Devastating Letter Re: Lieberman From A Connecticut Soldier

[kpete]

This letter tells you all you need about Joe Lieberman and why he does NOT deserve a fourth term (i.e., 24 years) as a Senator:

Town Times
Middlefield, CT

Letters to the Editor

Lieberman supports war, not troops.

I am a registered Democrat and a soldier currently serving in Afghanistan with the 1-102 Infantry Battalion of the Connecticut National Guard. Last week I received some newspaper clippings in the mail that sparked my interest: Senator Joseph I. Lieberman has been successfully challenged and forced into a primary that will take place in August.

As some readers may have heard, in January my battalion was issued substandard equipment for our deployment to Afghanistan. Originally, we were issued M-16s rather than M-4 carbines, rifles with shorter barrels and collapsible butt stocks. As a politically active member of the battalion, I began to get in touch with Representative DeLauro and Representative Simmons, who both responded quickly and enthusiastically. Senator Dodd also responded quickly and gave me prompts on how to further validate my request for weapons.

However, I did not receive a response from Senator Lieberman's office. I continued to leave messages for both him and his military aide, now senior counselor, Fred Downey, who represented Sen. Lieberman at the Battalion's send off ceremony on Jan. 4. After several messages, I finally received a return phone call. However, I was not met with the same enthusiasms expressed by other legislators; I was immediately confronted with an inquisition that seemed to have the purpose of dispelling the belief that the battalion was ill equipped. Rather than listen to our specific concerns, the "benefits" of the M16 were highlighted and the advantages of the M4 were downplayed.

Lieberman's office left the impression that they believed we had the equipment we needed, despite the contrasting beliefs of soldiers in my battalion, some who have been on as many as five deployments. The others in Washington were not so quick to abandon us.

Lieberman has never hesitated to voice his support for the war, and recently voted against pulling troops out of Iraq, so where was he when over 500 of his own constituents were being sent overseas to fight on behalf of his great country? It appears the senator was so concerned with climbing the political ladder, he forget what his job is really about: the people.

When my absentee ballot returns to the States next month, Lamont's name, not Lieberman's, will bear the check when August 8 arrives, will you stand for the hypocrisy?

Sincerely,

Colin D. Halloran

http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/2006/07/they-get-letters.html
via:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/7/26/151053/527

[Dr Fate]

1. God bless him. I pray he & his boys make it back.

And I pray Lamont wins against Lieberman too.

[ChristianLibrul]

2. They were forced to use rifles...

...that were more accurate at longer ranges, while weighing only a pound more. Man...

[corkhead]

4. have any info to back up what I presume to be a sarcastic remark?

[sutz12]

7. I hope you're being sarcastic.....

if not, you are showing your ignorance of urban combat, where shorter weapons with more firepower are needed for close quarters fighting.

And when you're already carrying 60-80 pounds of equipment and armor, yes, that extra pound matters. If for no other reason, that extra "meaningless" pound could be converted to more ammo to carry.

[Toots]

23. Since when did Afghanistan become "urban combat"?

and yes longer barrels do give greater accuracy but that is not the issue. The issue is the soldiers were ignored by someone who never served and yet had the temerity to tell them what weapon was better for them.

[acmejack]

8. A foot longer too

A big difference in close quarters combat. As I suppose you know with your apparent expertise, an extra foot can be a lot in tight situations, even if it only an extra pound.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M4_Carbine

http://concise.britannica.com/ebc/article-9370808/M16-rifle

[Recursion]

12. And they're 10" longer, dumbass

I've patrolled in Fallujah and the Qut. We stole carbines the first chance we got. That 10" will kill you dead when you are coming around a corner or a dude pops out of a crypt right next to you. The fact that urban patrols still have M16's after 3 years of grunts saying we need a shorter CQW weapon now is appalling to me. Engagement doesn't happen at "longer ranges" anymore. 50 yards was unusually long range.

Even carbines are a substandard solution; we need submachineguns and short-barrel shotguns. The shotguns are there, but still not issued. And why, with all the billions of dollars being spent on the US arsenal, is there not a standard-issue submachinegun? Oh, we have a brand new 155mm howitzer, and a remote-control airplane that can guide in artillery, but sorry, there's not the money (or tactical innovation) to come up with a workable submachinegun for urban patrols despite the fact that about 90% of armed forces issue one standard for urban deployments. To say nothing of the fact that our repeated requests for a black and grey urban utilities with knee and elbow pads were torpedoed. Sorry: DoD has to spend money on a Joint Strike Fighter.

God be with this guy, and massive DU props to him.

[fooj]

16. Wow. Your story is stunning.

Glad you are back ok. My heart aches for our soldiers. I want them home. Now.

[GOPFighter]

18. dmesg

Is there anything we can do to spur Congress to get the grunts the equipment THEY need? Is there a website that discusses what kind of arms and equipment the grunts need and why they are needed? I wasn't aware that the arms being issued are ill suited for the mission. As a veteran it burns me up to think we are sending our kids to fight a nasty, dangerous war and don't give them what they need to protect themselves and complete the mission.

[Straight Shooter]

27. Snap!!

Thank you, dmesg. :patriot:

[Renew Deal]

19. Who knows more about the equipment needed... A politician or a soldier?

:shrug:

They weren't exactly asking for nukes. Just a different gun.

[madokie]

21. might want to check this out on accuracy and long barrels

http://www.popularmechanics.com/outdoors/firearms/1277311.html

On the accuracy side of the equation, the longer it takes between the time you squeeze the trigger and the time the bullet exits the muzzle, the less your chances are for achieving a dead-accurate shot in long-distance shooting. A significant factor in this is lock time, or the interval between the instant the trigger releases the firing pin and the point of sufficient impact of the firing pin to detonate the primer.

(snip)

In a percussion rifle, the normal lock time is anywhere from 2.8 milliseconds on the fast end up to or exceeding 7 or 8 External appearances aside, the inner workings of the new Model 700 EtronX are nothing short of revolutionary. milliseconds. The biggest variable here is in the trigger mechanism itself. A fast system typically consists of a trigger that pulls out from underneath a sear and releases a striker, or firing pin, which is driven forward by a mainspring. In a slower system, the trigger mechanically releases a hammer that pivots about an arm and reaches up to strike the firing pin, which in turn starts to move and then impacts the primer. A few milliseconds here or there may not seem like much, but when you're aiming and pulling the trigger, the muzzle tends to move around a bit. All things being equal, shorter lock time reduces off-target barrel movement. As we mentioned, this applies primarily to long-distance shooting. Short- and medium-distance target accuracy remains largely unaffected by lock time.

[The Count]

28. Looks like Joe's staff is on the case....

Way to gain support, guys!

[SlavesandBulldozers]

35. i love how you make a soldier in a combat zone sound like a slacker.

i wouldn't even do that, and I'm a slacker.

[Nutmegger]

3. Sending this to the greatest.

:kick: and :thumbsup:

[ms liberty]

5. Ouch!

Gee Joe, you just never know when something's going to come back and bite you in the ass, do you?

Good for that soldier! I hope he and his battalion come home safe.

Thanks for posting.

[panader0]

6. Outstanding! I hope Joe takes the time to read it.

[BrotherBuzz]

9. Joe may, or may not read the letter, but I'm hoping...

the citizens of Connecticut do!

[caligirl]

10. Another vote, get rid of this kind of politician and we might have half a

chance.

[democrank]

11. Piercing letter.

If Lieberman really supported the troops, he would hold accountable the man who lied them into war.

[Cocoa]

13. if it was an insurance executive calling

Joe would return his call. :puke:

[Imagevision]

14. Rummy: "you go to war with the equipment you have, not the equipment

you wish you had or some BS along these lines...

[Reckon]

15. IMHO, M-16s can be unreliable and really bad to jam in a long engagement.

I don't blame Colin Halloran for wanting a better weapon.

Edit: Thank's for nuttin, Joe!

[Selatius]

20. I've heard US soldiers preferring AK47s instead of M16s

They're not as accurate as M16s at longer ranges, but they have better stopping power overall, and they almost never jam even if some grit gets into the rifle.

[malmapus]

29. Very true

Worst jam I had with my M-16 was a triple chamber, have to keep those things stupid clean to keep them going.

Still remember an exercise we had where one of our instructors on WARSAW Pact arms had buried a AK-47 in mud, he then pulled it out, washed it a little and could fire a full clip with no problem.

[Recursion]

31. M16 is an example of the modern cult...

...of the small high-velocity round. And I'm not totally against that notion; the M16 is a great weapon in its proper environment. There are few rifles I would rather have with me if I were assaulting a Soviet position in Europe. But, like you point out, the fact that the round has a high enough velocity to penetrate most troop carriers comes with a trade off in terms of the weight of the round: a 5.56 just doesn't stop physical motion like a 7.62 -- and in a lot of situations, you're literally more concerned with stopping the physical motion of the attacker charging you than you are with killing him. The smaller, faster M16 round simply doesn't transfer very much kinetic energy into its target; it uses that kinetic energy to punch through it. Again, time and place for everything.

But the time and place for the M16 is definitely not Tikriit in 2006. I knew some guys who "acquired" AK's early on. The AK has that nice heavy round, and is balanced better if you need to use it as a club, and it will fire even if its covered in mud, though it's just as vulnerable to that "powdered-sugar" dust you'll get in a duststorm (the coarse sand it can handle). Those banana clips jam more easily than the M16's, I found. I'd love a system with the firing mechanism reliability of the 47 and the magazine reliability of the 16. Good luck with that...

If I could arm a fire team any way I wanted, I'd have the "rifleman" (probably better called a "spotter" at this point) with an SMG (Uzi's would probably send the wrong political message; maybe the P90, or get some Skorpions from the Czechs), the automatic rifleman with a SAW, the AAR with a SPAS or some other shotgun, and the grenadier with an M16 and M203.

I'd also reorganize a rifle platoon so that it had 3 fire teams and one "rifle team" (and I would probably rename the fire team as the "movement team" and call the rifle team the "fire team") -- the rifle team would have several people with M16's and M203's (basically, everyone with an M16 would have an M203 in my perfect setup) one M240G crew. The movement teams could locate and contact the enemy so that the rifle team could engage them.

But, hey, I'm not a general, so it's just armchair talk... it just irritates me that we're still equipping to fight the Soviet Union.

[autorank]

17. Thats one pissed off Irishman, I don't blame him at all.

What an experience, having some aid in your Senator's office argue with you, a soldier, about ordinance. This is totally embarrassing and I'm upset that the troops have substandard weapons.

This is the gift that will keep on giving for Lieberman, whether or not he wins the primary, runs as an independent, or as a Republican.

"Constituent services" Joe, constituents...that's what it's about, people.

Great find and editorial comment. You're on fire kpete;)

[Canuckistanian]

22. Too bad that absentee ballot will get lost in transit

Due to an "unfortunate clerical error".

[gratuitous]

24. Odd, that was my thought too

I hope Mr. Halloran gets his ballot in early. Joe was awfully charitable toward military ballots in 2000, but something tells me he's not going to be quite so open-minded about postmarks and dates of receipt in 2006.

[tabasco]

25. Godspeed to Halloran and all of our soldiers.

They have been placed in a quagmire thanks to our corrupt national leadership, which includes Lieberman.

Personally, I would prefer the M-4 for city fighting and the M-16 for desert fighting.

I carried the carbine on my second tour in Somalia; on occasion a shotgun.

[NewJeffCT]

26. I had no response from Lieberman on another issue

While this is in no way near as serious as what Mr. Halloran went through, I was subjected to a similar lack of response from Lieberman’s office.

I got married in November of 2001 to a woman that was not a US citizen and did not have a green card. Soon after our marriage, we filled out the massive amount of paperwork needed for my wife to apply for her green card.

Everything seemed to be going fine, and we were interviewed in October of 2002 by a representative of the INS. (now, the BCIS) My wife was 5-6 months pregnant at the time and that interview seemed to go fine as well.

However, after that, my wife’s green card seemed to fall into some sort of black hole. We would try to contact INS and would be told that it was in process and there was nothing more we could do. INS has an appeals process if your case goes beyond a certain time-length. So, we filed the appeal and a few months later, we got a form letter saying “Your request has been referred to the appropriate department.”

Going to INS in person was no help either – you might have to spend all day in line to have them tell you there was nothing they could do, which my wife did more than once. We did get confirmation that we did nothing wrong on our end.

They told her to file another appeal, which we did. And, we got the same form letter back.

We were at a loss as to what we could do and it was now into 2004. The normal green card process takes about a year.

Somebody that my wife worked with suggested writing to Lieberman. I took it a step further and wrote a letter to Lieberman, Sen. Chris Dodd and our local US representative, John Larson, a Democrat.

I mailed the letter out on a Friday.

On Monday or Tuesday of the next week, I got a call from Maureen Moriarity in Congressman Larson’s office. She was very helpful, and followed up with us several times over the next few months as she tried to figure out the problem. However, even she had problems getting an answer other than saying it was in process.

About a week later, we got a letter from Dodd’s office saying that he had asked a woman in his office to contact the senior officer at the Hartford INS office and that she would get back to us as soon as she heard something. She got back & said the same thing Maureen did above.

We never heard anything from Lieberman’s office. I even followed up with an email to him using the contact form on his website and got no response. Not even a form letter or email saying that he was having somebody looking into the issue.

(As a follow-up, we eventually had to sue the government to show they had justification for holding up the process for so long, and it all ended up working about by Sept or October of 2005. But, we have a lawsuit with NewJeffCT vs Alberto Gonzalez (and Michael Chertoff, etc) on it in our house. )

[AzDar]

30. Kick... n/t

[Drops_not_Dope]

32. Ranking member of Homeland Security

I received the following response for a letter I wrote to the senator regarding the boulders passing as security at a petroleum storage facility in my town.
I sent this response back to the Lieberman office noting I had written about a homeland security issue. I've never gotten a response to my issue. :eyes:


Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns about press reports of National Security Agency (NSA) phone record collection. I share your concerns for this serious matter, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.

As you may know, press reports have alleged that AT&T,
Verizon, and BellSouth telephone companies began turning over records of tens of millions of their customers' phone calls to NSA's surveillance program shortly after the September 11, 2001 attacks. Some of these companies subsequently disputed the reports, and the Bush Administration has refused to confirm or deny the existence of the program.

I am troubled by these reports, and especially by the prospect
that NSA is collecting information on the calling habits of millions of Americans without any judicial review or the authority of a national security letter. Our laws rightly provide the Administration with the means to fully monitor and investigate suspected terrorists. We must use every tool available to fight and win the war against terrorists who aim to attack us, but we must do so in a manner that is consistent with our constitution and laws. Therefore, I have called on the Bush Administration to come before Congress and fully explain these surveillance programs so that we can reach a reasoned conclusion about their legality.

Please be assured that I will continue my commitment to maintaining the balance between the crucial need for tools to fight the
war on terror and the equally important need to protect our constitutional liberties.

My official Senate web site is designed to be an on-line office that provides access to constituent services, Connecticut-specific information, and an abundance of information about what I am working on in the Senate on behalf of Connecticut and the nation. I am also pleased to let you know that I have launched an email news update service through my web
site. You can sign up for that service by visiting
http://lieberman.senate.gov and clicking on the "Subscribe Email News Updates" button at the bottom of the home page. I hope these are informative and useful.

Thank you again for letting me know your views and concerns.
Please contact me if you have any additional questions or comments about our work in Congress.

Sincerely,
Joseph I. Lieberman
UNITED STATES SENATOR

JIL:ae

[WildEyedLiberal]

33. Holy shit

Joe needs to learn a little about constituent services... :eyes:

[bigwillq]

34. That's a great letter.

Thanks for posting.

:bounce:


Let's go LAMONT! :bounce:

[BluePatriot]

36. K&R for a great letter