really a "respected" discussion point. It never will be, unless and until people start telling the truth. The truth is "fuck democracy" over there; we want the OIL, we want a FOOTHOLD in the region, and we want to keep those pesky Persians caged. We also want to be close by if the House of Saud goes wobbly. Now that Russia is getting iffy, it's good, from the rightwing and more aggressive perspective, to be up their ass, too. I might not agree with anyone shopping these views, but I'd have respect for the argument if they'd just ADMIT this is what it was all about, and not try to paper it all over with that "freedom loving peoples" bullshit.

That "Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids didja kill today," was just the igniting of the fuse closer to the end of the Johnson administration, and that fuse was attached to the mess that blew up in Tricky Dick's face and culminated in our hasty departure from the Embassy rooftop. Nixon was thrilled with that John O'Neill clown that debated Kerry on Cavett; he especially liked the fact that he was "clean cut" and had short hair.

All politics didn't start getting local (to paraphrase Tip O'Neill) on Nixon until sixty nine; when THIS shit happened: http://www.sss.gov/lotter1.htm

Amazing how people got motivated when the net was cast wider. I never saw so many people in college (mainly for the deferment) at that time, either. There was never a problem, despite the absence of sophisticated communication methods like these here tubes on the internets, in communicating, either. If a protest was planned on a Wednesday to be held on Friday, word of mouth would get THOUSANDS of people into the streets with home-made signs. No need for fringe front groups to organize--there WAS no "organization" and damn few "leaders" really.

The issues were what led, and the main issue was that people didn't want to be drafted and sent off to the meat grinder, where a lot of kids didn't come back.

[still_one]

19. That was my point. Unlike the Iraq war, there was initial support for the Viet Nam war

which was also based on a lie

You are right the draft was also influential, but even with the draft it still took quite awhile before people started to turn

The other thing is that the Iraq war isn't covered by the MSM like the Viet Nam war was

[MADem]

21. Oh, no...the draft was THE turning point. That's what got even the LAZIEST bastards up off their

asses!!!

Now, we'd had a few major protests BEFORE the draft, but the draft did the unthinkable--not only did it get the fat and satisfied out in the streets, but it also got their PARENTS up in arms. Families were divided -- "He'll GO--like ***I*** did!! It't the PATRIOTIC thing to DO!!!" was countered with "Hell, NO, he won't--I'll send him to Canada...I will DRIVE HIM THERE MYSELF!!!"

And the coverage is totally different. Very controlled.

[still_one]

23. The draft was all through the Viet Nam war. I know, I got a 2S deferment for college

but the moment I graduated, my status changed to 1A, my number 152 got called, and went in for my physical. I was luckey and finally got out of it due to hypertension, but I had to go back multiple times to have it verified

We are essentially on the same page though I think

[MADem]

24. Yeah, true--but it wasn't "universal conscription" until the lottery + they took the OLDEST first.

So, before the Big Game In Congress, it wasn't hard to escape service if you played it right, got an education, and "fell in love/had other priorities"--you could cruise through college (deferment), get married quickly (deferment+1), have a kid (deferment 2), have a third kid (deferment 3), be the sole support of an aged mother and/or grandmother (disabled war widow, so much the better!!!); or better yet, get an "essential" job, like, say, TEACHING--in a community college, for example...and then, you'd be safe as houses! That's somewhat how Cheney swung it, with the marriage/kids/teaching...!

[still_one]

25. yeah, you are right , I forgot abot that. A walk down memory lane

If they had a true draft today we would be out of Iraq tomorrow, figuratively speaking

[patrice]

2. Vets for what Freedom????

I would like those guys to point to one "Freedom" we wouldn't have if we weren't in Iraq. Or give me a timeframe of some sort in which we can expect to lose one or more of our "Freedoms" because we left Iraq.

Take the money that we are spending on Iraq now and for the un-forseeable future, reapply it to domestic needs and issue and then count the FREEDOM that you are creating for millions of Americans.

WAR IS SLAVERY.

[atreides1]

3. Corporal Hartmann is an idiot!

The commanders in the field are for lack of a better term political appointees, they will adhere to the Bush agenda, because the only other option is to resign their commissions and leave the service.

Petraeus may be in country, but he only goes into the field when it's safe and he takes bodyguards and gunships for protection. Maybe if Corporal Hartmann and the others like him would look at the reality instead of the fantasy world that they've created to justify this illegal and immoral war, something good could come of it.

But I don't think that the good Corporal has the ability or the desire to look at the whole picture, and he probably never will.

[acmavm]

4. These guys are EXACTLY why I don't give a shit what vets say.

edit: Maybe I should put a disclaimer to that statement.

I don't care because I think that if these guys think we should be fighting this war, go back into the field with their big, bad selves. Don't make others fulfill their dreams of conquest. Go back and fight until the job is done.

Don't tell me about the 'mission'. There was no mission, only a criminal scheme to overthrow a government and hijack the country. I don't see where these guys are to be given any respect for that, for their part in the murders of innocent people. We didn't accept the 'I vas only following orders' from the Nuremburg crowd, these guys shouldn't get a pass either. Everyone has to stand up for their OWN beliefs, for what they think is right and wrong. If they enjoy killing innocent men, women, and children, then what the fuck is there to say? And if they don't enjoy the killing but still feel that they need to support this illegal invasion and occupation, then do it on someone else's dime. Fuck 'em. Get their paychecks from Exxon-Mobile or somewhere else. And their body armor. These guys ain't doing ONE DAMN THING to keep me and mine safe.Or you and yours either. They aren't fighting for the homeland. They have no clear mission other than to keep this bloody carnage going until bush** can cut and run. There is NO HONOR in killing innocent people. Nor is there any honor in invading a country and occupying it for the benefit of a puppet government.

[MADem]

6. Well....that was an interesting remark. nt

[still_one]

10. You are making an incorrect generalization. You are basing your opinion on a small group

You can find 30% of the citizens who take the same position for various reasons

These people do not learn from history. We cannot occupy a country, especially when we are in the middle of a civil war

We also do not have the resources to continue this circus, without a draft or more countries joining

More countries are walking away from us, not joining, and if we had a draft, Americans would NOT put up with it

The amount of money that this war is causing us is also unaffordable

I only hope that Americans have finally learned their leasons, but I am skeptical

We will leave Iraq, it is all a question of how many more people will die before we do?

[acmavm]

11. Yeah, I figured I made a pretty half-assed and abrupt post so I

went on and further explained it.

[still_one]

14. Your statement about a mission is right on, and MOST soldiers in Iraq know the con

and that they are being used

At least from what I am led to believe

[MADem]

5. Oi Vey---what IS "the JOB" pray tell? Once upon a time, the "mission" was to get rid of Saddam.

And that was AFTER the mission was to get rid of those WMDs that weren't there.

THEN then mission was "give them Eye-Rakkis a gubmint!!! With a constitution!!! And ELECTIONS!!" Ohhh kay...done, done and done.

Let's just go HOME!!!

Of course, we can't, because the REAL mission is to get that damned oil. Four bucks a gallon is one thing. Six bucks, though? There are people who think that preventing that is actually worth forty bodies a month....

[elocs]

7. The trouble is that the mission will never be over.

We could leave after 100 years, losing tens of thousands of troops, spending untold billions of dollars while hundreds of thousands of Iraqis will lose their live or homes. But after year 100 or year 6, the people of Iraq will have to form their own nation or nations with their own blood. They are shedding their blood now because of our occupation on their country and ultimately they will need to shed their own blood to give birth to a nation that is really their own and not one that is given the stamp of approval and imposed by the U.S.

[unhappycamper]

12. IMO, the Republican/neocon vision is to leave Iraq after the oil is gone. n/t

[MADem]

22. Sure it will...once the oil is pumped dry; then we can leave 'em to their own devices. NT

[newfie11]

8. Can we say brainwashed to believe anything their higher ups say

[Crowman1979]

20. More like ass kissing IMO.

And I've seen plenty of that in the USMC. Being in Iraq myself, I had to put up with rocket attacks, having diahrrea for several weeks and KBR filtered water to shower & the fumes from the trash they burned (plus we heard rumors of prostitution and gambling taking place at KBR's living quarters). Never was in direct combat, but everytime we'd stop at the flight line, I kept hearing of someone in a platoon who died. Then hearing that one of the Sgt's from my unit in Afghanistan was killed, that was the big turning point for me. Anyone who still voices their opinion in supporting this war and the strategies that are part of the operation, is similar to a vinyl record that skips. How the F*** would anyone be that warped into thinking that one country is going send a large army to end 1000+ years sectarian war?!?!?! Could be either unquestionable support of neocon ideas or some obsessive belief in modern day rapture theology.

For those even thinking about joining right now, DON'T! You'd be better off homeless or living meagerly, than putting your life at risk for lies. Plus you should wait a few years after Obama's inauguration so that the ones with criminal records and a belief in christian fanaticism who were recruited, will be out of service.

[Hugabear]

15. These dumbasses really need to STFU

How many more of their comrades do they need to see DIE?

[rakeeb]

26. wow....you couldn't cut through that irony with a K-Bar....

the kids who have ostensibly signed up for a low-paying job that by oath includes defending your freedom of speech with their very lives need to STFU...